Immediately upon arriving in Singapore I got my first taste of how serious Singapore takes efficiency. Literally, I walked off the plane to go to the bathroom and was greeted by a touch screen TV in the bathroom asking me to rate its cleanliness on a scale from 1 to 5. A nearby sign noted that the touch screen was sanitized regularly. A nearby information desk had a similar touch screen, asking to rate the level of service at that desk.
Efficiency, and safety, are two attributes emphasized throughout Singapore, driven by government efforts. Mandatory A/C environmental inspections, escaltors which run twice as fast as in the US (to get people to their destination faster), and a super reliable subway system are examples of efficiency, while claims that you can walk around anywhere at anytime of night, as well as a multitude of cameras in public places support Singapore’s claim to safety. Further fueling Singapore’s efficient culture is its high work ethic standard. The government encourages people to learn as much as possible. It puts in place programs such as discounted fares if you take the train very early in the morning, to incent people to get into work earlier.
But all of this comes at a cost. Singapore was recently rated the least happy city in the city, prompting the government to (anacdotally) form a Ministry of Happiness. People violating laws, from eating or drinking on the train to jay walking to spitting, can be fined. Fining is so prolific, in fact, that many shops sell t-shirts which proclaim “Singapore: A fine city.” The cameras can be overbearing; I counted over 15 cameras covering one MRT entrance. A local Singaporean told me that he feels like “big brother is watching.”
To me, this is a lesson of extremes, which can apply to the way a government runs a city, but also to the way peoplel choose to live their life. You can pick a few areas to focus on and get really great at them, which will help you advance faster in those areas but probably alienate some people in the process. Or, you can try to attack a myriad of issues well, aligning with more people’s interests but making progress less rapidly. I’m not sure that one way is better than the other — just different strokes, for different folks, I suppose.
Lessons Learned
–Accomplishing something that is considered good (safety, efficiency), can come at a price (happiness, sense of freedom)
–Taking a tight focus in what you are trying to accomplish may help you make progress more rapidly, but in the process it may be challenging to “bring others along for the journey” and cause them to feel alienated
What are your thoughts on whether it is better to be great at a few things, or good at many things?
Both. Good to be master of one (or a few if your that smart). To be good at many things—-guess that’s good too. Leave room to fail at one. (or —-) Good learning experience. I don’t think you have to worry.
Ah, both! Yes, I guess that would be the best. Too much to do and too little time, though
Better to know and be yourself. The skills will or won’t come naturally. Trying to be someone you’re not leads to unhappiness.