src='https://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js?client=ca-pub-2513966551258002'/> Rightways: mindset Infolinks.com, 2618740 , RESELLER

Pages

Share This

Showing posts with label mindset. Show all posts
Showing posts with label mindset. Show all posts

Thursday, September 6, 2018

Liberating the Malay mindset, the right way to speak out


The right way to speak out


I REFER to the article “The real Malay Dilemma” ((The real Malay dilemma: race, religion & politics, Siti Thoughts, Sunday Star, Aug 26). Siti Kassim made her details as clear as they can be but not without error in her bewildering opinion on the subject.

Siti’s observation is near faultless and I wonder if she is sincere enough to defend the cause of changing the so-called Malay mindset. Firstly, why publish such a strong, emotional and provocative article in an English newspaper if she insists that she has studied her “targeted audience” well enough?

Learn and appreciate the views of a different mindset before telling everyone to change. According to Bakri Musa, a mindset refers to the outlook in or philosophy of life. It is a set of ideas, attitudes and opinions that we – as individuals or members of a group – share of reality, or of what we recognise to be reality.

Neurologically speaking, a mindset is the pre-existing neural pattern in our brain; conceptually, it is our mental hypothesis of reality. Having said this, the mindset is not really a result of the religion’s influence but rather of their past experiences.

It is common to see differing mindsets among people in other countries too, but why exactly wouldn’t anyone in those countries make a big fuss about it?

Malaysia is a progressing population and some of its characters do not wish to portray their advancement as a double-edged weapon. We need to be thoughtful and informed about it.

Not only is it the wrong thing to say but it is also the wrong way to do it. We understand that Islam is a way to help ourselves to improve. There is no flaw in Islam when we talk about civilisation; Islam is civilisation. It was a tried-and-true Islamic value that brought the ancient world to its golden age during its peak.

Some individuals who have a lazy understanding of Islam will describe its teachings as backward, prohibitive and jumud; and they repeatedly use Islam as an excuse for many problems. This unceasing stream of vitriol towards Islam is nothing new.

A change in government will not change the people’s mindset. The May general election did not bring about a change in mindset but rather a choice of two governments, one less benign than the other.

It is not surprising that the so-called liberal Malays are accused of being blasphemous because the accusers are not able to answer or defend a particular issue brought up by repugnant personas. With this in mind, if we let it continue, Malays will be further divided as liberals and conservatives.

Majlis ilmu, seminars and tahfiz schools are not harmful; on the contrary, they are as good as TED Talks if we want them to be. Let’s see them in a different light. Being obsessed with such things is not harmful. We are in dire need of getting the right contents and ideas to share – and we have many of them.

Why would we want to waste such golden opportunities for getting the right message across? If we need to tweak the content to make it more conducive, multicultural or suggestive, we will do better as multicultural societies.

If we can encourage the Malays to ask the right questions about development and their contribution as a Malaysian community, and ultimately shape the demand for knowledge, then every ustaz, ustazah and religious teacher will have to provide the right answers.

But why wouldn’t the Malays ask the right questions? Maybe that is when the fixed mindset comes into play. Rather than putting these forums in a poor light and defining them as the reasons for the nation’s problems, there are more effective ways to bring the change via the same existing ground.

We do not want to compare Malaysia with Iran, Saudi Arabia, or even Switzerland for that matter. There are different dynamics in Malaysia, and even Aceh has its own uniqueness. Malaysia will never be like those countries and those countries will never be like Malaysia.

On the same note, we do not need to model Malaysia on other Muslim-majority countries, good or bad. We should stand on our own and set a new precedent for other Muslim countries to follow.

We are not going to focus on religion solely for the afterlife but as an equally important design to survive and compete globally together as a nation.

Any issues found in other Muslim countries are coherently found in non-Muslim countries: bad governance and corruption are universal. We can uphold syariah law and be 100% Islamic, yet there will still be people who circumvent the law to line their pockets.

We are moving towards changing the paradigm of Malays being supplicants. Most Malays are ready to lead the change. The only thing is they are not singing loudly enough. So who or what is holding them back?

Malays can’t dispel the stereotypical perception others have of them. And we always make efforts to maintain our self-affirmation, not surprisingly buttressing the stereotype in the process.

Some Malays fear more the threat of being seen as a stereotype rather than actually being the stereotype, and this could be one of the reasons why we see gaps in streamlining the grand purpose of understanding Islam among the progressive Malays.

Being apologetic for the bumiputra policy is not considered appropriate as it was properly studied and the implication was well understood.

Our forefathers would have known the long-term divisive consequences, and this is particularly poignant given the non-bumiputra’s outstanding contributions in developing the country.

However, all Malaysians must accept that such a policy is the right way to help the nation. Malays have already become aware of the reasons for such policies and of how the opinions of some of them are being manipulated by politicians to stay in power. We just need to know when and where to make a healthy distinction.

