From Samirul Ariff Othman
Let me be blunt. Malaysia does not suffer from a lack of planning: it suffers from a lack of execution.
Every few years, we produce a five-year development plan thick enough to rival a phone book. Ministries present it. Consultants praise it. Then the real world intrudes – and nothing much happens.
The Malaysian Institute of Economic Research wants annual reviews to keep these plans “relevant”. That proposal, shared at their Brown Bag Talk on the 13th Malaysia Plan frankly, misses the point.
You can review a plan every month if you like. It won’t matter if the civil service lacks discipline, if ministries are chasing KPIs instead of solving problems, or if political leaders change course with every new slogan.
Malaysia’s weakness does not lie in reliance on outdated planning cycles but in an over-reliance on process over purpose.
Getting things done
The proposal for an annual review sounds neat on paper: review the plan every year, align KPIs, track progress. But real reform doesn’t happen over a 12-month timespan. It happens when a government has the will to act, not the urge to monitor.
Other newly industrialised Asian economies didn’t shift direction every year. On the contrary, they stayed the course for decades: clean government, disciplined institutions, long-term investment in people. If they had paused every year to re-evaluate their five-year strategy, they’d still be writing reports.
Malaysia already has mid-term reviews for its five-year plans, typically conducted around the third year. Use them properly. Make them ruthless. Set clear benchmarks. Punish failure. Celebrate performance. But don’t pretend that annual paperwork will solve a structural problem.
Predictability, not panic
If you want private investment to lead growth, then stop moving the goalposts. Business leaders don’t plan on yearly cycles. They need clarity, stability, and policy that outlasts election seasons.
Malaysia’s own success stories (Penang’s electronics cluster, Sarawak’s energy corridor) were built over decades of consistent strategy. Not one-year experiments. Investors will not bet on a country that keeps second-guessing itself.
If you want more private capital, build a system that keeps its promises. That doesn’t rewrite policies midstream. That doesn’t dress up inertia with a new committee every year.
No substitute for leadership
I’ve seen this movie before. When a government is unsure of itself, it turns to KPIs. It starts counting things. But you cannot KPI your way out of weak governance.
Take the New Industrial Master Plan 2030 for an example. It boasts over 30 KPIs across 4 missions and 8 targets—yet most industry players are still unclear how these targets translate into actual reforms, funding mechanisms, or enforcement structures. Impressive on paper; still vague in delivery.
The real reforms Malaysia needs are to fix the subsidy system, rationalise taxes, curb monopolies and raise productivity. These are not popular measures: they will not deliver tidy wins every 12 months. They require political courage, elite consensus, and public trust.
If ministers are busy preparing slides for an annual review instead of rolling up their sleeves to solve problems, then the review is part of the problem.
Bold measures, not more meetings
This is what I would do:
- set a bold five-year direction, grounded in real national priorities;
- conduct a tough, high-stakes mid-term review – not a polite checklist;
- build a reform delivery unit with teeth – like Singapore’s public service division or the fiscal discipline structures in their finance ministry;
- hold ministers, not just civil servants, personally accountable for missed targets;
- communicate directly with the public: explain trade-offs, earn trust.
Governance is not a game of incrementalism. If you want transformation, you need consistency, conviction, and consequence.
Malaysia’s five-year plans are not irrelevant. But they are at risk of becoming meaningless, not because they lack reviews, but because they lack follow-through.
Don’t confuse movement with progress. Don’t micromanage what needs leadership. And don’t forget: nations rise not by the frequency of their reviews, but by the strength of their resolve.
Samirul Ariff Othman is a lecturer, international relations analyst and a senior consultant.
The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of FMT.
