Moving Away from the Culture of Contentment and Embracing the Culture of Advancement: Choice of Values in the Public Service

For many who had lived in Sarawak during the decades of the 1960s and early 1970s, the then era would surely and at times nostalgically remind us of the less than developed state that we were in. Many basic needs have still to be met. The standard of our infrastructure (roads, buildings and institutional support) were mostly in a very rudimentary state. Administrative managers, development and economic planners must have wondered then what Sarawak would have looked like by the end of the century?

Imagine therefore that we are not in a time like the year where we are today (2002), but rather in the closing years of 1960s, (say end of 1969). Consider making a prediction of Sarawak economy by the end of the 1990s (the end of the 21st. century) or 30 years ahead as follows:

"Sarawak GDP will grow from RM438 million in 1960 to RM13,908 million in real terms in 2001, or RM489 million to RM36,054 million in current price, respectively. The manufacturing sector will be a leading growth sector with its GDP share, from 1 % in 1960 to 24 % in 2001. While resource-based industries like timber, petroleum and LNG, would account for a huge share of its industrial production , Sarawak will emerge as a wafer producer in 2000. There will be five (5) universities established in the State - UNIMAS and UiTM in Samarahan, UPM in Bintulu, Swinburne in Kuching and Curtin in Miri. Apart from it rich endowment of natural resources, Sarawak by 2000 with its various institutions of higher learning will be focusing on its human resource development. Amidst growth, development and prosperity, Sarawak will enjoy peace, stability, unity and harmony among its people".

The above description actually depicts the scene today and it would have made one a great soothsayer if we dared have written those prophetic predictions at the end of the 1960s. These descriptions would encapsulate our successful effort in bringing change towards enabling us to embrace the culture of advancement. For the culture of advancement is meant to signify or denote progress, rapid socio-economic transfor-mation, improved welfare and societal enhancement. And with the continual role of Government complemented by the private sector, we are confident that Sarawak will continue to see further progress in the future.

Yet, we need to pause for a moment and ask further questions. Can we automatically assume that we will achieve such progress without any commensurate effort put in? Do we have a sublime right to expect success and more success without re-looking at our past and present effort, as well as doubling and tripling our effort? Do we not need to consider what it takes to reach such commanding heights? With great and rising expectation from the rakyat and given global uncertainty, how are we to manage these imponderables and many unpredictable events?

What this editorial is particularly concerned is to address the issue of contentment and its derivatives like complacency. Let us look at the fact and reality. The State economy is not isolated nor insulated. Our borders are porous. With growth and development, we have created jobs, but we still have to turn to foreign labour. There are still "pockets of poverty" amidst prosperity. We still have a significant proportion of our population residing in the rural areas and thus still outside the mainstream of development. With the limited infrastructure and infostructure, the rural-urban dichotomy still exists and now exacerbated by the digital divide phenomenon. If knowledge is going to be the key driver of growth and development in the future, it follows that we would need to not only accelerate the applications of ICT in our urban setting but would need to more than double our effort in the rural areas if we are to narrow the digital divide.

What do all these mean or signify? For the State Civil Service, we must be the pacesetters with the ability to play role models. With our very well-established administrative set up at Divisional (11), District (28) and sub districts (30) levels, covering all State and Federal Departments and agencies, we can individually or as a group play our part. Our offices can be seen or can symbolize the ICT nerve centres at these Divisions, Districts and Sub-Districts. Our officers and staff can be looked upon as resource persons, catalysts and role models. Our collective expertise, skills and cumulative experiences will certainly place us in an unenviable position to effect and bring change. If we do not play these roles meaningfully, then contentment will rear its ugly head.