I celebrate Siti’s righteousness and her gifts but she has to be careful that she uses them wisely and avert some scenarios that will hamper everyone’s efforts.

If maybe one day Siti could share the good things she likes about Muslim and Malays, and share these as an agent of change, there would definitely be more who would listen to her and be inspired, I guarantee it.

Being an activist without having an action plan to change the people’s mindset is not going to work.

IKMAL BAHARUDIN Kuala Lumpur, The Staronline


Related posts:

The real Malay dilemma: race, religion & politics messed up!

 
 

Are Malays powering the nation ?


Liberating Malay mind, unnecessary hoo-ha and nonsense!

Liberating the Malay mind

Open-minded people are usually more tolerant, and when you are tolerant you are also moderate in your actions and behaviour.

Dr. M. Bakri Musa Speaks His Mind:Liberating the Malay Mind

>>>> " 90% of the Doctorates held by Malays is not worth the toilet paper on which it is printed because it was all produced by some internet degree mill for a fee and worse still is when you hold them to a discussion or debate , the thoughts that emanate from the area between their ears is so embarrassing you want to run away and jump off a cliff but yet they proudly parade their Doctorates with pride "

>> >> " 90% of the Malay wealth is not from the fruits of their labour as great entrepreneurs , like the Chinese , but rather the hand-outs of their political patronage and cronyism and there is nothing to be proud of the huge mansions and expensive cars and life-style , because they are nothing but the produce of utter corruption at stealing the wealth of the people's blood , sweat and tears , and yet , without shame their spouses and children flaunt it like they earned all these through intelligence and hard-work .

Liberating Malay mind: Shed ‘excess baggage’ of privileges !

 Malays must shed ‘excess baggage’ of privileges, says Rafidah 



Malaysia's Vision 2020: Falling apart with alarming speed; Dr M is creator and destroyer, said Musa


KUALA LUMPUR: Former Deputy Prime Minister Tun Musa Hitam said Malaysia’s Vision 2020 objective was “falling apart” with “alarming speed”, and he blames Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad for it.

In his keynote speech at an event to mark the sixth anniversary of the Institute for Democracy and Economic Affairs (Ideas), Musa said this was because the former premier did not train leaders but instead chose to retain and train followers instead.

“It is ironic that Dr Mahathir’s vision is now certain to fail because of Dr Mahathir himself.


Investing in minds to stop brain drain

Beijing lures back foreign graduates with lucrative offers


New Malaysia should push for meritocracy

The Meritocracy Paradox

Monday, February 13, 2017

For the love of Datuk titles

Zunar’s cartoon reflects the glut of titles in society. Image from Aliran Monthly.

IF there’s one Malaysian practice that needs reviewing, it has to be this – the long salutations, thanks to the titles of prominent individuals, at the start of speeches during functions.

I can never understand why addressing the audience as “distinguished guests” isn’t good enough. Surely, the audience would be happy to be called distinguished. Or maybe even just “Ladies and Gentlemen”.

Malaysians, however, have to cringe and listen to speakers formally addressing each and every titled person at functions.

We begin with “Tan Sri Tan Sri, Puan Sri Puan Sri, Datuk Seri Datuk Seri, Datin Seri Datin Seri, Datuk Datuk, Datin Datin and distinguished guests”.

And this before the speaker even begins honouring the more important guests by actually naming them one by one, along with their long titles, honorifics and designations.

All these can take up to 10 minutes before the person finally gets to the actual speech.

Welcome to Malaysia. This is another practice which reflects our obsession with formality and titles. It may sound medieval and strange to visitors to Malaysia but this is the done thing here, presumably because some ego-inflated titled individual got offended when his title was not mentioned in a speech.

But alas, the whole thing has become a mockery of sorts. The intention, good as it may be, is actually offensive to the other equally important guests, those with no titles.

They have ended up at the bottom of the pack, in the category of “tuan tuan dan puan puan” or “ladies and gentlemen.” To put it in perspective, without us realising, this is like the category of “dan lain-lain” or “others” which many Malaysians have stood up against.

One would understand it if such a practice is carried out in a palace where protocols are strictly adhered to but surely, not in ordinary functions?

For one, it takes up precious time when most of us just want to get on with the business of the day or in many instances, get on with the dinner. Please, at 8.30pm, most of us are hungry already.

Many times, guests are made to wait, especially when the guest of honour arrives late. By the time the VIP gets there, and thanks to the long and winding speeches, dinner is finally served – at 9.30pm or 10pm.

One wonders why the VIP has to be ushered into a holding room – another peculiar Malaysian practice – before he makes his grand entrance into the ballroom.

I have attended enough events in Britain and the United States, where VIPs would just walk straight into the function hall without any fanfare.

