Start small, go with projects with lower classifications first so you have better choice of tech stack. Develop, deliver are the easy parts. Maintaining the project is the hardest part. And make the SWE responsible for it, so they have the incentive to keep the solution simple(Instead of trying to do resume-based development). SVC should not be the graveyard of projects (which they got dumped from others) that they have to keep on life support.


It's time for a reorg then. Certain directors needs to stop playing politics so that they can expand their team size, and also trying to put clauses into IM8 so that people are forced to use them when it does not make sense technically.

Already gave feedbacks on multiple level that I gave up on most of the teams. Some of it is outside their control(Who approved that product when it does not have market fit? Why should I use that product when AWS provides one with 10x lower cost? Why do I have to setup specific components just to connect to their endpoint? etc etc.). And yes, if their products can't find market fit, the management needs to have the courage to cut the product and reallocate resources.

Not exactly sure if this is sarcasm, or this is real grievance. But my personal stand is this. All the different "managers" real task is to remove blockers for the dev team to deliver(Administrative, beauracracy, persuading stakeholders etc). If they can't do it, and they add more **** to do for the dev team, then jolly well **** off.

nobody reads feedback. you build trust with customers by actually listening to them, asking short and pointed questions and taking notes, not by presenting fanciful ppts showing your past projects, position on the org chart and throwing out technical jargon.

Why gds and svc keep fighting lei? Be like dsaid we ok with everyone

Haha we didn’t fight la but having difference perspective as SVC manages systems and is like a very corporate organization and GDS works like a startup.

However on a prejudiced side, SVC funds GDS HC and this is a fact, like it or not.

Also SVC funds the industry too.

s://.tech.gov.sg/media/media-releases/2023-05-24-government-projected-to-spend-on-ict-in-fy23

I think that’s just expecting too much out of govtech.

mission statements are easy to write, actually achieving it and not ownself bluff ownself, is another thing.

remember the world cup dream? how did that turn out?

if you really believe you can execute and not just wayang, you should set your sights elsewhere.

Wut in the world. Do we really need a swe in each project? Absolutely not

U have to understand why a lot of projects are outsourced.

Because the govt need to keep the market healthy. The govt gives business to small SME so they can thrive . average companies can compete in open tender and business profit govt wins. Its a cycle.

If govt do everything themselves, we won't have company providing services and companies will just leave SG

Thats one part of it. Another is govtechies can provide a higher value deliverables.

no, the only reason is because outsourced companies can do it better and cheaper than govtech.

if you think that all the software SMEs have to beg govt otherwise their biz will fold, that's a bit delusional.

Dsaid also a bit awkward one. Develop the launchpad then bank hard on it.

The recent dsaid conference also damn small. Should bring more ppl

That being said, the venue and food was good

I dont mean all. But gebiz exists for a reason. So that companies can come in and provide services

Its the same thing, govt cant do everything all at once

the reason why govt outsource some projects so that these companies, be it SME or big 4 or ncs can hire Singaporean and FT. They remain competitive so that govt dont need to do everything

The govt CANNOT afford to hire all the best software developer there is just to develop in house

Its just not sustainable

Hope this gives u some perspective on how govt works

Even if no one changes their mind at the end of the day, always good to hear other perspective from different spectrum. And SM(or at least the previous ones) watching this thread anyway.

That said, GDS at current stage is just a corporate organization larping as startup. U wont see so many 'M' in one. And not so many engineers in one team.

And that news is just masking failure as success. Agencies are going to look at the ballooning cost in this economic situation, and CIO wil be the ones to answer for it(from their CE or PS)



Been there done that multiple times(with success). Unfortunately im just a lowly person and the most i can influence the projects around me, and this would require higher ups to evolve(lol in public service). For now I will just take it one project at a time. Maybe one day
I will just follow the rest and lie flat, or maybe one day i will just quit quietly. Who knows?



No one asking for insource every single project. Outsource those that are low on rewards, and insource those that are highly valuable. Just getting a small team of 2-4 SWE for every agency could do wonders in supporting the agencies.

At this age of bulk tender, SME is not going anywhere near Govtech projects unless they are in bulk tender.
Foreign SI companies dont hire Singaporeans most of the time. So no loss if they leave just because they dont have gov projects. I would rather get augmented resource(where we can get a local in) and get him the experience for his future job.

If you think dev work is not high value, we can just go back to IDA times when everyone is project manager. Just shut down govtech since theres no point in building tech capabilities.


