46th Workshop Meeting of Heads of NPOs
14–16 February 2006, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
It is my great pleasure to welcome delegates, advisers, and observers to this 46th Workshop Meeting of Heads of NPOs. I want to express my deep gratitude to Tan Sri Dato’ Azman Hashim, APO Director for Malaysia for his warm words of welcome and for his kind and immediate consent to host this meeting in response to the Secretariat’s request. As you are aware, this meeting was initially scheduled to be held in Pakistan. However, a devastating earthquake struck northern Pakistan and parts of neighboring India in October last year, resulting in untold loss of lives and destruction of homes and property. For this reason, Pakistan’s inability to host the WSM was understandable. Our hearts and condolences go out to the people of Pakistan and India who were severely affected by this natural disaster.
This year also marks the 40th anniversary of the founding of the NPC. Our congratulations go to Chairman Tan Sri Dato’ Azman Hashim, Director-General Dato’ Nik Zainiah Nik Abdul Rahman, and board directors and staff members of the NPC Malaysia for reaching this important landmark in its history, which is one of continuous outstanding growth, development, and achievements in the service of the country. We wish the organization even greater success in the future.
Delegates at last year’s WSM in New Delhi expressed the desire for time for more substantial discussions of the two-year program. In response, we have restructured this year’s meeting to allow more time for this purpose and for the country presentations. I consider the latter to be just as important, because they provide essential insights into the critical productivity issues facing our member countries and the measures that are being taken to meet the challenges. There is much that member countries can learn from each other in this regard. Moreover, this knowledge will enable the APO to provide the type of support and assistance that will make a significant difference to member countries in their productivity quest.
The way I see it, a primary role of the WSM is to discuss future APO programs and assist the Secretariat in program planning, bringing it in line with the needs of member countries. Who else is better placed to help the Secretariat achieve this than the heads of NPOs? For this reason, we would like to request you to be more proactive in advising the Secretariat of your needs and expectations.
At the WSM in New Delhi, delegates requested the Secretariat to undertake a survey exercise to determine member countries’ preferences for the projects listed in the initial draft of the 2006 Program. This was immediately done after the WSM. The results of the survey, together with the comments and suggestions of the delegates at last year’s WSM and the Governing Body Meeting (GBM) in Tokyo, were reflected in the final 2006 Program, which has been submitted for review and final adoption by this meeting. A similar exercise was conducted for the planning of the 2007 and 2008 Programs.
This survey is an important first step in the consultation process between the Secretariat and NPOs in the planning of APO programs and activities. For this reason, it warrants your careful consideration and prompt response. I believe that the survey exercise should be institutionalized. In doing so, we would like to improve it to enhance its usefulness and effectiveness. This has been included as an item for discussion at the strategic planning sessions. I am looking forward to your comments and suggestions.
In my annual report to the GBM last year, I mentioned that I was struck by the range and diversity of the subjects covered in APO projects. At the same meeting, the “selection and concentration strategy” was propounded to underline the need to be more focused in our activities so that we could achieve the maximum impact with what we do. This strategy should be a key principle in our program planning in the future. In this context, we should continuously review and reexamine the relevancy of the thrust areas, target groups, and nature of programs. In this regard, I have some suggestions for your consideration.
The productivity movements in member countries are operating in a socioeconomic milieu that is changing constantly. New issues and challenges are emerging. But they are not always obvious at first glance and their implications are not always clear. To help member countries identify them and deal with them effectively, the APO must intensify its think tank role by undertaking more survey and research activities.
I understand the issue of globalization and its broad implications has been addressed before, but not sufficiently, particularly in the industrial and service sectors. Perhaps we should pay more attention to its significance to the productivity movement and identify issues that industries in our member countries must deal with to sustain their competitive edge in world markets.
At the 2005 GBM, I made reference to declining private-sector participation in APO projects and the need not only to reverse the trend but also to achieve an increase. This is because the private sector is the key to the success of any productivity drive in member countries. Among the main causes of declining private-sector participation are the following: 1) limited involvement of the private sector in the selection, design, and implementation of APO projects; 2) external influence on NPOs in the nomination of candidates; and 3) financial constraints in paying airfares, particularly on the part of SMEs. The following are some possible solutions: 1) to offer projects for the exclusive participation of the private sector, which is being done; 2) to empower NPOs with more authority to select and approve candidates for APO projects, which would also help to speed up the selection process; 3) to encourage NPOs to interact closely with the private sector for more effective sourcing of candidates from this sector; and 4) to provide airfares for participants from the private sector, especially the SMEs.
A selection and concentration strategy that should be intensified is to organize more projects that meet the specific needs of member countries, either individually or in groups with similar interests. This essentially means having more Category B and C projects compared with Category A.
Another area of importance that has been eroded over the past years through shorter course duration is the training element in our projects, especially those that are meant to impart application skills through in-plant training and observational visits. Projects of too-short duration do not provide significant learning to our participants. For this reason, they are not cost-effective. We must once again offer longer training courses, especially in areas new to NPOs, to imbue participants with in-depth knowledge and appropriate skills that they can put to immediate use.