In London, then mayor Boris Johnson cycled to the opening of a property development site and in Sydney, the mayor parked his car a short distance away and walked to the venue!

He introduced himself to his (very) surprised Malaysian audience – and of course, there was no entourage fussing around him to make him look important, another one of our local standard operating procedure.

To be fair, not all of our VIPs are spoilt silly. Sometimes, it is their officers who make a fuss over these formal arrangements to the event’s host.

Those in the royal circles, who have a career in protocol, push even harder – even when the heads of states themselves do not demand it. His Highness Sultan Sharafuddin Idris Shah of Selangor does not even allow waiters to get the napkins ready for him before his meals, insisting on doing it himself.

The Ruler drives his own car often to functions and tells his police motorcade not to put the sirens on because to him, there was no need to put on such a display of importance.

The Sultan of Johor, Sultan Ibrahim Ibni Almarhum Sultan Iskandar, sportingly poses for selfies with his subjects often, sending his security and protocol officers into a frenzy many times.

And most of the time, he drives his car himself. Often, he makes a stop and have a meal at roadside shops, without prior notice. For breakfast, he goes to a mamak restaurant for roti canai quite regularly, again without fuss or advance notice.

At the Cabinet level, Datuk Mustapa Mohamed, the Minister of International Trade and Industry, is certainly the most down-to-earth minister from Umno.

Travellers taking the ERL from KL Sentral to KLIA often see Mustapa travelling alone or taking a flight on Economy Class home to Kelantan. He does not see the need to shout about it or have his officers post a picture on Instagram to get publicity.

Permodalan Nasional Bhd chairman Tan Sri Abdul Wahid Omar insisted on moving around on his own, without the need for bodyguards, when he was in charge of the Economic Planning Unit (EPU). The same can be said of Datuk Seri Idris Jala, who is now chief executive officer of the Performance Management and Delivery Unit (Pemandu).

Perhaps their non-political background helps but having said that, there are corporate figures who are even more status-conscious than politicians.

And seriously, what do Malaysian VIPs do with gifts or “token of appreciation” items presented to them at the end of every function? Yep, they are probably gathering dust in some room filled to the brim with other such items in Putrajaya.

At one time, there was a proposal that only a basket of fruits be given as it was more practical but it never got off the ground.

Likewise, this article will have no impact on the issue.

I wish to thank the “Tun Tun, Toh Puan Toh Puan, Tan Sri Tan Sri, Puan Sri Puan Sri, Datuk Seri Datuk Seri, Datin Seri Datin Seri, Datuk Datuk, Datin Datin, tuan tuan dan puan puan yang dihormati sekalian” for reading this.

On The Beat By Wong Chun Wai  

Wong Chun Wai began his career as a journalist in Penang, and has served The Star for over 27 years in various capacities and roles. He is now the group's managing director/chief executive officer and formerly the group chief editor.

On The Beat made its debut on Feb 23 1997 and Chun Wai has penned the column weekly without a break, except for the occasional press holiday when the paper was not published. In May 2011, a compilation of selected articles of On The Beat was published as a book and launched in conjunction with his 50th birthday. Chun Wai also comments on current issues in The Star.
Related posts:

Friday, February 10, 2017

Where is your Datukship from, Datuk? The trouble with titles

https://youtu.be/xHCpTyBHzQM

 

Malaysia is in danger of becoming a nation with the most number of decorated people


THIS has to be a record of some sort – a notorious gang of 60 hardened criminals including four low-level politicians with the titles of Datuk and a Datuk Seri, has been netted in a series of swoops.

The Gang 360 Devan gang, involved in murder, drug-pushing, luxury car theft and hijacking, has to be the gang with the most number of titled leaders.

Then, there is also the leader of the notorious Gang 24 – a Datuk Seri – who was among 22 men held in another spate of arrests.

Last December, a gang leader known as Datuk M or Datuk Muda was shot dead by his bodyguard while they were driving along the Penang Bridge. The Datuk was a detainee at the Simpang Renggam centre.

A day later, a video went viral showing a heavily tattooed man being violently beaten up by a group of men believed to be gangsters, at the late Datuk’s funeral.

Three days ago, there was a series of arrests by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Agency (MACC) which saw a number of Datuks being arrested and charged.

If we hold the record of being the country which has the highest ratio of government servants, we may also soon be the country with the most number of titled people.

And if we are not careful, we could well be a country which has the most titled criminals.

The people being conferred a Datukship seem to be getting younger and some are surprisingly under 30 years old, which begs the question – what have these youngsters contributed to society to deserve such titles?

Last October, Singapore’s Straits Times carried prominently a news report of a teenager who purportedly became the youngest “Datuk” in the country.

“The image that went viral shows the apparent recipient of the title standing in a crowded waiting room while dressed in ceremonial attire with the caption reading: “Youngest Dato in Malaysia ... 19 years.”

