In the modern economic landscape, mental health is no longer merely a public health concern or an employee welfare benefit; it is an imperative driver of national productivity and macro-economic resilience. For the Philippines, a country whose growth trajectory is fueled heavily by a young, tech-savvy workforce, the Business Process Outsourcing (BPO) industry, and service sectors, human capital is the primary engine of development.

To maximize this economic potential, mental well-being must be positioned at the core of labor policies, workplace design, and national legislative frameworks. A mentally healthy workforce translates directly to higher innovation, reduced absenteeism, lower turnover, and maximized output across all economic sectors.

This will be a 3-part series to delve a little into different areas where mental health is an imperative picking up from the Management Association of the Philippines (¶¶Òô³Ô¹Ï) General Membership Meeting Panel last October 16 featuring Sen. Risa Hontiveros as speaker and Ms. Jeannie Goulbourn and Doc Edgardo Juan Tolentino as panelists with Agnes Gervacio as Moderator.

PART 1: The Workplace Imperative — Operationalizing RA 11036 and Inclusive Employment

In my nearly four decades across the telecommunications and healthcare sectors, I have spent countless hours in executive boardrooms analyzing operational efficiency, capital allocation, and bottom-line growth. Yet across every balance sheet and strategic plan, one truth remains undeniable: human capital is the ultimate driver of national productivity. Parallel to my corporate career, my time as a frontline volunteer for the Natasha Goulbourn Foundation’s Hopeline exposed me to the deeply human side of this equation. Sitting with individuals in their moments of acute crisis taught me that psychological well-being is not an abstract personal matter—it is the foundational infrastructure of human capability.

When Republic Act (RA) No. 11036, the Philippine Mental Health Act, was enacted eight years ago, it marked a historic shift by recognizing mental healthcare as a fundamental right. However, as business leaders, we know that policy declarations on paper do not automatically yield economic productivity. Execution does. Today, as a member of ¶¶Òô³Ô¹Ï and its Health Committee, my personal mission extends beyond promoting basic awareness of the law. We must urgently operationalize RA 11036 across our organizations so that millions of working Filipinos can experience its tangible benefits in their daily lives.

Translating Policy into Daily Workplace Practice

To bridge the gap between statutory intent and workplace reality, corporate compliance must move past passive measures, like annual wellness webinars or printed employee handbooks. Implementing the Mental Health Act alongside our Occupational Safety and Health Standards (OSHS) requires embedding actionable mental wellness protocols into the operational bloodstream of our companies.

First, businesses must establish clear, confidential, and stigma-free pathways for professional psychological support. This means integrating robust Employee Assistance Programs (EAPs) and tele-mental health services into standard health benefit packages. Second, managers and middle supervisors must be trained in basic psychological first aid and empathetic leadership. Frontline leaders are the first line of defense; equipping them to recognize early indicators of burnout, anxiety, and severe stress prevents preventable medical leave and voluntary attrition. Third, operationalizing the law demands structured workplace accommodations. Flexible work arrangements, temporary duty reassignments, and manageable workload adjustments should be viewed not as operational disruptions, but as strategic retention tools that safeguard valuable talent.

Unlocking the Potential of Mentally Challenged and Neurodivergent Workers

A critical, yet underutilized, dimension of RA 11036 is its explicit alignment with RA 7277, the Magna Carta for Disabled Persons. The Mental Health Act affirms that individuals with psychosocial, neurological, and mental health conditions retain full legal capacity and the fundamental right to meaningful employment.

Integrating mentally challenged and neurodivergent individuals—such as those living with clinical depression, bipolar disorder, adult ADHD, or autism spectrum conditions—into the formal labor market is not merely an exercise in Corporate Social Responsibility. It is an economic growth strategy. Neurodivergent individuals frequently bring exceptional attention to detail, innovative problem-solving abilities, and unique analytical perspectives that enrich organizational culture and foster creative problem-solving.

When employers provide reasonable accommodations—such as structured daily routines, sensory-friendly workspaces, and clear performance frameworks—these workers thrive. Integrating this population directly increases household incomes, reduces reliance on state support, and expands our national tax base.

A Call to Action as Business Leaders:Ìý Build a Resilient Economic Future

As routine tasks become increasingly automated, the true competitive advantage of the Philippine economy lies in complex human capability. Mental health issues like presenteeism—where employees are physically present but cognitively disengaged—cost the global economy billions annually in lost output. By actively implementing RA 11036, breaking down social stigma, and opening our doors to individuals facing mental health challenges, we build a resilient, highly productive workforce. Investing in workplace mental wellness is not a corporate expense; it is a high-return investment in our nation’s economic future.

(The author is Co-Vice Chair of the ¶¶Òô³Ô¹Ï Sports, Fellowship and Wellness Committee and Member of the ¶¶Òô³Ô¹Ï Health Committee.Ìý She is the Group Chief for Strategic Accounts and Patient Experience of The Medical City. Feedback at <map@map.org.ph> and <rrcagurangan@themedicalcity.com>.)

The post The Mental Health Imperative: Unlocking Workplace Productivity and Safeguarding the Future of the Philippine Economy appeared first on Management Association of the Philippines.

What becomes valuable when technology is everywhere

Stavros Lee, co-founder of the US gaming platform Oncade, put the principle simply: value moves toward what is scarce. Speed, access and scale used to be hard to come by. Artificial intelligence (AI) is making all three abundant.

What it does not supply is judgment: deciding which problem is worth solving, which risk is worth taking and which trade-off an organization can live with. An AI model can tell a bank which loan applicants look risky. It cannot decide how much risk the bank should carry for a farming town after a typhoon, or what the bank owes a community it has served for decades. So the useful question about AI is no longer whether to adopt it. The real question is what AI should scale for us, and what we should keep human by design.

In my own field, where the work has always been about how institutions earn and keep the trust of the people they serve, this is a practical matter. People may accept that a machine drafted a statement or flagged a risk. They will still hold a person accountable for the decision. Judgment, and the accountability that comes with it, stays with leaders.

