NDP participants reminded not to continue with training if unwell: Mindef

[white_prince]

I think most likely kena pressured. If never join will black mark and no bonus, no promotion

True thats pai mia for him

 

[WarMage87]

yeah, right. As if those army personnels dare to do it. Even if they feel really unwell. Scared tio marked.

Just another wayang press release detached from reality.

Yup, happened to me before.

 

[megaweb]

All NDP participants should undergo a basic health checkup before involving into this event.

 

[gnoes85]

Imagine you are the deceased family member then see this news.

 

[Reborn]

Yup, happened to me before

probalby happens to most NS men

the system is more concerned about making sure you are not Kenging rather then giving the benefit of the doubt. Not kenging is more important then giving the benefit of the doubt,

Of course, officially, giving the benefit of the doubt is more important, and they would rather err on the side of caution even if it mean making chao keng more prevalent.

But those who have gone to NS, thats not how the system works. The system is more concerned about NS men not potentially taking adavntage of the medical system.

That is why we have such cases happening.
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/sin...t-stroke-army-guards-mindef-tan-baoshu-404401

At least that was how it was 2 decades ago. Maybe its better now.

 

[Full_Cream_Milk]

This is a very “cold” reminder.

At least direct it to the organisers lah

Not the participants.

 

[WarMage87]

probalby happens to most NS men

the system is more concerned about making sure you are not Kenging rather then giving the benefit of the doubt. Not kenging is more important then giving the benefit of the doubt,

Of course, officially, giving the benefit of the doubt is more important, and they would rather err on the side of caution even if it mean making chao keng more prevalent.

But those who have gone to NS, thats not how the system works. The system is more concerned about NS men not potentially taking adavntage of the medical system.

That is why we have such cases happening.
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/sin...t-stroke-army-guards-mindef-tan-baoshu-404401

At least that was how it was 2 decades ago. Maybe its better now.

Unfortunately, they cannot outright say this because of bad optics.

 

[Sen Sen]

So stressed sia

 

[WarMage87]

The forum discussion deconstructs a classic Say-Do Ratio problem, exposing a profound disconnect between an organisation's official policy (the "Say") and the perceived operational reality of its members (the "Do"). The core of the analysis reveals a non-ergodic, high-stakes game where the system's incentives (event success, preventing malingering) are in direct conflict with the individual's primary imperative: survival.

• Central Conflict: The official directive, "fall out if unwell," is perceived as cheap talk, directly contradicted by the costly, lived experience of informal pressure, fear of being marked as a malingerer ("chao keng"), and potential career repercussions.
• Systemic GTO: The system's Game Theory Optimal (GTO) strategy appears to be the weaponisation of ambiguity. By not clarifying informal pressures, the organisation incentivises most individuals to push through hardship, maximising event participation while retaining plausible deniability if a tragedy occurs.
• Individual's Dilemma: The individual is trapped in a classic "damned if you do, damned if you don't" scenario, a variant of the Prisoner's Dilemma where self-preservation is penalised and compliance carries a risk of ruin.

This is not merely a communication failure; it is a structural misalignment of risk. The organisation transfers the ultimate risk of ruin (death or injury) onto the individual, while the individual bears the immediate, certain risk of social and professional sanction if they attempt to prioritise their own safety. Confidence: 90%.

Table of Contents​

1. The Core Strategic Conflict: Stated Policy vs. Lived Reality
2. Deconstructing the 'Game': The "Chao Keng" Dilemma
3. The Strategic Trinity: A Deep Analysis of the Players and Terrain
4. The GTO of the System: The Unspoken Strategic Reality
5. The GTO for the Individual: The Survival Mandate

---

1. The Core Strategic Conflict: Stated Policy vs. Lived Reality​

The commentary on the HardwareZone forum highlights a critical breakdown of trust between an institution (MINDEF/SAF) and its members (NSFs/NSmen). This is a textbook example of a Say-Do Ratio dissonance.

