Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

2018 Singapore National Values Assessment

724 views

Published on

2018 National Values Assessment Provides Update on Singaporeans’ Views about Society and their Workplace

The study suggests that affordable housing, effective healthcare, care for the elderly and disadvantaged, respect and compassion are what would define Singaporeans’ ideal society, while employee recognition, engagement and fulfilment, mentoring and continuous learning are what would define employed Singaporeans ideal workplace.

Published in: Data & Analytics
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

2018 Singapore National Values Assessment

  1. 1. Copyright © aAdvantage Consulting 2018. All Intellectual Property Reserved. 1 How we view Singapore society and the workplace as these are today, and what we want them to be 30th July, 2018
  2. 2. Copyright © aAdvantage Consulting 2018. All Intellectual Property Reserved. 2 Terms of Use All title, ownership rights and intellectual property rights in and relating to this document or any copies thereof including but not limited to copyright, logos, names, trademarks, service marks, design, text, images, concepts and themes are owned by aAdvantage Consulting Group Pte Ltd (“aAdvantage Consulting”) and/or Barrett Values Centre (“BVC”). Any reproduction, transmission, publication, performance, broadcast, alteration, hyperlink, creation of derivative works or other use in whole or in part in any manner without the prior written consent of aAdvantage Consulting is strictly prohibited. The content contained within this document may be referenced to only if credit is attributed to aAdvantage Consulting, provided that the information cited is accurately represented and does not in any way contradict the information provided in this document. You shall not use aAdvantage’s name, trademarks, service marks, logos, trade names and/or branding without aAdvantage’s prior written consent. This document contains general information only. aAdvantage Consulting are not, by means of this document, rendering any professional advice or services. This document is not a substitute for such professional advice or services, nor should it be used as a basis for any decision or action that may affect your business. Before making any decision or taking any action that may affect your business, you should consult a professional advisor. Whilst every care has been taken in compiling this document, aAdvantage Consulting makes no representations or warranty (expressed or implied) about the accuracy, suitability, reliability or completeness of the information for any purpose. aAdvantage Consulting or its employees accept no liability to any party for any loss, damage or costs howsoever arising, whether directly or indirectly from any action or decision taken (or not taken) as a result of any person relying on or otherwise using this document or arising from any omission from it.
  3. 3. aAdvantage Consulting: From Vision to Results Partnering clients in achieving impactful implementation and seamless transformation for sustainable growth.
  4. 4. Copyright © aAdvantage Consulting 2018. All Intellectual Property Reserved. 4 Objectives of the Study • Obtain preliminary insights into what matters to Singapore Citizens. • Generate meaningful dialogue about the society and workplace environment that Singapore Citizens desire. Our Purpose
  5. 5. Copyright © aAdvantage Consulting 2018. All Intellectual Property Reserved. 5www.aadvantage-consulting.com 01 Introduction
  6. 6. Copyright © aAdvantage Consulting 2018. All Intellectual Property Reserved. 6 Respondents were asked the following three questions. For each question, respondents were required to pick exactly 10 values and behaviours from a list that: 4. Best reflect your workplace today 5. Best reflect your desired workplace 1. Best reflect who you are 2. Best reflect Singapore’s society today 3. Best reflect the desired Singapore society Personal Societal Organisational Assessment Questions Introduction
