Connect with us

Features

Managing political interference during my stint as ETF Chairman

Published

on

LESSONS FROM MY CAREER: SYNTHESISING MANAGEMENT THEORY WITH PRACTICE – PART 20

The last episode continued with more experiences from my stint at the ETF Board, from which I learned many lessons. Today, I continue with stories highlighting how I managed political interference and tackled other vital issues.

Tackling politicians

The most challenging issue was when a vacancy occurred for the post of General Manager at ETF. Although, according to the ETF Act, I, as the Chairman, was the CEO, I needed a second in command. Even before we advertised the post, the Minister gave me the CV of a confidant of his, obviously expecting me to tailor the job specification based on his CV. I obviously didn’t do so and asked the very experienced Board of Directors how to handle the issue. If he had become the GM, I would have lost control of the entire institution. The Board decided not to change the recruitment scheme and to appoint a top-level interview panel that would make the right decisions without fear. We received a high volume of applications, and the interview panel determined that the Minister’s candidate lacked sufficient senior management experience for the post, as noted in the interview sheet. Another candidate was selected.

The next day, I met the Minister. I told him, “Sir, something unexpected happened. The interview panel found his senior management experience insufficient and rejected him”. The Minister was not impressed. With a sour face, he just said, “Is that so?” (ehemada?). I left his office. This short conversation was, of course, in Sinhala.

Recruitment of an HR head

When the post of Head of HR fell vacant, the State Minister’s relative applied. The state minister was very decent, though. He told me there is no pressure to appoint her, but that I should make sure that if someone else was selected, it should be a person much more qualified and experienced than his relative. There were many superior candidates. I had promised the staff that I would be very fair and transparent in recruitments and promotions.

I would not deprive any candidate of the rightful place, despite any political pressure. The staff became aware of the state Minister’s relative, and rumours circulated that, despite my assurances, I would have to yield to political pressure this time. We finally selected a very good candidate, and when I informed the state minister, he was very decent about it. I maintained my credibility and effectively handled the political situation, too.

Correcting injustice

Before my time, an incident had occurred in which the selected list for promotions was tampered with in the Ministry, with some names deleted by the former Minister or his personal staff. This would always come up as a grievance. I decided to investigate and found it was true. This was later corrected. Subsequently, when a promotion list was sent for approval to the Ministry, I refused to give additional details such as marks and interview details. I maintained that an autonomous Board has been appointed to the ETF, which appointed a suitable interview panel, and the Ministry should honour the decision of the Board without demeaning the Board by re-evaluating the decision of the Board. After much debate, this was accepted by the Ministry.

Politically Influenced Investments

Investments, too, came under severe political pressure. I was pressured to invest in various projects, including half-completed ones, when the promoters ran out of funds. I set up a strong investment team and a Board Committee on investments. Previously, the ETF had funded a small catering business that had closed down, and an IT outfit that was non-operational; even the assets of these investments could not be found. I was prepared to provide funds to venture capital companies that were well-equipped to evaluate projects, and we did so. We did not invest in any projects under pressure. Many entrepreneurs with political influence were quite displeased with me and openly hostile. However, I would feign interest in these projects and finally declare that they either did not fit into our portfolio or were not feasible according to our professional team.

Sometimes I would lose patience when the Minister called meetings with such project promoters, and I would be blunt. Later, the Minister would caution me to listen attentively because these promoters had helped during the election campaign and, therefore, they had to be given a chance to present their case. We had to show interest in their projects, he told me. I realised that I needed to be more diplomatic. I was beginning to understand the mind of politicians.

One factor that I am grateful for is the attitude of Mr Paskaralingam, the Secretary of Finance, and perhaps the public officer who was the President’s right-hand man. I would get calls from him occasionally about some investment. Obviously, he had been asked to intervene by these project promoters. As soon as I explain that the Board is not in favour due to a particular reason, he would always say, “Then it is okay, there is no compulsion.”

