MAS for Mid Career Professionals

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I know right, then simple and real things dunno how to do, but wayang and smoke bombs do until swee swee, then fk those who can really do things...

It is better to be a critic in MAS, rather than a implementer. You can progress easily that way. Plus, you can freely give your suggestions without any consequences, as you are not the one doing afterall. And if "doing" is really that important, then there will not be so many meetings and "doing" will not be done by underlings. Plus now vocal culture and theatrics are the 'in' thing in this social media era. So if you wanna move up the ladder, you should think about how to move your mouth instead of your hands.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

It is better to be a critic in MAS, rather than a implementer. You can progress easily that way. Plus, you can freely give your suggestions without any consequences, as you are not the one doing afterall. And if "doing" is really that important, then there will not be so many meetings and "doing" will not be done by underlings. Plus now vocal culture and theatrics are the 'in' thing in this social media era. So if you wanna move up the ladder, you should think about how to move your mouth instead of your hands.

My sentiments exactly! You took the words right out of my mouth. There are way too many meetings and clearances in MAS.

Junior executives at private firms can have mistakes in their internal presentations and no one cares. Junior lawyers at external law firms clear their top level partners directly before responding to clients. No excessive layers in between.

But at MAS, it's all about clearance and framing, even if it is for internal audiences. A gigantic waste of time, to what end? This is just creating more bureaucracy for management to justify their positions.

Add that to how progression is through some nebulous, subjective criteria like "CLIP attributes" instead of actual objective outcomes like meeting KPIs and that totally encourages ambitious people ('management wannabes') to game the system by attending as many meetings as possible to "provide perspectives" or "give suggestions" without actually doing any work.

Management needs to learn that the implementer is always more important (and usually more knowledgeable) than the armchair critic, especially if these suggestions just consist of "doing more work". Of course "doing more work" usually leads to better work, but there are only 42 hours in a work week, so what are the trade-offs?

Originally Posted by Unregistered

My sentiments exactly! You took the words right out of my mouth. There are way too many meetings and clearances in MAS.

Junior executives at private firms can have mistakes in their internal presentations and no one cares.

*Grammar mistakes, not all mistakes

Originally Posted by Unregistered

My sentiments exactly! You took the words right out of my mouth. There are way too many meetings and clearances in MAS.

Junior executives at private firms can have mistakes in their internal presentations and no one cares. Junior lawyers at external law firms clear their top level partners directly before responding to clients. No excessive layers in between.

But at MAS, it's all about clearance and framing, even if it is for internal audiences. A gigantic waste of time, to what end? This is just creating more bureaucracy for management to justify their positions.

Add that to how progression is through some nebulous, subjective criteria like "CLIP attributes" instead of actual objective outcomes like meeting KPIs and that totally encourages ambitious people ('management wannabes') to game the system by attending as many meetings as possible to "provide perspectives" or "give suggestions" without actually doing any work.

Management needs to learn that the implementer is always more important (and usually more knowledgeable) than the armchair critic, especially if these suggestions just consist of "doing more work". Of course "doing more work" usually leads to better work, but there are only 42 hours in a work week, so what are the trade-offs?

It’s bad enough with the multiple layers and red tapes but you still have the CB bosses who may not agree with your proposal but also won’t express what they want, and will keep ask you to go back and think further. Continue doing this until you reach the conclusion they desire. They use this time-wasting CB strategy to give the impression that they never impose their opinions on you.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I know right, then simple and real things dunno how to do, but wayang and smoke bombs do until swee swee, then fk those who can really do things...

🤣 Jiak lioa bee ness is a virus that should be eliminated. I have no idea why HR is remaining silent. It's become so bad that even TOs, who should be more responsible, are openly taking hour-long tea breaks. Lack of regard for their bosses and coworkers

The solution might be to expose these JlBs. They believe no one is aware of their lengthy tea breaks, but they are a topic of discussion among people.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

The solution might be to expose these JlBs. They believe no one is aware of their lengthy tea breaks, but they are a topic of discussion among people.

Is it a regular routine on top of lunch, or is there some plausible explanation eg. they were working over lunch?

You are right that “wrongdoing” should be brought into the light. However, it may not be effective to do it here, as its not really clear what context you are describing.

