IMDA (under MCI)

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Not sure turf war civil war got what difference lol.

After the talk, my friends from private said that they thought PDPC and IMDA were the same and the guidelines come out under PDPC's logo, so how come the Director said a few times that "the advisory guidelines were drafted by MY team, not PDPC".

How to reply them?

I think whether you're from PDPC or IMDA, at the very least for public facing events, present a united front and promote the advisory guidelines together right.

This PDPC is a ****ing joke. If you want to report someone for unsolicited marketing, need to fill up a form with tons of pages. Seems like they are deliberately doing that to discourage people to report which reduce the number of reports which in turn reduces their workload

Originally Posted by Unregistered

The state of IMDA and comments here are tragic. Even more degrading for someone like myself who joined the org recently. The culture and work here is tough, efficiency levels are poor but if anything, I have nothing but respect for the people who have been able to put up with all the tough fights and worked hard through the hours. It's really sad that people externally would not see this if they have the perception that IMDA's work accounts for nothing and that people in the org are deemed unfit for any other role outside of IMDA. Having joined this cursed place for a few months now I can say for sure that it's unlike any challenge that I've faced in my career. The work is tough, the processes are warped, managing the people even harder. If anything, the people who manage the survive this place are mentally tough people, who have either decided to sacrifice their personal life for this place or just have no life but are willing to clock in the hours and enslave themselves to work. In short, the survivors here, disregarding the cruisers but to the people who have truly worked hard, are incredibly resilient and respectable. We should still give credit for the quiet ones who have tolerated this madness.

As for LCH, as much as he is unpredictable and harsh is his ways sometimes, you've to admit, his intellect isn't for everyone,and often he has a point. Not sure if he's too smart for his own good or if people like myself are just finding it hard to match up to his level of quick thinking.

THIS. I actually empathise with some of the corporate leaders who worked hard in developing their industry, w/o the wayang-ness and mind games. They truly deserve our respect cos it's really not easy to survive and thrive as a leader in imda. Especially so if they themselves were at the mercy of mediocre leaders, and yet having to be a strong, resilient leader to their subordinates (or at the very least, behave the part).

I specially wrote in and thanked my hiring manager (DD) for not shortlisting me to the next round, sharing my revelations of CE's dismal leadership and toxic working culture. I even applaud and appreciate her leadership inside the email - turnover rate at the directors' level is so high, she could have walked away if she wants to, yet she continue turning up consistently in this pressure cooker environment (quiet quitting is another story thou). I felt so bad for her, I even offered words of encouragement (I mean, I don't even want to work there despite knowing that she will make a good boss/leader).

For some reason, I feel strongly for her plight and unknown struggles.

This is the most radical and boldest move I've made in a recruitment process.

I don't understand your point regarding LCH's intellect. From what I've read, his intellect is so bad it turns many pple off. It's either he has it, or not. But it's damn clear that he lacks wisdom in tech.

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.

PSD really farked it up big time by parachuting LCH to IMDA. They could have tactically created a new DS role in some ministry and send him there for further observation as opposed to getting him to lead a stat board when he was fresh out of navy.

Since those below him (DCE, ACE, D etc.) knows that he lacks substance, they become nonchalant about the need to have any sort of domain knowledge and end up focusing on frivolous stuff like the artistic value of slides.

You are right, the policies related to areas that IMDA is responsible for are totally mismanaged.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

The state of IMDA and comments here are tragic. Even more degrading for someone like myself who joined the org recently. The culture and work here is tough, efficiency levels are poor but if anything, I have nothing but respect for the people who have been able to put up with all the tough fights and worked hard through the hours. It's really sad that people externally would not see this if they have the perception that IMDA's work accounts for nothing and that people in the org are deemed unfit for any other role outside of IMDA. Having joined this cursed place for a few months now I can say for sure that it's unlike any challenge that I've faced in my career. The work is tough, the processes are warped, managing the people even harder. If anything, the people who manage the survive this place are mentally tough people, who have either decided to sacrifice their personal life for this place or just have no life but are willing to clock in the hours and enslave themselves to work. In short, the survivors here, disregarding the cruisers but to the people who have truly worked hard, are incredibly resilient and respectable. We should still give credit for the quiet ones who have tolerated this madness.

As for LCH, as much as he is unpredictable and harsh is his ways sometimes, you've to admit, his intellect isn't for everyone,and often he has a point. Not sure if he's too smart for his own good or if people like myself are just finding it hard to match up to his level of quick thinking.

The most tragic part is those survivors whom you respect can't find another job outside IMDA, so they're stuck there as high class admin.

Having worked at this cursed place for a few years, I can say for sure that it's unlike the pre LCH era where a collegial atmosphere and competent leaders existed.

