Team kks finals submission

Moving Panacea Forward

Team KKS

Kian Sin

Sean Tan

Siswanto Tang

• Executive Summary

• Key Objectives

Introduction

• ESS Framework

• Education & Industrialisation

• SOE Development

• SME Creation

Next Steps

• Summary of Recommendations

• Implementation Timeline

• Appendix

Conclusion

Presentation AgendaThe team will present the way forward for Panacea

I. We should focus on training and developing its

labor first before focusing on services

II. State-owned enterprises are developed to

accelerate industrialization in three identified

industries and to reduce reliance on FDI

III. As the labor force becomes increasingly skilled and

educated, we will start to focus on services and foster

innovation through providing avenues for local

entrepreneurship

Executive Summary

Key ChallengesPanacea faces key challenges in meeting its targets

Lack of skilled labour

Lack of entrepreneurship spirit and innovation

Inadequate soft infrastructure

Current Situation 2030 Targets

• Contributions of services to GDP –25%

• Exports of high-tech products & services - 20.2%

• Limited success of initiatives launched by various ministries

• Contributions of services to GDP - 70%

• Exports of services to 25% of overall exports

• TFP to have increased by 5% every decade

• Development of key sectors in manufacturing and services

Key Challenges

Selected Asian Economies (Services as % of GDP)

Both ways of reaching the target are unsustainable

Panacea should reassess its targets

Assessing Targets

Share of services to

GDP: 25%

Share of services to

GDP: 70%

• Unsustainable growth in low value-added services

• Removal of agricultural & manufacturing sectors

Downsizing non-related sectors

Dramatic increase in services

20101980

Initial Projections

Annual GDP growth of

approx. 6%

12.7% annual growth in GDP

of services

5

SME Creation

SOE Development

Education & Industrialisation

ESS Framework 2013The team recommends a holistic progressive framework approach which aims to build the foundation, drive growth, and sustain results

Lack of skilled labour

Lack of entrepreneurship spirit and innovation

Inadequate soft infrastructure

Key Challenges - Sustaining innovations with less state funding

- Increasing TFP through R&D funding

- Laying foundations for growth and innovation

- Concentrate industry synergies

- Develop indigenous capability in key industries

- Reduced reliance on FDI

Foundation Building

Driving Growth

Sustaining Results

Justifications

Recommendations


Laying the foundations for a skilled and innovative workforce

Concentrating labor force through manufacturing centers to gain technical expertise

SOE Development

Undertaking long-term investments which the private sectors will not undertake

Accelerating developments into industries with high growth potential

SME Creation

Fostering sustainable local innovations and entrepreneurship

Moving into high value-added service industries whilst leveraging on skilled workforce

Education & Industralisation

Promotes logical and systematical thinking for problem solving and innovation

Rationale

Provides impetus for research and innovation

Shifts the labour force to higher value-adding industries by equipping technical skills

