PArt of the reason why I haevn’t been blogging for a pretty long while is because I’m busy. But hey, my wife has discovered blogging! So instead of this blog, me and my wife will be jointly blogging at mrandmrschng.wordpress.com. I think it’d be fun, and it would certainly solve the problem of me taking a long blog vacation.
See you there!
I was just flipping through the upper sec social studies textbook and boy, was it an interesting read. See how it describes the Civil Service in section 4.2 What Makes an Efficient Civil Service (pg 13 
in the section on practising Meritocracy:
Officers in the Civil Service are recruited mainly on the basis of good academic qualifications. Promotion within the Civil Service depends on one's ability and potential. Those who perform well are rewarded for their hard work and dedication through promotions and performance bonuses. The Civil Service ensures that it has a share of the country's top scholars by offering scholarships to them. After their course of studies, these scholars work in the Civil Service for a number of years.
To uphold the image that the Civil Service is efficient and effective in providing its service, poor performance is not tolerated. Those who perform poorly will be advised when their work is not up to standard and will be given a reasonable period of time to improve. If there is no improvement, the officer will have to leave the service.
Let's take a step back and try to imagine an essay question or a multiple choice question based on the above 2 paras.
MCQ: Officers in the civil service are recruited mainly on the basis of:a) Good looks; b) Good Academic Qualifications; c) Good manners; d) who their parents are. [Ans: b of course!]
Essay Question: Describe how the Civil Service practises Meritocracy. (20 marks)
You can just imagine that the poor student would have to memorise the above 2 paras, and the teacher going, ok 1/2 mark for recruiting on the basis of good academic qualifications. Another mark for talking about promotion based on ability and potential. Another mark on being rewarded through promotions and bonuses. Another 4 marks for talking about the scholarship system.
Back when I had to do social studies, life was more simple then. Less stuff to remember. Besides, the historical figures we studied about seemed very interesting (Tan Tock Seng, Whampoa, Sang Nila Utama.) The name which I remember best is Syed Omar bin Ali Aljunied, because I did a project on him and even visited the mosques he set up.
You guys have to check this video out. It’s a rap about guys with a thing for Girls with big bibles.
Saw this video on Tomorrow.sg. I just had to post it. It’s one of those Public Service Advertisements commissioned by Petronas for CNY 2006. THe story is about a group of mothers comparing how good their kid is. Each one outtrumping the other by boasting about their successes.
I just had to post this dilbert comic. This kind of describes my life now.
On a seperate note, here’s a speech by Narayana Murthy, Chairman of Infosys on Work-Life Balance.
I am not relating this to the present scenario. I know people who work 12 hours a day, six days a week, or more. Some people do so because of a work emergency where the long hours are only temporary. Other people I know have put in these hours for years. I don’t know if they are working all these hours, but I do know they are in the office this long. Others put in long office hours because they are addicted to the workplace. Whatever the reason for putting in overtime, working long hours over the long term is harmful to the person and to the organization.
There are things managers can do to change this for everyone’s benefit. Being in the office long hours, over long periods of time, makes way for potential errors. My colleagues who are in the office long hours frequently make mistakes caused by fatigue.Correcting these mistakes requires their time as well as the time and energy of others. I have seen people work Tuesday through Friday to correct mistakes made after 5 PM on Monday.
Another problem is that people who are in the office for long hours are not pleasant company. They often complain about other people (who aren’t working as hard); they are irritable, or cranky, or even angry. Other people avoid them. Such behaviour poses problems, where work goes much better when people work together instead of avoiding one another.
As Managers, there are things we can do to help people leave the office.First and foremost is to set the example and go home ourselves. I work with a manager who chides people for working long hours. His words quickly lose their meaning when he sends these chiding group e-mails with a time-stamp of 2 AM, Sunday.
Second is to encourage people to put some balance in their lives. For instance, here is a guideline I find helpful:
1) Wake up, eat a good breakfast, and go to work.
2) Work hard and smart for eight or nine hours.
3) Go home.
4) Read the comics, watch a funny movie, dig in the dirt, play with your
kids, etc.
5) Eat well and sleep well.This is called recreating. Doing steps 1, 3, 4, and 5 enable step 2. Working regular hours and recreating daily are simple concepts. They are hard for some of us because that requires personal change. They are possible since we all have the power to choose to do them.
In considering the issue of overtime, I am reminded of my eldest son. When he was a toddler, If people were visiting the apartment, he would not fall asleep no matter how long the visit, and no matter what time of day it was! He would fight off sleep until the visitors left.. It was as if he was afraid that he would miss something. Once our visitors left, he would go to sleep. By this time, however, he was over tired and would scream through half the night with nightmares. He, my wife, and I, all paid the price for his fear of missing out.