  7. 7. Copyright © aAdvantage Consulting 2018. All Intellectual Property Reserved. 7 • 2,000 Singapore Citizens were interviewed. • Survey period: March to May 2018. • Stratified quota sampling across Ethnicity, Education Qualifications, Age, Housing Types across constituencies. • Data collection through Face-to-Face Interviews and Online Survey (particularly for private households). NB: Of the 2,000 respondents, 956 employed Singapore Citizens also responded to our questions on their current and desired workplace in Singapore. This however is not based on Stratified Quota Sampling. Methodology Introduction
  8. 8. Copyright © aAdvantage Consulting 2018. All Intellectual Property Reserved. 8 Maslow’s Needs to Barrett’s Consciousness Know and Understand Physiological Safety Love & Belonging Self-esteemAbraham Maslow Know and Understand Needs Consc iousness Self-Actualization Richard Barrett Introduction
  9. 9. Introduction The Barrett Seven Levels of Consciousness Selfless service Compassion, humility, forgiveness, caring for humanity Global sustainability Human rights, long-term perspective, peace, focus on future generations Making a positive difference in the world Empathy, alliances, cooperation, intuition, mentoring Strategic alliances and regional partnerships environmental awareness, care for disadvantaged, sustainability Finding meaning in existence Integrity, honesty, authenticity, passion, enthusiasm, creativity Strong cohesive culture Fairness, transparency, trust, shared vision and values, citizen dialogue Letting go of fears. Adaptability, life long learning, continuous renewal Democratic processes and continuous renewal Freedom, equality, empowerment, accountability, adaptability Feeling a sense of self-worth Fear: I am not enough. power, authority or status seeking Institutional effectiveness Bureaucracy, central control, elitism, complacency, and apathy. Feeling protected and loved Fear: I am not loved enough. jealousy, blame, and discrimination Sense of belonging & social stability Inequality, discrimination, intolerance, hatred, and loneliness/isolation. Satisfying physiological and survival needs Fear: I do not have enough. control, domination, demanding, and impatience Economic stability and citizen security Corruption, violence, poverty, environmental pollution, and greed. SelfinterestCommonGood Personal National
  10. 10. Copyright © aAdvantage Consulting 2018. All Intellectual Property Reserved. 10 Completed National / Regional Values Assessments Introduction* Denmark 2008 Latvia 2007 Sweden 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2016, 2017, 2018 Iceland 2008, 2010, 2014 Belgium 2010, 2014 UK 2012 Finland 2010, 2011 Switzerland 2011 France 2012, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017 USA 2009, 2010, 2011 Australia 2009, 2016 Canada 2009 South Africa 2011** Bhutan 2007 Brazil 2010, 2017 Nigeria 2012 Argentina 2001** Singapore 2012, 2015, 2018 United Arab Emirates 2012 South America North America Africa Asia Oceania Europe Venezuela 2010 ** Trinidad & Tobago 2012 ** Data collected by random public sample Italy 2012 Hungary 2012 ** Slovakia 2017 Turkey 2011, 2017 Kingdom of Saudi Arabia 2016, 2017 Serbia T.B.D.
  11. 11. Copyright © aAdvantage Consulting 2018. All Intellectual Property Reserved. 11www.aadvantage-consulting.com 02 Personal Values and How Singapore Citizens View the Current and Desired Singapore Society (2018)
  12. 12. What Singapore Citizens Consider are the Values and Behaviours that Best Describe Themselves (2018) % of total votes across 7 levels 2% 1% 1% 7% 18% 10% 19% 24% 10% 8% 0% 20% 40% 60% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 # Value/Behaviour* Level 1 Family 2(R) 2 Health 1(I) 3 Caring 2(R) 4 Friendship 2(R) 5 Responsibility 4(I) 6 Honesty 5(I) 7 Happiness 5(I) 8 Compassion 7(R) 9 Balance (home/work) 4(I) 10 Humour/ fun 5(I) Level Singapore Citizens 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 IRS (P)=6-4-0 • L5: Authentic to one’s needs and aspirations • L4: Willingness to let go of personal fears and concerns • L2: Value personal relationships and connections * Top 10 arranged in order of frequency of votes cast in descending order
