I refer to Mr Tan Kin Lian’s blog post, ‘Suggestions are not welcomed‘ (TOC, 18 Jun 2008). He makes some good points and reflects a common frustration among many people. As an ex-civil servant, I oso have a few thoughts and suggestions on how to improve one’s chances of a suggestion getting through: It helps to be clear. It is really helpful if a suggestion includes specific details like date / time / place, reference numbers, names. For example, if an insurance company gets a suggestion/complaint that ‘Your waiting time very long. You should not make me wait so long’, it’s not entirely clear if the person is referring to the time it takes to approve a policy, acknowledge a claim application or pay out on a claim. You email back to ask for clarification but he either neber read or then it get caught in his spam folder. Then you both think that you both never reply. Haiz. Please be accurate in your facts. This is a corollary of the above but it is very very important especially if you are going to take the Straits Times route advocated by Mr Tan. Like that gentleman who wrote to the Forum after he got fined because he didn’t tell MDA he didn’t have a TV anymore. He said that he wasn’t told he needed to inform MDA he got no more TV and they should do so. MDA replied saying: ‘We got tell you what‘ - he had been sent not one but two letters to inform him so and explaining why. Who ends up looking silly? My favourite is one from a few years back when a lady wrote to the Forum to comprain that the police had detained her boyfriend overnight and had refused to let him answer her worried phone calls simply because he was a Chinese national. The police replied to say that actually hor her boyfriend was picked up because causing a public disturbance and that he was so drunk that he konked off so they put him in a cell to sleep it off but no charges will be pressed. Oh and BTW he was with another woman. Thank you for your letter. The medium is important too. Phone calls are good for giving information about ‘IA, IA’ type of situations e.g. something is on fire, there is a vehicle blocking the road, the counter staff are MIA. They are rather less good for more complicated and long-term issues like procedural or policy change; emails or letters are better for the latter. The written medium also helps your clarity and factual accuracy instead of having to ‘Aiyah, what was my policy number har? *flip papers* I have it here somewhere… *drops files and papers* Aiyoh! Errr… Can you people check right now with just my NRIC number? Aah, nabeh! *chase paper blowing away*’ As highlighted above, emails can get caught in spam filters. And not just on one side. The reply to your suggestion may have been caught your spam filter. Please keep records. One big reason phone calls are less ideal for more complex issues is that they don’t leave a paper trail like the way an email or a dead-tree letter does. Such records help to lubricate civil service processes and keeps the issue alive as long as the suggester keeps their records too. (E.g. ‘I refer to my letter dated…’ vs. ‘You know har last time I said dunno what dunno when…’) Phone calls depend on memory, interpretation and one person’s word against another. (E.g. ‘On such a such a date, such a such a time, I spoke to Mr So and So about This and That’ vs. ‘I got tell you what!’) You have a much stronger case when you have the records to back you up. See, for example, NMP Mr Siew Kum Hong being meticulous and, as a result, how he looks relatively much more convincing than the PMO reply. Please send suggestions to the appropriate level. Mr Tan notes that ‘approaching the top people’ had gotten him results but I’m not an ex-CEO of a big important company so I’m not sure if that’s applicable to me too. Besides sending suggestions about counter staff procedures to the Minister and sending suggestions about national policy to the manager of the service counter staff is probably not the fastest way to work through the levels of management and the lines of responsibility. Please understand that procedures and policies are there for a reason. A procedure or policy may seem time-consuming or troublesome but it is often there for a fairly good reason. For example, someone write in: ‘Last time I claim car accident from NTUC Income, I must sign accident statement, other party must also sign. But that’s clearly unrealistic as, often - like in my case- the other party dowan to sign. I had a lot of ding dong chang before I had my claim processed. Therefore your procedure is stupid. Please change your procedure to reflect reality.’ Imagine you are a service quality centre personnel and you’re thinking: ‘Wah lao, but this is company policy.’ So you send the suggester back: ‘The Accident Statement helps us to establish the basic facts of the accident. It is not an admission of liability.’ The suggester then thinks: ‘Wah lao, non-reply. Suggestions are not welcomed.’ Please be civil. Believe or not, civil servants are people too. And they will more inclined to treat a suggestion more seriously if it is not filled with #@%^&*, sarcasm or innuendo. You may have a good reason to be angry with the organization and its policies but taking it out on individuals who have to read your suggestions won’t help you or your case. It’s kind of like those kungfu movies where the good guy and bad guy trash talk each other before their final big duel. Notice how the bad guy always lose his temper first and then goes on to lose the fight? In conclusion, please do your homework. It may sound leh cheh but spending civil servant time to answer your suggestion is also spending your tax money and it is not the best use of your tax money if civil servant got to scratch their head trying to figure out what you are trying to say or you are asking her to do Minister or Perm Sec change when she does not have Minister or Perm Sec pay or authority or you are scolding his father, mother and eighteen generations of ancestors. It helps the receiving side, it helps you and improves the working of a useful feedback mechanism for everyone.