Education

Universities with more

emphasis on engineering,

science, coding

All lessons to be taught in English

Overseas Scholarships

Government-led research

laboratories

Primary schools in rural areas with focus on

Science & Math

Breaks down language barriers

Grooming the future leaders of Panacea

Education & Industralisation

Assimilate the required technological expertise and manpower

Rationale

Lower cost, faster start-ups, reduced cost of operations

Nudge economy up the value chain, and a services-driven one

Industrialisation

Partnerships with industry experts and

co-location of universities

Industrial policies

Infrastructure development

Focus on ICT and

professional services

Joint-venture with foreign companies

Achieve cluster synergy with proximity to research institutes and universities

Provide motivation for citizens to move into cities

Recommendations




SOE Development



SME Creation



SOE Development

Higher overseas market potential

Rationale

Leverage upon expertise acquired from clusters

Focus on high potential areasSOE

Development

Independent supervisory

boards

Export-orientated

focus

Focus on ICT and

electronics

Grants given for R&D efforts

CEO-sponsored

management teams

Reduce agency costs

Undertake local ICT infrastructure development

To reiterate privatization pressures

Internationalisation

Easier comparison for international KPIs

Move towards services economy

Emphasize urgency and prevent bureaucratic inertia

Recommendations




SOE Development



SME Creation



SME Creation

Matches ideas, entrepreneurs and funds together

Rationale

Reduce burden on state funding

Promotes R&D efforts as it promises adequate rewards for effort

SME Creation

Grants given for R&D

efforts and services

Ideas Marketplace

Attract alternative

funding mechanisms

Enforcement and

monitoring of IP and

investor laws

Promote indigenous TFP growth

Tap on expertise of venture capitalists

Move towards services economy

Provides a market of meeting suppliers and customers for ideas

Safeguard interests of investors

Creates risk-embracing culture

Establishment of Neo-Panacea

Development Council (NPDC)

Neo-Panacea Development Council (NPDC)

Cabinet Secretary

Pla

nn

ing

Lev

el

Chairman

Members

Minister of Commerce Minister of Public Works

Minister of Education Minister of Trade & Investment

Minister of Labor Ministry of Finance

Minister of Social and Welfare Industry Leaders (5 CEOs from targeted

industries)

Mayor for Minas Tirith Mayor for Gondolin

• Streamline KPI• One-stop centre for

business permits• Connection to high-

speed ICT infrastructure

Implementation

• No conflict of interest• Reduce excessive

bureaucracy• Gain commitment to ESS

Framework

Rationale

• Gather feedback on results

• Yearly performance review

• Bonuses contingent on performance

Monitoring

Inculcate and encourage informal networks to actualise benefits of

industry clusters

Establish a cluster management body to increase marketing efforts and

increase awareness of clusters

Establishment of an advisory committee to provide expertise for SOE

Reduce hierarchical levels and bureaucratic inertia through micro-

management from CEO-managed teams

Goods to be exported for objective comparison of financial results

Risks Mitigation

Lack of companies in industry

clusters

Failure of SOE corporate

performance

Competition from other countries

Entrench positive network effects of home clusters

Consider collaborative efforts in sector specialisation

Risk Mitigation

Funding Mechanism

94%75%

6%25%

2013-2020 2020 - 2030

Breakdown of Total Spending (in

Million US$)

Public Private

Funding volumes (in US$ million)

2013 2020 2025 2030

Public 3,604 3,935 4,287 5,111

Private 100 420 1,450 1,550

Total Funding 3,704 4,355 5,737 6,661

Public Funding Means

Private Funding Means

Corporate and income tax

Import dutiesSovereign funds

investments

Infrastructure bondsSocial impact bondsVenture capitalists

Private Equity

Panacea in 2030

25% 18% 9%

30%23%

18%

15%24%

28%

25% 31% 41%

5% 4% 3%

2013 2020F 2030F

Projected GDP Split

Agriculture Primary Secondary Services OthersA conductive and risk-embracing culture and environment for local

entrepreneurship

Highly educated workforce with a strong

foundation in Science and Math.

New challengers in the global marketplace

Vision of ESS Framework

Key Performance Indicators 2011 2020 (Est.) 2030 (Est.)

Economic Indicators

GDP growth (%) 4.5 5.5 6.5

TFP growth (annual %) N.A. 5.0 5.5

Innovation Indicators

Exports of High-tech Products (% of total exports)

20.2 23 36

R&D Spending (% of GDP) 1.6 1.8 2.2


SME Indicators

SME Contribution to GDP (%) 36.2 38 45

Social Indicators

Population below poverty line 28.9 25 20

Budget Indicators

Budget Surplus 6.2 3.5 4.0

APPENDIX

Appendix

Indicator Value Comparable Country

Area 2,220,760 sq. km Mexico

GDP, current (US$) US$ 728.3 billion (2011) Turkey

GDP per Capita US$ 1047.46 (2011) Kyrgyzstan

Public Debt: 49.5% of GDP Philippines

SME Contribution to GDP

36.2% of GDP

Population 695.3 million 3rd in the world

Net Migration Rate -0.05 migrant per 1000 population

India

Literacy Rate 76.8 of total population Belize

Population below poverty line

28.9% (2010) Sri Lanka

Distribution of income 40.1 GINI coefficient Russia

Key Indicator Comparable

740

84150

1050

120170

50

250

600

850

2013 2018 2025 2030

Additional Cumulative Construction (2013-2030)