When the fear is getting it wrong

Many leaders are less worried about missing AI than about buying the wrong thing. Dallas Dolen of PwC US answered that fear with a story. As a teenager playing piano beside Miles Davis, Herbie Hancock hit a wrong note, and Davis answered with a chord that made it right. Plenty of leaders have already made bad calls on AI, Dolen said; what matters is that the next decision is the right one. Some spending is safe in any future: protecting data, training people, keeping systems flexible. Start with the outcome you want and redesign the work around it, rather than buying the technology first. Measure the value created, not the activity. Use the tools yourself before asking your people to. And accept that you will sometimes be wrong. He is wrong often, he said, and sleeps fine.

The second question

Judgment also shapes whom we bring along. Dr. Kunihiko Hirabayashi, secretary-general of the ASEAN-Japan Centre, spoke about the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), the trade pact that links ASEAN with China, Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand. Agreements like RCEP lower barriers, but his larger point was about agency: we cannot wait for certainty before we act, and the better answer to anxiety is collective action.

He also questioned our assumptions about who drives growth. Young people, women entrepreneurs, startup founders and small businesses are often treated as beneficiaries of growth; he argued that they can be the channels through which growth is created and scaled. In a country where micro, small and medium enterprises make up more than 99 percent of businesses and about two-thirds of jobs, according to the Department of Trade and Industry, the point is hard to dispute. So every leader weighing a new opportunity should ask a second question. After “What does this create?” comes “Who do we enable so that it can multiply?”

Innovation that starts with ordinary problems

Two Filipino entrepreneurs showed what that looks like in practice. AgriDom, the Davao-based company led by Dom Subang, started from a plain problem: drones make farming faster and more precise, but many smallholders cannot afford one. Its answer is a service model. Farmers book drone work when they need it and pay only for that work. Subang was candid that wider adoption still has a long way to go, and that educating farmers is critical to getting there.

Anna Magalona started But First, Coffee as a one-person venture during the pandemic and grew it into a national chain by keeping prices within reach without giving up on quality, using branding, new products and technology to do it.

Neither business began with a breakthrough invention. Each began with a familiar problem looked at differently: a gap in access, a price that kept people out, a customer the market was not serving well. Technology creates impact only when people can reach it and use it.

Fix the roof when the weather is good

Catharine Kho, senior economist at the ASEAN+3 Macroeconomic Research Office (AMRO), offered the day’s most practical line: “Fix the roof when the weather is good.” Our region has tremendous potential, but it also faces fragmentation, ageing populations and climate risk. Resilience built in the middle of a crisis costs more and comes too late. The time to diversify suppliers, train people and strengthen partnerships is now, while there is still room to choose.

What leaders should ask next

So here is what I would ask every leader to bring to the next management meeting. What will we scale with technology? What will we keep human? Who will we enable along the way?

The answers will differ from one company to the next. What should not differ is the habit of asking them early, before certainty arrives and before the advantage has gone to someone else. Machines will keep getting better at producing answers. Deciding which questions matter, and for whom, remains our work.

(The author is Co-Vice Chair of the ¶¶Òô³Ô¹Ï CEO Conference Committee, Chair of the ¶¶Òô³Ô¹Ï Trade, Investments and Tourism Committee, and founder and CEO of The EON Group. Feedback at <map@map.org.ph> and <junie.delmundo@eon.com.ph>.)

Ìý

The post What to scale, what to keep human: Lessons from the 24th ¶¶Òô³Ô¹Ï International CEO Conference appeared first on Management Association of the Philippines.

This gap between innovation and execution is becoming one of the defining business challenges of our time. In a rapidly changing environment characterized by technological disruption, organizations can no longer afford to treat innovation as a sporadic activity or an isolated function. Instead, innovation must become a replicable and scalable capability embedded across the enterprise.

This is the essence of Innovation@Scale, one of the three pillars of the Transformation Realized framework alongside Humans@Center and Technology@Speed. These drivers help organizations create and sustain dynamic competitive advantage in an increasingly uncertain world. The framework recognizes that value creation today requires a shift from predictability to agility, from rigid planning to continuous innovation, and from static operating models to adaptable systems thinking.

Understanding Innovation@Scale

When the concepts of innovation and scale come together, Innovation@Scale emerges as the ability to continuously generate, test, and implement new ideas while rapidly scaling successful innovations across the organization. It involves moving beyond isolated innovation efforts, such as pilot programs or innovation labs, and embedding innovation into the core business model. Organizations practicing Innovation@Scale build adaptive capabilities that allow them to respond to their needs, disruptions, and market shifts through emerging trends and technologies while creating long-term value. Importantly, Innovation@Scale is an ongoing commitment requiring adaptability, resilience, and a long-term vision.

Many organizations recognize the importance of innovation, yet previous innovation efforts have often failed to deliver meaningful results. Large corporations frequently struggle with organizational complexity that slows decision-making and experimentation. Some organizations are not bold enough to pursue transformative ideas, preferring incremental improvements that feel safer but generate limited competitive advantage. Others become trapped by traditional methodologies that are no longer suited to today’s pace of change. In some cases, innovation becomes a compliance exercise where activities are performed merely to demonstrate progress rather than achieve meaningful outcomes.

Innovation@Scale addresses these shortcomings by focusing on a set of core principles that enable innovation to become a sustainable organizational capability. The first principle is fostering creativity. Innovation flourishes in environments where experimentation is encouraged and where failure is viewed as an opportunity for learning rather than punishment. Organizations that create psychological safety enable employees to test ideas, share perspectives, and challenge assumptions with confidence. In such environments, learning becomes a more important measure of success than short-term return on investment.

The second principle involves scaling innovation across the enterprise. Successful innovation requires more than great ideas; it requires structural support, funding mechanisms, incentives, and flexible organizational models. Internal venture-funding approaches help prioritize promising ideas, while shared digital infrastructure reduces duplication of effort and accelerates execution. By removing organizational barriers and connecting resources more effectively, organizations can move innovations beyond isolated teams and into everyday operations.

