National values-assessment-presentation-2012

Copyright © aAdvantage Consulting 2012. All Intellectual Property Reserved. 1
How we view Singapore society and the workplace
as these are today, and what we want them to be
23rd August, 2012

Contents
1. Introduction
2. Results
i. How Singapore Residents View the Current and Desired
Singapore Society
ii. How Singapore Residents View the Current and Desired
Singapore Workplace
Vincent Ho, Director, aAdvantage Consulting
Email: vincent.ho@aadvantage-consulting.com
Tel: 6853 2658
For all queries on the survey and results, please contact:

Copyright © aAdvantage Consulting 2012. All Intellectual Property Reserved. 3www.aadvantage-consulting.com
01
Introduction

Introduction
Objectives of the Study
The survey examined what Singapore Residents consider are:
 The values and behaviours that best describe them at a personal level;
 Their perception of Singapore society and their workplace as these are
today, and what they want them to be, ideally.
• Obtain preliminary insights into what matters to Singapore Residents.
• Generate meaningful dialogue about the society and workplace
environment that Singapore Residents desire.

Introduction
Maslow’s Needs to Barrett’s Consciousness
Know and
Understand
Physiological
Safety
Love & Belonging
Self-esteemAbraham Maslow
Know and
Understand
N e e d s C o n s c i o u s n e s s
Self-Actualization
Richard Barrett

Introduction
The Barrett Seven Levels of Personal Consciousness
Selfless service
Being your purpose. Compassion, humility, forgiveness. Caring for humanity and
the planet.
Making a positive difference in the world
Living your purpose. Empathy, alliances, cooperation, intuition, mentoring and
focus on wellbeing (physical, emotional, mental, spiritual).
Finding meaning in existence
Finding your purpose. Integrity, honesty, authenticity, passion, enthusiasm,
creativity and humour & fun.
Letting go of fears.
Finding the courage to grow and develop. Adaptability, life long learning,
continuous renewal and personal growth.
Feeling a sense of self-worth
Confidence, competence, self-reliance.
Fear: I am not enough.
Leads to need for respect and recognition and power, authority or status seeking.
Feeling protected and loved
Family, friendship, loyalty, safety.
Fear: I am not loved enough.
Leads to jealousy, blame, and discrimination.
Satisfying physiological and survival needs
Health, security, financial stability.
Fear: I do not have enough.
Leads to control, domination, demanding, and impatience.
SelfinterestCommonGood

Introduction
The Barrett Seven Levels of National Consciousness
Global sustainability
Human rights, long-term perspective, ecological resilience, peace, focus on future
generations and inter-generational equity. Global perspective.
Strategic alliances and regional partnerships
Regional collaboration, environmental awareness, quality of life, community
involvement and sustainability. Caring for nature and for the disadvantaged.
Strong cohesive culture
Shared vision and values. Fairness, transparency, trust, shared vision and values,
citizen dialogue and social cohesion. Positive collective spirit.
Democratic processes and continuous renewal
Freedom, equality, empowerment, accountability, adaptability, shared values,
entrepreneurship and consensus.
Institutional effectiveness
Law abiding, community/national pride, governmental efficiency and high quality
public services. Bureaucracy, central control, elitism, complacency, and apathy.
Sense of belonging & social stability
Neighbourliness, conflict resolution, racial harmony and a focus on family and
friendships.
Inequality, discrimination, intolerance, hatred, and loneliness/isolation.
Economic stability and citizen security
Prosperity, health care, employment, emergency services/defence and social
safety nets. Corruption, violence, poverty, environmental pollution, and greed.
CommonGoodSelfinterest

Introduction
The Barrett Seven Levels of Organisational Consciousness
Service to humanity and societal contribution
Social responsibility, long-term perspective, ethics, compassion and humility.
Internal/External collaboration, community involvement
Environmental awareness, employee fulfilment, coaching/mentoring and caring
for the local community.
Sense of purpose & strong internal community
Shared vision and values. Commitment, creativity, enthusiasm, integrity, honesty,
generosity, fairness, openness, transparency and trust.
On-going improvement and employee participation
Adaptability, accountability, empowerment, teamwork, goals orientation and
continuous improvement.
High performance systems and processes
Reliability, quality, efficiency, productivity and excellence. Bureaucracy, hierarchy,
confusion, and complacency.
Positive relationships that support organisation needs
Loyalty, open communication, customer satisfaction. Manipulation, blame,
favouritism, and secrecy.
Financial viability and people safety
Financial performance, organisational growth and employee health and safety.
Control, greed, exploitation, and micro-management.
CommonGoodSelfinterest