QUOTE=Unregistered;261467]no, the only reason is because outsourced companies can do it better and cheaper than govtech.
[/QUOTE]

If outsourced SI can do it cheaper and better than govtech, then govtech has failed.


Ppl will avoid Gebiz where possible, unless you have situations where you cant use bulk tender.

Outsourcing is there for multiple reasons(liabiliy, lack of capabilities etc). But supporting the private sector is never the main reason.

No one asking for the best in class to be in govtech, hence salaries are pegged to median+x. You just need people who can perform better than SI. We are not R&D, and we dont produce products competing with commercial.

I'm still laughing at the launchpad vs pair comparison. Unfortunately while launchpad had a good roadmap, their execution and end result lacks the polish and hence shitty. Too many use cases wont work with their product. And what happened to pair now? Announce big big on OGP copilot in newspaper, then crickets until now. End up we just wait for o365 copilot to come.

OGP got Pair, DSAID got LaunchPad, and what happened to GDS LLMStack? Every division wants to develop similar LLM products, but in the end, all no news already.

case of too many cooks spoil the dish?

The dish being yet another wrapper around openai API?

No wonder govtech needs to reduce head count.

But has agreement with Microsoft not to use our data for training purpose

cut the deadwood away

Say properly hor, who is the deadwood? Corporate? GDS? Dsaid? Ogp? Csg? Who else

What do you think?

I'd say chip every here and there...

Maybe that's why contract is the first to go

And that's the exact problem. I've also done heroics during my time, but that was not repeatable over the long run (not to my mental health, and also not sustainable in terms of required talent).

If i've stayed on, I'd get embroiled in arguments with people on top who know nothing about the subject but insist that they're right. (as evidenced by a similarly talented colleague who decided to stay on)


It should be outsource when the system is stable and requirements not in a flux. Insource when nobody know what they wants and we are in a pathfinding stage. It's not about high or low value.

No they can do it cheaper than govt if the system is not changing and crashing all the time.

I would even go on to say the system after the pathfinding stage should be reimplemented by commercial (after the requirements are firmed up) for maintenance in mind.

Pathfinding is R&D, and that should what govtech should be doing. no commercial entity would touch govt r+d unless they are paid obscene amounts because the contract would be so open ended.

How come we don't get year end bonus lei, not fair lei

i thought all stat boards get a similar year end bonus too? or does this only apply to certain stat boards?

No lei govtech don't have. We only have performance and corporate bonus. No mid year, year end or aws

Because we are public service, not civil service.

Gahmen got do what kind of R&D that is driven from agency side?

The tech agencies removed the year-end payments and incorporated them into higher monthly salary.

Not happy quit lor. Oh wait nevermind, your contract end you'll naturally leave as well.

It is because GovTech follow their own scheme same as IMDA. Infact your so called corporate bonus is actually mid year + year end AVC + 13th month. It is not you all don't have, is just that u all take later. Other stat boards also don't have corporate bonus.

Yes..govtech has beem doing it for long time liao

Moi full time lei

We all also full time. But is perm or direct contract?

Perm lah aiyo

But corporate bonus this year was just 1 month... Add here there also not as many as the rest gets

This is wrong. Corporate bonus is not about annual vs monthly salary components. It's to recognise GovTech's performance in meeting its corporate KPIs.

What are the historical figures for corporate bonus over the last 5 years for GovTech?

U will know if u r in GT for the past 5 years

This is just a way of saying only. As govtech is a tech agency and they supposedly need to pay higher and not be too under pay (although as a govt agency they can never pay on par or more tham pte) compared to a pte tech firm so they change scheme to put it as corporate bonus so they can pay slightly over than the normal total package other stats board is giving. You can go check it out or even calculate out yourself the annual package of Govtech. I am sure they are just slightly more than normal stats board only (normal stats board is about 12 + 3 or 4 months). And mind you, all stats boards also have kpi, not just govtech.

Govtech pay already factored in 13th month hence they pay more. That 1 month is actually avc for mid year + year end. This year civil and public is 0.3 + 0.6 =0.9. so govtech corporate bonus give is 1 month is abt there. IMDA also have the same scheme as govtech.

Compare annual package leh..think abt it, if govtech pay lesser, u think still got people go meh..u would have left urself liao lor. You jump to other stat board they will also pay u by comparing ur annual. Look at your payslip components.

EES survey 2022, highest score

EES survey 2023, lowest score?