Will we ever recognize and challenge our paradigm?

Not until we accept that to be parochial and insular is like wearing blinders. In other words, why aren’t we synonymous with innovation? Or high-value added products? Or why do we remain underdeveloped – that in the region we’re the only ones that can’t proudly say that we have drastically reduced poverty?

Of course it is more complicated than that. Which is why the blog speaks to our instincts in an effort to connect the dots – of the vicious circle that shackles us: We are parochial and insular. We value hierarchy and paternalism. We rely on political patronage and oligarchy. That at the end of the day ours is a culture of impunity.

The blog never tires of raising the imperative of benchmarking. Which presupposes seeking insights – in an effort to learn from others – not projecting our values, instincts and biases.

But is it even in our bag of tricks to want to learn from others? That there is a Pinoy way to development and therefore we will figure this out ourselves? It will come when it comes?

In the meantime, for this posting, let’s quote a few articles that we wrote ourselves and put them side by side with what an American school teacher that has traveled the world wrote about Mahathir (in his blog: http://factsanddetails.com/southeast-asia/Malaysia/sub5_4a/entry-3627.html.)

Mahathir keeps coming to the writer ever since the Du30 administration introduced Build, Build, Build. In the early 80s when Mahathir just came to power, a team from our employers’ group visited Malaysia and reported back to Marcos their impressions – that Mahathir appeared to be a man on a mission going by how rapidly he was pushing infrastructure development … and that their new highways will be a model for the world. Because they were rubberized, it would be kind to tires and vehicles and comfortable for travelers. That’s almost four decades ago while we’re still talking about how to deal with ROW cases.

But not only. Here’s a sampling of what we read in local media. And let’s start with the topic of water: “Enough is being said about the ongoing water crisis, so this short column will not belabor the continuing exchange all over the place about who is to blame. Instead, I want to remind everyone just how tough life was before Manila Water and Maynilad. The crisis you see today is nothing. In those days, numerous barangays simply had no water. Definitely, areas for informal settlers would only have illegal taps or manual deep wells built by some politician that people had to queue for; at times, they even had to pay some person in charge to have access to the water source.” [Business beyond job generation, Peter Angelo V. Perfecto, Philippine Daily Inquirer, 23rd Mar 2019]

And here’s something that others are doing right, and wish we do likewise: “The prohibitive provisions relating to foreign investment of the 1987 Constitution, expensive power cost, inferior infrastructure and difficulty in doing business is one set of ugly reasons. All these have caused foreign manufacturers to invest in more hospitable countries like Vietnam. By doing so, it deprived us from much needed technology transfer and recurring income through exports and tax revenues.

“The second reason is government’s lack of spending on research and development (R&D). As we are all aware, R&D is the path to innovation and innovation is what drives the manufacturing sector. Innovation can come in the form of improved products, processes, marketing methods or even business practices. In other words, innovation is all about making products better, faster, safer and/or cheaper.

“A UNESCO study shows a direct relation between R&D spending and economic and social development. The higher the R&D budget, the more rapidly industrialization takes place and consequently, the faster social development goals are met. The reverse is true. UNESCO recommends a minimum R&D expenditure of one percent of GDP.” [Is the Philippine Industrial Revolution forthcoming (?), Andrew J. Masigan; Numbers Don’t Lie, BusinessWorld]

And what can we do right versus what we do wrong? Consider: “To be fair, our national planners have always looked far ahead in planning our future. But all too often, it is politicians and inept bureaucrats who lack the sense of urgency and anticipatory action that has earned us the description of being great in planning, but miserable failures in execution.” [Urgency and proactive governance, Cielito F. Habito; No Free Lunch, Philippine Daily Inquirer, 22nd Mar 2019]

What else are we missing? “The day after Magsaysay died, corruption was back. The clean government that was ushered in by Magsaysay had not been institutionalized. It would have been very easy for his successor, President Carlos Garcia, to have continued his legacy, but he did not. This is an important lesson for us, and particularly for our political elite.” [The legacy of Ramon Magsaysay, F. Sionil Jose; HINDSIGHT, The Philippine Star, 23rd Mar 2019]

And finally, here’s how an American teacher described the leadership of Mahathir. He gave a balanced view – positive and negative – but in search of insights, the posting is highlighting how Mahathir led Malaysia in their journey from poverty to prosperity: “Mahathir came to power in 1981 and was the first non-aristocratic leader of Malaysia.