Orders from the Top

There were two incidents where I had to yield. One instance was when I received a call from Mr Paskaralingam, asking me to promote a particular officer for the position of head of the Division. We had advertised the post and already selected a good candidate who was much better than the internal candidate in question. I was told that the request came from the President himself. I explained that the internal candidate was one of the worst-performing officers and was unable to even control the staff. I was told that I had no choice because it was a request from the President. I offered to explain to the President how the Board would look ridiculous if that promotion was made. Mr Paskaralingam then blasted me, saying the President would not meet me to discuss the issue, but it had to be done. Finally, after much discussion, I agreed to create a new post with the same status as the Head of the Division. The latest post was more advisory and did not require leadership skills. It was agreed that the Ministry of Policy Planning would approve the new post without question. That night, I drafted the new job specifications, and the next morning, I obtained approval from our Ministry within an hour. The Ministry of Policy Planning gave approval the next day, and the Board approved it at the very next meeting. The President’s objective was achieved, and the Board maintained its dignity.

I was surprised by how the Government machinery worked when there was political pressure. Usually, our Ministry would either lose my letters of request or take a week or two to forward them to the relevant Ministry. The Ministry of Policy Planning would request various forms of additional information and sometimes even refuse to fill a post rendered vacant by a resignation. Even at that time, the stock excuse was that the IMF had recommended a freeze on recruitment. Sometimes I had heated arguments and an exchange of strong letters. In one instance, my request for approval to fill a post was turned down simply because I had advertised the vacancy before the post was approved. I had to argue that my initial training at State Engineering Corporation was to implement the activities in parallel to save time. In this latest instance, we were creating a new post, but still no questions were asked, and the approval was prompt.

The other issue was when I had made some internal transfers. They were not to a remote area but just to another floor of the same building. I received a call from the Prime Minister to cancel one of the transfers. I flatly refused. When I was giving my explanations, the PM stopped me and said, “Wije, I am the Prime Minister of the country, and of what use is my position if I cannot get a simple transfer cancelled?”. At that point, I relented. I put myself in the PM’s shoes. What he said was true. I cancelled the transfer.

The Herzberg’s “hygiene factors”

Frederick Herzberg, who proposed the two-factor theory of motivation in 1959, was spot on. The hygiene factors were poor at the ETF. There were constant complaints of discrimination, unfair treatment, and a lack of transparency. Whenever I attempted to initiate a new program after taking office, I was met with resistance, accusations, stories of discrimination, grievances, and other issues. Initially, I had to pause my programmes and attend to resolving these issues first. Salaries and wages administration is a science and an art. Ad hoc additional increments for selected employees had caused further anomalies when point-to-point adjustments were made in the case of a general salary revision.

I had to appoint committees with external experts to resolve anomalies and carry out a job evaluation to decide on the grading of posts. Once all these dissatisfiers were completed, the staff were more amenable to looking at new initiatives, and we were ready for the next phase of development. Some issues took almost five years to resolve. I learnt that unskilled and less professional meddling in carefully thought-out salary structures had resulted in disastrous consequences. In the private sector, it was not an issue because there are no scales but just salaries and allowances personal to each individual.

Tackling the overstaffing

Just before the General Elections, which had been held before I arrived at the ETF Board, an additional 100 staff had been recruited from the Ja-Ela electorate, but they had no work. They were housed in a temporary building in the Ceylon Transport Board (CTB) premises next door.

When I visited the place, I found them either sewing, knitting, reading newspapers or books. The hall they were housed in was very hot. It was in May that year. Every day, someone would faint due to heat stress. I asked the Factories Inspection Division of the Labour Department to conduct a study. The result showed that the heat stress exceeded the acceptable level for an office. I had to urgently find space for these 100 employees.

The Labour Department had a much lower occupancy per square foot. Still, all the clerical staff, too, had large tables occupying unnecessary space. We struck a deal with the Commissioner of Labour. The ETF would purchase new compact tables at its expense and gift them to the Labour Department. In return, they would provide us with additional space, now that the existing space has been released. This solved the space problem, and all those housed in the CTB premises were brought “home”. Of course, they found productive work too.