Another critical principle is leveraging ecosystems. Organizations rarely innovate successfully in isolation. Partnerships with startups, academic institutions, technology providers, industry platforms, and government agencies can significantly accelerate innovation by providing new capabilities, perspectives, and resources. Innovation ecosystems enable organizations to access ideas and expertise that would be difficult or costly to develop independently.

Continuous reimagining of value creation is equally important. Organizations must continuously monitor emerging trends, evolving customer behaviors, competitive developments, regulatory changes, and geopolitical shifts. Market intelligence and scenario planning can help leaders anticipate disruption and identify new opportunities before they become mainstream. Rather than reacting to change, organizations practicing Innovation@Scale proactively prepare for it.

Applying Innovation@Scale

One of the most important insights from Innovation@Scale is that successful innovation requires deliberate organizational mechanisms. Effective organizations establish clear leadership sponsorship and align innovation efforts with strategic priorities. Small, autonomous teams with defined ownership can move faster and make decisions more effectively than large, heavily coordinated groups. Structured governance helps balance experimentation with accountability by maintaining portfolios that include short-term improvements, growth opportunities, and long-term transformational bets.

Organizations also benefit from systematic experimentation, rapid learning loops, capability-building programs, innovation funding models, and repeatable scaling mechanisms that allow successful ideas to be adopted more broadly.

However, scaling innovation remains difficult for many organizations. Findings from EY’s Reimagining Industry Futures Study 2025 indicate that while organizations continue to invest heavily in emerging technologies, most deployments remain concentrated in proof-of-concept phases and pilot projects. Scalability, integration challenges, and data governance concerns have emerged as significant barriers to broader adoption. Organizations are often successful at generating innovative ideas and launching trials but encounter difficulties when attempting to integrate those innovations across the enterprise.

The research also highlights several barriers that prevent innovations from progressing beyond initial trials. Complex integration with legacy systems, budget limitations, technology immaturity, insufficient skills, organizational culture readiness, lack of demonstrable return on investment, and regulatory concerns frequently slow adoption. These findings reinforce an important reality: scaling innovation is not simply a technical challenge. It is equally an organizational, operational, and cultural challenge. Organizations must modernize infrastructure, develop talent, strengthen governance, and align incentives to unlock the full value of innovation.

To address these challenges, organizations must adopt disciplined approaches to innovation funding and portfolio management. Successful companies allocate resources across different types of innovation initiatives, balancing investments in core improvements, emerging opportunities, and transformative innovations. They establish governance structures that enable leaders to monitor progress, make funding decisions, manage risk, and ensure alignment with business priorities.

Equally important is innovation accounting, which measures not only financial outcomes but also indicators, such as experiment velocity, pipeline conversion, employee participation, and time-to-market. These metrics help organizations assess whether innovation capabilities are becoming stronger over time.

Organizations can complement innovation accounting with an innovation audit, a structured assessment of whether the capabilities needed to innovate and scale are working effectively across the enterprise. Such an assessment can examine the alignment of innovation with strategy, the strength of leadership and governance, the maturity of processes, the availability of talent and funding, and the ability of data and technology to support execution.

Finally, organizations must avoid common pitfalls that undermine innovation efforts. Innovation theater, where innovation activities are disconnected from strategy or funding decisions, can create the appearance of progress without delivering results. Siloed innovation labs often struggle to transfer successful experiments into core business operations, while celebrating failure without extracting meaningful lessons can create complacency rather than learning.

Transforming ideas into scalable value

In an increasingly disruptive business environment, competitive advantage will belong not to organizations that generate the most ideas, but to those that can consistently transform ideas into scalable value.

Innovation@Scale is ultimately about creating an organizational capability that repeatedly identifies opportunities, tests solutions, scales successful innovations, and adapts continuously to change. When innovation becomes embedded in the way an organization thinks, operates, and creates value, it ceases to be a project and becomes a lasting source of competitive advantage.

[This article is for general information only and is not a substitute for professional advice where the facts and circumstances warrant. The views and opinions expressed above are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of SGV & Co. and the ¶¶Òô³Ô¹Ï. The author is a member of the NextGen Committee of the Management Association of the Philippines (¶¶Òô³Ô¹Ï). He is the Ecosystems and Knowledge Head and Financial Services Leader of SGV & Co. This article was co-written with April Anne M. Corpuz, Business Consulting Partner of SGV & Co. Feedback at <map@map.org.ph> and <christian.g.lauron@ph.ey.com>).]

Ìý

The post Innovation@Scale: From great ideas to lasting competitive advantage appeared first on Management Association of the Philippines.

Many organizations continue to invest heavily in technology, recognizing its potential to improve performance and create new sources of growth. However, simply having access to technology is no longer a competitive advantage in itself. Cloud platforms, artificial intelligence (AI), automation, analytics, and other digital capabilities are increasingly accessible to businesses of all sizes. If competitors can access similar technology stacks, what distinguishes the market leaders from the rest?

The answer is speed. Organizations that can adopt, integrate, scale, and extract value from technology faster than their competitors will create a sustainable advantage.

This concept lies at the heart of Technology@Speed, one of the three pillars of EY’s Transformation Realized framework. Together with Humans@Center and Innovation@Scale, Technology@Speed serves as a key driver of organizational value creation. The framework emphasizes that successful transformation focuses on delivering long-term value across four dimensions: customer value, people value, societal value, and financial value. True transformation occurs when all three drivers work together to accelerate business outcomes and create lasting impact.

The need for speed

Technology@Speed is often misunderstood as a race to implement the newest technology, when in truth, it is about adopting technology at a pace that enables meaningful competitive advantage and value realization. Organizations practicing Technology@Speed can launch products faster, gain access to organized and actionable data sooner, proactively serve customers, increase operational capacity more quickly, and respond to market disruptions with greater agility.