Perhaps some people put in such long hours because they don’t want to miss anything when they leave the office. The trouble with this is that events will ever stop happening. That is life! Things happen 24 hours a day.
Allowing for little rest is not ultimately practical. So, take a nap. Things will happen while you’re asleep, but you will have the energy to catch up when you wake.
Hence “LOVE YOUR JOB BUT NEVER FALL IN LOVE WITH YOUR COMPANY Because you never know when it stops loving you)” - Narayana Murthy
Who doesn’t want to go to MIT? The Asst Director of admissions of MIT has his own blog and the comments from eager beavers hoping to impress to get in MIT are hilarious. Here is the Asst Director trying to organise a small get together, and you have this guy making the 1st comment on the blog post that’s totally off tangent, and hilarious.
no can do, ive got these bloody EXAMS!!!actually, exams aren’t all that bad. they afford me the opportunity to prove i know everything i’ve been taught. of course, screwing up sucks… plus i like to finish early and watch other ppl’s reactions as they finishi’ve only aced a few exams, actually. algebra I (8th grade) twice, english (8th) once, ancient world history (9th) thrice, algebra II/trig (9th) once, honors english (10th) once, ap chemistry (11th) once, ap calculus bc (11th) once, ap government (12th) and ap bio (12th) once each (and hopefully twice each by next week’s end).i mightve forgotten some, but hey, who honestly keeps track??
im sure lots of u guys have aced high school exams. ur favorites??
I’ve been reading Israel’s and Scoble’s book on Business blogging called “Naked Conversations”. It sounds dodgy, but it’s a book about using blogs to communicate with your customers; How blogs can repair corporate image and rebuild lost trust. Scoble argues that blogging in some way contributed to the rebuilding of Microsoft’s image, as it provided an oppportunity for customers to talk back to the company and get responses in a personal way, instead of being talked at.
Having just read the first few chapters of this book, I’m starting to discover why I am blogging in the first place. More importantly, I’m finding reasons why people in Christian Ministry, especially pastors or Christian leaders should blog. Here are 5 reasons.
Blogging is in essence, another form of conversation. It is like an insight to a person’s thoughts and opinions. I don’t know about you, but I find some things easier to write and share on a blog than in conversation with another person. Take for example my struggles on Sarah’s breastfeeding. If I just met you in church, what are the chances of me telling you all that?
How much richer would our ministry would be if we all share our thoughts and struggles with each other. I’ve been reading Josh Harris’ blog and Together for the gospel .There is much to learn. Shall we get the ARPC team to start blogging?
Lizzie’s been crying for the past 30 minutes.
I’ve been sitting in front of this computer, trying to write a blog entry to distract myself from attending to her. We’re trying to train her to sleep by herself, without having anyone by her side.
Trust me, these 30 minutes pass pretty slowly. As I write, she’s still crying. When should I go in and check on her? The moment I check on her, and she realises, then our sleep training is rendered ineffective…
This reminds me somewhat on how God deals with us. Sometimes, for our own good, God appears to be distant, not answering to our cries and groans. But He is always there listening, just like I am now doing on my baby monitor. He’s not just listening, but he’s groaning, and crying with us. See Romans 8 (Spirit groans, Jesus intercedes). And when the right time comes (and He knows when the right time is), He will act.
I chanced upon this the other day.
Richard Dawkins Evolves Into an Irascible TV HostEarlier this month, Britain’s Channel 4 aired The Root of All Evil?, a two-part exploration of religious faith hosted and narrated by Richard Dawkins, the eminent Oxford ethologist and author who is one of the world’s most outspoken proponents of the theory of evolution. He’s also an aggressive critic of religion. The Root of All Evil? follows Dawkins as he travels to some of the world’s religious centers—among them Jerusalem, Lourdes, and Colorado Springs—to observe services and to interview leaders and followers of various faiths.
Tipped off by a thread on Echo, I bittorrented both episodes a few days ago. From the vantage point of the United
States, the program is remarkable: You simply would never encounter such a brazen denunciation of religious faith on this country’s
airwaves, because the outcry from the religious right would be deafening. Dawkins’s narration drips with contempt; as he goes about
his rounds, it’s as if he can hardly restrain himself from shouting, “I’m surrounded by IDIOTS!” The smoke coming out of his ears leaves a trail behind him wherever he goes.In the seven-and-a-half minute clip linked through the image below, Dawkins visits Colorado Springs to attend a sermon by an influential but proudly ignorant pastor. In a conversation with Dawkins after the sermon, the pastor likens the event to a rock concert. Dawkins suggests that it was more akin to a Nuremberg rally—a comparison that the pastor appears to be too uneducated and ignorant to be offended by.