  13. 13. % of Potentially Limiting Values and Behaviours = 41% # Value/Behaviour Level 1 Kiasu (L) 1(I) 2 Complaining (L) 2(R) 3 Competitiveness (L) 3(R) 4 Materialistic (L) 1(I) 5 Educational opportunities 3(O) 6 Blame (L) 2(R) 7 Kiasi (L) 1(I) 8 Self-centredness (L) 3(I) 9 Care for the elderly 4(S) 10 Effective healthcare 1(O) % of total votes across 7 levels 16% 12% 13% 9% 5% 9% 15% 6% 7% 8% 0% 20% 40% 60% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Level Singapore Citizens 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 IROS (P)=0-0-2-1 IROS (L)=4-3-0-0 How Singapore Citizens Perceive the Singapore Society as it is Today (2018) * Top 10 arranged in order of frequency of votes cast in descending order • Systems in place to support health, self- development and well- being of the elderly • Places strong focus on the Self (64% votes: levels 1-3) o Unwillingness to try due to fear of losing out, desire for possessions and need to stay ahead of others o Environment where people attribute problems and imperfections to others
  14. 14. Cultural Entropy for Singapore (2018) This table depicts the survey participants’ total votes for Current Culture potentially limiting values by level. Potentially limiting values reflect the degree of disorder within a system and are found only at levels 1, 2 and 3. Level Potentially Limiting Values (Votes) Cultural Entropy % 3 Competitiveness (595) Self-centredness (479) Deteriorating values (431) Complacency (423) Elitism (324) Wasted resources (237) Bureaucracy (158) 13% of total votes 2 Complaining (866) Blame (499) Discrimination (334) Distrust (273) Non-transparency (256) Class division (211) 12% of total votes 1 Kiasu (1022) Materialistic (542) Kiasi (482) Uncertainty about the future (364) Control (231) Unemployment (192) Short-term Focus (185) Crime/ Violence (132) Corruption (125) 16% of total votes Total 8,361 out of 20,000 votes 41% of total votes Current National Entropy: 41%
  15. 15. Percentage of “Potentially Limiting Values and Behaviours” by Countries 82% 76% 75% 73% 72% 62% 61% 61% 59% 57% 54% 52% 51% 49% 44% 41% 37% 41% 39% 39% 32% 26% 21% 12% 4% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% HUNGARY (2012) SLOVAKIA (2012) TRINIDAD&TOBAGO (2012) ITALY (2012) VENEZUELA (2009) SOUTH AFRICA (2011) FRANCE (2015) ICELAND (2014) UNITED KINGDOM (2012) NIGERIA (2012) LATVIA (2007) UNITED STATES (2011) BRAZIL (2010) FINLAND (2011) SWEDEN (2018) SINGAPORE (2012) SINGAPORE (2015) SINGAPORE (2018) AUSTRALIA (2016) BELGIUM (2014) CANADA (2010) SWITZERLAND (2011) DENMARK (2008) UNITED ARAB EMIRATES (2012) BHUTAN (2008) Reference: National Values Assessment Resource Guide (2016), Barretts Values Centre
  16. 16. Copyright © aAdvantage Consulting 2018. All Intellectual Property Reserved. 16 Entropy 2015 = 37%Entropy 2012 = 41% # Value/Behaviour (2012) Value/Behaviour (2015) Value/Behaviour (2018) 1 Kiasu1 (L) Kiasu1 (L) Kiasu1 (L) 2 Competitive (L) Competitive (L) Complaining (L) 3 Self-centred (L) Materialistic(l) Competitiveness (L) 4 Material needs Self-centered(l) Materialistic (L) 5 Kiasi2 (L) Kiasi2 (L) Educational opportunities 6 Deteriorating values (L) Blame (L) Blame (L) 7 Elitism (L) Security Kiasi2 (L) 8 Blame (L) Education opportunities Self-centredness (L) 9 Uncertainty about the future (L) Effective healthcare Care for the elderly 10 Security Peace Effective healthcare Entropy 2018 = 41% Level Current Values (CC) 2012 Current Values (CC) 2015 Current Values (CC) 2018 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Current Culture Singapore Society: ‘12, ‘15, ‘18 Blue = Appeared in 2012, 2015 & 2018
  17. 17. # Value/Behaviour Level 1 affordable housing 1(O) 2 care for the elderly 4(S) 3 compassion 7(R) 4 care for the disadvantaged 4(S) 5 effective healthcare 1(O) 6 care for the environment 6(S) 7 dependable public services 3(O) 8 educational opportunities 3(O) 9 concern for future generations 7(S) 10 respect 2(R) % of total votes across 7 levelsLevel Singapore Citizens 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 IROS (P)=0-2-4-4 2% 1% 1% 12% 9% 9% 23% 17% 11% 15% 0% 20% 40% 60% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 What Singapore Citizens Said Would Define their Desired Singapore Society (2018) • Top 10 across the levels indicating consciousness of needs /aspirations at all levels • Call to let go of some of our fears and focus on common good (64% votes: levels 4-7) • At the same time, to enhance achievement of basic needs • Call for more respect and compassion as a possible response to societal blame and complaining