The need for speed has never been more urgent. Industry boundaries are rapidly disappearing: Digital banks are expanding beyond payments into lending, insurance, and investments, while retailers are embedding financial services into their customer experiences. Meanwhile, startups can launch sophisticated products using relatively small teams empowered by AI-enabled tools for coding, marketing, and content creation. As competitors emerge from unexpected industries and business models converge, organizations must continuously adapt to remain relevant.

While technology can enable transformation, technology constraints are not always the primary obstacle to progress. Many organizations face the constraint of complexity, with legacy systems, manual processes, fragmented technology investments, inconsistent data sources, cybersecurity concerns, and cumbersome reporting requirements often creating friction. Heavy reliance on spreadsheets and email, disconnected systems that fail to communicate, and the duplication of technology capabilities across business units contribute to inefficiencies that delay value realization.

EY’s Megatrends 2026 and beyond report highlights that advances in AI, robotics and other emerging technologies are driving a new human-machine hybrid era, making adaptive decision-making, governance and business model transformation critical priorities for organizations. The study suggests that competitive advantage will increasingly come not from access to technology, but from an organization’s ability to scale technologies faster and more effectively than others.

The critical role of leadership

Leadership plays a critical role in overcoming these barriers. Research conducted by EY in collaboration with Oxford Saïd Business School found that 96% of transformation programs encounter challenges significant enough to create a turning point, while 76% of leaders consider these turning points unavoidable. However, organizations that successfully navigate these moments can achieve 2.1 times faster transformation speed and 1.9 times better KPI performance.

The difference lies in how quickly leaders identify issues, make decisions, remove obstacles, and adjust execution when circumstances change. Technology may facilitate transformation, but leadership determines how rapidly value is realized.

This insight highlights an important reality for today’s executives. Speed comes from responsive leadership and disciplined execution. Organizations that continually look ahead, instead of relying solely on past successes, are better equipped to anticipate disruption and capitalize on emerging opportunities.

To accelerate Technology@Speed, organizations can focus on five key leadership levers. The first is adopting cloud and software-as-a-service solutions that provide faster deployment, lower infrastructure complexity, continuous innovation, and greater scalability. Rather than building everything internally, organizations can devote resources to activities that create unique business value.

The second is building a unified and trusted data foundation that serves as a single source of truth, enabling faster reporting, better decision-making, and more effective AI adoption.

The third lever is harnessing AI and automation to enhance productivity, improve customer experiences, eliminate repetitive work, and scale operations more efficiently.

The fourth is leveraging ecosystems by collaborating with technology providers, regulators, suppliers, startups, and other partners to accelerate access to innovation and reduce implementation risk.

Finally, organizations should strengthen governance and leadership by establishing clear ownership, accountability, and decision rights for technology investments. Effective governance does not hinder innovation; it enables organizations to scale innovation with greater confidence and consistency.

Utilizing speed as a competitive advantage

In the years ahead, virtually every organization will have access to AI, cloud platforms, advanced analytics, and automation technologies. As these capabilities become increasingly commoditized, competitive advantage will come from the ability to adopt technology quickly, integrate it effectively, scale it across the enterprise, and realize business value faster than competitors.

Technology@Speed is a leadership mindset and an organizational capability. It requires focusing on reducing complexity, strengthening execution, scaling innovation, and aligning technology investments with long-term value creation. In a world where transformation is continuous, the organizations that move fastest from investment to impact will be best positioned to lead, compete, and thrive.

(This article is for general information only and is not a substitute for professional advice where the facts and circumstances warrant. The views and opinions expressed above are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of SGV & Co. and the ¶¶Òô³Ô¹Ï. The author is a member of the NextGen Committee of the Management Association of the Philippines (¶¶Òô³Ô¹Ï). She is the Business Consulting Leader and the Consumer Products and Retail Sector Leader of SGV & Co. This article was co-written with Lee Carlo B. Abadia, Technology Consulting Principal of SGV & Co. Feedback at <map@map.org.ph> and <maria.kathrina.s.macaisa@ph.ey.com>).

Ìý

The post Technology@Speed: Turning technology investments into long-term value appeared first on Management Association of the Philippines.

Research conducted by EY reveals that constant market disruption is accelerating at an unprecedented pace. As many as 82% percent of CEOs and board members believe that market disruptions are becoming more frequent and impactful, while 65% of Forbes 2000 companies plan to increase transformation spending over the next three years. For many organizations, transformation is an ongoing process of adaptation and reinvention.

Yet despite significant investment, transformation success remains elusive. Studies consistently show that only 10% to 30% of transformation initiatives achieves their intended outcomes. EY’s global research further found that 67% of senior leaders have experienced at least one under-performing transformation in the past five years. The findings suggest that organizations often focus heavily on processes, technology, and strategy while under-estimating the human and emotional dimensions of change.

The research identifies transformation fundamentally as a human challenge. Both leaders and employees experience emotional journeys during significant change, and these journeys can determine whether transformation succeeds or fails. Employees who have experienced unsuccessful change initiatives are more likely to associate transformation with job insecurity, layoffs, and uncertainty, resulting in lower trust, reduced engagement, and diminished productivity.

The human-centered approach

To address this challenge, the research proposes a human-centered approach to transformation. Rather than viewing people as a single component within a broader program, successful organizations place humans at the center of their transformation agenda. This requires leaders to balance a business objective with a deep understanding of employee needs, emotions, and experiences.

The study highlights critical leadership actions that drive transformation success. Leaders must first lead by demonstrating inclusive leadership and aligning diverse stakeholders around a common purpose. They must inspire through a clear and compelling narrative that helps employees understand why change is necessary and what role they play in the journey. They need to care by fostering trust, psychological safety, and participation, ensuring people feel heard and valued throughout the process.

Equally important, leaders must empower employees by encouraging creativity, experimentation, and innovation. They must build by leveraging technology that enhances both organizational performance and employee experience. Finally, they have to collaborate, breaking down silos and enabling teams to co-create new ways of working that support success.

