More scholars not from Raffles or Hwa Chong

By Elgin Toh
elgintoh@sph.com.sg ↗ (opens in new tab)

THE main pipeline of Singapore's top echelons of civil service - the Public Service Commission (PSC) scholarship - is drawing from more diverse sources, and this change may be happening faster than many Singaporeans imagine.

In an interview with The Straits Times, PSC chairman Eddie Teo reveals that just 60 per cent of this year's scholars hail from Raffles Institution and Hwa Chong Institution, down from 82 per cent in 2007.

Mr Teo sheds light on how diversity is now a big part of PSC's work in selecting scholars and promoting top civil servants.

He was speaking in the same week the PSC announced that its new batch of scholars included five polytechnic graduates - the highest number in recent years - and, for the first time, two School of the Arts graduates.

* Why is diversity important?

The Singapore population is becoming more diverse. Public servants need to reflect the population and be able to understand the ground well. If you just have one kind of people in the public service and another kind of people in the population, there's going to be a disjuncture.

The nature of our problems has also become more complex. You need people with different abilities to address the issues.

For these reasons, we decided that diversity is important.

That's not to say that we have set quotas. Rather, you find that as our society changes, the people who appear before us also change. And you seize the opportunity and appoint the right people with the right fit to the public sector.

* When, roughly, did this shift in thinking happen?

If you look at the numbers, for instance, the year before I took over as PSC chairman - 2007 - some 82 per cent of our scholars came from Raffles Junior College (now known as Raffles Institution) and Hwa Chong Institution. This year, about 60 per cent are from Hwa Chong and Raffles.

This does not mean that Hwa Chong's and Raffles' standards have dropped. The education system has produced good schools like Dunman High School, Anglo-Chinese School (Independent), River Valley High, NUS High. And they are giving the two top schools a run for their money.

In 2009, we also started to engage schools more actively. I suspect there was, in the past, a degree of self-disqualification by students, who think: "Why apply? They only choose Hwa Chong and Raffles students."

So we persuaded schools to persuade students to apply. We met them and asked them what kind of problems they had and why they didn't submit applications before. We assured them that we were serious about wanting diversity and people with qualities apart from academic results.

Then, we began to see applications from schools that never applied before. And we actually gave them scholarships. So slowly, the feeling is beginning to spread that you don't have to come from Hwa Chong and Raffles to apply.

* Some people might ask if this emphasis on diversity means we trade off on ability.

Diversity doesn't mean no ability. Diversity means different abilities. We're still looking for people with the qualities we were looking for before - people who are not just top academically, but who also have integrity, commitment, empathy and leadership.

For instance, in the recent batch, there was one very interesting guy who grew up in Papua New Guinea. He's got a different experience. Now, I'm not saying that anybody with a strange background will make a good public servant. He's also a very able guy and did well in school. So we don't just pick people with strange backgrounds. They've got to have strange backgrounds plus all the other things.

* Deputy Prime Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam recently spoke on the need to ensure a continuous meritocracy - that we take a risk with people who have not done as well in the early stages.

I agree. Which is why we never assume that the PSC is faultless, or that it knows exactly which 18-year-old will make it as permanent secretary in 20 years' time. We assume that sometimes people fall through the cracks. We didn't look at them before.

Partly it's a practical problem. You can lower the bar, but if you make (it) so low, you will be faced with 20,000 people to interview, and you can't do it. So you have to set a bar. But you ensure that later on, (those) you miss have another shot. In 2007, we started giving mid-term scholarships to people who had begun their university studies. In 2008, we started giving out master's scholarships. These people may not have applied previously for various reasons - their grades were not good enough, or they knew nothing about government service, or they didn't want to be bonded. But after a few years they decide that maybe it's a good thing. We'll look at them. The wonderful thing is that the people who then apply at that stage - say, 20 years old instead of 18 - really want to join the public service. At 18, you may not be sure.

We also have a programme called green harvest: opportunities for people in the private sector. They join either the management associates programme (MAP - the primary route to the Administrative Service), or the Administrative Service, depending on their seniority. Last year, 19 per cent of MAP inflow was from the open market. This was a peak.

Of course, the numbers are not large, because if you are really good, and you are doing well outside government, why would you want to join the public sector? Unless you feel burnt out. And then you say, I'll give it a try.

Some don't fit in because cultures differ. They may be used to the way things work in the private sector but now they've got to seek approval from so many departments and bosses, and it's difficult to adjust. But for those who adjust and stay on, this is another way of increasing diversity.

In the service, if you're not in the MAP or the Administrative Service, but you show excellence, your name will be put up. It may take you longer, but if you're interviewed and considered good enough, you are brought into the Administrative Service.

* Is there anyone whom you would say was your best bet?

I have been PSC chairman for only five years. For me to see results, I need 10, 15, 20 years. If I make a bet now, give him a scholarship, it takes a long time to prove me right or wrong.

* That is the nature of PSC's work, isn't it? It's long-term.

Yes. And you can say that of many domains. We do the best we can in selecting the right people. The rest depends on the system, the organisation, the process of nurturing and the people themselves. You may choose somebody who's good but miss something about his character, for instance, and he gets derailed along the way because of some flaw.

Or some people find that this is not the life for them. And I don't agonise over that because, for me, the important thing is fit. If people leave for the right reasons, they stay in Singapore and contribute to Singapore, that's fine.

* But there's still a sense that he took up a place that could have been given to someone else.

That's a misperception. There is no quota. That is why we had 92 PSC scholars this year and 62 last year. I'm not trying to meet a number. If this year there are 92 good people, we give 92 scholarships. Last year there were only 62, so we gave 62. Next year, it may go down or may go up again. Of course, I don't think we will ever give 500 top-tier PSC scholarships. Singapore is small and the pool is small.

* One view out there is that in recent years, with families becoming more affluent, more parents can afford to send their children abroad to study, and therefore it is becoming harder for PSC to attract the top talent.

It is not necessarily a bad thing. If you go with your parents' money, it is because you want to have your options open. You don't want to join the public service. In the past, there would have been people who applied for the wrong reasons: It is prestigious or they wanted to go overseas, even though they didn't really want to join the public service.

My concern is: Of the top five to 10 people from each JC (junior college), are many of them still applying to PSC? The answer is yes. The interest from that top tier has been maintained.

PSC chairman Eddie Teo believes diversity in the public service is important as public servants need to reflect Singapore's changing population and be able to understand the ground well.

Source: Straits Times © Singapore Press Holdings Limited. Reproduced with permission.