The Malaysian media, which carried the news earlier, has not been able to verify the age of the person in the photo. And no one has denied the authenticity of the article, not even the person in the photo, who may actually be older than he looks.

Regardless of which state these titles are from, many Malaysians rightly deserve the recognition from the royal houses because of their community work, in various forms.

One or two states, especially Pahang, seem to be more generous in conferring awards while states like Selangor, Johor, Perak, Sarawak and Kelantan are more stringent in their selection.

The Selangor state constitution states that only a maximum of 40 Datuk titles can be conferred each year.

The Sultan of Selangor Sultan Sharafuddin Idris Shah has imposed stricter conditions – including the minimum age of 45 – for a person to be conferred the state’s Datukship, to limit the number of recipients and protect the image and dignity of the awards.

In the case of Johor, Sultan Ibrahim ibni Almarhum Sultan Iskandar has expressed his frustrations openly, saying sarcastically “that it has come to a point that if you throw a stone, it will hit a Datuk and when the stone rebounds, it will hit another Datuk”, to illustrate the point that Malaysia is in danger of becoming a nation with the most number of decorated people.

While the increasing number of people with the Datuk title has long been a contentious issue, what Malaysians are concerned about is the number of such titled persons being involved in crime.

Pictures of a certain Datuk with a visible tattoo on his hand, purportedly depicting his gang allegiance, have long gone viral on social media.

Malaysians are asking whether royal houses submitted the names of potential recipients to the police for vetting before conferring them with titles. This is a practice of the Sultan of Selangor. If that were the case with every state, criminals would not have been awarded.

I have complete faith in the ability of our police force. They will carry out their duty of checking the background of such people if asked to do so.

But what is taking place now in Malaysia is also a reflection of our people’s obsession with titles, honorifics and even fake academic titles.

Our former deputy prime minister, the late Tun Ghafar Baba, was just plain Encik, until the day he retired from office.

In Tunku Abdul Rahman’s first Cabinet, after we achieved independence, only five of 15 ministers were made Datuks.

The finance minister at the time, Tan Siew Sin, only held the title of Justice of Peace – which is recognised in Commonwealth countries.

Penang’s first Chief Minister, the late Wong Pow Nee, had no title until he retired, after which he was made Tan Sri. Another was the late Gerakan president Dr Lim Chong Eu who only became Tun upon retirement.

In short, things were pretty simple back then, with proper methodology when it came to conferring decorations, medals and titles. But not today.

There are now so many variations of the Datuk titles – Datuk Seri, Datuk Sri, Datuk Paduka, Dato’, Datuk Wira and Datuk Patinggi (depending on the states) – it has become confusing, even to members of the media.

There are now calls from some titled people that the press should use their titles accurately. I can only imagine the number of corrections the media has to deal with if mistakes are made and some snooty individual gets upset.

In the 1970s, the media decided to standardise how these title holders should be addressed by calling them all “Datuk”. The press also decided to call the Datuk Sri from Pahang “Datuk Seri”.

It is just impossible to check every single title or pre-fix when naming a person.

The reporter does not ask the police where the criminal suspect got his Datukship. Neither can we ask the Datuk criminal as he is being led to the courts in handcuffs, “Where is your Datukship from, Datuk” ?

Besides Brunei, the Malaysian press must be the only one that includes the titles of individuals. Well, there is the British media but they only address those who are knighted with the title “Sir”.

The royalty shouldn’t be the only party blamed for the increasing number of Datuks. Malaysians are willing to go to all lengths to buy the titles, even from bogus sources.

But the titles must not be bestowed on any one with a criminal record or it makes a mockery of this honour.

By Wong Chun Hai The Star/ANN

Related posts:

China Wen:Serve the people well, aim for big accomplishments, not big titles! 

 

Malaysian obsession for titles, world's highest holders! 

 

Proud of dubious titles: Datukship award ... 

 

The Malaysia's court and the PM’s Department 

 

Social climbers in Malaysia: Race, Datuk, Datin or Puan Sri, not professional meritocracy 

 

Water fiasco: RM114 million seized from Sabah water officials 

 

Structural defects to blame, stop history repeating itself !

 

Ministers may face conflict of interest, says Tunku Abdul Aziz:  "If you have no power, you cannot abuse it. Civil servants hav...

 

Saturday, April 16, 2016

One phone to rule all; Fintech, the healthy disruptors of forex

Software rules: Less than 20 of the iPhone comprises hardware and labour costs. The real profit is in software, which is all about knowledge and mindsets. – Bloomberg

WHO dominates the phone dominates the Internet. The whole world of information is now available in your hand, replacing your own mind as a memory base for instant decision-making.

The reason why traditional bank shares are dropping like a stone is that mobile phone companies and financial technology (FinTech) platforms “get it”. Banks and conventional financial institutions are stuck with so much legacy hardware (branches and outdated mainframes) and complex regulation that their CEOs feel beseiged by bad news – cyberattacks, privacy leakages (like the recent Panama leak), capital requirements and huge fines.