Paradoxes and challenges

The research also highlights several paradoxes leaders must navigate. They must deliver results today while disrupting business for tomorrow. They need a clear vision while simultaneously remaining humble enough to embrace uncertainty. They have to foster broad engagement while managing the emotional isolation that often accompanies leadership decisions, and they need to balance disciplined execution with the freedom that fuels innovation.

The consequences of getting transformation wrong can be significant. Among employees who have experienced an under-performing transformation, 50% agree that transformation is simply another word for layoffs, while 49% say it creates concerns about job security. In addition, 42% believe their organization does not really need to transform and is already performing well.

In the near term, these perceptions can erode trust in the organization, reduce psychological safety, and contribute to disengagement, attrition, and lower productivity. Over the long term, the effects can carry into future transformation efforts, making it more difficult to improve employee satisfaction, secure stakeholder buy-in, and achieve business objectives.

Creating the conditions to deliver long-term value

In an environment of constant disruption, transformation is no longer simply about changing processes or adopting new technologies. It is about building an organizational culture that can continuously evolve to deliver long-term value. The ability to transform repeatedly, effectively, and at speed is becoming a core determinant of business resilience and growth.

Organizations that place humans at the center of transformation are better positioned to adapt, innovate, and thrive. In the new normal of continuous change, transformative leadership is not just about managing transformation. It is about creating the conditions for people to embrace it, sustain it, and ultimately drive it forward.

(This article is for general information only and is not a substitute for professional advice where the facts and circumstances warrant. The views and opinions expressed above are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of SGV & Co. and the ¶¶Òô³Ô¹Ï. The author is a member of the Management Association of the Philippines (¶¶Òô³Ô¹Ï). She is the Chairman and Country Managing Partner of SGV & Co. This article was co-written with Jan Ray G. Manlapaz, Consulting Partner of SGV & Co.Ìý Feedback at <map@map.org.ph> and <rossana.a.fajardo@ph.ey.com>).

The post Transformative Leadership: Putting humans at the center of continuous change appeared first on Management Association of the Philippines.

On June 22, gunfire erupted at San Jose National High School in Tacloban. In August, another shooting took place at Ateneo de Zamboanga University. Then on Sept. 18, the country woke up to another tragedy, this time at Banga National High School in South Cotabato, where two students were killed, several others were wounded, and the student gunman took his own life. School shootings remain rare in the Philippines, but three deadly incidents in such a short period should force us to ask whether we are seeing warning signs of a much deeper problem.

Our instinct after an incident like this is understandably to focus on physical security. Schools tighten their gates, guards inspect bags, students are checked for weapons, and police visibility is increased. There will inevitably be proposals for metal detectors, CCTV cameras and more stringent security procedures. Some of these measures may be necessary, but if our principal solution is to find the gun before it enters the classroom, then we are already intervening too late. We need to reach the young person before he ever decides to pick up the gun.

This is why I believe the recent shootings should force us to confront the state of mental health and well-being among our young people. This is not to suggest that mental illness causes violence. Most people struggling with mental health conditions will never harm another person, and we should be careful not to reinforce that stigma. Violence has many possible causes, including family circumstances, bullying, social isolation, access to firearms, exposure to violent material and other factors. What we cannot afford to ignore, however, are warning signs that someone may be in serious distress or contemplating harm to himself or others.

Reports on the South Cotabato shooting indicate that the student had told friends about what he intended to do. Authorities are also investigating his online activities and possible exposure to violent content and online communities. The firearm used in the attack reportedly belonged to his father. These matters are still under investigation, and we should resist jumping to conclusions about what ultimately caused the attack, but they raise questions every parent in this country should be asking: How well do we really know what our children are going through?

Parents need to check on their children — and not just their bags. Talk to them, know their friends, understand what they are doing online and pay attention to when their behavior changes dramatically. Listen when they talk about hopelessness, anger, self-harm or violence. And if there is a firearm at home, keeping it inaccessible to children is a fundamental responsibility.

Teachers occupy an equally important position because they see our children for hours every day and may notice changes that families do not. A student who suddenly withdraws, becomes severely distressed, repeatedly talks about death or violence, is being badly bullied or makes threats should not simply be dismissed as a difficult child. Teachers are not mental health professionals, but they should know what to do, whom to inform and where to refer that student.

The same principle applies beyond schools. Bosses need to check on their teams. Managers are not psychologists and should never pretend to diagnose their employees, but responsible organizations should create environments where asking for help is acceptable and where employees in distress can be referred to professionals. Mental health is not only an education or health issue; it is also a workplace, productivity and ultimately national issue.

The troubling thing is that the Philippines is not starting from zero. We already have laws intended to build much of this system. Republic Act (RA) No. 11036, or the Mental Health Act, has been law since 2018. RA 12080, the Basic Education Mental Health and Well-Being Promotion Act, became law in 2024. The latter provides for school-based mental health programs, Care Centers in schools, Mental Health and Well-Being Offices in Schools Division Offices, and the hiring and deployment of qualified personnel. Its implementing rules are already in place.

The question, therefore, is no longer whether we need another law. The more urgent question is whether we are implementing the laws that we already have.

After these three shootings, the House of Representatives and the Senate should make this an urgent oversight agenda. They should require the responsible agencies to report publicly on implementation. How much has been appropriated and how much has actually been spent? How many schools have functioning Care Centers? How many counselors and counselor associates have been hired? What is our counselor-to-student ratio? How many cities and municipalities have functioning referral networks and accessible mental health services? We need numbers and measurable outcomes, not assurances.

DepEd should be able to tell parents how far we have progressed in implementing RA 12080 across the country. DOH should show where professional mental health services are available and whether families outside major urban centers can actually access them. DILG should work with governors, mayors and barangays to ensure that local mental health systems and referral mechanisms work on the ground, while DSWD should be part of the intervention network for vulnerable children and families. The Philippine Council for Mental Health should be able to show us how all these moving parts are being coordinated.

DICT has an increasingly important role because a significant part of our children’s lives now takes place online. Government needs better mechanisms for responding to credible online threats, cyberbullying and potentially harmful online communities. It should work with schools, parents, law enforcement and technology platforms to improve digital safety and literacy. At the same time, protecting children cannot become an excuse for indiscriminate surveillance. Any system must protect privacy and due process while providing a clear way to escalate credible threats of serious harm.