As for LCH, he is just a dud. Quick thinking doesn't equate to smart thinking.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

The most tragic part is those survivors whom you respect can't find another job outside IMDA, so they're stuck there as high class admin.

Having worked at this cursed place for a few years, I can say for sure that it's unlike the pre LCH era where a collegial atmosphere and competent leaders existed.

As for LCH, he is just a dud. Quick thinking doesn't equate to smart thinking.

Not considering the lack of domain knowledge, LCH is not dumb, but certainly not as clairvoyant and intellectual as he likes to brand himself.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

PSD really farked it up big time by parachuting LCH to IMDA. They could have tactically created a new DS role in some ministry and send him there for further observation as opposed to getting him to lead a stat board when he was fresh out of navy.

This is perhaps the greatest flaw of Singapore's "meritocratic" system.

Time and again, people have voiced their discomfort and unhappiness with military people directly entering into the highest echelons of the public service.

They have close to zero domain knowledge in their new organization, yet are expected to lead such an organization.

It's equivalent to asking the CEO of Coca Cola to become the CEO of Google and thinking he will perform fantastically well.

On the other hand, those who have spent years building up their domain knowledge and leadership in the organization are denied a chance at the top spot compared to this random dude from the military who walked in.

Honestly, it's not so much LCH's fault as it is of the government. If I'm LCH, I will certainly take up this role. Indeed, it is the government's fault for having such a bizarre appointment process in the first place.

I have some sympathy knowing that military people have an early retirement age with possibly limited transferability of skillsets to other jobs. But automatically opening the doors wide for them into the public service and GLCs cannot be the solution.

Instead, the conversation should go like this: "Thank you for your service to the nation. Here is money for you. We can also enroll you in some courses of your interest. However, you would have to find the next stage of your life on your own. All the best."

We simply cannot let sympathy for these military people translate into externalities for the rest of the country.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Reminds me of a convo I overheard that PDPC's AI Advisory Guidelines was just repeating things that people already know, and got nothing new inside so not important to read. This was at a large conference where an IMDA Director emphasised to a big roomful of audience that it was her IMDA team that drafted the Guidelines, not PDPC 😅

I thought it was already kinda embarrassing that people say your Guidelines got nothing much inside. Then add on the Director talking like got turf war between IMDA and PDPC... malu sia.

all thanks to LCH's ego...that guy needs to have 2 titles: Chief Executive, IMDA + Commissioner, Personal Data Protection Commission

of course it will give the impression that there's a faction and infighting ensues...

Originally Posted by Unregistered

This is perhaps the greatest flaw of Singapore's "meritocratic" system.

Time and again, people have voiced their discomfort and unhappiness with military people directly entering into the highest echelons of the public service.

They have close to zero domain knowledge in their new organization, yet are expected to lead such an organization.

It's equivalent to asking the CEO of Coca Cola to become the CEO of Google and thinking he will perform fantastically well.

On the other hand, those who have spent years building up their domain knowledge and leadership in the organization are denied a chance at the top spot compared to this random dude from the military who walked in.

Honestly, it's not so much LCH's fault as it is of the government. If I'm LCH, I will certainly take up this role. Indeed, it is the government's fault for having such a bizarre appointment process in the first place.

I have some sympathy knowing that military people have an early retirement age with possibly limited transferability of skillsets to other jobs. But automatically opening the doors wide for them into the public service and GLCs cannot be the solution.

Instead, the conversation should go like this: "Thank you for your service to the nation. Here is money for you. We can also enroll you in some courses of your interest. However, you would have to find the next stage of your life on your own. All the best."

We simply cannot let sympathy for these military people translate into externalities for the rest of the country.

Nothing meritocratic about our system here. It's as meritocracic as North Korea calling themselves a democratic republic.

Spend enough time in the public services and GLCs and you will understand that the path to senior management and above is based on connections and membership in an exclusive club rather then real capabilities.

No wonder that the country is regressing fast. The layperson attributes it to diminishing returns on investments for a developed country, but that is a lesser factor.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

all thanks to LCH's ego...that guy needs to have 2 titles: Chief Executive, IMDA + Commissioner, Personal Data Protection Commission

of course it will give the impression that there's a faction and infighting ensues...

Hmm, there's another person with two titles... ACE/Deputy Commissioner. How does it work?

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I do not understand your analogy about malaysians coming to singapore to work with the story you telling.
What are you saying? Malaysians came to Singapore to work after some times, leave Singapore before Singapore is a sheety place like IMDA?
I…. just… don’t…. understand what is ur point

what he/she means is those who leave malaysia and come to work in singapore have the courage and skills to do so

those who have left IMDA are like that while those who are still stuck have neither the courage nor skills to be hired outside

so if you join, you will end up being colleagues with shiiit people