Introduction
Completed National / Regional Values Assessments
Australia
Belgium
Bhutan
Brazil
Canada
Denmark
Finland
France
Iceland
Latvia
Macedonia (r)
Singapore
(r) = Region
South Africa
Spain (r)
Sweden
Switzerland
United Kingdom (r)
USA

Introduction
• 2,000 Singapore residents (Singapore Citizens & Permanent Residents) were
interviewed.
• Survey period: June to July 2012.
• Stratified quota sampling across Gender, Age, Housing Type across all
zones.
• Data collection through Face-to-Face Interview (Street intercept &
Households) and Online Survey.
Methodology

Introduction
Respondent Profile
Gender AgeMale ,
981,
49.1%Female,
1,019,
51.0%
Female, 1,019, 51.0%
Male, 981, 49.1% 65 and above,
216, 10.8%
46-64 years,
686, 34.3%
31-45 years,
596, 29.8%
15-30 years,
502, 25.1%
Housing Type
HDB 1-3
rooms,
396,
19.8%
HDB 4-5
rooms &
Executive,
1,257,
62.9%
Private
Apartmen
t /
Condomin
ium, 192,
9.6%
Landed
property
(incl. shop
house),
155, 7.8%
Landed Property (incl.
shop house), 155, 7.8%
Private Apartment
/ Condominium,
192, 9.6%
HDB 1-3 rooms,
396, 19.8%
HDB 4-5 rooms &
Executive, 1,257, 62.9%

Introduction
Assessment Questions
Respondents were asked the following three questions. For each question,
respondents were required to pick exactly 10 values and behaviours from a list
that:
SocietalOrganisational
1. Best reflect who you are.
2. Best reflect the Singapore society (Singaporeans
and PRs) today.
3. Best reflect what you desire of the Singapore
society (Singaporeans and PRs).
4. Best reflect your workplace today.
5. Best reflect what you desire in your workplace.

Introduction
Definitions of Terms Used
The following terms are used in this report:
1. Kiasu: A local colloquialism in the Hokkien dialect that directly translates as
“scared to lose”. It is generally used to describe selfish and inconsiderate
behaviours.
2. Kiasi: A local colloquialism that directly translates as “scared to die”. It is
generally used to describe over-cautious or extremely risk-averse behaviours.
3. Potentially limiting values and behaviours: Values and behaviours that are
not intrinsically negative, but could be harmful if lived to excess.

02 (i)
How Singapore Residents View the
Current and Desired Singapore
Society

What Singapore Residents Consider are the Values and
Behaviours that Best Describe Themselves
I = Individual
R = Relationship
P = Positive
L = Potentially Limiting (white circle)
O = Organisational
S = Societal
Level
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
IRS (P)=6-4-0 IRS (L)=0-0-0
2%
1%
1%
10%
16%
8%
20%
27%
7%
8%
0% 20% 40% 60%
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Singapore Residents
family 936 2(R)
friendship 708 2(R)
health 648 1(I)
happiness 603 5(I)
caring 546 2(R)
honesty 510 5(I)
responsibility 506 4(I)
well-being (physical/ emotional/
mental/ spiritual)
474 6(I)
respect 468 2(R)
balance (home/work) 444 4(I)

4. Do we observe these in our daily
interactions with people? What
impact does it have?
• Family
• Friendship
• Balance (home / work)
• Happiness
• Health
• Caring
• Well-being (physical / emotional
/ mental / spiritual)
• Responsibility
• Respect
• Honesty
1. What is the definition of
“balance” between work, family
/ friends and self?
2. Does caring extend beyond the
immediate family and friends?
3. To what extent are we meeting
our well-being / health needs?