Countering Disinformation with a “Talk Paper”

Spreading rumours and disinformation was a popular pastime at the ETF, mostly by mischief makers. Many organisations have their share of mischief makers. They would spread rumours, such as the ETF Board being scrapped due to the announced amalgamations of the EPF and the ETF, which would result in all losing their jobs. They would spread false stories about management decisions, creating fear or suspicion. I realised that rumours gather momentum only when there is a vacuum of official information, and this vacuum is filled with disinformation. Fortunately, I came across a document issued by the Federal Drug Authority (FDA) of the USA, which is the authority in the US to monitor and safeguard its citizens by issuing standards and enforcing regulations to protect people, regarding medicines. I found a document called the “Talk Paper” to be interesting. It is issued by the FDA internally to all at a particular level of management, allowing them to communicate the official version in response to inquiries. Officers of the FDA could therefore respond accurately and correct any fake news, as well as provide accurate and standard responses to queries about a newly discussed concern regarding a particular drug.

I introduced a similar Talk Paper and distributed it to all executives and above. There was no intranet or email then. I had no option but to send out photocopies. It worked well. Whenever unofficial information spread, the staff would wait for the Talk Paper, much like we now immediately check the internet for fake news. Official versions were now available, and there were no vacuums available for mischief makers.

My stint at ETF continues in the next episode with more initiatives, stories and lessons learnt.

by Sunil G Wijesinha ✍️
(Consultant on Productivity and Japanese Management Techniques
Retired Chairman/Director of several Listed and Unlisted companies.
Awardee of the APO Regional Award for promoting Productivity in the Asia Pacific Region
Recipient of the “Order of the Rising Sun, Gold and Silver Rays” from the Government of Japan.
He can be contacted through email at bizex.seminarsandconsulting@gmail.com)



Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Features

Trump-Xi meet more about economics rather than politics

Published

on

President Donald Trump meets President Xi Jinping in Beijing: Mutually beneficial ties aimed at. (CNN)

The fact that some of the US’ topmost figures in business, such as Tesla chief Elon Musk and major US chipmaker Jensen Huang of NVIDIA fame, occupied as nearly a prominent a position as President Donald Trump at the recent ‘historic and landmark’ visit by the latter to China underscores the continuing vital importance of business in US-China ties. Business seemed to outweigh politics to a considerable degree in importance during the visit although the political dimension in US-China ties appeared to be more ‘headline grabbing’.

To be sure, the political dimension cannot be downplayed. For very good reason China could be seen as holding the power balance somewhat evenly between East and West. The international politics commentator couldn’t be seen as overstating the case if he takes the position that China could exercise substantial influence over the East currently; that is Russia and Iran, in the main. The latter powers hold the key in the Eastern hemisphere to shaping international politics in the direction of further war or of influencing it towards a measure of peace.

For example, time and again China has prevented the West from ‘having its own way’, so to speak, in the UN Security Council, for instance, in respect of the ongoing conflicts involving Russia and Iran, by way of abstaining from voting or by vetoing declarations that it sees as deleterious. That is, China has been what could be seen as a ‘moderating influence’ in international politics thus far. It has helped to keep the power balance somewhat intact between East and West.

At present a meet is ongoing between Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin in Beijing. This happened almost immediately after the Trump visit. Apparently, Beijing is in an effort to project itself as treating the US and Russia even-handedly while underscoring that it is no ‘special friend’ of the US or the West.

This effort at adopting a non-partisan stance on contentious questions in international politics is also seen in Beijing’s policy position on the Hormuz tangle and issues growing out of it. The Chinese authorities are quoted as saying in this regard, for instance, that China is for ‘a comprehensive and lasting ceasefire in the Middle East’.