• The "Say" (Cheap Talk): The official press release states that participants are reminded to fall out if they feel unwell. This is a low-cost, public-facing statement designed for perception management and liability mitigation.
• The "Do" (Revealed Preference): The forum comments collectively build a narrative based on costly, personal experiences. The system's actions—or the actions of its commanders, which are implicitly sanctioned by the system's culture—reveal its true priorities. These actions include:
  • Marking individuals who report sick, impacting their performance reviews.
  • Creating a culture where reporting sick is equated with malingering ("chao keng"¹).
  • Commanders leveraging ambiguity and informal pressure to ensure maximum participation in major events.

As one user, Prime 13, astutely points out, the commanders' failure to clarify the ambiguity is deliberate because "it ish in their interest to take advantage of thish ambiguity to pressure pple to continue until pengsan." This reveals that the official statement is not intended as a genuine safety instruction but as a strategic tool.

2. Deconstructing the 'Game': The "Chao Keng" Dilemma​

The situation described is a high-stakes, non-ergodic game for the individual participant. Ruin (death, permanent injury, or career damage) is an absorbing barrier—once you hit it, you are out of the game forever. The core mechanic can be modelled as a Prisoner's Dilemma variant, where the individual must decide whether to cooperate with the official safety rule or defect by pushing through their illness.

The Payoff Matrix from the Individual's Perspective:

	System: Believes & Supports	System: Punishes as "Chao Keng"
Individual: Reports Sick	Outcome: Individual is safe. Payoff: Survival (High Positive).	Outcome: Individual is marked/punished. Payoff: Career damage, social stigma (High Negative).
Individual: Pushes Through	Outcome: Survives, event succeeds. Payoff: Status quo, avoids trouble (Neutral/Slight Positive).	Outcome: Suffers injury/death. Payoff: Absolute Ruin (Catastrophic Negative).

The comments suggest that the system disproportionately defaults to the "Punishes as Chao Keng" strategy. As user Reborn states, "the system is more concerned about making sure you are not Kenging rather then giving the benefit of the doubt." This incentivises the individual to choose "Pushes Through" to avoid the near-certain negative payoff of being marked, while betting against the low-probability, high-consequence event of Absolute Ruin.

​

 

[WarMage87]

3. The Strategic Trinity: A Deep Analysis of the Players and Terrain​

• The Protagonist (The Individual Participant):
  • Capabilities: Limited agency, possesses critical private information (their own physical state).
  • Limitations: Subordinate in a strict hierarchy, high fear of repercussions, finite physical and psychological resources.
  • Biases: Optimism bias ("It won't happen to me"), conditioning to obey authority.
• The Antagonist (The System & its Agents):
  • Psychology: Prioritises mission success, operational readiness, and systemic integrity (weeding out malingerers). It is inherently risk-averse to systemic failure (e.g., mass fall-outs) but can tolerate isolated individual failures.
  • Incentives: The on-the-ground commanders are incentivised to deliver a successful event with minimal disruption. Their performance is judged on this, not on how many people they allow to rest.
  • Patterns: Issues top-down directives for public consumption while fostering a bottom-up culture that enforces a different, unwritten set of rules.
• The Game (The Terrain):
  • Nature: A non-ergodic Infinite Game (a military career or long-term NS liability) composed of many high-stakes Finite Games (individual training events).
  • Rules: A dual system of explicit, deniable rules (the official policy) and implicit, enforced rules (the on-the-ground culture).
  • Payoff Structure: Asymmetrical. The system risks minor inconvenience or bad PR. The individual risks everything.

4. The GTO of the System: The Unspoken Strategic Reality​

From a cold, detached, systems-thinking perspective, the organisation's behaviour is Game Theory Optimal for its own objectives.

