GRABBED!!!! HOW THE PMD BAN ALMOST
IMMOBILISED THE FOOD DELIVERY
BUSINESS
NNENDA DOUGLAS
T00679425
ORGB 4870 - 01
Key issues the singapore government faced in deciding to ban PMDs
1. The major issue was safety. The PMDs were causing accidents on the walkways
shared with pedestrians. They were also causing fire accidents because the
substandard and modified PMDs were not safe especially while being charged.
When the safety problems resulted in the death of a pedestrian , the government
enacted the ban.
2. Another issue that the government faced was the public outcry about the menace
that PMDs had become for the citizens especially the pedestrians. Eventually, even
some members of the government joined in the outcry against the PMDs.
3. The government also considered their Active Mobility plan which was supposed to
ease the challenges faced by commuters, PMDs had made it easier for people to
travel short distances around the town and banning them would create a fresh set of
problems around transportation especially for short distances.
4. Economic factors were also a key issue. PMDs were being used by food delivery
companies and banning them would affect the companies business, which would
also affect government revenues from those businesses. The government also
considered the impact a total ban would have on the companies that import PMDs.
The ban could possibly put a lot of them out of business. The government also
considered the cost to the government because they would have to create alternative
means of transportation for the former PMD users if they went ahead with the ban or
the cost of updating their infrastructure to improve safety for the pedestrians and
PMD users if they chose to keep them.
5. The government also had to consider the environmental impact. Part of the reason
why PMDs were introduced was because they were an environmentally friendly
alternative to other vehicles. Banning them would definitely have an impact on the
government's environmental goals.
RELEVANT FACTS THAT INFLUENCED THE GOVERNMENT'S DECISION
The government went through several iterations of possible solutions to the PMD problems
that I have outlined earlier. One relevant fact that influenced the government's decision was
the fact that none of the previous solutions seems to have helped the problem. The
government had made regulations about the road use and speed limits, even imposing fines
and creating registration and insurance requirements. But the PMD users kept flouting the
rules and causing accidents.
Another important fact that influenced the government's decision was public opinion. The
members of the public were becoming more vocal about the dangers posed by the PMDs
and the Singapore government, being a responsive government, just had to listen to them.
The most important factor and the tipping point in my opinion was the death of 65 year old
Mdm. Ong Bee Eng in September 2019. The PMD users had not obeyed most of the
regulations set up by the AMA and that behaviour resulted in a fatality. This pushed the
government to finally enact a total ban of PMDs on public walkways.
LEWINS FORCE FIELD ANALYSIS
Restraining forces for change
The cost of infrastructure that the government would have to build to keep the PMDs on the
roads.
The cost of further regulations and enforcement personnel that would be required to try to
maintain safety on the roads and reduce PMD related accidents.
Letting go of their Active Mobility and sustainability initiative that they had put so much time
and effort to. Especially because the plan is actually a very good initiative for the people and
government of Singapore.
Driving forces for change
Safety of the pedestrians and PMD users on public paths
The increased fire accidents
Public outrage about the PMD related accidents.
The errant behaviour of PMD users in spite of the control measures introduced by the
government.
ANALYSIS OF THE CHANGES USING KOTTERS 8 STEP MODEL
STEP
EVIDENCE
IMPLEMENTATION
Create Urgency
There is no evidence that
the government created
urgency. The LTA just
developed active mobility
and implemented it. When
the public outcry began, the
government started
communicating with the
people through social media
and also receiving their
feedback but it was already
too late because the vision
had already been
implemented.
The impact of not creating a
sense of urgency and that
the citizens, especially the
PMD riders did not
understand the importance
of PMDs in respect to
affordable,convenient and
eco friendly transportation.
They did not understand that
they were the ultimate
beneficiaries if the active
mobility plan was
successful. The government
should have connected to
the heart and head of the
people by showing them
how the plan will benefit
them.
Build a guiding coalition
There is no evidence that
the government built a
guiding coalition
The members of the LTA
along with other members of
government did not set up a
properly representative
coalition before putting the
active mobility vision in
place. The government
should have assembled a
coalition that consisted of
pedestrians, PMD users,
delivery companies, sellers
of PMDs and other
stakeholders to inform them
of the vision and get their
support, opinions and
involvement.