Contentment can be symptomatic. It can start with complacency, resting on our laurels, being unprepared to face eventualities. We let procrastination rules the day and becomes the "thief of time". Some will say "tidak apa" or "cukup", when in fact action, firmness, determination and more should follow. Contentment can be systemic and pervasive. It can be a very serious problem if and when it invades and pervades our system. There can in fact be a disease called "contentitis". And contentment can be very dangerous to society when people start assuming "we have the knowledge and we have the past experiences", when in fact what we really need is to acquire and possess new knowledge and experience to meet the currents, undercurrents and waves of change(s). Of course, we need to distinguish here between indigenous knowledge versus technical knowledge. With rising income, there will also be very conspicuous consumption but we must also realize that the goods we procure and consume are not necessarily produced internally and may be imported. Increasingly, conspicuous consumption is a related contentment problem if we do not recognise that rising income is needed to meet our consumption (let alone conspicuous consumption) and which can only come from hard work, higher production and productivity. And higher production and productivity cannot be associated with the culture of contentment. If anything, contentment can eventually lead to retrogressiveness.

We now look at and relate what this topic got to do with the public sector or specifically to the Civil Service – and more so our own State Civil Service. The objective here is to send reminders, to signal premonitions, and to refocus our radar screens with respect to our work values or work culture. It will impact on our choice of culture in the service, in which the choice is clear: to move away from a culture of contentment and to embrace a culture of advancement.

As a starting point, we can start looking at our key roles: to administer and manage the functions of government as well as to produce public goods and services. And in delivering such products and services, we have to be efficient, quality conscious, economical and accountable. Imagine a Civil Service that is ruled and governed with such riddles as:

"We have been doing this for donkey

years.

Leave it to us.

We know what to do.

I don't like to work in outstation or I

don't like to work in the headquarters".

These are all manifestations of contentment. The fact that one has been doing things- the same things over and over again for umpteen years, does not necessarily mean one has all the requisite skills to do them. It will be a dangerous assumption to think we know (having the knowledge and requisite expertise) when in reality we do not actually know. Besides, whom are we benchmarking ourselves with? Is it ordinary or world-class performers? We may end up as "jaguh kampung" (which literally means village champions). In doing so, we are merely defining our own comfort zones. We may be revealing our own preferences, idiosyncrasies, likes and dislikes. In the service, we are often tasked to do things in the category of "things that I don't like to do" either for lack of confidence, being uninterested or lacking motivation. But it is in these highly demanding, challenging and unpredictable areas that our services are needed most. And of even more concern, you have to do them well, even up to a world-class standard. A world-class performance would call upon us in the Civil Service to have the competitive edge and calls us to embrace a culture of advancement.

A culture of advancement means that we are hungry, thirsty and insatiable for the quest and ultimately the nurturing of intelligence, knowledge, expertise and talent. We continuously search for wisdom. We want to drive good positive values. We definitely want to be world class. We want to be competitive and have the competitive edge. We are constantly aware of our changing, revolving and evolving roles. We benchmark our performance with the "best of the best". We are constantly aware that people need our services, recognize our decisiveness, and extol our leadership role.

Compare this state with a culture of contentment. In such a make believe environment we are always seemingly contented and satisfied. Sayings such as "we have been doing it and you can leave it to us" will undoubtedly prevail. A reality check will uncover that we are actually resting on our laurels because we always assume we know how to do it. In such a circumstance, we are really defining our own comfort zones. Also, we tend to avoid conflicts, paradoxes and disparities. In such a setting, we are thus dealing with status quo management (SQM) rather than total quality management (TQM). We are talking of business- as-usual mode of operation.

The second aspect that we can relate into is our effort at taking full advantage of our trainings that are organized for all levels of the service- from the managerial to the supporting staff. Is attending a course (with certificate of attendance) sufficient? What value-added knowledge have we acquired? Or are such courses relevant to our work? Do we need a good and balanced mix of management and technical subjects? This editorial takes a holistic view - we need all. We need to look back at refresher courses in Economics, Finance, Public Policy, Development, Sociology and the Social Sciences. We need to organize technical courses for our technical departments. The engineers, architects, surveyors, planners, agricultural specialists and others would need to be updated. In this way, we will be able to move away from a culture of contentment and hence to embrace a new culture of advancement.