Such a position has the effect of enhancing the perception that China is even-handed in its handling of divisive foreign policy posers. It is not openly anti-West nor is it weighing in with Iran and other Eastern actors that are opposed to the West in the West Asian theatre. A ‘comprehensive and lasting ceasefire’ implies that a solution needs to be arrived at that would be seen as fair by all quarters concerned.

On the highly sensitive Taiwan issue, President Xi was comparatively forthright during the Trump visit, but here too it was plain to see that Beijing was not intent on introducing a jarring, discordant note into the ongoing, largely cordial discussions with Washington. On the Taiwan question President Xi was quoted saying: ‘If mishandled, the two nations could collide even come into conflict.’ In other words, the US was cautioned that China’s interests need to be always borne in mind in its handling of the Taiwan issue.

The cautioning had the desired result because Trump in turn had reportedly conveyed to Taiwan that the latter’s concerns on the matter of independence had to be handled discreetly. He had told Taiwan plainly not to declare ‘independence.’

Accordingly, neither the US nor China had said or done anything that would have made either party lose face during their interaction. Apparently, both sides were sensitive to each others’ larger or national interests. And the economic interests of both powers were foremost among the latter considerations.

There is no glossing over or ignoring economic interests in the furtherance of ties between states. They are primal shaping forces of foreign policies and the fact that ‘economics drives politics’ is most apparent in US-China ties. That is, economic survival is fundamental.

Among the more memorable quotes from President Xi during the interaction, which also included US business leaders, was the following: ‘China’s doors will be open wider’ and US firms would have ‘broader prospects in the Chinese market.’

Xi went on to say that the sides had agreed to a ‘new positioning for ties’ based on ‘constructive strategic stability’. The implication here is that both sides would do well not to undermine existing, mutually beneficial economic relations in view of the wider national interests of both powers that are served by a continuation of these economic ties. That is, the way forward, in the words of the Chinese authorities, is ‘win-win cooperation.’

It is the above pronouncements by the Chinese authorities that probably led President Trump to gush that the talks were ‘very successful’ and of ‘historic and landmark’ importance. Such sentiments should only be expected of a billionaire US President, bent on economic empire-building.

One of the most important deals that were put through reportedly during the interaction was a Chinese agreement to buy some 200 Boeing jets and a ‘potential commitment to buy an additional 750 planes.’ However, details were not forthcoming on other business deals that may have been hatched.

Accordingly, from the viewpoint of the protagonists the talks went off well and the chances are that the sides would stand to gain substantially from unruffled future economic ties. However, there was no mention of whether the health of the world economy or the ongoing conflicts in West Asia were taken up for discussion.

Such neglect is regretful. Although the veritable economic power houses of the world, the US and China, are likely to thrive in the short and medium terms and their ruling strata could be expected to benefit enormously from these ongoing economic interactions the same could not be said of most of the rest of the world and its populations.

Needless to say, the ongoing oil and gas crisis, for instance, resulting from the conflict situation in West Asia, is taking a heavy toll on the majority of the world’s economies and the relevant publics. While no urgent intervention to ease the lot of the latter could be expected from the Trump administration there is much that China could do on this score.

China could use its good offices with the US to address the negative fallout on the poorer sections of the world from the present global economic crunch and urge the West to help in introducing systemic changes that could facilitate these positive outcomes. After all, China remains a socialist power.

Continue Reading

Features

The Quiet Shift: China as America’s “+1” in a Changing World Order

Published

on

Xi and Trump

“Everything ever said to me by any Chinese of any station during any visit was part of an intricate design”

— Henry Kissinger

That design may already be complete before this week’s , a meeting that could shape the future balance of global power.

The wind arrives quietly. By the time it is heard, history has already begun to turn. Across Asia, that wind is no longer distant. It carries with it the exhaustion of an old order and the uncertain birth of another. The question now is not whether the world will change. It is whether those who hold power possess the wisdom to guide that change toward something less violent than the century behind us.