University Vocational Schools* Primary Schools

Increased Education Spending in Panacea

Major focus point for S&T universities

50 250 600

850

200

1,000

2,400

3,400

2013 2018 2025 2030

Financial Support for Education

(2013-2030)

(in million US$)

Student Bursaries Student Scholarships

*Does not include 24 vocational schools planned

Key Risks & Mitigations

Type of Risk Risk Probability Mitigation

Lack of vocationalteachers

Low Overseas tie-up

Low enrollments High Financial bursariesand scholarships

Funding Mechanism and Return (Education)

Initiative Cost*Funding (first 10 years)

Funding (next 10 years)

Remarks

Universities Construction

$1,500 Federal Federal150 schools in 20 years, $200 million per school

Student Bursaries $ 50 State -Top 1% (500,000 students), $100 each

Primary School Construction (rural)

$ 200 State State50 schools per year, $4 million per school

Vocational Schools

$ 750 Federal Private10 schools per year, $50 million per school

Additional funding for universities

$ 800 State State

7.5 schools built on average per year, $100 million per school

Student Scholarships

$ 200 StatePublic –Private

1,000 students, $0.2 million per student

Total $ 3,500 Annually (2013 price level)

* In millions annually (USD)

64% 52%

36%27%

021%

2013 - 2020 2020 - 2030

Breakdown of Educational

Spending (in Million US$)

Federal State Private

Key Performance Indicators 2013 2020 2030

Literacy Rate (%) 76.8 82 93

Universities (#) N.A. 20 70

Vocational Schools (#) N.A. 60 100

School Enrolment, Tertiary (% of population of age

N.A 10 18

Government-led research laboratories

N.A 8 20

• Focusing on

electronics and

automotive parts

• Availability of low-

cost labor

• Geographical

proximity to high-

tech manufacturing

countries

Manufacturing clusters (HIDE Zones) to

be developed

Partnership with

industry & Academia

Infra-structure Development

JV with foreign

companies

Industrial Policies

Panacea Industry Cluster

Why investment into ICT,

Electronics, and Automotive?

ICT

• ICT-driven innovation could contribute about one third of GDP Growth1.

• ICT investment drives productivity growth in the economy1.

• Continuous growth. Projected to reach US $4 T globally by 20152.

Electronics

• Growth in electronics goes in-tandem with ICT growth

• The competitive nature in this industry requires companies to continuously develop innovations

• Global gadgets spending to reach $1 T in 20131

Automotive

• CAGR of 5.5% for vehicle assembly (2010-2017)1

• 83% growth will be contributed by emerging markets1

• Automotive industry represents 8.5% of total value-added generated by manufacturing in Europe (High Value-add to GDP)2

1 International Institute of Communications2 Gartner Report

1 PWC Auto Report2 Alphametrics Auto Employment

1 PWC Auto Report2 Global Edge Report

Major Phases in Industry Clusters

Phase I (2013-2015)• Generate awareness, build

linkage• Improve regulatory

environment in IPR• Create funding mechanism to

develop successful home-grown companies

• Create organization to accelerate cluster development and attract activities into clusters