How Singapore Residents Perceive the Singapore Society as
it is Today
17%
7%
17%
14%
4%
6%
15%
6%
6%
8%
0% 20% 40% 60%
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Level
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
IROS (P)=1-0-1-0 IROS (L)=4-3-1-0
Singapore Residents
kiasu1 (L) 1154 1(I)
competitive (L) 823 3(O)
self-centred (L) 653 3(R)
material needs 628 1(I)
kiasi2 (L) 600 1(I)
deteriorating values (L) 591 3(I)
elitism (L) 573 3(R)
blame (L) 494 2(R)
uncertainty about the future (L) 470 1(I)
security 440 1(O) Percentage of Potentially
Limiting Values and
Behaviours = 41%I = Individual
R = Relationship
P = Positive
O = Organisational
S = Societal

How Singapore Residents Perceive the Singapore Society as
it is Today
• Kiasu (L)
• Competitive (L)
• Self-centred (L)
• Material needs
• Elitism (L)
1. How do we measure success
today? Does that drive these
behaviours?
• Deteriorating values (L)
• Blame (L)
2. Are we experiencing a fall in moral
and ethical standards?
3. Are we taking personal
responsibility?
• Uncertainty about the future (L)
• Kiasi (L)
4. What about the future that we are
uncertain about?
5. Will we be held back given our risk
averseness
• Security 6. What makes us secure?

Percentage of “Potentially Limiting Values and Behaviours”
by Countries
72
63 62 60 57 56 54 53 51 48
43 42 42 41 39
32
26
21
4
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Venezuela
Iceland
SouthAfrica
Argentina
France
USA
Latvia
Belgium
Brazil
Finland
UK(NW)
Australia
Sweden
Singapore
Spain…
Canada
Switzerland
Denmark
Bhutan

How Other Countries Perceive their Current Society
Level
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
IROS (P)=0-0-0-0 | IROS (L)= 2-3-5-0
United States of America
Level
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
IROS (P)= 0-1-2-1 | IROS (L)= 2-0-4-0
Finland
Level
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
IROS (P)= 3-1-2-1 | IROS (L)= 1-0-2-0
Switzerland
blame (L) 820 2(R)
bureaucracy (L) 771 3(O)
wasted resources (L) 696 3(O)
corruption (L) 682 1(O)
materialistic (L) 671 1(I)
uncertainty about
the future (L)
651 1(I)
conflict/ aggression
(L)
560 2(R)
crime/ violence (L) 509 1(R)
unemployment (L) 504 1(O)
short-term focus (L) 444 1(O)
unemployment (L) 431 1(O)
uncertainty about the
future (L)
416 1(I)
educational
opportunities
405 3(O)
wasted resources (L) 371 3(O)
short-term focus (L) 353 1(O)
freedom of speech 335 4(O)
peace 324 7(S)
envy (L) 298 2(I)
democratic process 293 4(R)
quality of life 186 6(I)
democratic process 185 4(R)
secrecy of the banks
(L)
129 2(O)
decentralisation 122 4(O)
materialistic (L) 116 1(I)
economic stability 110 1(I)
prosperity 103 1(I)
freedom of speech 102 4(O)
tradition (L) 92 2(O)
neutrality 91 4(S)

What Singapore Residents Said Would Define their Desired
Singapore Society
I = Individual
R = Relationship
P = Positive
O = Organisational
S = Societal
Level
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
IROS (P)=1-1-4-4 IROS (L)=0-0-0-0
1%
1%
1%
15%
9%
4%
26%
18%
9%
16%
0% 20% 40% 60%
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Singapore Residents
affordable housing 875 1(O)
caring for the elderly 744 4(S)
effective healthcare 650 1(O)
caring for the disadvantaged 624 4(S)
compassion 590 7(R)
concern for future generations 579 7(S)
quality of life 549 6(I)
equal opportunities 538 4(O)
social responsibility 517 4(S)
employment opportunities 502 1(O)

What Singapore Residents Said Would Define their Desired
Singapore Society
• Caring for the elderly
• Caring for the disadvantaged
• Compassion
• Social responsibility
1. Who’s responsibility is it?
2. What’s the role of individuals?
• Equal opportunities
• Employment opportunities
• Concern for future generations
3. How does meritocracy feature in
light of this?
• Affordable housing
• Effective healthcare
• Quality of life
4. To what extent are we meeting
basic healthcare and housing
needs?
5. How do we define quality of life?

