Lousy Scholar vs Excellent Farmer

[Stanong11]

It seems, in the civil service, a lousy scholar who so long he don't screw up big time, will end up in a higher position than an excellent farmer (non-scholar), even if the farmer is better and more productive than the scholar.

 

How meritocratic is this?

 

Scholars can easily get back-to-back promotions and continually top level performance grading, while a farmer will never be considered for back-to-back promotion (no matter how good) and worse, performance grading after every promotion is a default 'C'.

 

Again, how meritocratic is this?

 

If these scholars are put on an even footing with the farmers, same starting point, same running equipments ..., I dare say the results at the finishing line will be astonishing.

 

Comments?

 

Meritocracy = good results in school, full stop.

[Kiadaw]

Well I was born a peasant but now stay in private property, drive conti car and have lotsa cash! so peasants can make it too as long as you work hard like the farmers!

Si bei haolian leh you. I also incidentaly drive continental car & live in Private property, so I am as sucessful as well? hehe.

 

 

On topic:

Thats why a lot of capable people (who are not scholars) prefer to join the private section, or start their own business.

 

Lucky for me, there is not a lot of things I liked to do in public sector, so no loss for me. I am happy where I am, even though I am not the same finanical level as some of the MCF bros here.

 

No one contested you can be sucessful or not if you are a scholar, but the question is, can you be sucessful if you are not a scholar in public sector, if youa are just as capable or more than them. When I say sucessful, I mean at least on par with most scholar in promotion & chances.

 

 

Anyone from public sector can testified?

Edited March 20, 2012 by Kiadaw

[Lethalstrike]

Since on scholar topic..

 

i caught 1 FT scholar before doing sala thing in my premises, i warned him and he wrote an apology letter

 

the english is machiam pr 1 english and he already sec 4

 

i wonder how he qualify as scholar..

 

anyway guess what? i didnt report him and he reported i threatened him...play with me?i used my CCTV footage, submit to his principal..let them settle him..

 

bite me first ..knn

 

hope he kana revoke

 

Fwah, it really did bit back like an ungrateful dog should.

 

Luckily you did have the dog-beating stick in the form of a CCTV footage.

[Shinigaimi]

There is never a perfect system. We can only choose the better one.

 

Out of 1000 farmers... only 1 is good... Out of 1000 scholars... 100 is bad..

 

Must you compare that 1 good to the 100 bad?

 

Do you prefer the nation to run by Uni grads or school dropout? Of course we have famous school dropout like Bill gates, steve jobs or even our local hero (creative founder). Can you trust them to run the nation?

 

The way we continue to argue for the sake of arguing... we can tell our children not to study hard. Study so hard for what.. next time pples will laugh at you being a lousy scholar.

[Caramelised]

All systems need guidelines to run, at the end of the day it is still LUCK. See too many cases of top management stupid stupid and everyday do nothing still service the company for many many years. If you come across staff who works for more than 10 or 20 years sitting on the high post are mainly by LUCK ( not all are like that). It is LIFE and FATE, like it or not this is how the market work.......

[Lethalstrike]

There is never a perfect system. We can only choose the better one.

 

Out of 1000 farmers... only 1 is good... Out of 1000 scholars... 100 is bad..

 

Must you compare that 1 good to the 100 bad?

 

Do you prefer the nation to run by Uni grads or school dropout? Of course we have famous school dropout like Bill gates, steve jobs or even our local hero (creative founder). Can you trust them to run the nation?

 

The way we continue to argue for the sake of arguing... we can tell our children not to study hard. Study so hard for what.. next time pples will laugh at you being a lousy scholar.

 

After reading through your post 3 times, I still could not comprehend your logic.

 

Are you actually implying that if a nation is being ran by 100 lousy scholars, it is actually better than a nation ran by 1 truely outstanding dropout? I hope you realise that your analogy between 2 extremes is inappropriate and possibly, insufficient enough to substantiate TS's comments on meritocracy.

 

If you read TS's comments closely, the real problem is not the comparison of real ability between scholars and farmers, but rather the assumptions that "scholars can do no wrong" in which this country has wrongly pursued since its inception.

 

 

 

[Jim]

No one contested you can be sucessful or not if you are a scholar, but the question is, can you be sucessful if you are not a scholar in public sector, if youa are just as capable or more than them. When I say sucessful, I mean at least on par with most scholar in promotion & chances.

 

I took ideas from this blogpost and followup comments, and it is probably more interesting that what I have to say:

http://mrwangsaysso.blogspot.com/2007/04/t...ot-to-join.html

 

Take a look at this scenario:

 

Bob is the top performer in his role among his peers. Bob has no special projects.

 

Alice is above average in her current role, but as shown by her involvement in special projects, she is capable of taking more responsibilities.