No wonder top bank talent is leaving the industry. In Silicon Valley they get fat bonuses to become “cool” without regulations. Regulated bank CEOs are held personally responsible for everything that goes on in their bank, having to deal with soul-destroying staff and expenditure cuts, on top of their own pay cuts.

I was at the Singapore Forum this month moderating a panel on FinTech when the Alibaba strategist mentioned that the current battle for market share is all about “mindset and handset”. The mindset of the Internet age is that you do not need to own any assets – you simply share or rent them from those who have excess capacity. The mobile handset is where most of the world’s population is moving towards doing business, from dating to buying a house, phone, using your fingerprint and retina as digital signature.

Finance today is an information business and FinTech (see below) can deliver payment services at 1-2 cents per transaction compared with US$10-US$12 per paper-based payment. Increasingly, we spend more on apps and software than on the actual hardware.

Did you know that the fastest adopters of technology in the world are porn, gambling and politics, in that order?

The financial consultants Oliver Wyman have come up with a major report on “Modular Finance”, which argues that technology has transformed finance into modular parts – modular supply (provision of financial services by specialists); modular demand (buying new services from such specialists).

Oliver Wyman’s report begins with a cartoon about a customer buying a house, arranging a mortgage and insurance, selling stocks and wealth products for the downpayment and paying for all fees through a single mobile phone. Equipped with the latest encryption, digital signatures and right apps, the mobile phone has empowered the customer to everything what used to take several visits and weeks to the bank, the lawyer, real estate agent and even land registry to complete the transaction.

In short, the game of finance is being fought by one super-bank to rule them all (Goldmans?) or one phone to rule them all.

The global supermarket model (one brand to rule them all) is having a serious re-think about being labelled G-SIFIs (global systemically important financial regulations), requiring special regulatory attention and additional capital and liquidity requirements. Increasingly, these universal banks do not need to own and supply all services in-house – they simply outsource the back-office or even key services to trusted specialists.

On the other hand, FinTech aims to change our lifestyles through different types of technology.

First, frictionless and seamless inter-operability integrates businesses like logistics with payments, such as Alibaba, making it easier to buy, pay and deliver in one pass.

Second, Big Data analytics, which Amazon uses suggest to you what to buy next and understand how customers are changing.

Third, Blockchain and Distributed Ledger technology, which makes systems more secure.

Fourth, artificial intelligence, such as robo-advisers on investments.

Fifth, data secrecy and unique identity codes that ensures privacy and confidentiality.

FinTech platforms have less staff, less legacy assets, less regulation and more flexible mindsets. These barbarians at the gate are only stopped by regulations that currently protect the banking franchise. This is not to say that they don’t have defects, such as lack of attention to anti-money laundering, terrorist funding and cyberattacks. When they reach super-scale, they are also Too Big to Fail.

The rapid evolution of FinTech means that Asia now has the money and the technology to transform our antiquated financial systems into the 21st century.

The Asian population is young, tech-savvy, mobile and willing to experiment with new services and equipment, which we are creating in Asia. The good news is that if our young startups get it right, the world is their market. The bad news is that if our regulatory and government support services don’t allow our startups to compete, our markets and jobs will be someone else’s lunch.

What is holding back this transformation to FinTech Asia is still mindsets. Look at how Jakarta taxi drivers are protesting against Uber. Regional banks are expanding their footprints by buying the franchises of retreating European and American banks in investment and private banking. But they and their regulators have not thought through how to use FinTech to cut back their legacy systems, many of which are obsolete and operating under-scale, because many regulators still insist on each bank owning and running their own hardware and branches. To be fair, not all regulators think that way.

Barriers to FinTech are sometimes regulatory mindsets. Asian regulators are more willing to accept the entry of financial institutions from outside the region than from their neighbours. Without regulatory concurrence, many banks and financial institutions do not dare to experiment with new technology.

We now have Asian customers moving to global service providers like Apple, Google and Amazon, if Asian financial service providers do not get their act together. Compe-tition is good – look at how Sri Lanka is negotiating with Google to provide balloon-suspended cheap high-speed wifi coverage.

Asian bankers and regulators need to think hard about what Asian customers really want to achieve global scale in terms of efficiency, stability and trust.

FinTech and mobile handsets are not the solution to all our problems, but they will change how the problems are resolved. The real problem is our mindset. Less than 20% of the iPhone comprises hardware and labour costs. The real profit is in software, which is all about knowledge and mindsets.

That belongs to the realm of politics and education, which is another story.

Andrew Sheng writes on global issues from an Asian perspective.

Image for the news result

Fintech, the healthy disruptors of forex


SINCE the global financial crisis of 2008-2009, investment banks have spent much of their time and energy on regulatory compliance, leaving them “on the back foot” innovation wise.

