Lethal Sloppiness Revisited: One Taiwan, Two Systems

Lethal Sloppiness Revisited: One Taiwan, Two Systems
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
September 25, 2014

Summary: Lethal sloppiness syndrome can be overcome in two ways. One. Throw the doors of the marketplace open to competition. Two. Revamp the system and its oversight mechanisms to prevent malfeasance. Reject liberalization and one will not be able to improve oversight and oversight capabilities. Carelessness and haste will be unavoidable. Society will be forced to endure such scandals over and over again.

Full Text Below:  

On the 23rd, this newspaper published an editorial entitled, "Lethal Sloppiness: One Reason Taiwan Has Not Progressed." Private companies and government agencies have recently committed a string of sloppy and perfunctory blunders. Many readers and netizens became concerned. Some feel a deeper exploration of the causes are required. Others cite TSMC and other technology industries as counterexamples. They think many industries on Taiwan lead the world in precision and efficiency. Clearly the label of "lethal sloppiness" cannot be applied to everyone. Today's editorial elaborates on this.

As one reader said, lethal sloppiness is a label that cannot be applied to everyone. In the technology industry, Taiwan companies' precision and efficiency have made the world sit up and take notice. In this highly competitive field, any slackness leads to one's elimination. Actually, in the traditional food industry, I-Mei also pursues perfection. It does not overlook a single detail. It is not the least bit afraid that the rancid oil scandal will bring it down. Lethal sloppiness also infects government agencies. They complete their assignments in slapdash fashion. They shine the public on with bureaucratese. Only in rare instances do dedicated individuals toil away with due diligence.

Generally speaking, private companies or government agencies guilty of lethal sloppiness exhibit certain traits. One. They operate in a relatively closed environment. They lack obvious competition. Therefore they lack internal incentives. They can perform low quality work and skate by. Two. They are part of more traditional structures. They embody old business models or obey old power structures. Their operations are not dependent upon new knowledge or skills. They can get by with clever tricks or by playing a waiting game. Three. Their leaders' commands are unclear or the leaders have ulterior motives. Lacking a clear mandate, subordinates find themselves at sea. So they go through the motions and ignore content and quality.

Compare the above with the private companies and government agencies implicated during the recent scandals. With the exception of LCY Chemical Corp., such carelessness and sloppiness is not hard to find. The vast majority of sloppy businesses are domestic market oriented. They hide behind lower domestic standards and more lenient oversight. This enables them to skate by. Think about it. What nation's gas industry uses smell alone to determine whether gas is leaking? What kind of food industry watches as underground factories produce rancid oil that stinks to high heaven, yet like the Chang Guan Company, has no qualms about purchasing barrel after barrel as raw material?

Domestic or export is of course not the sole criterion for corporate quality or performance. But in practice, the export industry must accept downstream manufacturer quality control. It must also meet export nation administrative standards. As a result, manufacturers must strive to meet these standards. Only then can they ensure product quality. By contrast, the purely domestic market-oriented industries often face inspection standards lower than those mandated internationally. Intentionally or otherwise, this, coupled with government agency leniency, product or service quality inevitably tends to decline.

Over the past twenty years on Taiwan, the information and communications industries have thrived. Why? Because this sector continues to pursue precision and progress. A steady stream of global technology companies come here to develop new technologies and parts manufacture. Every day engineers from Taiwan fly all over the world, solving technical problems for their customers. In other words, when businesses look to the world stage, they become accustomed to higher standards and more willing to accept them. By doing so, they make themselves more powerful and more irreplaceable. This sector of Taiwan's economy has become a global pioneer. Most companies however, are still spinning their wheels. Many industries are no different than they were 20 or 30 years ago. They have become a slack and backward industry sector.

Take the service industry for example. Most businesses are domestic market oriented. Services have long been a relatively backward and inefficient sector on Taiwan. The sizeable financial industry is no different. Service sector output accounted for 70% of our gross domestic product. It employs almost 60% of the workforce. But insufficient innovation and scale limits it to low-wage, unskilled labor. This is why Taiwan's economic development has been weak in recent years . This is why young people remain trapped in low-wage jobs. Improving the quality and efficiency of the service sector, requires opening up one's markets to competition. Doing so enables the influx of up to date business philosophies, and stimulates industry development. Unfortunately in recent years, many people have demanded protectionism. This includes the Sunflower Student Movement, with its anti-globalization demands. Such demand have even stalled the STA. Opponents of the STA are prescribing the wrong medicine for what ails them.

In fact, the same yardstick can be applied to politics. Politics is a domestic market oriented industry. It is a closed industry sector that lacks competition. It too has become a stagnant sector. Taiwan may have blue vs. green competition. But in recent years neither the KMT nor the DPP have offered a new vision for the nation's future. The two parties merely sabotage each other, or attempt to settle old scores. Voters can effect ruling party changes through the electoral process. But Taiwan's democracy no longer has the ability to solve problems, never mind enhancing the effectiveness of the executive branch. The rancid oil scandal showed that local and central governments are clueless. That much is all too clear.