DOLE and the Civil Service Commission should similarly examine whether workplace mental health requirements are actually being implemented. DTI can help mobilize businesses and industry groups to participate in a national response. The private sector employs millions of Filipinos and has resources, technologies and networks that can support mental health programs in workplaces and communities. This cannot remain a collection of separate government programs operating independently of one another. We need one national system.

I propose that government undertake a 90-day national audit of the implementation of RA 11036 and RA 12080. The results should be public and should identify gaps by region, province and school division. From that audit, government should create a national mental health implementation dashboard showing where counselors, care centers, crisis services and referral facilities are available. If we can build dashboards for economic indicators, weather disturbances and infrastructure projects, surely we can track something as important as the mental well-being of our people.

We also need a clear national early-intervention protocol for schools. When a student makes a credible threat to harm himself or others, teachers and administrators should not have to improvise. There should be a defined process for assessment, parental notification when appropriate, professional intervention, referral and follow-through, with safeguards for confidentiality and the rights of the student. Most importantly, identifying a person at risk is useless if there is nowhere to send that person. Schools, LGUs, hospitals, social workers and mental health professionals need to be connected through a functioning referral network.

Congress should use the national budget process to determine whether we are putting enough resources behind the promises contained in our laws. It should also require an annual public accounting of our progress: what we promised, what we funded, what we implemented, what worked and what did not. Mental health cannot be something government remembers only after a tragedy and then forgets when the headlines disappear.

As President of the Management Association of the Philippines (¶¶Òô³Ô¹Ï), I believe the business community should also be part of this effort. Companies can strengthen workplace mental health programs, support community initiatives, provide technology and resources, and help make seeking professional help normal rather than shameful. But this requires a coordinated national response in which government, business, schools, families and communities understand their respective responsibilities.

Parents must check on their children. Teachers must check on their students. Bosses must check on their teams. Friends must check on each other. And government must check itself.

We already have the Mental Health Act. We already have the Basic Education Mental Health and Well-Being Promotion Act. We have government agencies with defined responsibilities, the House and the Senate exercising oversight and controlling the national purse, and LGUs responsible for delivering services in our communities. The laws are there and the institutions are there. The question we should now be asking is simple: Where are we in implementing them?

Tacloban, Zamboanga and South Cotabato should be enough. We should not wait for another school to become a headline before we act.

(The author is President of the ¶¶Òô³Ô¹Ï. He is also President and COO of DITO CME Holdings Corporation. Feedback at <map@map.org.ph> and <donaldpatricklim@gmail.com>).

The post Three school shootings are three too many appeared first on Management Association of the Philippines.

Somewhere in East Asia, a buyer is choosing a supplier, and a manufacturer is deciding where to expand. For the Philippines, RCEP’s value will be measured by how often those decisions bring business here.

The Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership connects 15 economies through rules governing trade, services, and investment. Its promise becomes tangible when a Philippine company can offer a better price, deliver more reliably, or justify a larger factory. Converting that advantage into market share requires deliberate action by companies and the government. Our regional competitors have access to the same framework. The advantage must come from how well our firms and public institutions use it.

Turning market access into advantage

I describe RCEP as an operating system for regional growth because it helps businesses coordinate activities across borders. A Philippine manufacturer can use qualifying inputs from Japan, Korea, and ASEAN partners to meet the agreement’s origin requirements for preferential tariffs. That flexibility can help it build a more competitive regional supply chain.

The commercial calculation must still be made shipment by shipment. RCEP coexists with other trade agreements, including our bilateral arrangements with Japan and Korea. Companies should compare applicable tariffs, origin requirements, and compliance costs. Another agreement may offer better terms; some products already enter duty-free. The objective is the best available arrangement for the transaction.

Management should then decide how to turn any savings into a stronger offer: a lower delivered price, better service, or greater capacity to handle more orders. Sales staff, production teams, and logistics managers must work toward the same promise to the customer.

Earning the next order

Vietnam’s Vinapro illustrates that approach. The exporter of cashews, pepper and cinnamon saw RCEP as an opening to expand formal exports to China and seek buyers at regional trade fairs. Its early account documents a commercial response to the agreement. It shows why trade facilitation must be accompanied by active selling.

For Thailand’s NC Coconut, which supplies fresh coconuts to China, that promise depends on time. Delays erode freshness and margins. RCEP provides priority treatment of perishables and, under normal circumstances and where possible, customs release within six hours of arrival and submission of required information, provided regulatory requirements are met. Philippine fruit and seafood exporters have a direct interest in ensuring these provisions work, alongside investments in storage and transport.

At home, ANTHILL Fabric Gallery connects traditional weaving communities with international buyers. Its experience highlights the challenges smaller enterprises face. Products with distinctive appeal still need competitive pricing, consistent quality, and dependable delivery. RCEP offers a new trade option to assess; converting it into sales requires capabilities that many small firms cannot build alone.

The Department of Trade and Industry and business associations (such as PCCI) should provide or arrange advice on an actual product, buyer, and order. Assistance should link tariff and origin guidance to testing, packaging, financing, and logistics. Larger exporters can help smaller firms qualify as suppliers, providing a practical route into regional markets.

Winning the next investment

Investment brings another dimension. In March 2023, I attended the inauguration of P&G’s ₱864-million Pampers production line in Cabuyao, intended to supply South Korea. It demonstrated how an established investor could expand Philippine production for regional customers. The line opened before RCEP took effect here in June 2023, and its specific RCEP savings remain unverified. Its relevance is the business model: producing here to serve markets beyond our borders.

RCEP can strengthen that model. More customers can justify greater production capacity, and a wider range of qualifying suppliers can improve costs and resilience. Yet investors still compare locations. Reliable, competitively priced power, efficient logistics, skilled workers, and predictable regulations remain decisive. Existing investors deserve particular attention: we should help them choose the Philippines for their next expansion.