  18. 18. Copyright © aAdvantage Consulting 2018. All Intellectual Property Reserved. 18 Singapore NVA 2018: Value Jumps A value jump occurs when there are more votes for a value in the Desired Culture than in the Current Culture. Listed below are the values with the largest increase in votes. The values in bold are represented in the Desired Culture. Current Culture Votes Desired Culture Votes Jump Affordable housing 251 773 522 Compassion 208 656 448 Care for the disadvantaged 243 562 319 Care for the elderly 446 725 279 Respect 124 400 276 Care for the environment 232 503 271 Positive attitude 50 288 238 Transparency 63 284 221 Integrity 92 308 216 Helpfulness 160 372 212 What’s going to promote trust and connections towards transformation?
  19. 19. Copyright © aAdvantage Consulting 2018. All Intellectual Property Reserved. 19 # Value/Behaviour (2012) Value/Behaviour (2015) Value/Behaviour (2018) 1 Affordable housing Affordable housing Affordable housing 2 Caring for the elderly Caring for the elderly Care for the elderly 3 Effective healthcare Effective healthcare Compassion 4 Caring for the disadvantaged Compassion Care for the disadvantaged 5 Compassion Quality of life Effective healthcare 6 Concern for future generations Caring for the disadvantaged Care for the environment 7 Quality of life Peace Dependable public services 8 Equal opportunities Employment opportunities Educational opportunities 9 Social responsibility Caring for environment Concern for future generations 10 Employment opportunities Concern for future generations Respect Level Desired Values (DC) 2012 Desired Values (DC) 2015 Desired Values (DC) 2018 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 IROS (P)=1-1-4-4 IROS (P)=1-1-3-5 IROS (P)=0-2-4-4 IROS (L)=0-0-0-0 Desired Culture Singapore Society: ‘12, ‘15, ‘18 Blue = Appeared in 2012, 2015 & 2018
  20. 20. Summary of 2018 NVA Results Personal Values vs. Societal Current Values vs. Societal Desired Values Personal Values Societal Current Values Societal Desired Values 1 family 940 2(R) kiasu (L) 1022 1(I) affordable housing 773 1(O) 2 health 597 1(I) complaining (L) 866 2(R) care for the elderly 725 4(S) 3 caring 587 2(R) competitiveness (L) 595 3(R) compassion 656 7(R) 4 friendship 587 2(R) materialistic (L) 542 1(I) care for the disadvantaged 562 4(S) 5 responsibility 585 4(I) educational opportunities 510 3(O) effective healthcare 527 1(O) 6 honesty 466 5(I) blame (L) 499 2(R) care for the environment 503 6(S) 7 happiness 451 5(I) kiasi (L) 482 1(I) dependable public svcs 468 3(O) 8 compassion 448 7(R) self-centredness (L) 479 3(I) educational opportunities 451 3(O) 9 balance (home/work) 393 4(I) care for the elderly 446 4(S) concern for future gen. 450 7(S) 10 humour/ fun 364 5(I) effective healthcare 443 1(O) respect 400 2(R) (0) Black Underline = PV & CC (0) Orange = PV, CC & DC (3) Orange = CC & DC (1) Blue = PV & DC P = Positive L = Potentially Limiting (white circle) I = Individual R = Relationship O = Organisational S = Societal Singapore Citizens (n=2,000) 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 IRS (P)=6-4-0 IRS (L)=0-0-0 IROS (P)=0-0-2-1 IROS (L)=4-3-0-0 IROS (P)=0-2-4-4 IROS (L)=0-0-0-0 Cultural Entropy: 41%
  21. 21. Copyright © aAdvantage Consulting 2018. All Intellectual Property Reserved. 21 1. How do we manage the priorities between more basic needs like effective healthcare and affordable housing vis-à-vis higher societal aspirations of compassion and care for the less privileged? 3. What roles and responsibilities can the community of stakeholders play to effect the desired change? Some Parting Thoughts 2. What does it take for us to move from “blaming/complaining” to taking personal accountability of what’s desired in our society?