Faced with growing regulatory demands in recent years, investment in new technology has had to take a back seat. This does not come as a surprise given the lack of deals and flows as well as the broad-based decline in commodity prices. That little space innovation wise has been quickly filled by fintech firms.

There are traditional fintech firms that act as ‘facilitators’ (larger incumbent technology firms supporting the financial services sector) and there is emergent fintech firms who are “disruptors” (small, innovative firms disintermediating incumbent financial services firms with new technology).

The fintech space can be further broken down to four major sectors – payments, software, data and analytics and platforms.

In the foreign exchange market environment, a typical trading would include sourcing for the best price either via electronically or via the voice broker.

In Malaysia’s financial market landscape of foreign exchange trading, the wholesale price or in other words interbank market is dominated by investment banks facilitated by money brokers who source the best available price to match foreign exchange trades.

With the wholesale market dominated by firms with deep pockets and ample liquidity, customers are subject to a spread cost, whereby prices they receive naturally takes into account a spread from the screens and a spread from the interbank price as well as a spread that is subject to the credit profile of the customer.

Global fintech firms however are altering this process or at least are gradually making inroads.

These firms provide a platform that offers a comprehensive foreign exchange solutions, including live mid-market exchange rates updated in real-time, customised foreign exchange rate alerts, a fully automated transaction information dashboard, multi-user and multi-subsidiary control panel as well as on-demand forex reports.

The best part is, these firms charge a flat fee of which is detailed before each currency trade with absolutely no additional or hidden fees.

Until recently, SMEs have had little choice in terms of where to go, other than to the banks, but now it seems a different foreign exchange model is emerging in the fintech sector, giving banks a run for their money.

The crux of these business models by fintech firms in the foreign exchange business is service via the use of technology.

The automation of the process, eliminates the middlemen and therefore reducing cost, fintech has enabled companies to be more transparent with their pricing.

In the case of Malaysia, SME’s play a vital role in Malaysia’s economy, with foreign exchange risks increasingly being a volatile variable in their cost structure.

These form of fintech solutions are likely to witness exponential growth, but the cost would be, a gradual erosion of SMEs foreign exchange business that are currently held by our local investment banks.

Fintech firms’ foreign exchange model broadly encompasses four major steps, namely, the SME firm carries out their foreign exchange transaction by selecting the currency, the amount, delivery date and beneficiary account and confirm the exchange rate.

Once this is done, the next step is, the SME firm sends the fund to the fintech firm whereby the fund is segregated and held in a local bank.

Bear in mind these funds don’t form the part of the assets of the fintech firm and are held separately to ensure full client fund security at all times.

The third step is, the fintech firm’s matching engine will proceed to the exchange, matching the SME firm’s fund with another company or through the wholesale foreign exchange market.

Throughout the process, the SME firm is provided full transparency on prices, giving the SME firm the liberty to be fully in control.

Once the trade is matched, the funds are sent to the chosen beneficiary account of the SME firm, either its own, a subsidiary or directly to its supplier.

A four-step approach that uses the middle rate of the foreign exchange, removes the so called spread cost that is usually charged by banks to these SME firms and finally gives full transparency on the whole process itself.

With the clout and importance of these fintech firms, the Monetary Authority of Singapore recently announced the formation of a new FinTech & Innovation Group (FTIG) within its organisation structure.

FTIG will be responsible for regulatory policies and development strategies to facilitate the use of technology and innovation to better manage risks, enhance efficiency, and strengthen competitiveness in the financial sector. The upcoming Singapore FinTech Festival, to be held in Singapore from Nov 14 to Nov 18 will be an event to watch.

Organised in partnership with the Association of Banks in Singapore, the week-long event, which is the first of its kind in Asia will bring together a series of distinct, back-to-back fintech events.

Bottom-line, Malaysia’s financial sector, in particular its foreign exchange market needs vibrancy and fintech firms are likely to add spice to the local foreign exchange market, aside from creating value added business processes and technology intensive jobs, it would provide a healthy competition to the local investment banking scene.

Suresh Ramanathan believes gone are the days when foreign exchange trading was noisy, loud and unruly. It’s more about savvy technology driven trading. He can be contacted at skrasta70@hotmail.com

By Suresh Ramanathan Currency Insights.

Related:  

Is FinTech Forcing Banking to a Tipping Point? "To survive, banks will be compelled to embrace many of the FinTech innovations ...
 

Related posts:

  The market is saying that this recovery in oil prices will be pretty positive for the Malaysian economy," said Kelvin Tay, chief.

Exchange rates | Rightways

Saturday, February 6, 2016

Journey To The West: More Monkey business; Monkey do, Monkey don't



 
 No, I don’t have a daughter for you to marry and we’re not going on a road trip to hand out wedding invitations. this isn’t that kind of Journey.’- Photos: GSC Movies 

Journey To The West gets a slightly Westernised treatment this time around, and turns out better than the first movie.