Phase II (2015-2020)• Nurture existing companies

in the clusters• Improve funding

mechanism for established companies

• IPO, M&A, cross-border transactions

Phase III (2020-2030)• Identify next wave of

emerging technology in cluster

• Solidify Panacea’s leading position in selected industry clusters

2013 2015 2020 2030

• HIDE Zone recognized as an emerging cluster

• Measurable increase in collaboration and technology transfer

• HIDE Zone recognized as emerging world class industry cluster

• Cluster effects take over to attract activities into HIDE Zone

• Innovation starts to take place in HIDE Zone

• HIDE Zone recognized as a world class industry cluster

• World-leading innovation flourishing in HIDE Zone

• HIDE Zone becomes a pillar in big company global R&D network

Cluster Development Initiatives

• Industry & University cooperative research centers

• Co-funding industry and university R&D projects

• Develop training programs for the industry

• Western Corridor of Panacea to be developed

• Increased infrastructure investment in the clusters

Industrial Policies

Promote partnership with industry & academia

Infrastructure Development

• Attractive tax structure and reduced customs duties

• Tax holidays for setting up in industry clusters

• Further subsidies and supports for local JVs

• Interest subsidies for purchase of capital goods

Cluster management body is

established to ensure the progress

Manage network openness to

business outside the cluster

Risks and Mitigations to Cluster

Development

Clusters not sustainable in the future

Lack of stakeholders in clusters

Lack of R&D Expertise

facilitating strong inter-organisational relationships within the cluster

Enhance investments in R&D by facilitating overseas tie-ups

Risks Mitigants

Funding Mechanism and Return (SOE)

Initiatives 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030

Subsidies and reduced customs duties (0.3*0.05*import duty) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.94 4.41 11.76 22.05 49.98 83.46 119.99 207.84 287.52 418.20 530.12 721.73 877.82 1066.58

Tax Holidays 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.30 0.44 1.18 2.21 5.02 17.42 5.61 18.75 8.27 31.73 4.72 16.97 4.72 16.97

Interest Subsidies for purchase of capital goods (2.5% discount) 2.50 2.75 5.42 6.92 12.92 15.08 19.17 23.00 29.58 34.25 42.08 48.67 59.58 57.17 66.25 63.67 72.08 57.00

Co-funding industry and university R&D Projects 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 5.00 5.00 6.00 6.00 7.00 7.00 8.00 8.00 9.00 9.00 10.00 10.00

Develop training programs for the industry 0.50 0.50 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.50 2.50 3.00 3.00 3.50 3.50 4.00 4.00 4.50 4.50 5.00 5.00

Increased infrastructure investment in the clusters 100.00 100.00 200.00 200.00 300.00 300.00 300.00 300.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00 200.00

Total Outflow 104.00 104.25 208.42 209.92 322.15 325.94 339.61 354.76 293.58 344.13 378.18 485.75 567.37 719.10 814.59 1015.87 1169.62 1355.55

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

2013 2016 2019 2022 2025 2028

Cumulative Investment

(in US$ Million)

Import & Tax Subsidies Grants Private FundingInstitutio

nal

Investors

42%

Import

Duties &

Tax

Subsidie

s

50%

Grants

8%

% of Project

Infrastructure bonds

Targets overseas investors seeking:1. New financial product for

diversification2. Safe returns, with excess returns

dependent on usage of public utility

Infrastructure funded includes:1. Roads (roadtoll booths)2. Power plants3. Water treatment plant4. Airports (airport tax)5. Ports (port services tax)

Pricing depends on product mix and type of bond, and whether payout is contingent on social impact reached.

Objective reporting of KPI is vital.

KPI for Cluster Development

Key PerformanceIndicators

2013 2020 2030

Total SEZ (#) 7 12 17

Joint Ventures (#) N.A. 200 850

Unemployment(%)

8.3 8.0 6.5

Urbanization (%) 35.2 40 48

0.00

1000.00

2000.00

3000.00

2013 2016 2019 2022 2025 2028

Total Capital Goods Stock ( for one cluster)

FDI Local JV

Export value 200 300 600 1,200 2,400 4,000 4,500 7,800 9,900 12,000 15,000 17,500 19,000 20,000 Value add to GDP 4 6 12 24 48 200 225 390 495 600 750 875 950 1,000 Import Value 196 294 588 1,176 2,352 3,800 4,275 7,410 9,405 11,400 14,250 16,625 18,050 19,000

Benefits of Industry Cluster

Agent of growth

FDI SOE SME

Pros:1. Quick transfer

of technology and expertise

2. Low costs to government

3. Transfer more different (optimal) management organisationalmethods

Cons:1. Over-reliance of GDP on FDI2. Loss of national sovereignty3. Diversion of local talents to MNCs with higher pay

Pros:1. Strategic

industry development to fill demand not met by private sector

2. Easy to form and effect changes

3. Fully internalisedprofits

Cons:1. May be

manipulated to fulfill selfish political goals

2. Inefficiencies and slackness of government bureaucracy

3. No expertise or technology

• ICT is a key strategic industry that should be internalised.• Expertise to be obtained from scholars and JVs• Transparent boards coupled with privatisation pressures