  22. 22. Copyright © aAdvantage Consulting 2018. All Intellectual Property Reserved. 22www.aadvantage-consulting.com 03 Country Comparison
  23. 23. Copyright © aAdvantage Consulting 2018. All Intellectual Property Reserved. 23 National Assessment Sweden Overall Group (1000) bureaucracy (L) 407 3(O) uncertainty about the future (L) 402 1(I) crime/ violence (L) 378 1(R) blame (L) 360 2(R) wasted resources (L) 341 3(O) freedom of speech 334 4(O) materialistic (L) 306 1(I) short-term focus (L) 300 1(O) educational opportunities 270 3(O) diversity 259 4(R) peace 259 7(S) financial stability 503 1(I) employment opportunities 452 1(O) concern for future generations 412 7(S) effective healthcare 349 1(O) equality 307 4(R) nature conservancy 305 6(S) law enforcement 279 3(O) democratic process 270 4(R) environmental awareness 261 6(S) peace 261 7(S) Black Underline = PV & CC Orange = PV, CC & DC Orange = CC & DC Blue = PV & DC P = Positive L = Potentially Limiting (white circle) I = Individual R = Relationship O = Organisational S = Societal family 455 2(R) responsibility 443 4(I) humour/ fun 432 5(I) honesty 337 5(I) accountability 302 4(R) financial stability 295 1(I) compassion 267 7(R) balance (home/work) 248 4(I) positive attitude 246 5(I) health 227 1(I) Level Personal Values (PV) Current Culture Values (CC) Desired Culture Values (DC) 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 IRS (P)=7-3-0 IRS (L)=0-0-0 IROS (P)=0-1-2-1 IROS (L)=2-2-3-0 IROS (P)=1-2-3-4 IROS (L)=0-0-0-0 Cultural Entropy: Current Culture 44%
  24. 24. Level 2013(1001) 2014 (1001) 2018 (1000) 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 IROS (P)=0-0-2-1 IROS (L)=2-1-4-0 IROS (P)=0-0-2-1 IROS (L)=2-2-3-0 IROS (P)=0-1-2-1 IROS (L)=2-2-3-0 Sweden National Assessments (Current Culture) unemployment (L) 599 1(O) bureaucracy (L) 457 3(O) uncertainty about the future (L) 438 1(I) freedom of speech 395 4(O) wasted resources (L) 354 3(O) materialistic (L) 338 1(I) blame (L) 334 2(R) peace 332 7(S) short-term focus (L) 319 1(O) educational opportunities 279 3(O) Matches 6 Cultural Entropy: 2013: 47% 2014: 43% 2018: 44% bureaucracy (L) 407 3(O) uncertainty about the future (L) 402 1(I) crime/ violence (L) 378 1(R) blame (L) 360 2(R) wasted resources (L) 341 3(O) freedom of speech 334 4(O) materialistic (L) 306 1(I) short-term focus (L) 300 1(O) educational opportunities 270 3(O) diversity 259 4(R) peace 259 7(S) unemployment (L) 507 1(O) bureaucracy (L) 407 3(O) freedom of speech 379 4(O) uncertainty about the future (L) 378 1(I) materialistic (L) 357 1(I) peace 331 7(S) wasted resources (L) 328 3(O) blame (L) 297 2(R) short-term focus (L) 281 1(O) educational opportunities 268 3(O) Orange = Past and Present P = Positive I = Individual O = Organisational L = Potentially Limiting R = Relationship S = Societal Legend
  25. 25. Copyright © aAdvantage Consulting 2018. All Intellectual Property Reserved. 25 Sweden Municipal-level Dialogues https://www.valuescentre.com/resources/articles “With Focus on Values - Measurement and Transformation in Swedish Municipalities”
  26. 26. Copyright © aAdvantage Consulting 2018. All Intellectual Property Reserved. 26 Australia (2016) • An organisation called the Australian Futures Project ran the NVA in 2016. • They then created a nationwide competition called "My Big Idea" based on the top 10 desired culture values. • What practical ideas did Australian citizens have to bring the desired culture values to life in society. This was supported with TV and media coverage and significant corporate sponsorship https://youtu.be/rqzyaK6WZRE
