The thing is, Singapore has done very well out of MNCs and government-backed large enterprises. Its comparative advantage over the rest of the world is in efficient implementation rather than innovation, and it achieves the former through values that are not conducive to innovation (central-planning, regulation, conformity). And it's a model that works so well for Singaporeans there's perhaps very little incentive to deviate from it either for entrepreneurs or investors. The country collectively went from "rags to riches" within the memories of the parents that most twentysomething Singaporeans live with, without a single Gates or Jobs to point to inspire individualism. Singapore's rich list is dominated by people who earned their fortunes through banking or smart property investments, and their highly-skilled job market is dominated by the finance sector, which pays very nicely.
At worst that can breed a sense of entitlement where not only is failure (the expectated outcome for any budding entrepreneur) inconceivable, but steady career progression is believed to be guaranteed simply by having the requisite qualities and turning up. A friend who headed up recruitment for an MNC noted how brazen young Singaporeans (by contrast to both immigrants to Singapore or job applicants in the Western world) were about stating that a percentage increase in salary was their prime/only motivation for wanting the job. Compare that with your average startup story where people are enthusiastic about working longer hours for less money for the challenge and the freedom - are these people as easy to find in Singapore?
Of course, that creates plenty of opportunities for those that do want to break out from the norm - it's a climate which is business-friendly, you can speak both the world's most important business languages fluently, the basic costs of living are cheap compared with much of the developed world, and if you've got the cash there's no shortage of smart, well-educated people to hire at lower rates than San Francisco.
Notahacker, i just realised you made an very good observation of Singapore: her being an excellent implementor but not an innovator.
I really do hope that the Singapore government's efforts to revive its education curriculum works out well. Previously (and rampant in the age group of today's 14-22 years old), students take pride in their ability to organise large conferences and overseas trips. All these demonstrate and place glory on the ability to implement projects. However, it forgoes the emphasis on the ability to create.
Creation is probably what Singapore is in desperate need to sustain its crazy economic growth it still experiences till this day.
Comments
Outsider perspective here:
The thing is, Singapore has done very well out of MNCs and government-backed large enterprises. Its comparative advantage over the rest of the world is in efficient implementation rather than innovation, and it achieves the former through values that are not conducive to innovation (central-planning, regulation, conformity). And it's a model that works so well for Singaporeans there's perhaps very little incentive to deviate from it either for entrepreneurs or investors. The country collectively went from "rags to riches" within the memories of the parents that most twentysomething Singaporeans live with, without a single Gates or Jobs to point to inspire individualism. Singapore's rich list is dominated by people who earned their fortunes through banking or smart property investments, and their highly-skilled job market is dominated by the finance sector, which pays very nicely.
At worst that can breed a sense of entitlement where not only is failure (the expectated outcome for any budding entrepreneur) inconceivable, but steady career progression is believed to be guaranteed simply by having the requisite qualities and turning up. A friend who headed up recruitment for an MNC noted how brazen young Singaporeans (by contrast to both immigrants to Singapore or job applicants in the Western world) were about stating that a percentage increase in salary was their prime/only motivation for wanting the job. Compare that with your average startup story where people are enthusiastic about working longer hours for less money for the challenge and the freedom - are these people as easy to find in Singapore?
Of course, that creates plenty of opportunities for those that do want to break out from the norm - it's a climate which is business-friendly, you can speak both the world's most important business languages fluently, the basic costs of living are cheap compared with much of the developed world, and if you've got the cash there's no shortage of smart, well-educated people to hire at lower rates than San Francisco.
Notahacker, i just realised you made an very good observation of Singapore: her being an excellent implementor but not an innovator.
I really do hope that the Singapore government's efforts to revive its education curriculum works out well. Previously (and rampant in the age group of today's 14-22 years old), students take pride in their ability to organise large conferences and overseas trips. All these demonstrate and place glory on the ability to implement projects. However, it forgoes the emphasis on the ability to create.
Creation is probably what Singapore is in desperate need to sustain its crazy economic growth it still experiences till this day.
Thanks for your reply!