Will the public servants speak out?

In compensation terms, the year 2007 ended with “money” talk. As we recalled, there were debates of how we should throw more cash at people to attract, and retain them. There were also discussions on “are we paid our worth?” and perceived pay equity.

For the public servants, their salaries were revised significantly higher to reflect the amount of compensation they expect to receive if they hypothetically resign from public duty to take on their dream jobs in private enterprises.

The thinking behind compensating talented public servants with top private enterprise salaries is to induce and retain them in the civil service. Is such thinking flawed, and taken in the interest of the public, especially when the motivation of work of the private enterprises is significantly different from that of the civil service?

According to March & Simon (1958), pay, within the context of the employment exchange, is an inducement to work. Money is provided in return for work and is based upon some specified contingency relationship between work and pay. To the extent that pay is desired as a medium of exchange with instrumental value, money provides people, either as means or an end, with a purpose to work.

In addition, pay can be conceived in terms of symbolism. The concept of symbol, in this context, is defined as a sign which signifies something other than itself. Do you remember the first dollar you earned when you started work? The symbolic meaning of the first dollar you earned signifies more than the instrumental value of a dollar. Clearly monetary pay symbolizes instrumentality as a medium of exchange, but it may also be associated with outcomes such as status, security, and achievement and thus acquire symbolic value as well.

Pay and reward systems in general is symbolic of organization culture. Will there be a clash of cultures between hierarchical bureaucracies and the horizontal organizations of the private sector? Are we motivating our public servants to behave like mercenaries?

In presenting the rationale and justification for paying public servants market benchmarks, our leaders appear to discount the symbolic value of pay. In all respect, the symbolic value of the high office of the land is worth a lot more than several millions of Singapore dollars. If we cost the symbolic value of pay, our public servants’ pay may be placed beyond the red circle; a term used to denote salaries that exceeds the top pay range in their grades.

But then again, if we ask ourselves whether we are pay competitively, our answers invariably would be negative, because money is never enough. Perhaps, we should start the year of the golden rat by questioning why we are paid so much for doing what we enjoy. Should we also be asking why we are paid so much for doing so little?

In the brave new world of 2008, we hope to have less “money talk” and more on the intangible value of reward management. The GROW 2.0 initiative announced by the Ministry of Education, Singapore may be a start.

In its 2007-08 Global Strategic Rewards study, the global consultancy firm Watson Wyatt concluded that employers and employees rank attraction and retention factors differently. They commented that the first thing employers need to do is to recognise the factors that attract and retain talent, and to realise that their expectations, as employers, are sometimes different from those of their employees.

For example, the Watson Wyatt study on accounting and finance industry in the Asia-Pacific region revealed that employers ranked base pay, employer reputation and career development opportunities as the top three attraction factors. On the other hand, employees ranked the nature of work, then base pay and employer reputation as the top factors that attracted them to a job.

In addition, the recent Watson Wyatt WorkAsia study found that drivers for employee engagement are customer focus, compensation and benefits, and communication. Employees said they wanted to feel good about the products and services their employer offers. Employees also said pay, stress levels and promotion opportunities were the main factors affecting their decision to stay with a firm. The amount of respect employees received in the workplace was another important factor in their decision to join or stay with a company.

Can we ask the real public servants the factors that will drive them to commit and engage themselves with the Public Service Division of Singapore? Do they intend to leave for greener pastures now that they are paid according to the private sector? Are our talented people currently working in global corporations applying in doves to serve the Public?

If we are to stop throwing more cash to attract and retain employees, we may need to understand their expectations more fully. We certainly need to keep the people who keep us in business. What do our public servants feel most passionate about as they serve? Will the real public servants and our private sector employees please speak out?

Should we pay volunteers and full time employees of charitable organisations "private sector" salaries?

It appears that we are having a stab at the "war on talent" problem, once again, by throwing money at it. Haven't we learn from Gordon Gekko of The Wall Street that greed is good and we may get away with murder regardless of corporate governance? What happened to the lessons on the "old" National Kidney Foundation of Singapore, and more recently the Singapore Ren Ci Hospital and Medicare Centre?

Can we cultivate a Singaporean culture of caring simply by throwing money at it? Some of us truly believe we can because we are motivated by money and money alone. Offering more money is an expensive way to incentivise or reward behavioural change. Offering more money does not, in itself, solve the problem of inefficient working practice. Nor does it instil sincerity and care. How about volunteering for the sake of volunteering? Social responsibility or wishful thinking?

Shouldn't we be engaging senior (professionals above the age of 55 years) volunteers at charitable (or non-profit) organisations instead? Can we pay them what they're worth and in accordance with benchmarked salaries of charitable organisations? Perhaps, the Singapore National Volunteer & Philanthropy Centre can play its role in connecting our senior "brick and mortar" nation builders with charitable and non-profit organisations for this purpose.

When we are told to jump, do we ask how high we need to jump, as opposed to whether we should jump at all. Really, can (or should) we pay volunteers and full time employees of charitable organisations private sector salaries, or can we afford not to?

