1. Benchmarking
Benchmarking refers to measuring the performance of one’s process against the best-in-class process. Simply put, it is a comparison between Yingluck’s performance against other people’s. In this case, Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia will be used even though they are not even close to the best in terms of disaster prevention. They are, however, selected because they have common similarities to Thailand. With this partial selection of neighboring countries, Thailand should easily outperform them due to her level of advancement.
1.1 Reportedly Death Toll
These numbers were taken on Oct 26, 2011 from the following websites; http://www.radioaust...10/s3339930.htm for Cambodia, http://english.aljaz...0942429435.html for Laos, http://www.philstar....bcategoryid=200 for Thailand, http://abcnews.go.co...floods-14758043 for Vietnam.
Clearly and surprisingly, the death toll in Thailand, illustrated above in both table and graph forms, is the highest among Southeast Asian neighbors in spite of the fact that Thailand is the most advanced, much more advanced than the mentioned neighbors. Many resources such as water experts, dams, networks of rivers and monkey cheeks, water gates, large centrifugal pumps, high-end PCs, GIS, SCADA, are more readily available at the Thai government’s disposal. None was used effectively. As of Oct 28, 2011, there are 731,557 families affected over 27 provinces, 377 deaths and 2 people still missing (http://disaster.go.t...lood/flood.html).
1.2 Estimated Economic Loss
These numbers were taken on Oct 26, 2011 from the following websites; http://www.worldweat...ng-in-a-decade/ for Cambodia,
http://www.nationmul...C-30167580.html for Thailand.
Apparently and atrociously, the estimated economic loss of Thailand, illustrated above in both table and graph forms, is the highest among Southeast Asian neighbors. Seven industrial parks are still under water. This accounts for about 15,000 manufacturing plants and nearly 700,000 workers. More than 700,000 houses have to be renovated or rebuilt. Moreover, a lot of money was spent by affected people to prevent their lives and property from floodwater. Cambodia which was also affected by the worst flooding in decades came in distant second. The above figure shows astonishingly poor disaster prevention and crisis management by Thai government.
In spite of the fact that the best-in-class processes such as disaster prevention programs in Western Europe or North America were not even selected for this benchmarking, the obtained comparative results between Thailand’s processes and less advanced processes of neighboring nations evidently show extremely weak performance by Yingluck and her government. Her best performance fails pathetically.
2. Six sigma
Some disputants may try to argue minor differences of flood situation in Thailand and her neighbors. The six sigma technique can then be used. Six-sigma is a performance measure that develops and delivers virtually perfect services. Statistically, six-sigma corresponds to only 0.0000002 percent defects or two defects per billion. However, to be practical, 1.5-sigma deviation is allowed for off-center process. This translates to a 6-sigma defect rate of 3.4 defects per million.
This level of quality is comparable to 221 people per 65 million. In other words, the presumed death toll of 358 which is way greater than the threshold of 221 alarmingly fails the six sigma performance measure by 61.99 percents.
The reportedly flood damage can account for 1.3-1.5 percents of the 2011 economic growth. This is drastically greater than the threshold of 0.0000002 percent.
Obviously and undeniably, the service quality that Thai people received from Yingluck’s government during this crisis is unacceptable.
Discussion
From management perspective, Yingluck and her government learned about this flood problem in Northern Thailand more than 2 months ago. Her election campaign, dated back about 5 months ago, also promised a complete solution for flood and drought problems. Supposedly, she should have been really ready for any kinds of water-related problems. Inexplicably, she and her cabinet never realized how serious the flood problem in Northern Thailand could gradually develop. That is why preventing the loss of life and minimizing the damage to property by applying scientific approach for water management were never the top priority of her cabinet meeting’s agenda then. The longer Yingluck ignores, the worse it can destroy since it moves nearer to the economic and densely populated areas. By the time she understood the situation, the first industrial estate was already under the water and the floodwater was about a week away from Bangkok. No matter what she had done since then, it was just too little, too late. That is why the numbers of losses are so high. The magnitude of this disaster would have decreased exponentially if proper water management had been applied in time. Due to her ignorance and incompetence, she has transformed a regionally manageable flood problem into a historically national crisis. These management weaknesses can be seen unquestionably.
In summary, based on performance measures used, Yingluck’s best performance is clearly unacceptable for Thailand. As a matter of fact, her performance is alarmingly poor! It is very important to note that the presented numbers for Thailand are still rising since the crisis is not over yet. Hence, Yingluck’s performance will only get worse and worse until the crisis is over. Identification of other weaknesses that cause this catastrophic magnitude should be studied next for future prevention. Affected people must be compensated somehow and any wrongdoers must be brought to justice as well.
