IMDA (under MCI)

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.

I started to question the so-called meritocratic society that singapore claims to be when I was at IMDA. How can so many incompetent people be holding Director or higher positions there? They didn't even earn it, just parachuted there and have to be carried by their staff so that they are visible.

Haha yep, consider the mystery solved. People can come in as AD/SAD, not understand how anything works, and be moved up to SAD/DD in a year. The key is just to have at least a couple of people reporting to you on paper, which is an easy administrative matter. At ranking sessions, the DSes won't know what they have or haven't done, as long as their dirs (who are fellow scholars) are willing to vouch for them.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I started to question the so-called meritocratic society that singapore claims to be when I was at IMDA. How can so many incompetent people be holding Director or higher positions there? They didn't even earn it, just parachuted there and have to be carried by their staff so that they are visible.

After joining IMDA, I no longer believe that the government is meritocratic. And whenever I meet AD/SAD/DD/D from IMDA and MCI, I will take whatever they say with a pinch of salt.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Yes, IMDA should focus on its regulatory functions and stop its other mickey mouse activities.

At least mickey mouse still got commercial value, those lame initiatives they came up with will be a laughing stock if it's in the ICT industry.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I started to question the so-called meritocratic society that singapore claims to be when I was at IMDA. How can so many incompetent people be holding Director or higher positions there? They didn't even earn it, just parachuted there and have to be carried by their staff so that they are visible.

Bunch of fools who cannot even carry a presentation without an army supporting. If you know what you want, go ahead and work those golden fingers. Stop tormenting your staff with motherhood comments and throwing questions. Your staff are quiet not because you are right, but you are known to be petty and humiliate them when they cannot do your pretty slides.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Not true - different roles in ministries and statutory boards require different levels of security clearance, and being a citizen isn't a requirement for non-sensitive roles. That said, I haven't come across a non-citizen in a ministry, though I could be wrong.

I actually have come across PRs in IMDA, and while I've got no issue with them and accept that they could have been hired for their skills/experience, what did puzzle me is that I work closely with a dept which deals with sensitive areas, and while the PR colleague doesn't have access to secure e-mail, he's actually responsible/aware of quite a bit of the content which goes *into* sensitive material. Even if the PR colleague doesn't get to see the sensitive document, it doesn't exactly take a genius to figure out what the work he's doing is going towards.

In this particular example, I also don't see that any special skills are required - the job is largely info-gathering and processing, so not sure why they couldn't get a Sinkie, knowing that it would ultimately touch on sensitive areas.

So much so for being the agency tasked with data protection.....

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Bunch of fools who cannot even carry a presentation without an army supporting. If you know what you want, go ahead and work those golden fingers. Stop tormenting your staff with motherhood comments and throwing questions. Your staff are quiet not because you are right, but you are known to be petty and humiliate them when they cannot do your pretty slides.

I'm from another site and its really depending on the director themselves la. Actually no choice. Director must look good otherwise how to command respect

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.

I have more respect for the xmm part-timers at Liho at ARC than the entire IMDA mgmt

how come the vacancies in HR and WOD are all 11 month contract? So cheapo until don't want to pay AWS?

the fact that out of all departments, only these 2 (which are supposed to engage employees and care for their well being) are only offering 11 month contract shows what kinda lan jiao culture it is here

so much neg comments. any insights on the digital transformation office? keen on the engineer role

Originally Posted by Unregistered

how come the vacancies in HR and WOD are all 11 month contract? So cheapo until don't want to pay AWS?

the fact that out of all departments, only these 2 (which are supposed to engage employees and care for their well being) are only offering 11 month contract shows what kinda lan jiao culture it is here

No not just them, the media industry development also offer 11 months contract a few months ago for their new project.

With HR at least you know what you're getting into, but for media industry dev they market their role in the JD like so glam, but in reality it's just handling grants. Nothing glam at all. I was expecting high profile media tasks such as organising events/mar comms/media relations type.

The best part is, you can't tell that the role is actually about handling grants just by reading the JD. They packaged it as project management in the JD lol. Grants just put grants lah, simi project management! *roll eyes*

But then again, the entire imda is just damn good at marketing lah. All the punny hash tags #techthatstep, dynamic events that scream nothing but cool and happening, corporate leaders who profile themselves and the work they had achieved as high impact level on linkedin, and even the physical office is just so nice to be in.

It literally is the most perfect stat board in SG I've ever seen, almost like as if I'm in corporate "Instagram", until I read all the negative reviews on Glassdoor and in this forum. Even the work processes are so instagram inspired, you know, trying to figure out CE's erratic algorithm and forever "uploading" some aesthetic ppt just so you can gain as many likes as possible from every layer. IG upload 1 time will do, imda staff upload 20 times for the likes :/

Behind the facade of perfection is the unraveling of horrors and the stuff of nightmares for you guys.