Since 1945, the United States has carried the burden of a global order built with its Western allies. To its credit, the world avoided another direct world war between great powers. The conflicts remained contained in distant lands—proxy wars fought in the shadows of ideology, oil, and influence. From Latin America to Asia, the American century expanded not only through prosperity, but through intervention. Yet empires, even democratic ones, grow tired. Fatigue settles slowly into institutions, alliances, and public memory. The role of global policeman no longer inspires certainty in Washington as it once did.

The “rules-based order” now confronts its own contradiction: it was built to be universal, yet it often appeared selective. During my recent visit to , a young researcher asked me quietly, “Does the West itself still believe in the rules-based order?” The question lingered long after the conversation ended. The rising century demands a more inclusive architecture—one that recognises the reality of Asian power, especially China.

My three years of field research across South and Southeast Asia, documented in , revealed a transformation too significant to dismiss as temporary. China has moved beyond being merely a competitor to the United States. In trade, infrastructure, technology, cultural diplomacy, and economic influence, Beijing has established itself as what may be called the world’s “US +1.”

Great powers often search for such a partner. History shows this tendency clearly. When an empire becomes overextended—burdened by wars, alliances, sanctions, tariffs, and crises—it seeks another center of gravity to stabilize the system it can no longer manage alone. The United States today faces disorder stretching from Venezuela to Iran, from Ukraine to the unsettled Middle East. In this landscape, China emerges not simply as a rival, but as a state powerful enough to broker peace where Washington alone no longer can.

Drawing from the lessons of the Nixon–Mao era, warned that “” The United States and China are now engaged in a long-term economic, technological, political, and strategic competition. Managing that competition wisely may become the defining challenge of this century. In such a deeply polarized and unstable world, recognising China as a “US +1” partner is not surrender, but strategic realism.

Donald Trump understood this reality before boarding his flight to meet Xi Jinping. Their meeting inside Zhongnanhai—the guarded compound where China’s leadership governs—was never merely ceremonial. It symbolized a deeper recognition already acknowledged quietly within the itself: China is the nearest peer competitor the United States has ever confronted. Before departing Washington, Trump seemed to reassess not only China’s strength, but its unavoidable position as a “” shaping the future global balance.

Yet the significance of a Trump–Xi meeting extends beyond trade wars, tariffs, or diplomatic spectacle. It presents an opportunity to confront two crises shaping the century ahead: global energy insecurity and regional instability. Washington increasingly understands the limits of direct engagement with Tehran. Decades of pressure, sanctions, and confrontation have produced exhaustion rather than resolution. In that vacuum, Beijing now possesses leverage that Washington does not.

For China, this is an opportunity to evolve from a development partner into a security actor. Xi Jinping’s (GSI) was never designed merely as rhetoric. It was intended as the next phase of Chinese influence—transforming economic dependence into strategic trust. The geopolitical spillover from the Iranian conflict now offers Beijing a historic opening to project itself as a stabilising force in the region, not against the United States, but alongside it as a “US +1” partner.

If China succeeds in helping stabilise the Gulf and secure energy corridors vital to Asia, it will reshape perceptions of Chinese power globally. Beijing would no longer be seen only as the builder of ports, railways, and industrial zones, but as a guarantor of regional balance. This transition—from infrastructure diplomacy to security diplomacy—may become one of the defining geopolitical shifts of the coming decade.

Xi Jinping does not seek open confrontation. His strategy is older, more patient, and perhaps more formidable because of its restraint. Beijing speaks not of domination, but of a “,” advanced through three instruments of influence: the Global Development Initiative (GDI), the Global Security Initiative (GSI), and the Global Civilization Initiative (GCI). These are not slogans alone. Across Asia, many governments increasingly trust China as a development partner more than any other power.

India, despite its ambitions, has not matched this scale of regional penetration. In both ASEAN and South Asia, China’s economic gravity is felt more deeply. Ports, railways, technology networks, and financial dependency have altered the geopolitical map quietly, without the spectacle of war.

