President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has said that he will devote all of his efforts to boosting economic development this year and that developing infrastructure is one way of doing so. Last year, Ma complained on Facebook about the slow pace of public construction projects.
Slow progress and failure to stay within budget show that the government’s money is not going where it should. When public works contractors do not receive money, material and equipment, procurement is delayed. This means that materials and equipment suppliers are left waiting for business, and employee salaries stagnate. It is little wonder that the supply chain’s efficiency is sacrificed.
By comparison, in just one year, Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) built a fabrication plant that cost more than US$10 billion, commenced mass production and received a lot of orders with all parties involved earning money.
This was possible because as soon as senior management ordered that the factory be built, those in charge of implementation turned to skilled private contractors they had worked with in the past, paid them well and stressed the importance of completing the project on schedule. Throughout this entire process, no time was spent on unnecessary administrative document reviews and the contractors were allowed to bring their skills and experience into play. Any problems were solved through communication on site, and it was rarely necessary to contact superiors for instructions. Everybody involved was clear about when the project had to be completed, and with a common goal in mind, the plan worked.
There are cases in which public projects are completed on schedule, one example being the underground railroad construction in Taipei more than two decades ago.
When problems arose, former Taiwan Railways Administration director-general Tung Ping (董萍), who was then head of the project, resolved to fix any problems as soon as they were discovered. That did not mean things were not done according to procedure; rather, it involved the ability to make judgements and solve problems on the spot because there were too many gray areas inherent in the project.
Tung’s view was that he had promised to finish the project within six years and that he would do everything in his power to deliver on that promise. He was not afraid of offending anyone and he did not take advantage of the contractors.
A comparison with how public works projects are carried out nowadays shows that government organizations stick their noses in way too much. Once a project is decided on and has its budget allotted, construction companies are seemingly chosen in a fair process, but in reality, they are chosen based on who can do the work for the lowest price. Throughout this process, a lot of time is spent on superfluous regulations and duties like reviews and filling out forms, and the contractors are treated like enemies and often blamed for a perceived lack of experience and ability.
When setbacks are encountered — such as design changes — those in charge of a project first look at their administrative responsibility and ask their superiors for their opinions, instead of making informed decisions by themselves. To make matters worse, completion dates are not taken very seriously.
TSMC’s management did not stick its nose into what was going on too much. It allowed its contractors to use their experience and professional judgement. Those in charge of building Taipei’s underground railway also made decisions when the time and situation called for them to do so. Thus, the first step in speeding up the pace of public projects is to remove any administrative regulations that do not facilitate the project at hand.
When contractors are not tied down by these restrictions and do not need to wait for decisions to be made, projects can be completed more quickly. If about half of the dozen or so management regulations on public works were scrapped, project efficiency could increase by 15 percent. If those overseeing these projects could make decisions by themselves, efficiency could be further increased by 15 percent.
Economic development does not necessarily mean spending lots of money. Performing daily tasks effectively and meeting goals are very helpful for any economy.
Andrew Chang is a professor at National Cheng Kung University’s Department of Civil Engineering.
Translated by Drew Cameron
For the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), China’s “century of humiliation” is the gift that keeps on giving. Beijing returns again and again to the theme of Western imperialism, oppression and exploitation to keep stoking the embers of grievance and resentment against the West, and especially the US. However, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) that in 1949 announced it had “stood up” soon made clear what that would mean for Chinese and the world — and it was not an agenda that would engender pride among ordinary Chinese, or peace of mind in the international community. At home, Mao Zedong (毛澤東) launched
The restructuring of supply chains, particularly in the semiconductor industry, was an essential part of discussions last week between Taiwan and a US delegation led by US Undersecretary of State for Economic Growth, Energy and the Environment Keith Krach. It took precedent over the highly anticipated subject of bilateral trade partnerships, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) founder Morris Chang’s (張忠謀) appearance on Friday at a dinner hosted by President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) for Krach was a subtle indicator of this. Chang was in photographs posted by Tsai on Facebook after the dinner, but no details about their discussions were disclosed. With
Astride an ascended economy and military, with global influence nearing biblical proportions, Xi Jinping (習近平) — general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), chairman of the Central Military Commission and president of the People’s Republic of China — is faithfully heralded, in deeds and imagery, as a benevolent lord, determined to “build a community of common destiny for all mankind.” Rather than leading humanity to this Shangri-La through inspirational virtue a la Mahatma Gandhi or Abraham Lincoln, the CCP prefers a micromanagement doctrine of socialism with Chinese characteristics as the guiding light. A doctrine of Marxist orthodoxy transplanted under a canvas
On Sept. 8, at the high-profile Ketagalan security forum, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) urged countries to deal with the China challenge. She said: “It is time for like-minded countries, and democratic friends in the Indo-Pacific region and beyond, to discuss a framework to generate sustained and concerted efforts to maintain a strategic order that deters unilateral aggressive actions.” The “Taiwan model” to deal with the COVID-19 pandemic provides an alternative to China’s authoritarian way of handling it. Taiwan’s response to the health crisis has made it evident that countries across the world have much to learn from Taiwan’s best practices and if