How Singapore Residents View the Current and Desired
Singapore Society
Implications
• Are the dimensions identified in this survey comprehensive? What
other important dimensions can be examined?
• Who (e.g., government, business, community leaders and
organisations, residents/employees) should lead the change to move
the current state of affairs to the desired state of affairs? Is the
desired state of affairs all that desirable?
• What concrete steps can we take to effect positive change?
• What obstacles could hinder positive change?

02 (ii)
How Singapore Residents View the
Current and Desired Singapore
Workplace

Private SectorLevel
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
IRS (P)=7-3-0 IRS (L)=0-0-0
I = Individual
R = Relationship
P = Positive
O = Organisational
S = Societal
Orange = Unique values
Public SectorLevel
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
IRS (P)=8-2-0 IRS (L)=0-0-0
family 374 2(R)
friendship 305 2(R)
health 249 1(I)
happiness 244 5(I)
mental/ spiritual)
219 6(I)
positive attitude 218 5(I)
accountability 211 4(R)
honesty 207 5(I)
family 122 2(R)
happiness 100 5(I)
friendship 93 2(R)
mental/ spiritual)
88 6(I)
humour/ fun 80 5(I)
health 79 1(I)
honesty 71 5(I)
commitment 65 5(I)

How Singapore Residents Perceive their Current Workplace
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
IROS (P)=0-2-6-0 IROS (L)=0-0-2-0
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
IROS (P)=0-2-6-0 IROS (L)=0-0-2-0
Percentage of Potentially Limiting
Values and Behaviours = 21%
customer satisfaction 298 2(O)
cost reduction (L) 267 1(O)
teamwork 247 4(R)
brand image 227 3(O)
long hours (L) 221 3(O)
results orientation 204 3(O)
profit 188 1(O)
continuous improvement 182 4(O)
continuous learning 159 4(O)
teamwork 86 4(R)
customer satisfaction 77 2(O)
hierarchy (L) 77 3(O)
long hours (L) 69 3(O)
results orientation 66 3(O)
achievement 58 3(I)
Percentage of Potentially Limiting
Values and Behaviours = 21%
I = Individual
R = Relationship
P = Positive
O = Organisational
S = Societal
Private SectorLevel Public SectorLevel

What Singapore Residents said Would Define their Desired
Workplace
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
IROS (P)=0-4-6-0 IROS (L)=0-0-0-0
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
IROS (P)=0-5-5-0 IROS (L)=0-0-0-0
I = Individual
R = Relationship
P = Positive
O = Organisational
S = Societal
employee recognition 300 2(R)
balance (home/work) 298 4(O)
teamwork 291 4(R)
employee fulfilment 211 6(O)
leadership development 195 6(O)
employee health 180 1(O)
respect 180 2(R)
fairness 179 5(R)
balance (home/work) 135 4(O)
teamwork 112 4(R)
employee recognition 100 2(R)
respect 76 2(R)
coaching/ mentoring 75 6(R)
staff engagement 75 5(O)
employee fulfillment 69 6(O)
fairness 65 5(R)
Private SectorLevel Public SectorLevel

What Singapore Residents said Would Define their Desired
Workplace
• Balance (home / work)
• Employee health – Private sector
1. cares for our well-being and
allows time for personal
pursuits?
• Continuous improvement
• Continuous learning
• Coaching / mentoring – Public
sector
• Leadership development –
Private sector
3. commits to development and
improvement?
4. our leaders are motivated and
enabled to guide and coach us?
• Teamwork
• Fairness
5. encourages the spirit of working
together across all levels, while
being impartial to one another.
• Employee recognition
• Employee fulfilment
• Respect
• Staff engagement – Public sector
2. provides a sense of achievement;
seeks and values our views /
contribution?
How do we create a workplace which …

Fromvisiontoresults
Vincent Ho, Director, aAdvantage Consulting
Email: vincent.ho@aadvantage-consulting.com
Tel: 6853 2658
For all queries on the survey and results, please contact:

National values-assessment-presentation-2012

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to National values-assessment-presentation-2012

Similar to National values-assessment-presentation-2012 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

National values-assessment-presentation-2012