MAS senior public servants contact details are freely available on intranet and government directory, if it’s important enough to you, write to them and see how they address the matter.

Actually, it should not be too difficult to trace time spent inside and outside of MAS building on office days, using entry exit records from security gantry. The more pertinent question is, can you really prove that someone was not doing “work” just because they were outside the building during “office hours”? What if TO get caught then say they were discussing work in the cafeteria or at the outside sitting area, that is also outside gantry but still within or near the building premises right? Ha ha ha…

Originally Posted by Unregistered

It’s bad enough with the multiple layers and red tapes but you still have the CB bosses who may not agree with your proposal but also won’t express what they want, and will keep ask you to go back and think further. Continue doing this until you reach the conclusion they desire. They use this time-wasting CB strategy to give the impression that they never impose their opinions on you.

It's not even just bosses at this point. It's the wayang colleagues who have no stake in projects but turn up at meetings to give suggestions for others to "do more work" and thereby: 1) are seen as contributing by the bosses without actually doing anything but 2) are pushing more work on the actual implementer.

End up the implementer gets more work but the credit goes to the colleagues who gave the suggestions. But if something goes wrong, the one to answer will be the implementer, not the one who came up with the impractical suggestion. The bosses don't see this happening, especially "big picture" bosses who love ideas but don't have background in implementation.

That's why objective KPIs that track actual project outcomes are important instead of just subjective criteria like "this person has good ideas, can be management".

Originally Posted by Unregistered

It's not even just bosses at this point. It's the wayang colleagues who have no stake in projects but turn up at meetings to give suggestions for others to "do more work" and thereby: 1) are seen as contributing by the bosses without actually doing anything but 2) are pushing more work on the actual implementer.

End up the implementer gets more work but the credit goes to the colleagues who gave the suggestions. But if something goes wrong, the one to answer will be the implementer, not the one who came up with the impractical suggestion. The bosses don't see this happening, especially "big picture" bosses who love ideas but don't have background in implementation.

That's why objective KPIs that track actual project outcomes are important instead of just subjective criteria like "this person has good ideas, can be management".

Ok so what’s happening is that wayang colleague(s) actions resulted in more work for your project you are tasked to implement without them lifting a finger, and you are concerned they will be promoted next April for their ideas.

Got it, but such characters are really quite common whereever you go. We might think public service employees should be more noble but personal ambition is a reality. If you have competitive skills, try to find employment outside after the project is reasonably completed; if you want to stay, suck it up. It’s part of the deal for getting paid on time every month. Most companies don’t look kindly on complainers or whistleblowers, and I don’t think MAS is any different despite all that is said about being open to feedback and ideas. Individual bosses might be receptive depending on their personal character and your relationship with them, but it doesn’t sound like it in your case.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

It’s bad enough with the multiple layers and red tapes but you still have the CB bosses who may not agree with your proposal but also won’t express what they want, and will keep ask you to go back and think further. Continue doing this until you reach the conclusion they desire. They use this time-wasting CB strategy to give the impression that they never impose their opinions on you.

omg this is soooooooo true!!

Originally Posted by Unregistered

My sentiments exactly! You took the words right out of my mouth. There are way too many meetings and clearances in MAS.

Junior executives at private firms can have mistakes in their internal presentations and no one cares. Junior lawyers at external law firms clear their top level partners directly before responding to clients. No excessive layers in between.

But at MAS, it's all about clearance and framing, even if it is for internal audiences. A gigantic waste of time, to what end? This is just creating more bureaucracy for management to justify their positions.

Add that to how progression is through some nebulous, subjective criteria like "CLIP attributes" instead of actual objective outcomes like meeting KPIs and that totally encourages ambitious people ('management wannabes') to game the system by attending as many meetings as possible to "provide perspectives" or "give suggestions" without actually doing any work.

Management needs to learn that the implementer is always more important (and usually more knowledgeable) than the armchair critic, especially if these suggestions just consist of "doing more work". Of course "doing more work" usually leads to better work, but there are only 42 hours in a work week, so what are the trade-offs?

Junior executives at private firms can have mistakes in their internal presentations and no one cares. -> I envy these execs man, you dunno how stupid and frustrating it is for higher ups to pick on small irrelevant issues in the slides here (and then say you underperform).......