In , I compared three inward-looking national strategies shaping Asia today: Trump’s MAGA, Modi’s emerging economic nationalism , and Xi’s strategy. Among them, China has demonstrated the greatest structural resilience. Faced with American tariffs and decoupling pressures, Beijing diversified its supply chains across Central Asia, Europe, and Southeast Asia. Rail corridors now connect Chinese industry to European markets through Eurasia. ASEAN has surpassed the United States as China’s largest trading partner, while the European Union follows closely behind. Exports to America have declined sharply, yet China continues to expand. Trump, once defined by confrontation, now arrives seeking a new “” with China—an acknowledgment that economic rivalry alone can no longer define the relationship between the world’s two largest powers.

Unlike Washington, which increasingly retreats from multilateral institutions, Beijing presents itself as the defender of multilateralism. Whether genuine or strategic matters less than perception. In geopolitics, perception often becomes reality.

What emerges, then, is not surrender between rivals, but interdependence between powers too large to isolate one another. The future may not belong to a bipolar Cold War, but to a reluctant coexistence. The United States now recognises that China possesses diversified markets and partnerships capable of reducing dependence on America. China, in turn, understands that its long march toward global primacy still requires strategic engagement with the United States.

This is where the true geopolitical shift begins.

Many analysts continue to frame China solely as a threat. Yet history rarely moves through absolutes. The next world order may not be built through confrontation alone, but through uneasy partnership. Artificial intelligence, technological supremacy, economic stability, and global governance now demand cooperation between Washington and Beijing, whether either side admits it publicly or not.

Trump will likely celebrate his personal relationship with Xi, presenting himself as the American leader capable of negotiating a “better deal” with China than his predecessors. But beneath the rhetoric lies something larger: the gradual acceptance of China’s indispensable role in shaping the future international order.

Even the question of war increasingly returns to Beijing. If Washington seeks an understanding with Tehran, China’s influence becomes unavoidable. Iran listens to Beijing in ways it no longer listens to the West. This alone signals how profoundly the balance of power has shifted. And Xi, careful as always, refuses to openly inherit the mantle of global leadership. He delays, softens, and obscures intention. It is part of a longer strategy: to rise without provoking the final resistance of a declining hegemon too early.

History rarely announces its turning point. Empires fade slowly, while new powers rise quietly beneath the noise of the old order. Washington still holds immense power, but Beijing increasingly holds the patience, reach, and strategic depth to shape what comes after.

The century ahead may not belong to one power alone, but to the uneasy balance between Washington and Beijing. And in that silence, a new world order is already taking shape.

By Asanga Abeyagoonasekera

Continue Reading

Features

Egypt … here I come

Published

on

Chit-Chat Nethali Withanage

Three months ago, 19-year-old Nethali Withanage, with Brian Kerkoven as her mentor, walked the ramp at Colombo Fashion Week. On 06 June, she’ll walk for Sri Lanka in Hurghada, Egypt, as the country’s delegate to Top Model of the World 2026._

I caught up with Nethali as she prepares to fly out, this weekend, and here’s how our chit-chat went:

1. Tell me something about yourself?

I’m someone who blends creativity with ambition. I’ve always loved expressing myself, whether it’s through fashion, styling, or the way I present myself to the world. At the same time, I’m very driven and disciplined, especially when I was working, as a student counsellor, at Campus One, at a young age, where I’ve learned how to connect with people, understand them, and communicate with confidence. I believe I’m still evolving, and that’s what excites me the most … becoming better every single day.

2. What made you decide to be a model?

Modelling felt natural to me because it combines everything I love – fashion, confidence, and storytelling without words. I realised that modelling isn’t just about appearance, it’s about presence and how you carry your energy. I wanted to be part of an industry where I could express different sides of myself, while inspiring others to feel confident in their own skin.