 

Bob has outstanding performance, and will get a good performance bonus, but wont get promoted. Alice will get promoted.

 

I think this is the system in almost any organization, not just the Singapore civil service. (Bearing in mind the Singapore civil service is more like the private sector than almost any other civil service in the world.)

 

If you only work within your job scope, you are likely to get a C grade.

 

If you want special projects, your boss must show you can handle it. Singapore civil service has this nailed down to the CEP, current estimated potential.

 

If you start your career with a super high CEP, you will be thrown so many special projects, and if you dont crack, you will rise up fast.

 

OTOH, if your CEP is low, your boss will need some serious balls to approve you to take on special projects.

 

And even then, a scholar has performance reviews more frequently than the non-scholar.

 

So a top performing non-scholar is not likely to keep pace with a mediocre scholar, since from the get go, these two will not be running on the same track anyway.

 

Like an F1 race, if you didnt start from the pole position, you will need to do some serious overtaking just to keep up. This is the rules of the game, and it is never fair for everyone.

 

But even in private organisations, I dont think I need to explain that sometimes a top performer may not do well in management. It is just a shame modern organisations reward base on rank rather than performance, except in cases where performance really matters, likes sales, and as a result, not making management is seen as a slight on their performance.

 

If it is up to me, a top perfomer should have the chance to be paid as much as the CEO. Or the Permanent Secretary.

[Alechi]

Supposed scholars don't get thrown more work for nothing.

 

"High potential" individuals get additional special bonus of $20-30k (estimate) annually.

Management trainees/associates get additional special bonus of $30-50k (estimate) annually.

Administrative service individuals get *your guess is as good as mine*.

 

This is on top of higher CEP, higher salary, accelerated progression ... etc

[Joseph22]

these are bookwormmies.they have outstanding skill in memorizing.to be a scholar you have to memorizing just like ancient china memorizing of poems.

if not,go be a farmer or table wiper.

I dont think they are only memorizing poems. they are suppose to give political views too. or at least that is what the impression we had on varies movies and drama

[Good-Carbuyer]

And that is the reason why many excellent farmers choose to leave the civil service and its charade of meritocracy. Where's the meritocracy to speak of when the government is just paying lip service to it? I will say the priorities of this country has already gone wrong quite sometime ago.

 

Put a tortoise and a hare on the same starting line and you can be sure the hare will finish first no matter how much it rests along the way. That's uniquely Singapore for you. The story of the hardworking tortoise winning the race eventually doesn't apply here.

 

If i'm the tortoise in the race, i will leave the hare to run its own race and venture off the track to chart another path of my own.

Perhaps my workplace got one classic case:

FT with M.Sc. repeatedly confessed himself to be incompetent at each meeting. Yet locals are not allowed to come forward to solve the issues due to the FT's presence (like the repeated SMRT trains breakdowns). The culture of discrimination against locals. The pen mighter than the sword. All that we can name are here.

[Shinigaimi]

After reading through your post 3 times, I still could not comprehend your logic.

 

Are you actually implying that if a nation is being ran by 100 lousy scholars, it is actually better than a nation ran by 1 truely outstanding dropout? I hope you realise that your analogy between 2 extremes is inappropriate and possibly, insufficient enough to substantiate TS's comments on meritocracy.

 

If you read TS's comments closely, the real problem is not the comparison of real ability between scholars and farmers, but rather the assumptions that "scholars can do no wrong" in which this country has wronglyil pursued since its inception.

 

Yes. As long as the 100 lousy scholars is backed up by the 900 better ones.

 

So we have 900 better scholars compared to 1 outstanding dropout.

 

I know the system is damn lousy but there is really no better alternative.

 

The only alternative is to give them opposition mps in the parliament to cap the minister ego & make them work better & faster.

 

[Kiadaw]

Yes. As long as the 100 lousy scholars is backed up by the 900 better ones.

 

So we have 900 better scholars compared to 1 outstanding dropout.

 

I know the system is damn lousy but there is really no better alternative.

 

The only alternative is to give them opposition mps in the parliament to cap the minister ego & make them work better & faster.

The Topic is not if we should invest in scholarship, identifying potential good candidates & give them a good head start.

 

The question is only when they are in the job, then it should be purely base on performance & merit & not record as scholar. If most of the scholars are as good as you think they are, then they have nothing to worry about the competition right?

 

They can get into a race by your past merit, even in a position in front but once in the race, should they be given a much faster car.

 

Never mind that actual working & studying is not the same thing. You can get by good in school without ever be good in social, interpersonal, management & leadership skills.

[Mustank]

https://m.facebook.com/Jamaicanmedia/videos/when-people-who-cant-do-better-criticize-you/7851620884911708/

🤪