  27. 27. Copyright © aAdvantage Consulting 2018. All Intellectual Property Reserved. 27www.aadvantage-consulting.com 04 How Singapore Citizens View the Current and Desired Singapore Workplace
  28. 28. 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 The Barrett Seven Levels of Organisational Consciousness
  29. 29. Summary of 2018 CVA Results Personal Values vs. Workplace Current vs. Workplace Desired Personal Values Workplace Current Values Workplace Desired Values 1 Family 415 2(R) Teamwork 284 4(R) Employee recognition 360 2(R) 2 Responsibility 301 4(I) Continuous improvement 225 4(O) Balance (home/work) 321 4(O) 3 Balance (home/work) 262 4(I) Continuous learning 217 4(O) Teamwork 298 4(R) 4 Friendship 253 2(R) Cost reduction (L) 214 1(O) Continuous improvement 255 4(O) 5 Health 250 1(I) Customer satisfaction 212 2(O) Continuous learning 255 4(O) 6 Caring 234 2(R) Results orientation 203 3(O) Employee engagement 255 5(O) 7 Compassion 206 7(R) Achievement 192 3(I) Coaching/ mentoring 220 6(R) 8 Honesty 197 5(I) Balance (home/work) 190 4(O) Employee health 209 1(O) 9 Positive attitude 191 5(I) Long hours (L) 190 3(O) Open communication 205 2(R) 10 Happiness 190 5(I) Information sharing 174 4(O) Employee fulfilment 204 6(O) (0) Black Underline = PV & CC (1) Orange = PV, CC & DC (3) Orange = CC & DC (0) Blue = PV & DC P = Positive L = Potentially Limiting (white circle) I = Individual R = Relationship O = Organisational S = Societal Singapore Employed Citizens (n=956) 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 IRS (P)=6-4-0 IRS (L)=0-0-0 IROS (P)=1-1-6-0 IROS (L)=0-0-2-0 IROS (P)=0-4-6-0 IROS (L)=0-0-0-0 Cultural Entropy: 19% Entropy 2018 = 19%
  30. 30. Copyright © aAdvantage Consulting 2018. All Intellectual Property Reserved. 30 Entropy Impact 0-10% Prime: Healthy Functioning 11-20% Minor Issues: Requiring cultural and/or structural adjustment 21-30% Significant Issues: Requiring cultural and structural transformation, and leadership coaching 31-40% Serious Issues: Requiring cultural and structural transformation, leadership mentoring/coaching, and leadership development 41%+ Critical Issues: Requiring cultural and structural transformation, selective changes in leadership, leadership mentoring/coaching and leadership development Organisational Cultural Entropy Represents The Degree Of Dysfunction In A Culture
  31. 31. Copyright © aAdvantage Consulting 2018. All Intellectual Property Reserved. 31 1.As the economy restructures, what’s the correct balance in terms of excellence in execution, financial results and innovating for the future? 3. What can organisation leaders do to create a conducive workplace environment to meet the personal aspirations and motivations of your employees? Are they willing to invest? 2. What’s currently inhibiting organisations in terms of leadership and culture? What’s being done to address these?​ Some Parting Thoughts
  32. 32. Copyright © aAdvantage Consulting 2018. All Intellectual Property Reserved. 32 From vision to results Vincent Ho, Director, aAdvantage Consulting Email: vincent.ho@aadvantage-consulting.com Tel: 6853 2658 For all queries on the survey and results, please contact:

×