“He is credited with replacing colonial subservience with national pride, and raising a country from the Third World to developed world status at an astounding pace.

“Mahathir also ambitiously pursued economic reforms, such as orienting the economy toward the production of export goods, promoting joint ventures with Asian firms, and privatizing many state industries …

“Mahathir bin Mohamad was the leading force in making Malaysia into a major industrial power. He is credited with turning Kuala Lumpur into a modern city with (for a while) the world’s tallest building and high-tech industrial areas but criticized for ignoring the villages and provinces. Even, his home province of Kedah seems undeveloped and stuck in a time warp.

“Mahathir developed the ‘Malaysia Can’ slogan in 1993 and developed the Vision 2020 program in which he planned to make Malaysia a fully developed country with 70 million people (compared to 20 million in 1998) by the year 2020.

“Mahathir put a lot of money into expansive infrastructure projects … and high-tech development even when Malaysia was suffering an economic crisis. Mahathir once called himself as ‘cyber addict.’ He was one of the first world leaders to have his own blog and website and said he wanted to create a paperless government in Malaysia.

“Vision 2020. The aim … is to turn Malaysia into a fully industrialized country and to quadruple per capita income by the year 2020. This will require the country to continue ascending the technological ‘ladder’ from low- to high-tech types of industrial production, with a corresponding increase in the intensity of capital investment and greater retention of value-added (i.e. the value added to raw materials in the production process) by Malaysian producers.

“One of Dr Mahathir’s ambitions was to make Malaysia into an Asian Silicon Valley. Foreign companies were invited to invest in a ‘Multimedia Super Corridor’ between the new international airport and the twin Petronas Towers, which rise like gigantic pewter cocktail shakers in the center of Kuala Lumpur. An international committee of experts, including Bill Gates, advised Dr Mahathir that, if he wished to attract foreign investment, censoring the Internet would be unwise.

“Mahathir sought to shake the colonial past, to remake his county and people much as he has transformed the natural landscape of Malaysia. Omar bin Sidek, a 91-year-old with a wispy white beard, remembers the long years when his town of Dengkil in Selangor state was a modest jungle outpost in the midst of vast oil palm plantations, long a mainstay of the Malaysian economy. ‘Ooh, I'm speechless to describe the change,’ said Omar, squinting to recall life before Mahathir's major public works came to this area 25 miles south of Kuala Lumpur, the capital.

“While the export of raw material remained an important part of the Malaysian economy, manufacturing became more of a focus under Mahathir. Important manufactured goods have included rubber gloves, catheters, rubber-threads, room air conditioners, semiconductors and audio-visual equipment.

“By the 1990s Malaysia had become the world's largest exporter of semiconductors, an industry that dates back to the mid-1970s when many U.S. and Japanese companies set up factories in Malaysia. At that time there was also a trend to produce more assembled products like cameras and VCRs from semiconductors in Malaysia.

“Malaysia's rapid development has been attributed to the transparency of government policies, its educated and skilled workforce, well-developed infrastructure, good communications facilities and efficient bureaucracy.

“High tech industries developed in Malaysia in the 1990s and 2000s included advanced electronics, scientific instruments, biotechnology, automated manufacturing systems, electro-optics and non-linear optics, advanced composite materials, optoelectronics, software engineering, alternative energy sources and aerospace.

“Malaysia in the 1990s was reminiscent of South Korea in the 1980s and Japan in the 1960s and 1970s, when people are intoxicated with their new affluence and happy to leave their poverty behind them.