For a further insight to how he views God, read his essay on Religion’s Misguided Missiles, where he speaks about the development of a perfect missile for the terrorists’ use he concludes that the best missle = human being/sacrifice for their cause aka suicide bomber. To train a suicide
bomber is to promise something after death which is better than life. To promise that is to use religion.
Let’s compare that to what Romans 1 says. I’ll let the words speak for itself. (emphasis are mine)
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suprress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power, and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. SO they are without excuse. For although they knew God, they did not honour him as God or give thanks to him, but thye became futile in their thinking and their foolish hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles …..
(cont at v2
Let’s pray for Richard Dawkins and those who subscribe to his theory because they choose to deny God.
A friend sent this FT article to me. Are we becoming like this?
Tribal workers
Today’s generation of high-earning professionals maintain that their personal fulfillment comes from their jobs and the hours they work. They should grow up, says Thomas Barlow.
A friend of mine recently met a young American woman who was studying on a Rhodes Scholarship at Oxford. She already had two degrees from top US universities, had worked as a lawyer and as a social worker in the US, and somewhere along the way had acquired a black belt in kung fu. Now, however, her course at Oxford was coming to an end and she was thoroughly angst-ridden about what to do next.
Her problem was no ordinary one. She couldn’t decide whether she should make a lot of money as a corporate lawyer/management consultant, devote herself to charity work helping battered wives in disadvantaged communities, or go to Hollywood to work as a stunt double in kung fu films.
What most struck my friend was not the disparity of this woman’s choices, but the earnestness and bad grace with which she ruminated on them. It was almost as though she begrudged her own talents, opportunities and freedom - as though the world had treated her unkindly by forcing her to make such a hard choice.
Her case is symptomatic of our times. In recent years, there has grown up a culture of discontent among the highly educated young, something that seems to flare up, especially, when people reach their late 20s and early 30s. It arises not from frustration caused by lack of opportunity, as may have been true in the past, but from an excess of possibilities.
Most theories of adult developmental psychology have a special category for those in their late 20s and early 30s. Whereas the early to mid-20s are seen as a time to establish one’s mode of living, the late 20s to early 30s are often considered a period of reappraisal.
In a society where people marry and have children young, where financial burdens accumulate early, and where job markets are
inflexible, such reappraisals may not last long. But when people manage to remain free of financial or family burdens, and where the perceived opportunities for alternative careers are many, the reappraisal is likely to be angst-ridden and long lasting.Among no social group is this more true than the modern, international, professional elite: that tribe of young bankers, lawyers, consultants and managers for whom financial, familial, personal, corporate and (increasingly) national ties have become irrelevant.
Often they grew up in one country, were educated in another, and are now working in a third. They are independent, well paid, and enriched by experiences that many of their parents could only dream of. Yet, by their late 20s, many carry a sense of disappointment: that for all their opportunities, freedoms and achievements, life has not delivered quite what they had hoped.
At the heart of this disillusionment lies a new attitude towards work. The idea has grown up, in recent years, that work should not be just a means to an end a way to make money, support a family, or gain social prestige - but should provide a rich and fulfilling experience in and of itself.
Jobs are no longer just jobs; they are lifestyle options. Recruiters at financial companies, consultancies and law firms have
promoted this conception of work. Job advertisements promise challenge, wide experiences, opportunities for travel and relentless personal development.Michael is a 33-year-old management consultant who has bought into this vision of late-20th century work. Intelligent and well-educated - with three degrees, including a doctorate - he works in Munich, and has a “stable, long-distance relationship” with a woman living in California. He takes 140 flights a year and works an average of 80 hours a week. Some weeks he works more than 100 hours. When asked if he likes his job, he will say: “I enjoy what I’m doing in terms of the intellectual challenges.”
Although he earns a lot, he doesn’t spend much. He rents a small apartment, though he is rarely there, and has accumulated very few possessions. He justifies the long hours not in terms of wealth-acquisition, but solely as part of a “learning experience”.
This attitude to work has several interesting implications, mostly to do with the shifting balance between work and non-work, employment and leisure.
Because fulfilling and engrossing work - the sort that is thought to provide the most intense learning experience - often requires long hours or captivates the imagination for long periods of time, it is easy to slip into the idea that the converse is also true: that just by working long hours, one is also engaging in fulfilling and engrossing work.
This leads to the popular fallacy that you can measure the value of your job and, therefore, the amount you are learning from it) by the amount of time you spend on it. And, incidentally, when a premium is placed on learning rather than earning, people are particularly susceptible to this form of self-deceit.
