Originally Posted by Unregistered

I think that at least some parts of IMDA have reason to exist, for example the regulatory functions like for media, telecom, PDPC. There are existing projects that IMDA could be excelling at, and exciting ones that IMDA could take on.

But as one other poster described it... "poverty of leadership". How many leaders like ACE, D, DD, are here for the long haul, as compared to being secondees who are just going through a rite of passage in being seconded, and are here to chalk up some quick high-profile wins on their CVs so that when they return to mothership they can get promoted? To many of them, staff are mere tools to help them achieve these objectives. They don't actually care about the welfare and development of staff, and they're only "nice" to staff to the extent that it helps them achieve their self-interested objectives.

Now, whether these ACE/D/DDs are here for the long or short term, how many have actual domain knowledge in the area they're supervising? What can they actually contribute? Can we count the number on two hands? One hand?

My colleagues and I write speeches and TPs, and hell - we know how much domain knowledge and experience the folks giving them have. I've personally witnessed Ds and DDs making inaccurate representations to sister agencies and foreign government officials quite a few times because of lack of domain expertise, and even saying things antithetical to IMDA's policies. It left me completely speechless. But these people still get the glory and promotions and move on. The speechwriters, who actually know their stuff, continue to be small cogs in the machinery.

And even if these ACE/D/DDs here for the long haul, are they decent towards staff, or tyrannical/dictators, acting purely in their own self interest, or power hungry and trying to expand their empire and build fiefdoms?

It *might* work when the self-interest of these people coincide with what's good for IMDA overall. But I think much much more often than not, the interests of this gargantuan gaggle of bad eggs diverge as between themselves, let alone as between themselves and IMDA, resulting in a heck of a mess within IMDA and low morale at the working level.

A bunch of colleagues and I are actually worried about the future of Singapore and policies in relation to key areas that IMDA is responsible for. It's like watching a huge grand building slowly burn and collapse, and not being able to do anything about it.