Form a strategic vision
There is some evidence that
they formed a strategic
vision. This is the Active
Mobility vision.
Although the government
had a vision, the big picture
of the vision was not
communicated to the
citizens and so they had no
connection to the active
mobility plan. The
government should have
spent as much time or even
more time, communicating
the value that the use of
PMDs could add to their
communities.
Enlist a volunteer
army/communicate the
vision
There is no evidence that
the government did this at
the initial stage of forming
the active mobility plan. But
the government tried to
communicate using social
media when the public
outcry began.
The government should
have enlisted employees of
the government who would
then communicate the vision
to the PMD users and
pedestrians and even the
members of the public when
the public outrage began.
These volunteers would
have answered the publics
questions and reassured
them about the importance
of the vision. The
government could have
consistency reminded the
public about the active
mobility and the benefits of it
using mass media and
social media.
Enable action by removing
barriers
The government tried to
remove barriers to the active
mobility plan in several
ways. The government
developed regulations for
the use of PMDs and
created the active mobility
advisory panel. The
government also created
financial incentives for
people who had defective
devices to get rid of them.
The government did well in
removing barriers to action.
The government could have
increased the financial
incentives. The government
should have taken steps to
educate the PMD users,
especially the errant users,
as they were the most
significant barrier to the
active mobility plan.
Generate short term wins
There is no evidence that
the government generated
short term wins. The
The government could have
celebrated the reduction of
vehicular traffic on the roads
government appears to be
overwhelmed by all the
issues created by the
increasing number of PMDs
on the public paths that they
did not generate or
celebrate any short term
wins or any wins at all. The
government never declared
victory until PMDs were
banned from the public
pathways.
and the attendant reduction
in delay, emissions etc. the
government could have also
celebrated the increase in
employment for the PMD
users who worked in the
food delivery businesses.
The government could have
also celebrated a reduction
in fire related accidents with
the introduction of the safer
PMD model. The celebration
of these wins would have
been motivational to the LTA
staff who would have seen
that their vision was yielding
positive results.
Consolidate change.
The government did not
consolidate change as they
remained inundated with
PMD related issues until
they had to ban them.The
government never declared
victory until PMDs were
banned from the public
pathways.
The government could have
consolidated change
through the training of the
PMD users especially the
errant ones. The
government should have
stepped up their
communication with the
public, reiterating the
importance of the active
mobility vision. This
communication with the
public would have resulted
in an expansion of the
volunteer army, members of
the public who would have
connected to the vision and
would have seen the
importance of accomplishing
the active mobility vision.
Institutionalize change
The government tried to
institutionalize change by
enacting the AMA and other
regulations regarding PMD
use but these measures
were ineffective because
some of the prior steps were
not properly executed.
Ultimately, The government
did not institutionalize
change, rather the
government had to abandon
the vision and reverse the
change.
The government could have
institutionalized change by
making the financial
sacrifice of building the
necessary infrastructure to
sustain PMD use. The
government could have also
institutionalized change by
regaining public confidence
in their ability to regulate
PMD use.
BALANCING COMPETING INTERESTS
There are always competing interest in every decision the government makes. The best way
to figure out what to do is based in human centered design. The first thing that any
government should do in human centered design is to find out what the public needs and
how they would like that need to be satisfied. So the government should conduct large scale
empathy interviews to find out what the public thinks about the active mobility plan and how
it should be implemented. The government should also ask the pedestrians, food delivery
companies and PMD users especially the errant ones what they think the problems are and
what they think the solutions should be. Then the governments plan should be an answer to
the needs of the people.
The government should also ensure that they have the necessary infrastructure to
implement solutions that will satisfy the competing interests. In this case, the governemnt
should have built dedicated PMD pathways to reduce the accidents on public shared
pathways. In addition to regulating PMD use, the government could have regulated the
importation or manufacturing of PMD so that only the PMD with inbuilt speed restriction and
safety features are imported or manufactured. This step would have ensured
safer,affordable PMDs while also protecting the food delivery businesses.