Agent of growth

SOE SMEFDI

Pros:1. Strategic

industry development to fill demand not met by private sector

2. Easy to form and effect changes

3. Fully internalisedprofits

Cons:1. 1. May be

manipulated to fulfill selfish political goals

2. Inefficiencies and slackness of government bureaucracy

3. No expertise or technology

Pros:1. Long-term

sustainable innovations

2. Constant competitive pressures

3. No agency costs

4. Generates more employment

Cons:1. Small in scale

and limited resources

2. Failure rate is high

3. Difficult to dominate in overseas markets

• ICT is a key strategic industry that requires economies of scale• Mandate of government to shift to sustainable innovation and driven by

services sector

SOE Development

Rationale

Pursue active participation in focus

industries to catalyze the

industrialization process and develop

indigenous capability

Key Characteristics• No state interference or favors• Expected to be efficient and

profitable with clear financial targets

• Export orientation ensures learning the best technology overseas

• No protection in domestic market after 5 years

Clear financial targets

Increased transparen

cy

Export-oriented

focus

Free from political

interference

State-owned

Enterprises

Major Phases in SOE Development

Phase I (2018-2023)• Start recruitment of expertise

for SOE• Injection of working capital• Purchase of capital goods• First production starts• Source of innovation:

• Indigenously developed• Licensing

Phase II (2015-2020)• SOE starts developing

products for export• Gradual privatization

• IPO, stake sell• Continuously develop

innovations

Phase III (2020-2030)• SOE starts developing more

highly sophisticated products• SOE invites more capital

injection from private sectors• SOE starts to develop

proprietary technology

2018 2023 2027 2030 and beyond

• SOE develops its core competitive strength

• SOE produced the first product or services by first phase

• SOE starts to attract private capital

• SOE starts to develop innovation

• SOE recognized as a emerging world-class company

• SOE starts to have innovation on its own

• SOE is seen less government-linked (50-50%)

Domestic Nurturing

Export-focused Building competencies

Funding Mechanism (SOE)

Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 RemarksSOE Establishment 40 80 120 200 160 120 80 40 0 0 0 0 $20m/ capital injection

SOE Privatization -15 -15 -15 -15 -15 -15 -15 -1515 % stake per privatization

R&D Grants 5 5 5 5 5 10 10 10 $ 5m/ research grantTotal Govt Outlay 40 80 120 200 150 110 70 30 -10 -5 -5 -5

ICT infrastructure development 10 20 100 200 250 300 300 300 300 300 300 300

$300 m/ year after 5th

yearTotal Private Outlay 10 20 100 200 250 300 300 300 300 300 300 300

SOE Funding Source

Public Funding Private Funding

R&D GrantWorking Capital

Public Guaranteed Loan

Capital Goods

Local BanksForeign Loans

50% Co-Funding

50% Co-Funding

Foreign technologies• Public capital Injection follows VC funding structure and are

conducted in stages. SOEs are eligible for further capital injection after fulfilling certain requirements

• This measure reduces risk for the government

KPI for SOE Development

015

3045

55

10085

7055

45

Year 1 Year 6 Year 12 Year 18 Year 24

Changes in Ownership Structure

Private Source Public SourceKey Performance Indicators

2013 2020 2030

State-owned enterprise (#)

NA 4 10

Broadband Penetration (>256kbps) (%)

20.3 25 50

Mobile Penetration (%) 78.5 82 95

Exports of High Technology Products & Services (% of total exports)

20.2 23 40

Tax incentives to incentivize R&D activities

Accelerated Depreciation

R&D Expense Carry- Over

Contract Research Off-set Profit Tax

Personal Income Tax Incentive

Examples from other country

• Implement similar incentives in Panacea

• Implement similar incentives in Panacea

• Allow certain percentage of R&D expense directly off-set profit tax

• Equipment related to high-tech R&D:• In US, R&D related equipment can be

fully depreciated in 3 year, software in 2 years

• Singapore and Korea allow 50% depreciation of R&D equipment in first year

• Allow life sciences companies carry over their loss due to R&D investment t off-set future profit