Our opportunities extend from electronics and food processing to engineering, software and business services supporting regional operations. Local suppliers must develop alongside incoming investment so that Filipino firms and workers gain contracts, skills and higher-value work.

Making commitments work

Three priorities follow. First, make borders predictable. The Philippines already uses digital customs systems and accepts electronic trade documents. The government must build on that progress by connecting regulatory agencies, expanding electronic acceptance, and reducing remaining paper requirements. A delay at one agency can erase the benefit of a tariff preference.

Second, provide effective investor aftercare, with a service point empowered to coordinate agencies and resolve operational issues. Third, help suppliers meet buyers’ actual requirements through accessible testing, skills development, and advice on proving origin. Support should follow firms through delivery and repeat orders.

A partnership measured by results

The RCEP Business and Investment Summit should lead to a continuing compact between business and government. The East Asia Business Council, Management Association of the Philippines and other business associations should document recurring obstacles and work with DTI to bring them to the appropriate agencies and RCEP committees. The general review due in 2027 offers a further opportunity to pursue remedies grounded in business experience.

Business associations and DTI should jointly publish an aggregate scorecard that protects commercial confidentiality: orders completed, delivery performance, suppliers engaged, and investments operating. Announcements, approvals, and financing should be reported separately from productive capacity actually brought into use. This would make the compact accountable for results.

The next buyer and the next investor have choices. RCEP gives us additional tools to compete for their business. We must make the Philippines a country they choose with confidence—and choose again.

[The author is former President of the Management Association of the Philippines (¶¶Òô³Ô¹Ï). He served as Secretary of Trade and Industry, President of UP System and director and Adviser at the Asian Development Bank. Feedback at <map@map.org.ph> and <apascual@up.edu.ph>.]

The post Making RCEP Work for the Philippines appeared first on Management Association of the Philippines.

The Leadership Imperative: Converting Advantage into Capability

This is precisely what makes leadership so challenging today. Whether an individual is thrust into leadership by circumstance or entrusted with authority by their constituents, the full weight of day-to-day operations and strategic survival rests on them.

We see this universal truth reflected across every field. From Arts and Music to world-class Sports, extraordinary circumstances often forge the ultimate platforms for transformation. True leaders are created when they step up to the plate—using their environment and platforms to their advantage, whether that means channeling their wealth and influence to discover the next talent or breaking boundaries in competition.

Converting circumstances into advantage requires deliberate execution. A young population is not automatically an economic dividend—it becomes one only when matched with quality education, workforce development, innovation, and productive employment. Likewise, our strategic location in Asia yields lasting benefits only when backed by modern infrastructure, reliable power systems, and efficient capital deployment.

Trust and the Horizon Ahead

The opportunity before leaders is not merely to automate existing processes or reduce operating costs. It is to fundamentally rethink how value is created, delivered, and sustained in an environment where technology, economics, and geopolitics are changing simultaneously.

Yet technology remains only an accelerator. It amplifies both the strengths and weaknesses of the institutions that deploy it. Organizations grounded in strong governance, sound leadership, and a culture of innovation will be positioned to unlock extraordinary value. Those without these foundations risk doing little more than magnifying existing inefficiencies.

This is why, even as artificial intelligence transforms how organizations operate, trust has become an increasingly scarce strategic asset. The institutions that will endure are not necessarily those that adopt technology the fastest, but those that can use it responsibly while maintaining credibility with employees, investors, regulators, customers, and the public.

For business leaders, this increasingly means operating with the sophistication of diplomats. They must navigate shifting public policy priorities, regulatory developments, geopolitical risks, stakeholder expectations, and market realities—often simultaneously. Leadership today is therefore less about having all the answers and more about understanding how these forces interact, making difficult choices amid uncertainty, and preserving institutional credibility while doing so.

¶¶Òô³Ô¹Ï–SGV 7th NextGen Conference: UNCHARTED

This changing environment provides the context for the ¶¶Òô³Ô¹Ï-SGV 7th NextGen Conference: UNCHARTED. Preparing the leaders of tomorrow requires more than conventional management tools; it demands a fundamental shift in mindset.

To venture into uncharted territory is to confront uncertainty without the comfort of an established map. It forces both speakers and participants to reflect deeply on shifting global realities and to reconsider what leadership means when traditional assumptions no longer hold. At the Conference, these questions come together: What does it mean to lead beyond titles and traditional boundaries? How do we replace outdated playbooks with agility, cross-border collaboration, and purpose-driven influence? And how do we make decisions when the path ahead is neither certain nor clearly defined?

Leading through uncertainty is ultimately a profound exercise in self-confrontation and adaptation. As speakers share their own experiences of being tested by sudden responsibility, disruption, and unfamiliar challenges, they invite the audience to consider what it takes not merely to survive change, but to thrive through it.

The traditional blueprints for growth have begun to break down. Evolving economic forces have redefined value, cost, and competitiveness. Technology has altered the speed at which industries transform, while geopolitical and institutional shifts have made yesterday’s assumptions increasingly unreliable. Yet, even in uncharted territory, emerging leaders can consistently exceed expectations by choosing curiosity over certainty, trading rigid titles for genuine connection, and stepping forward with courage when there is no established path to follow.

The map is not coming—and that is precisely the opportunity.

The NextGen Conference will leave us with a simple but undeniable truth: navigating the uncharted is not about waiting for quiet seas or formal authority. It is about having the audacity to steer through the storm. In a landscape transformed by shifting economics, technological disruption, and broken templates, the future belongs to those who stop reaching for old playbooks and begin charting new waters.

To lead in this environment is to step beyond the comfort of titles, embrace ambiguity, build trust, and have the courage to move forward when certainty is unavailable.

Building through Uncertainty

But leadership in uncharted territory cannot end with individual courage. It must ultimately translate into the ability to build institutions that can withstand uncertainty.

For the Philippines, we possess many of the ingredients necessary for sustainable economic success—a talented and increasingly capable workforce, strategic geography, growing capital markets, entrepreneurial energy, and significant development potential. The challenge is not simply to recognize these advantages, but to transform them into enduring national capabilities.