The Monkey King 2 Director: Soi Cheang Cast: Aaron Kwok, Gong Li, William Feng, Xiao Shenyang, Chung Him Law, Kelly Chen

CGI- heavy blockbusters from China, Hong Kong, India, or any other Asian countries for that matter – except for maybe Japan and South Korea – have always been hit- and- miss affairs.

Despite scoring US$ 168mil in China alone, there’s no denying that 2014’ s The Monkey King was plagued by cheap- looking and even just plain bad CGI and visual effects, not to mention a slapdash narrative that barely made sense despite being based on something as familiar as Wu Cheng’en’s classic novel Journey To The West.

Returning to the director’s seat for this sequel, up- and- coming genre whiz Soi Cheang ( of cult hits like Motorway, Accident and Dog Bite Dog) again directs this one without any of the cool edge and personality that made him so beloved by Hong Kong genre fans across the globe, but makes amends for the many sins of The Monkey King.

Probably because The Monkey King 2 concentrates on the more familiar chapters in Journey To The West, scriptwriters Ran Ping, Ran Jianan, Elvis Man and Yin Yiyi have kept things simple, linear and relatable, concentrating on the push and pull between the personalities of main characters Sun Wukong, aka the Monkey King ( Aaron Kwok, taking over from Donnie Yen) and young monk Xuanzang ( William Feng), to generate drama and emotion.

After 500 years of imprisonment beneath Five Element Mountain, Wukong is accidentally freed by Xuanzang and is then tasked by the Goddess Guanyin ( Kelly Chen) to escort the monk on his journey West to retrieve some ancient sutras.

The impetuous, impulsive Wukong and calm, benevolent Xuanzang’s contrasting personalities are severely tested when Wukong’s “kill first, ask questions later” approach and Xuanzang’s “enlighten instead of killing” philosophy clash almost every step of the way as they meet all kinds of demons, dangers and challenges.

Also joining them on their journey are Wujing ( Chung Him Law) and the gluttonous, horny halfman/ half- pig Baije ( Xiao Shenyang). Because this sequel is obviously set on Earth instead of the heavenly settings of the first movie, the use of real locations here helps immeasurably in making the CGI and VFX look much better and more believable.

There’s even an obvious attempt to make the fantastical imagery slightly less Chinese and more Western- friendly, with one of the kingdoms they visit looking more like something out of The Lord Of The Rings or Game Of Thrones rather than Legend Of Zu.

This is even more apparent in their approach to the villain of the piece, the White Bone Spirit Baigujing, played by a radiant and show- stealing Gong Li, whose outfits and character design will no doubt evoke memories of Angelina Jolie in Maleficent and Charlize Theron in Snow White & The Huntsman. Even her back story echoes that of Maleficent, in which an innocent young woman is driven to evil because of others’ wrongdoings.

Soi Cheang even gets the humour right this time, thanks to the absurd combination of Aaron Kwok’s slightly more macho approach to playing Wukong and the general monkey business that monkeys get up to, not to mention Baije’s antics whenever he comes across women and food ( yes, in that order).

Ultimately though, these are still very minor updates to a story that’s been told countless times, and it certainly doesn’t come anywhere near the bold approach of crowd favorites like Jeff Lau’s A Chinese Odyssey movies or even last year’s animated hit The Monkey King: Hero Is Back.

But as a Chinese New Year holiday blockbuster to bring the whole family to, it’s done more than well enough to do even better at the box- office than The Monkey King. It is, after all, the better movie, and definitely an entertaining and enthusiastic enough welcome to the Year of the Monkey. Review by Aidil Rusli The Star/Asia News Network

The ‘Monkey Do, Monkey Don’t


Talk about ‘Planet of the Apes’


“What got you here won’t get you there.” – Marshall Goldsmith

Someone once said, “I love people, I really do, it is just their behaviour that I cannot stand.” When it comes down to what really frustrates organisation leaders, it is not the lack of skills or knowledge of their employees. Rather it is a shortfall of desired behaviours.

As we usher in the Chinese Lunar New Year, it is a timely reminder that new results and new performance expectations cannot be achieved with the old behaviours of yesteryears. BAU (Behaviours As Usual) cannot be an acceptable leadership culture if the organisation desires to move collectively towards the place of sustainable high performance.

Upon the threshold of any fiscal year, company leaders are usually abuzz about the strategies going forward and are eager to witness a transformation in results and key performance indicators.

Yet, we all instinctively know that a well-written proposal and a persuasively-designed PowerPoint presentation cannot guarantee the delivery of results. Here is one often-neglected truth about performance – culture produces results.