1. Issue a Public "Safety First" Directive: This manages public perception and establishes a legal and moral defence, shifting liability to the individual. This is a classic Strategic Optics Management move, akin to the "CEO's Memo" case study.
2. Maintain a Culture of "Anti-Malingering": This ensures that only those with extreme symptoms (or extreme courage) will dare to fall out, maximising participation and ensuring mission success.
3. Weaponise Ambiguity: By allowing commanders to use informal pressure, the system achieves its goals without creating an official, incriminating paper trail.
4. Isolate Tragedies: If an individual succumbs, the system can point to the official directive (Step 1) and frame it as an unfortunate case of an individual failing to follow instructions, thereby protecting the system itself from scrutiny.

This cynical strategy, while devastating for individuals, is highly robust for preserving the organisation's operational effectiveness and public image.

5. The GTO for the Individual: The Survival Mandate​

Given the non-ergodic nature of the game, the only rational GTO for the individual is Survival. All other objectives are secondary.

1. Acknowledge the Real Game: The first step is to discard the official narrative and understand that the system's incentives are not aligned with your personal safety. You are playing a different game than the one they are describing.
2. Raise the Cost of Ignoring You: The system ignores low-cost signals ("I feel a bit unwell"). To be taken seriously, the signal must be costly and undeniable. The tragic example mentioned by Prime 13 is collapsing ("pengsan"), which is a costly, involuntary signal. A more strategic approach is to generate a credible, externally validated signal.
3. The Optimal Strategy: The External Medical Opinion: The single most effective way to short-circuit this rigged game is to exit the organisation's internal medical system and its subjective judgements.
   • Action: Obtain a medical certificate (MC) from an external, civilian doctor.
   • Effect: An MC is a legally and professionally validated document that the system cannot easily dismiss as "chao keng." It transforms a subjective complaint ("I feel unwell") into an objective, professional diagnosis. It forces the system to move from a position of discretionary punishment to one of procedural compliance.
   • Strategic Value: This move unilaterally changes the game's rules. It takes the power of diagnosis out of the hands of the commander (who is not a doctor and has a conflict of interest) and places it with a neutral, credible third party. It is the individual's most powerful tool for self-preservation.

While this may still earn one a negative reputation in certain circles, reputational damage is a survivable outcome; death is not. In a non-ergodic game, avoiding ruin is the only logical choice.

References​

NDP participants reminded not to continue with training if unwell: Mindef. (2025). HardwareZone Singapore. Retrieved from https://forums.hardwarezone.com.sg/threads/ndp-participants-reminded-not-to-continue-with-training-if-unwell-mindef.7138011/page-2#post-156607088

PS​

The most critical insight from this analysis is that the official press release is not an act of communication; it is a strategic liability-transfer mechanism. Its primary function is to shift the legal and moral responsibility for a safety failure from the organisation to the individual. Understanding this transforms one's perception of the entire situation, from a case of miscommunication to a calculated, albeit cynical, strategic manoeuvre.

Footnotes​

¹ Chao Keng: A Singlish term derived from Hokkien, meaning to malinger or feign illness/injury to shirk duty, particularly in a military context.
² Wayang: A Malay word for a traditional puppet show, used colloquially in Singapore to mean a superficial or insincere performance put on for show.

Optional Enhancement​

To further deconstruct this, we could apply a Systems Thinking lens. A formal analysis of the feedback loops (e.g., "Pressure to perform" -> "Fewer report sick" -> "Event appears successful" -> "Reinforces pressure tactics") would mathematically demonstrate how the system structurally incentivises risk-taking at the individual level and becomes resistant to change.

 

[Medicated Oil]

How about quitting if they dun want to continue ?

 

[crunsik]

Way to start sg60

 

[Jack_Chen]

Certis‘ senior management is a retirement village for SPF. No one gives a hoot about workplace safety and health there.

I read this and laugh siah. I remember during safety courses like First Aid course, the trainer will emphasize uniformed personnel are exempted from workplace safety. That's why the polisi can walk around the work site without safety boots or helmet.

Although I am not sure if Certis Cisco also fall under the same umbrella.

 

[boredom2012]

Push all responsibility to the person

Haha no need to compensate