_______________________

SPEECH BY MR GOH CHOK TONG,SENIOR MINISTER, AT ASSISI HOSPICE'S FUND-RAISING CHARITY DINNER, 25 NOVEMBER 2007, 7.45 PM AT PAN PACIFIC SINGAPORE

“Lighting up the Lives of Hospice Patients”

1 My wife and I are delighted to be here this evening at Assisi Hospice’s fund-raising charity dinner.

2 Assisi Hospice was started by the Franciscan Missionaries of the Divine Motherhood Order in 1986, first as a home for the chronic sick, and then as a hospice in 1993. Over the years, Assisi Hospice has provided a comprehensive range of palliative care services and generated greater public understanding of hospice and palliative care services.

3 Palliative care is a comprehensive approach to treating terminal illness. It focuses on keeping patients comfortable through pain control and symptom management, and also addresses their psychological, social and spiritual needs. This is a challenging job because patients and their family members generally find it difficult to accept that curative treatment is no longer an option. They may not recognise that palliative care can help patients spend their final days with dignity, comfort and support from their loved ones.

4 We live in a fast-paced society. Not many people pause to think about dying. In our culture, it is also considered inauspicious to talk about death. Many of us believe that we will age healthily, with only occasional and short episodes of illness. Unfortunately, we may not always be so lucky. Moreover, Singapore has a rapidly greying population. We will increasingly encounter elderly people with chronic medical conditions.

5 With the rapid advancement in medical science, lives can be prolonged using sophisticated machines and treatment. However, merely extending lives without giving due consideration to the quality of the life is a burdensome and wrong approach. Moving forward, the Ministry of Health will make end-of-life issues one of its priorities. It will study issues such as how end-of-life healthcare practices and provisions are managed and how they can be improved. Our goal is to help Singaporeans to live long, live with dignity and peace of mind.

Living Life to the Fullest

6 Here we can follow the inspiring example of Ng Wei Hau. Wei Hau, whom I first met two years ago, is a young man with strong determination to live his life to the fullest despite his illness. Wei Hau was diagnosed with brain cancer in 1999, at the age of 12. He was then given only 6 months to live. However, since then, Wei Hau has survived against the odds and has written two little books detailing his struggles with cancer. When I met Wei Hau during the charity lunch in 2005, he was weak and walking unsteadily. I am therefore delighted to learn that he is now a member of the Taekwondo programme in Assisi Hospice. I look forward to his Taekwondo performance this evening. I hope that Wei Hau can be an inspiration for other Hospice patients to similarly make the most of their lives.

Contributions of a varied team

7 The lack of cure for a disease must never lead us to think that nothing else can be done for a patient. The holistic care provided at a hospice requires an interdisciplinary approach. Doctors and nurses, of course, play a pivotal role by providing good medical and nursing care. However, the needs of hospice patients go beyond physical concerns. Patients and their families also require support with psychological, emotional and spiritual issues. Social workers and pastoral care staff help patients and their families with their social and emotional needs. Volunteers are also an important pillar of support for patients and their families. I understand that Assisi Hospice is supported by over 70 individual volunteers and several corporate volunteers. Working with the hospice team, volunteers befriend patients and coordinate patient activities, such as exercise and karaoke sessions and birthday celebrations. Their enthusiasm, energy and encouragement have lifted the hearts of many patients.

8 Donors, of course, are needed. They play a key role in providing the financial resources for hospices. Earlier this month, the inaugural Barclays Asia Forum and the Barclays Singapore Open golf tournament were held in Singapore. As both events were very successful, Barclays decided to donate $75,000 to a charity in Singapore. As I was the Guest-of-Honour and Patron for the two functions respectively, Barclays asked me to nominate a charity for their contribution. I nominated Assisi Hospice because I was coming for your dinner. On behalf of the Hospice, I thank Barclays for their donation. I also commend the Lee Foundation, the Singapore Totalisator Board and Singapore Pools, Ms Emily Chan and many other organisations and individuals for their generous and sustained support for Assisi Hospice.

Good corporate governance

9 Charitable organizations provide valuable social services in our community. However, it is important that they have robust systems to ensure sound governance, transparency and accountability. This is to retain the trust of the donating public. It is no longer sufficient for charities to solicit donations just by explaining the good work that they do. The public should have the confidence that their donations are used prudently and effectively.

10 It is therefore important for charities to have people of integrity and the necessary expertise on their boards to provide sound leadership and raise governance standards. Charities should also actively attract the right people to work in their organisations. One way to do this is to pay full time employees salaries commensurate with the alternative jobs they could hold. Otherwise, the charity sector will fail to attract enough professional staff and lag behind the private sector in terms of efficiency and management. The volunteers on the boards who supervise the management must be capable men and women of integrity with a deep sense of social responsibility. Only then can the charities be run well and earn the trust of the public. While Singapore companies are now placing greater importance on corporate social responsibility and many have made financial contributions to charities, I hope corporate leaders could be more forthcoming in volunteering to serve on the boards of charities. Following the more stringent supervision by the Commissioner of Charities, some corporate leaders and professionals may become hesitant about serving as board members. This will be the wrong way to react. The right way to react is that such scrutiny is welcome as it will help them to help charities raise their standards of governance. Volunteering to serve on the boards of charities is a very meaningful and rewarding way for those who have succeeded in the corporate world to help make Singapore a compassionate society.

Conclusion

11 To conclude, I commend Assisi Hospice for its many contributions to palliative care. I am touched by the dedication of its staff, volunteers and board members. Please keep up the good work and continue to light up the lives of hospice patients and their relatives. For those of us who do not have the time to volunteer but have the financial resources, we too can play our part.

12 I wish everyone a warm feeling as we help others in a less fortunate position. Thank you.