In 2005, the APO organized 13 e-learning projects involving more than 1,000 participants from APO member countries. They featured live presentations through videoconferencing and the APO Web site on the Internet. We also started the first on-demand e-learning course on TQM which allowed users to pursue the course at their own pace, on their own time, and from their own home. To make all this possible, the APO has established collaborative relationships with the World Bank Tokyo Development Learning Center, JICA-net and Association for Overseas Technical Scholarship. We are endeavoring to increase the e-learning element in our projects. However, the survey results on the 2007 and 2008 Programs seemed to indicate that NPOs have some reservations about e-learning. If this is true, then this matter should be reviewed at the strategic planning sessions tomorrow and a consensus reached on how we should proceed on e-learning in the future.
In 2004, the APO co-sponsored the first Eco-products International Fair (EPIF) outside Japan in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. The success of that EPIF prompted the APO to organize another in 2005. It was held in Bangkok, Thailand, and the co-sponsors were the Federation of Thai Industries and Thailand Productivity Institute. A parallel event was also held and the Eco-products Directory 2005 was released. The 2005 EPIF was bigger in scale with larger floorspace and more booths. Visitors to the EPIF surpassed the 20,000 mark, which was almost twice that in 2004. Because of increasing interest in sustainable production and consumption, in which eco-products and green supply chains are key elements, the EPIF is emerging as an annual landmark activity of the APO. Singapore has agreed to host the 2006 EPIF, and some member countries have shown interest in hosting the fair in 2007 and 2008. We are encouraged by this development as it is an indication that we are meeting a felt need of member countries.
Consumers today put a premium on product safety and reliability. Food products must be safe and environmentally friendly. Any enterprise in the region wishing to remain competitive must respond to this reality. Recognizing this shift in consumer preference, the APO has been advocating the importance of continuous quality improvement, with particular emphasis on food safety. In this regard, the APO will endeavor to play a pivotal role in developing supply chains in the region to produce safer and greener products and assist farms, communities, and industries in acquiring the requisite skills and knowledge to produce them. Many projects are proposed in the Two-Year Plan with this objective in mind.
As the survey results on the 2007 and 2008 Programs showed that member countries give a low priority to projects relating to integrated community development (ICD), we will be scaling down the ICD Program. It will be incorporated into either the GP Program or the Sustainable Development in Agriculture Program.
A unique feature of the APO is the spirit of cooperation that characterizes the relationships among member countries. Each undertakes to share with the others the knowledge and experience gained in productivity promotion and improvement for the greater good of all. All member countries must contribute to this collective good. In this context, I would like to urge each member country to host at least one APO project per year. We are very grateful to those that are hosting more. Our special thanks also go to the Japanese government for the special cash grants and the ASEAN Foundation for the financial support for capacity building in the region. These programs should go a long way to enable the less developed APO members to catch up with the rest.
In the coordination and implementation of APO projects in member countries, the key persons are the liaison officers. Only about half of them usually attend the WSM or GBM. We do not usually meet with them exclusively. That has only happened twice in the past, and the most recent meeting was three years ago. We are planning a third meeting with the liaison officers this year. This meeting will be one of the items for consideration at the strategic planning sessions. The views and comments of delegates on the purpose and contents of this meeting will be most appreciated.
In 2005, the Technical Expert Service (TES) Program was consolidated and centralized within the Secretariat. This is to ensure that requests from all the economic sectors––industry, service, and agriculture––are given equal consideration and importance. I would also like to add that even though TES is a Category C program catering to country-specific needs, it should be seen as having a direct linkage with multi-country programs as well. As far as possible, TES projects should be implemented within the framework of Category A and B projects.
Last year’s GBM supported my proposal to initiate a dialogue with Africa with a view to strengthening strategic partnerships at the global level. As a follow-up, the APO deputed a fact-finding mission to South Africa, Botswana, and Kenya to study the status of their productivity movements and the organization and activities of their respective NPOs and the Pan African Productivity Association. The mission comprised staff members from the APO Secretariat, JPC-SED, and Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry of Japan. The mission report revealed that the countries visited fully recognize the importance of productivity in their economic development, that they have a strong interest in establishing alliances with the APO, and that they are seeking assistance to enable their NPOs to build up in-house capabilities in various fields. I believe that the NPOs of our member countries have much to offer them and that the APO could serve as the bridge in linking Asia and Africa in a mutually beneficial partnership. However, for this to become a reality, special contributions will be required from member countries. I am hoping that this will happen in the near future.
In concluding, I would like to thank all the delegates, advisers, and observers who traveled a long way to attend this meeting. I would also like to express my gratitude to NPC Director-General Dato’ Nik Zainiah and NPC staff members for sparing no effort to ensure that we have a smooth meeting and a pleasant stay in beautiful and dynamic Kuala Lumpur. They had less than the usual time for making the arrangements to host this meeting and they have done a superb job. Thank you very much indeed. Last but not least, I hope that we have a productive meeting that will contribute to making a difference in the work of the APO.
Back to list