That transformation requires institutions that can attract and deploy capital intelligently, embrace technology without abandoning trust, develop talent, and make decisions with a view toward the next generation rather than merely the next quarter.

As the global order evolves, our task is therefore not merely to navigate change. It is to shape outcomes—to strengthen our institutions, expand opportunities, deepen our economic capabilities, and create lasting national value.

The waters ahead may remain uncharted. But that does not mean we are without direction.

We chart the course by the institutions we build, the trust we earn, and the courage with which we lead.

[The author is Co-Chair of Sub-Committees on Marketing, Community and Networking of NextGen Committee of the Management Association of the Philippines (¶¶Òô³Ô¹Ï).Ìý Feedback at <map@map.org.ph> and <jbchen@mic.gov.ph>].Ìý

The post Uncharted Waters: Strategic Leadership in an Age of Fragmentation appeared first on Management Association of the Philippines.

From that time on, each succeeding generation has been gauged or measured against the country’s economic status during its time at the helm. After all, the country’s level of development is the sum of all its citizens’ contributions during a specific period.

After World War II, the Philippines was widely regarded as one of the Asian countries most likely to become a developed nation. We possessed formidable built-in advantages: (1) abundant natural resources, (2) a strategic location, (3) a high literacy rate, (4) proficiency in English, and (5) close ties with the U.S.A., the world’s dominant economic power then.

Indeed, the 1950s seemed to vindicate the expectation.Ìý The economy grew by 6.5% to 7%, the currency remained stable, and the country emerged as one of region’s leading economies, behind only Japan. Filipino workers were readily absorbed by the domestic economy, and working abroad was virtually unheard of. Well-off Filipino families even employed foreign yayas (helpers). No wonder many old-timers remember this bygone era as our “Golden Age.â€�

The 1960s somehow tempered the optimism of the previous decade, as economic growth slowed to 5.4%, a still respectable level. Back then, our Makati Central Business District, its skyline dotted with gleaming, modern skyscrapers, was the envy of our Asian neighbors (though today their commercial and business districts dwarf ours).

The 1970s heralded the start of our economic underperformance. Ballooning foreign debt and chronic fiscal and budget deficits had started putting a heavy strain on our economy. While we still registered GDP growth of 6.4%, countries like South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, and Hong Kong surged ahead, posting average growth rates of 8% to 10%.

The 1980s ushered in our worst economic performance thus far as we reeled from triple whammy of severe recession, a debt crisis, and political turmoil. In contrast, other ASEAN members, like Malaysia, Thailand, and Indonesia, registered phenomenal growth, catapulting them into tiger-economy status. The decade also signaled the start of China’s economic miracle, with double-digit annual GDP growth that would continue unimpeded into the next century.

The country’s performance in the succeeding three and a half decades can best be summed up as middling and erratic. Even if we finally attain the coveted high-middle-income status this year, we would still be the laggard as many of our regional peers had already reached that level – or surpassed it – many years ago.

Today’s senior citizens, most of them born in the 1950s and 1960s and already at the twilight of their lives, have more time to reflect on their generation’s economic contribution—or lack thereof. Although some are still active in running the country’s economic engine, many are now retired and idle.

The question troubling their minds is: Where did we go wrong?

Finger-pointing as to who or what to blame has become a favorite pastime of our seniors. The usual suspects include our more than three centuries of colonization, the inherited Spanish culture, our Christian faith, American interference, our system of government, and our corrupt politicians.

From the above list, only the last two seem valid. The rest won’t wash because other countries that are now prosperous share the same historical or cultural baggage. What is undeniable is that our leadership and system of governance have fallen severely short.

Those two problems are intertwined. Corrupt and unqualified leaders came to power and retained power because the current system is loaded in their favor. The prohibitive cost of election puts qualified but less affluent candidates at a huge disadvantage, allowing wealthy and entrenched political dynasties to remain in power.

Yet ordinary citizens cannot escape responsibility for such outcome. We elected these officials in the first place. That makes it a generational sin.

If we have to identify one major reason we failed to keep pace with our neighbors, it would be our inability to attract sufficient foreign direct investment (FDI). For whatever reason, no administration since independence has managed to significantly increase it.

Why?

Primarily because we have focused too heavily on legislative measures for solutions – enacting new economic laws or amending provisions of the Constitution – instead of fixing administrative problems that discourage investors.Ìý These include honoring government contracts, improving inadequate infrastructure, eliminating red tape and corruption, reducing high electricity costs, and addressing bureaucratic incompetence.

Until we tackle these issues head-on, no amount of economic legislation or constitutional amendment will deliver the FDI we need.

Vietnam is a case in point. Despite enduring two decades of continuous warfare, it has overtaken us, attracting historically higher FDI and now receiving more than three times what we do.

The remnants of my generation, with diminishing ability to influence our economic trajectory, are relegated to being mere observers in our country’s unfolding saga. We impatiently await the start or completion of big-ticket government projects essential to development: airports, railways, toll ways, seaports, and other major logistics and distribution infrastructure. Many worry they won’t live long enough to see the projects’ completion and enjoy their benefits. We are quite literally living on borrowed time.

But we need not remain passive and apathetic about our country’s future. We are not totally powerless. We can join forces with the youth to demand changes in our system of government and use our votes to elect the leaders we truly deserve. We must utilize our remaining years and accumulated influence to change our country’s direction.

Giving up is not an option.

[The author is member of the Agribusiness Committee of the Management Association of the Philippines (¶¶Òô³Ô¹Ï).Ìý He is also the Adviser of the Philippine Disaster Resilience Foundation (PDRF) and is former President of UCPB-CIIF Finance and Development Corporation, and UCPB-CIIF Foundation. Feedback at <map@map.org.ph> and <edgardo.amistad@yahoo.com>].Ìý

The post A Senior’s Perspective on Our Economic Growth and Development appeared first on Management Association of the Philippines.