Lethal sloppiness syndrome can be overcome in two ways. One. Throw the doors of the marketplace open to competition. Two. Revamp the system and its oversight mechanisms to prevent malfeasance. Reject liberalization and one will not be able to improve oversight and oversight capabilities. Carelessness and haste will be unavoidable. Society will be forced to endure such scandals over and over again.

再論草率主義：一個台灣，兩種境界
【聯合報╱社論】
2014.09.25 02:03 am

本報廿三日社論「致命的草率：台灣無法進步的一大癥結」，對近期民間廠商和行政部門在一連串事件中的草率及敷衍提出檢討，引起許多讀者及網友關注。有人認為應更深入探討其成因，有人則舉台積電等科技業為例，認為台灣不少產業之精準與效率獨步全球，可見「草率主義」不能一概而論。今日社論將就此再加申論。

誠如讀者所言，草率主義不能一概而論。在科技產業，台灣企業卓越的精準和效率讓世界刮目；在這個充滿競爭的領域，業者只要稍一懈怠，即可能遭到淘汰。其實，在傳統的食品產業中，也有像義美這樣追求完美、不放過任何細節的企業，絲毫無懼餿水油風暴侵襲。包括在行政體系，敷衍了事、只求官樣文章的公務員比比皆是，但在幾個案子中，我們看到孜孜矻矻盡忠職守者亦不乏其人。

整體而言，容易流於草率作風或隨便心態的民間或政府部門，多半具有幾個特色：第一，處於比較封閉的地帶，因為外在的競爭不明顯，因此缺乏內在的自我鞭策力量，僅憑低標準作業即能應付了事。第二，屬於比較傳統的結構，因為遵循的是古老的營利模式或權力法則，運作時藉助的不是新知或技能，只需靠取巧或因循即可滿足所需。第三，領導者指令不明或另懷私心，使部屬缺乏明確的任務認知，所以只求形式或格式的應付，而不問內容和品質。

上述特徵，如果與最近一連串事件的相關廠商和部門作一對照，即不難發現，除了榮化之外，這些粗疏、草率的業者絕大多數屬於以「內銷市場」為導向的部門；業者躲在國內較低標準的規範及較鬆散的行政管理底下，因而能逍遙度日。試想，什麼國家的瓦斯業者，可以僅憑「用鼻子聞」，來研判天然氣有沒有外洩？又有什麼樣的食品業者，看到地下工廠內遍地發臭的餿水油，竟還能像強冠那樣可以大桶大桶買進充當原料？

「內銷」或「外銷」當然不是判斷企業品質或表現的唯一判準。但在實務上，外銷產業除必須接受上下游廠商的品管，同時必須通過出口國的行政規範；也因此，廠商必須力求精準，才能確保品質銷售無虞。相對而言，僅以國內市場為導向的產業，所需通過的檢驗標準往往低於國際規範，若再加上行政部門有意無意的放水，其產品或服務品質低落即勢所難免。

回顧台灣過去廿年的發展，資訊及通訊產業之所以一枝獨秀，因為這個部門不斷追求精準與進步，為全球科技廠商源源不斷開發技術與零件，台灣的工程師每天飛往世界各地，為客戶解決技術問題。亦即，當業者放眼以世界為舞台時，他們慣於、也樂於接受更高標準的檢驗，亦因此使自己變得更強大、無可取代。然而，當台灣經濟在這個部分變成了世界的先行者，但整體體質上卻仍有很大一部分在原地踏步，許多產業跟二、三十年前沒有兩樣，便形成了鬆散、落後的部門。

以服務業為例，由於多數企業是以國內市場為主，這一直是台灣相對落後、沒效率的部門，包括規模不小的金融業亦然。服務業產值雖占了國內生產毛額的七成，雇用人數占了就業人口近六成，但由於創新程度不足，服務規模有限，所能吸引的只是低薪、低技術的人才。這點，正是近年台灣經濟發展無力、青年受困低薪的主要原因。要提升服務業的品質和效率，原應開放市場引入競爭，以期導入更新的經營理念，刺激既有產業的發展。但遺憾的是，近年社會上卻反而有更多聲音要求保護，包括太陽花學運的反全球化訴求，乃至《服貿協議》因此卡關，恐怕都開錯了解方。

事實上，以同一標尺檢驗，政治也是屬於內銷、封閉、競爭不足的產業，也淪為「不進步」部門。儘管台灣有藍綠的競爭，但近年國、民兩黨都已經無力再就國家走向提出新的訴求，雙方只能互扯後腿，或清算歷史的舊帳。如此一來，就算民眾還能透過選舉製造政黨輪替，對台灣的民主而言，其實已失去解決公共議題的能力，遑論提升行政部門的效能。從這次餿水油事件，地方政府與中央的茫然無策，已一目了然。

克服草率主義之路有二，一是開放市場引進更多競爭，一是透過制度設計及行政監督來防範劣行。但如果既拒絕開放，又無法提升監督管理能力，粗疏草率就是必然，社會只能一次次承受不確定的風險。