“Over these three decades Malaysia accomplished a transition from a primary product-dependent economy to one in which manufacturing industry had emerged as the leading growth sector. Rubber and tin, which accounted for 54.3 percent of Malaysian export value in 1970, declined sharply in relative terms to a mere 4.9 percent in 1990.” [http://factsanddetails.com/southeast-asia/Malaysia/sub5_4a/entry-3627.html]

But let’s repeat the following line from above: But is it even in our bag of tricks to want to learn from others? That there is a Pinoy way to development and therefore we will figure this out ourselves? It will come when it comes?

The blog often speaks to benchmarking. But it presupposes a desire to learn from others. Many years ago the wife and writer were driven around Tokyo by the then country manager of his MNC-company, who was Japanese. And he related how they learned to build submarines. “We simply disassembled a British submarine and put it back together again. Of course, we studied every detail.” The writer responded in jest that all he had done in his lifetime was disassemble a rifle and put it back together again as part of his ROTC course in college. 

Fast-forward to the time Toyota decided to enter the premium car segment. Lo and behold, they disassembled several German premium cars and put them back together again. Of course, they studied every detail. The writer read as much of the story as he could.

Then one day he asked the wife to join him to the appointment he made with the Lexus dealer in their neighborhood, in suburban New York. The wife never likes buying cars, not even bringing them for maintenance checks. She thinks car salesmen and car dealers are crooks. And that was precisely why the writer wanted her to come. He wanted to test for himself if what he read about the Lexus story was true. And the first question the wife asked, “I thought you’d only buy a German car after all these years? And aren’t you looking for an SUV?”

Wow! That was their first reaction. They thought they were walking into the First-Class lounge of British Airways. The details of the conversation with the salesman have escaped the memory being 14-15 years ago. But buying “an experience” was something one will not forget. “If you want to check out a blue SUV I can call for one and it will be right here in a few minutes.”

But we were on the second floor or at least not on the ground floor. And yes as we stood up from a lounge-like room, there was a sparkling blue SUV in front of us. To cut a long story short, after the husband and wife team did the test drive accompanied by the salesman, they were back in the lounge. And without further ado, the writer said, “We are buying this blue SUV. When can we get it.”

Then the salesman explained. “We will get you a truly brand-new unit, but you don’t have to come. We will deliver it to your house.”

Benchmark. Benchmark. Benchmark. Is it even in our bag of tricks? Will we ever recognize and challenge our paradigm?

And to us in the employers’ group, if we still want to toot our horn instead of accepting that we blew it, shame on us! The following lines from Rizal are meant for us!

“Why independence, if the slaves of today will be the tyrants of tomorrow? And that they will be such is not to be doubted, for he who submits to tyranny loves it.” [We are ruled by Rizal’s ‘tyrants of tomorrow,’ Editorial, The Manila Times, 29th Dec 2015]

“Now I know why Paul dared to speak of ‘the curse of the law’ (Galatians 3:13). Law reigns and discernment is unnecessary, which means there is little growth or change in such people. When you do not grow, you remain an infant.” [Faith and Science, Open to Change, Richard Rohr’s Daily Meditation, 23rd Oct 2017]

“As a major component for the education and reorientation of our people, mainstream media – their reporters, writers, photographers, columnists and editors – have an obligation to this country . . .” [Era of documented irrelevance: Mainstream media, critics and protesters, Homobono A. Adaza, The Manila Times, 25th Nov 2015]

“National prosperity is created, not inherited. It does not grow out of a country’s natural endowments, its labor pool, its interest rates, or its currency’s value, as classical economics insists . . . A nation’s competitiveness depends on the capacity of its industry to innovate and upgrade.” [The Competitive Advantage of Nations, Michael E. Porter, Harvard Business Review, March–April 1990]

“You have to have a dream, whether big or small. Then plan, focus, work hard and be very determined to achieve your goals.” [Henry Sy Sr., Chairman Emeritus and Founder, SM Group (1924 - 2019)]

“Learning and innovation go hand in hand. The arrogance of success is to think that what you did yesterday will be sufficient for tomorrow.” [William Pollard, 1911-1989, physicist-priest, Manhattan Project]

“Development [is informed by a people’s] worldview, cognitive capacity, values, moral development, self-identity, spirituality, and leadership . . .” [Frederic Laloux, Reinventing organizations, Nelson Parker, 2014]