a aussie teacher finds Singapore management more inflexible and intolerant of dissent than communist China's:
http://chinawords.spaces.live.com/Blog/cns!458AD99F75DAB973!3346.entry
China-Vs-Singapore?
Working the Singaporean way
Dec 2, 2006
................
Profile for those who donÂ’t know- X is an international school in Shanghai (a private for-profit company). The management of the school is Singaporean, and most positions in management are held by Singaporeans, with little in the way of positions available for people from other countries.
Let’s start at the beginning. When I came to China, almost six years ago, I like many people was under the impression that China was an authoritarian country. Even though I’d studied the history of the place and understood the political structure in a more sophisticated sense than the one illustrated in western media, I still assumed it would be quite a rigid place to live in work. This was a sterotype that I quickly saw was in many ways very flawed. Workers riot and protest at a frequency I didn’t think was possible here, workers question their bosses, and local committees in the suburbs help government make decisions on ‘living areas’. When Chinese workers are unhappy with the boss, they ‘drag their feet’ and passively resist. As an Australian, with our traditional disrespect for authority, this was a side to China I was surprised to see. While China is still not Australia, it’s much ‘freer’ (for want of a better word) than I’d imagined.
The image I have from the western media of Singapore is one of a vibrant modern state. Like China, the images we have of Singapore in the west are few and far between, but instead of authoritarian we get the word ‘tough’ to describe the place, or ‘hardworking’. The word ‘modern’ springs to mind to when one thinks of Singapore. With that in mind, when I was offered the job at X, I was really excited about what I thought would be a really good workplace. Singapore sells itself as a fusion of the best of the east and the best of the west, and I thought I’d feel right at home in this kind of mix. It was to be, in my mind, the highlight of my working career so far.
My first three months or so at X seemed to be fine. My only real complaint was that the place was a bit mechanical, a bit cold. In Chinese workplaces, foreign workers were given a support teacher to help them through the first few months, and they were eased into teaching. At X I was plonked into the job, given a teachers manual that had all ‘school policy’ and I was expected to read this. That was my integration to the school. I got the feeling very early on that I was a cog in the machine, and I did what I thought was the right thing. It was until I queeried the boss that things started to change.
I was given a class that was lower in English ability to other classes of the same level. I assumed this was a streamed class because I seemed to have almost all the low ability kids. Exams were coming, and I flicked through the paper and realised all my students would fail. Being mainly from Korea, these students would find a Singaporean text quite tough. I thought this would kill their confidence (they’d actually worked really well in class and improved a lot). I organised a meeting and explained things to the boss, and the first thing she said to me, with a smile, was “Our classes aren’t streamed. We have mixed ability classes, this is school policy. If we had streamed classes, parents would complain.” Under the veneer of ‘modernity’, I was beginning to see, very early, that X was more Chinese than I’d been lead to believe. This means, say one thing, do another. Where was all the ‘modern management’ practice’?
At the same time that this began, I noticed that my Singaporean colleagues (not all of them, but many of them) regularly complained about China. The most common complaint was the ‘dirtiness and unhygenic’ nature of the place. I expected more, assuming that teachers who would come here would understand that this is not a city state (so there will be a lot more industrial pollution here given it’s a manufacturing centre), and also be sympathetic to, and even excited about, a China getting on its feet. Some of my colleagues go on so much about hygene that one would be forgiven for assuming they believe civilisations greatest gift is clean streets. I will come back to the idea of ‘civilisation’ later. The Chinese staff I worked with at X only said nice things about what they knew of Singapore and their Singaporean colleagues, or nothing at all.
It became clear after this first discussion with the boss, that the school and the “thinkers” running it weren’t all that ‘modern’. There was a lot of great talk at meetings about new ideas, but the reality was something quite the opposite. There is always a certain amount of inertia in any group of people when it comes to change, but this was far more than that- it was my first taste of a strange culture of ‘modern facade, ancient heart’. This contrasted with my experience in Chinese schools- if there was some element of innovation it would be followed through. If not, there was no pretence at being modern. It was much easier to cope with. You knew, much more, where you stood.
When teachers were unhappy about something at school they complained a lot, quietly in ‘safe groups’ about it, but when it came to meetings, they were silent. On more than one occasion western teachers were approached quietly by a Singaporean teacher to complain about something. When the matter was brought up, no Singaporean staff supported the complaint, but after the meeting they’d congratulate the ‘western teacher’ who’d brought it up. This strange culture of fear permeates the whole staff. X has had various major problems, and staff never band together to change things despite the fact that the school has trouble getting staff, and they are far away from ‘trouble’. They actually have the power to stand up for what’s right and be apart of change. Instead, staff watch as poor management practice leads to crisis, and the veneer cracks.
Management at X, and we’ve had different managers, generally do not tolerate dissent. They are very uncomfortable with dissent, and they either stifle discussion, or make changes with no consultation. There is a very strong paternalsitic attitude about management- they do ‘what’s best for the school’ which often equates to what’s best for profit making, or what parents want (sometimes ignoring sound educational practice). This is true of Chinese schools, but it’s much stronger at X. I have been to meetings in Chinese schools, and they have debates and changes are done generally after some sort of consultation. Not so at X. X actually has very highly qualified staff (either with a huge amount of teaching experience, or high acedemic qualifications) but this experience and expertise is rarely tapped. “Management knows best”.