Thus, whereas in the past, when people in their 20s or 30s spoke disparagingly about nine-to-five jobs it was invariably because they
were seen as too routine, too unimaginative, or too bourgeois. Now, it is simply because they don’t contain enough hours.Young professionals have not suddenly developed a distaste for leisure, but they have solidly bought into the belief that a 45-hour week necessarily signifies an unfulfilling job.
Jane, a 29-year-old corporate lawyer who works in the City of London, tells a story about working on a deal with another lawyer, a young man in his early 30s. At about 3am, he leant over the boardroom desk and said: Isn’t this great? This is when I really love my job.”
What most struck her about the remark was that the work was irrelevant (she says it was actually rather boring); her colleague simply liked the idea of working late. “It’s as though he was validated, or making his life important by this,” she says.
Unfortunately, when people can convince themselves that all they need do in order to lead fulfilled and happy lives is to work long hours, they can quickly start to lose reasons for their existence.
As they start to think of their employment as a lifestyle, fulfilling and rewarding of itself - and in which the reward is proportional to
hours worked - people rapidly begin to substitute work for other aspects of their lives.Michael, the management consultant, is a good example of this phenomenon. He is prepared to trade (his word) not just goods and time for the experience afforded by his work, but also a substantial measure of commitment in his personal relationships. In a few months, he is being transferred to San Francisco, where he will move in with his girlfriend.
But he’s not sure that living in the same house is actually going to change the amount of time he spends on his relationship. “Once I move over, my time involvement on my relationship will not change significantly. My job takes up most of my time and pretty much dominates what I do, when, where and how I do it,” he says.
Moreover, the reluctance to commit time to a relationship because they are learning so much, and having such an intense and fulfilling time at work is compounded, for some young professionals, by a reluctance to have a long-term relationship at all. Today, by the time someone reaches 30, they could easily have had three or four jobs in as many different cities - which is not, as it is often portrayed, a function of an insecure global job-market, but of choice.
Robert is 30 years old. He has three degrees and has worked on three continents. He is currently working for the United Nations in Geneva. For him, the most significant deterrent when deciding whether to enter into a relationship is the likely transient nature of the rest of his life.
“What is the point in investing all this emotional energy and exposing myself in a relationship, if I am leaving in two months, or if I do not know what I am doing next year?” he says.
Such is the character of the modern, international professional, at least throughout his or her 20s. Spare time, goods and relationships, these are all willingly traded for the exigencies of work. Nothing is valued so highly as accumulated experience. Nothing is neglected so much as commitment.
With this work ethic - or perhaps one should call it a professional development ethic” - becoming so powerful, the globally mobile
generation now in its late 20s and early 30s has garnered considerable professional success.At what point, though, does the experience-seeking end? Kathryn is a successful American academic, 29, who bucked the trend of her generation: she recently turned her life round for someone else. She moved to the UK, specifically, to be with a man, a decision that she says few of her contemporaries understood.
” We’re not meant to say: ‘I made this decision for this person. Today, you’re meant to do things for yourself. If you’re willing to make sacrifices for others - especially if you’re a woman - that’s seen as a kind of weakness. I wonder, though, is doing things for yourself really empowerment, or is liberty a kind of trap?” she says.
For many, it is a trap that is difficult to break out of, not least because they are so caught up in a culture of professional development. And spoilt for choice, some like the American Rhodes Scholar no doubt become paralyzed by their opportunities, unable to do much else in their lives, because they are so determined not to let a single one of their chances slip.
If that means minimal personal commitments well into their 30s, so be it. “Loneliness is better than boredom” is Jane’s philosophy. And, although she knows “a lot of professional single women who would give it all up if they met a “rich man to marry”, she remains far more concerned herself about finding fulfillment at work.
“I am constantly questioning whether I am doing the right thing here,” she says. “There’s an eternal search for a more challenging and satisfying option, a better lifestyle. You always feel you’re not doing the right thing, always feel as if you should be striving for another goal,” she says.
Jane, Michael, Robert and Kathryn grew up as part of a generation with fewer social constraints determining their futures than has been true for probably any other generation in history. They were taught at school that when they grew up they could “do anything”, “be anything”. It was an idea that was reinforced by popular culture, in films, books and television.
The notion that one can do anything is clearly liberating. But life without constraints has also proved a recipe for endless searching,
endless questioning of aspirations. It has made this generation obsessed with self-development and determined, for as long as possible, to minimize personal commitments in order to maximize the options open to them.One might see this as a sign of extended adolescence. Eventually, they will be forced to realize that living is as much about closing
possibilities as it is about creating them.