Here’s one simple diagnostic question to ascertain if behavioural issues are holding your organisation back from achieving the intended key results: If everyone in your organisation continues to think and act in the same manner as they do today, can they achieve the expected results in the stated timeframe?

If the answer is a resounding “No”, then your organisation would need to embark on a cultural design initiative to determine the right cultural standard for achieving the right results. Companies with a thriving business do not leave their culture to chance, rather culture is intentionally designed and delivered.

Left on its own, the culture tends to degrade to a situation of territorialism whereby specific individuals create their own brand of sub-culture – their own monkey kingdoms.

How then do we address this monkey culture and rally the behavioural changes towards a common vision?

Behaviour is caught, not taught

It is what you do when no one is looking that determines the worth of your contribution.

It is interesting that the most common feedback I receive at the end of each behavioural-related training workshop is this, “Is my boss attending the same training as well?”

This highlights our human need for a moral reference when it comes to the motivation for changing our own personal behaviours and attitude.

Here are five common mistakes made by organisation leaders when they are too quick to implement strategic plans without giving thought to the foundational need for behavioural alignment.

Communicating the results without clarifying the overall vision of the company.
Growing the numbers without a specific plan to grow the employees.
Non-performers are still rewarded – sending an inconsistent signal to those who do perform.
Sending employees for training without involving the direct supervisors.
The performance appraisal criteria do not reflect the desired behaviours.

Behaviour requires a moral standard

Everything is not relative.

When it comes to behaviour, one cannot assume that people, by default, would know what to do.

In fact, when left on our own, our behaviour tends to degrade towards the fulfilment of selfish agendas, not that of the common good.

I recall facilitating a visioning workshop where almost everyone in the room had their own interpretation of the company’s values, and it was a challenge coming to a consensus. It was not until we were crystal clear with the expectations of the group chief executive officer that there was a decision on the way moving forward.

In other words, we needed to first establish the true north as the absolute by which all other behaviours are measured against. Without a fixed reference, behaviours are just personal preferences leading to territorial mindset.

Here are three questions to ask when communicating behavioural expectations:

  1. Are the recognition practices consistent with the behaviours we want to promote?
  2. Are the leaders aware of their own behaviour and seen to be walking the talk?
  3. Are managers trained in the skill of having accountability conversations when there are misbehaviour and attitude issues?

Behaviour reinforces values

A child is known by his actions, not his intentions.

Many organisations are too hung up about corporate values until it becomes a copywriting debate. The fact of the matter is that corporate values are there as a directional guide while a more specific delivery guide requires something more observable.

Here is where we need an executable concept called key behaviours. Key behaviours are personal accountability statements that are communicated as behavioural expectations for every employee.

In Leaderonomics, we have five key behaviours which operationalise our core values:

  • Be Accountable: “I take personal ownership to deliver on all expectations entrusted to me.”
  • Be Excellent: “I accept challenges and exceed expectations in all that I do.”
  • Be Synergistic: “I actively seek out and lead collaborative opportunities.”
  • Be Courageous: “I am open to honest and authentic conversations.”
  • Be Agile: “I find opportunity in all circumstances and will adapt myself to thrive in them.”

Does your company have a set of key behaviours which are non-negotiable accountability statements for every employee?

Just propagating core values alone is insufficient to set the tone for real change that will impact productivity, profits and people. If your corporate values are just statements on the walls with little behavioural clarity, then do not be surprised if the culture does not reflect the aspiration.

Monkeys vs donkeys

In social experiments, monkeys have been shown to display mob mentality behaviours i.e. they will all do what is the social norm, but it requires a few brave ones to set the tone and then have it reinforced through a series of risk-and-reward responses.

Now, when it comes to setting the cultural tone of an organisation, we can also take a cue from this observation in that we need a few courageous ones to set the tone and make a stand as to what is expected from everyone else – in other words, change begins with courageous leadership.

The other option is to go the way of the donkey which makes a lot of noise but refuses to budge due to stubbornness. In this year of the monkey, let’s not go down the path of the donkey.

By JOSEPH TAN Leaderonomics.com

Joseph Tan is CEO of Leaderonomics Good Monday. His passion is to work with performance-focused leaders to capture the hearts and minds of their employees through a strengths-based and accountability-driven approach. Much of what is shared in the article above comes from his work as a Gallup-certified strengths coach. If you would like to enhance the engagement level of your organisation, email joseph.tan@leaderonomics.com for more details. For more Be A Leader articles, click here.

Related:

Monkey Business:




Related posts:

 Malays must shed ‘excess baggage’ of privileges, says Rafidah  SHAH ALAM: The Malays should drop the “excess baggage” hobbling them...
>>>> " 90% of the Doctorates held by Malays is not worth the toilet paper on which it is printed because it was all prod...
Liberating the Malay mind Open-minded people are usually more tolerant, and when you are tolerant you are also moderate in your action...