• In Korea, foreign experts who work in domestic companies and government entities are entitled to exemption of personal income tax

• In Korea, foreign experts who work in domestic companies and government entities are entitled to exemption of personal income tax

• In accelerated depreciation cycle for R&D related investment• Equipment fully depreciated in 3 years• Software in 2 years• Up to 50% depreciation in first year

• In US, 65% of R&D expense on contract research with university and non-profit institutions can be off-set in profit tax

Proposed Possibilities for Panacea

R&D Expense Off-set Profit Tax

• In Korea, companies can withhold 3%-5% of sales before tax for R&D purpose

• Direct R&D expense off-set: Singapore -100%

Seed Funding Mechanism

Seed Financing Initiative

SME

Venture Capitalist

Seed Funding

Scout for investors

with higher risk appetite

Post Collateral

Seed Funding

Forming the deal


SME

Venture Capitalist

Payout if SME successful

Expertise given

Payout

Major Phases in SME Creation

Phase I (2019 - 2020)• Improve regulatory

environment in terms of IPR

• Establish Seed Financing Initiative (SFI) to attract overseas venture capitalists

• Initial promotion of KCC in Minas Tirith with construction of basic infrastructure

Phase II (2021-2025)• Launch of initiatives to attract

entrepreneurs• Ideas Marketplace• R&D Grants• Co-funding Schemes (for

ideas scalability)• Key focus is on high value-added

services such as professional services, healthcare, tourism

Phase III (2026-2030)• Review performance of SMEs

under seed financing• Launch of the Market

Assistance Grant for internationalisation of SME Operations

• Consolidate knowledge assimilation by connecting SMEs to university research institutions

2019 2020 2025 2030

• KCC recognized as an emerging cluster

• Measurable increase in marketing Panacea to the world

• KCC recognized as the latest city of indigenous innovations

• Cluster effects take over in knowledge assimilation, allowing for collaborations and mergers across SMEs

• KCC recognized as a centreof mass idea commercialisation and industry consolidation

• SMEs to increase contribution to GDP through international operations

Laying Foundations

InitialisingGrowth

Driving Forward

SME Creation Initiatives

• Internationalisation of SME operations

• Provides capital, connections and capability for SMEs

• Training programmes to understand cultural differences

• Actively match investors’ targets with suitable SME

• Government to serve as counterparty to give assurance to foreign investors in return for entrepreneurs’ collateral

Ideas Marketplace

Market Assistance Grant


• Free platform for meeting place of ideas, people, funds

• Counterparty to be found after agreement of non-divulgence of ideas

• Technical advice to be given for each starting SME

Key Performance Indicators

2013 2020 2030

SME Contribution to GDP (%)

36.2 37 45

Spending on R&D (% of GDP)

1.6 2.0 3.5

Services % of GDP 25 27 32

Patent Granted by US (per year)

N.A 500 3000

KCC Parks/Clusters N.A. 2 4

*in millions USD

Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 RemarksInfrastructure 100 100 100 100 0 0 0 100 100 100 100R&D grants 50 50 50 50 50 60 60 60 60 60 $300k each, 200 SMEsCo-funding scheme 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 $500k each, 200 SMEsMarket Assistance Grant 100 100 100 100 100 $100k each, 1000 SMEs

Total Cash Outlay 0 0 150 150 150 150 150 260 260 260 260 260

Breakdown of control mechanism

Risks Mitigations

Multi-tiered privatisation targets, transparent reporting to independent board

Lack of companies in clusters Create informal networks for synergy generation,

establish cluster management body

Failure of SOE corporate performanceAdvisory committee established for consulting

purposes from the onset

Widespread imitationsEstablish a IPR Task Force to issue and enforce

patents

Increase in oil prices due to armed violence in

Middle East

Increase fiscal budget, and slow down pace of

ESS framework execution

Reduce price of Panacian goods, and give tax

breaks to local exporters to Europe

Emergence of low cost centers (e.g. Myanmar)Move to higher value-added industries where

their competitive advantage is reduced

PO

LIC

Y R

ISK

MA

CR

OR

ISK

Eurozone collapses due to Greek exit

Types of Risk

Low enrolment in schools

Risks Mitigations

Financial bursaries (primary/secondary) and

scholarships (university)

