Control Yuan President Wang Chien-shien’s (王建煊) recent remark that civil servants are “idiots” sparked debate from various quarters. I cannot say I agree with him.
In fact, I would have to say that they are very intelligent people. If they weren’t, how would they be able to pass the stringent civil service examinations? And how could they survive in a difficult, rigid, inefficient environment for their entire working lives, working for senior managers who they are not supposed to question?
Let’s look at the statistics. The acceptance rate for the civil service examinations last year was a mere 1.18 percent — it is obviously very difficult to get in. Also, since 1997, there has been a trend for those who are accepted to be better educated. Well over 90 percent have a university degree or higher, and a growing number hold a masters’ degree, or even a doctoral degree.
With these high standards and low acceptance rates, the current civil service examinations are evidently every bit as exacting as the old imperial examinations. You’re not going to get in unless you’re either really intelligent or a fountain of knowledge. It seems slightly strange, then, to say these people are idiots.
I also imagine their jobs are incredibly demanding. Civil servants have a lot of issues to deal with on a daily basis and, what’s more, they have to make sure that everything they do is to the letter of the law: There is no room for error.
They have to mediate between different government departments and iron out any mutual differences or sticking points that arise. Finally, they need to deal with requests from their superiors and have their work constantly appraised. You would surely need to have a very high emotional quotient (EQ) to do this. Otherwise, you would just leave.
Our civil servants are blessed with high IQs and EQs, and yet Wang still chose to describe them as idiots. There are two possible explanations for this: Either he considers the majority of civil servants his intellectual inferiors, or the system they work in is ineffectual and weighed down by policies and measures that are hard to justify.
I think it would be safe to discount the first explanation, given the things Wang has said and done in the past. The second is more probable.
We have all this talent joining the ranks of the civil service every year, and yet the government constantly falls short of public expectations. The root of the problem must lie in the rigidity of the system and excessive bureaucracy. The point is not that the civil servants were originally stupid; it is that the civil service system in Taiwan makes them so.
Civil servants devote themselves to executing government policy and upholding the law. The problem is that the laws that government departments are asked to abide by are inflexible and overly complex, and quite often contradict each other. Something that would be simple in a private company gets bogged down in government institutions and is handled in a totally ineffectual manner.
The other thing civil servants do is exactly what they’re told. The majority of senior managers are all talk and precious little action. They worked their way up through the ranks of the same system and are a product of it. Government departments have their own “special” appraisal system. If individual civil servants want to work their way up, they had best not challenge their superiors.
The senior managers call the shots in the appraisals. If you act too smart, or have too many ideas, you are likely to tread on people’s toes, and that is unlikely to help your chances for promotion. Over time this means that you will become passive, coming to accept that “the boss is always right” and doing what your superiors say without question.
Before you know it you are a puppet. How can you avoid being dumbed down in such an environment?
If Wang feels the need to call civil servants a bunch of idiots, he might want to think about justifying the existence of the Control Yuan, overhaul governmental departments and make senior managers pull their weight. Maybe then our civil servants will be able to fully realize their potential.
Hsu Yu-fang is an associate professor and chairman of the Chinese Department at National Dong Hwa University.
TRANSLATED BY PAUL COOPER
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under