Lack of Vocational Teachers Attach more industry tie-ups with overseas MNCs

Lack of shareholders in clusters Create informal networks for synergy generation,

establish cluster management body

Lack of technical expertiseSet up Board of Investments to encourage joint ventures

/ Attract industries requiring lower-end skills

Failure of SOE corporate performanceAdvisory committee established for consulting

purposes from the onset

Multi-tiered privatisation targets, transparent

reporting to independent board

Failure to find buyers during IPOExpand outreach of investors to more regions,

slow down company privatisation if required

Lack of capable CEOsSet up a talent recruitment centre, engage

local scholars and talented entrepreneurs

Lack of entrepreneursMarketing campaign to encourage

entrepreneurship spirit and risk taking

Lack of foreign capital fundingEstablish an efficient financial capital

market

Widespread imitationsEstablish a IPR Task Force to issue and

enforce patents

ED

UC

ATI

ON

IND

USTR

IALI

SA

TIO

NSO

E

DEV

ELO

PM

EN

TSM

E

CR

EA

TIO

N

Breakdown of control mechanism

Dimensions of KPI


Economic Indicators

GDP per capita, current (US$) 728.3 1384 2598

GDP growth (%) 4.5 5.5 6.5

Unemployment (% of population) 8.3 7.5 6.8

TFP growth (annual %) N.A. 5.0 5.5

Social Indicators

Population below poverty line 28.9 25 20

Gini Index 40.1 39 36

Literacy Level (% of population) 76.8 82 93

Innovation Indicators

Exports of High-tech Products (% of total exports)

20.2 23 36

R&D Spending (% of GDP) 1.6 1.8 2.2


SME Indicators

SME Contribution to GDP (%) 36.2 38 45

FDI net inflow (% of GDP) 1.8 1.9 2.0

Patents granted by US patent office annually

N.A. 1,000 4,000

Budget Indicators

Budget Surplus 6.2 3.5 4.0

Finance Cashflow

Public Funding(in millions USD)

Education 3500 3500 3500 3500 3500 3500 3500 3500 3500 3500 3500 3500 3500 3500 3500 3500 3500 3500

Industralisation 104 104 208 210 322 325 340 355 294 344 378 486 567 719 815 1016 1170 1356

SOE Development 40 80 120 200 150 110 70 30 -10 -5 -5 -5

SME Creation 150 150 150 150 150 260 260 260 260 260Total Govt Expense (Real) 3604 3604 3708 3710 3822 3825 3880 3935 4064 4194 4178 4246 4287 4509 4565 4771 4925 5111

Private Funding (in millions USD)

Education 950 950 950 950 950 950 950 950 950 950

Industralisation 100 100 200 200 300 300 300 300 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200

SOE Development 10 20 100 200 250 300 300 300 300 300 300 300

SME Creation 100 100 100 100 0 0 0 0 100 100 100 100Total Private Funding (Real) 100 100 200 200 300 300 410 420 1350 1450 1400 1450 1450 1450 1550 1550 1550 1550

Total Funding (in millions USD)Total Govt Expense (Real) 3604 3604 3708 3710 3822 3825 3880 3935 4064 4194 4178 4246 4287 4509 4565 4771 4925 5111Total Private Funding (Real) 100 100 200 200 300 300 410 420 1350 1450 1400 1450 1450 1450 1550 1550 1550 1550

Total expenses 3704 3704 3908 3910 4122 4125 4290 4355 5414 5644 5578 5696 5737 5959 6115 6321 6475 6661

Knowledge Services Clusters

• Focus on: o ICT services and Professional services

• Rationale:o Availability of lower-cost skills

o Skilled workforce and proficient in english

• Trend:o Increasingly commoditized knowledge services

• Examples:o Software development

o Engineering support

o Analytical services

Team kks finals submission

Documents

Transcript of Team kks finals submission