3. What sets you apart from other models?

I would say my ability to connect. Whether it’s with the camera, a brand, or an audience, I bring authenticity. I also have a strong background in communication and sales, which gives me an edge in understanding how to represent a brand, not just wear it. I don’t want to just model clothes, I want to bring them to life.

4. What clothing do you prefer to model?

I enjoy modelling versatile styles, but I’m especially drawn to elegant and expressive fashion pieces that tells a story. I love looks that allow me to embody confidence and femininity, whether it’s a structured outfit or something soft and flowing.

5. What is the most important aspect of modelling?

Confidence combined with professionalism. Confidence allows you to own the moment, but professionalism ensures that you respect the work, the team, and the brand you represent. Both are equally important.

6. If you could change one thing about yourself, what would it be?

I would say I’m learning to trust myself more and not overthink. I’ve realised that growth comes from embracing who you are, not constantly trying to change it. So instead of changing something, I’m focused on becoming more confident in my own voice.

7. School?

I did my O/Ls at Seventh Day Adventist High School Kandana, and, while at school, I was actively involved in creative activities. I enjoyed participating in English Day events that allowed me to express myself and interact with others. Those experiences helped me build confidence, teamwork, and communication skills, which continue to shape who I am today.

8. Happiest moment?

One of my happiest moments is realising how far I’ve come from being unsure of myself to stepping into opportunities, like modelling, and representing myself with confidence. That feeling of growth is something I truly value, and also a dream come true!

9. Your idea of perfect happiness?

Perfect happiness for me is peace of mind, being surrounded by people I love, doing what I’m passionate about, and feeling proud of who I am becoming.

10. Your ideal guy?

My ideal partner is someone who is respectful, supportive, and confident in himself. Someone who values growth, understands my ambitions, and encourages me to be the best version of myself.

11. Which living person do you most admire?

I admire strong, self-made individuals who have built their identity through hard work and resilience. People who stay true to themselves, despite challenges, inspire me, because they show that success is not just about talent, but also about strength and consistency.

12. Your most treasured possession?

My most treasured possession is my confidence. It’s something I’ve built over time, and it allows me to face challenges, take opportunities, and believe in myself, even when things are uncertain.

13. If you were marooned on a desert island, who would you like as your companion?

I would choose someone who is calm, positive, and resourceful, someone who can turn a difficult situation into an adventure. The right mindset matters more than anything.

14. Your most embarrassing moment?

I’m 19 and still haven’t faced any most embarrassing moment. But I would say I’ve had small moments where things didn’t go as planned, but I’ve learned to laugh at myself. Those moments remind me that perfection isn’t necessary; confidence is about how you recover, not how you avoid mistakes.

15. Done anything daring?

Pursuing modelling and stepping into competitions is something I consider daring. It pushed me out of my comfort zone and challenged me to grow, both personally and professionally.

16. Your ideal vacation?

My ideal vacation would be somewhere peaceful, yet beautiful, like a beach destination where I can relax, reflect, and reconnect with myself, while enjoying nature.

17. What kind of music are you into?

I choose music that matches my mood at that time, whether it’s calm and relaxing or energetic and uplifting. Music is something that helps me express emotions and stay inspired.

18. Favourite radio station?

Usually I don’t listen to radio stations but whenever I get into a car I would search for Yes FM because it has a refined balance of contemporary hits and timeless music. I appreciate how it maintains a vibrant yet sophisticated energy, keeping listeners engaged while creating a consistently uplifting atmosphere. It’s something I enjoy because it adds a sense of positivity and elegance to my day.

19. Favourite TV station?

At the moment, I don’t have a television at home, but growing up, my favourite TV station was ‘Nickelodeon’. I genuinely loved the shows and series it aired; they were fun, creative, and full of personality. It was something I always looked forward to, and those memories still bring a sense of joy and nostalgia, whenever I think about it.

20. Any major plans for the future?

My future plans are to grow in the modelling industry, work with international brands, build a strong personal brand and finish completing a Bachelor’s Degree in Business Studies. At the same time, I want to explore my creative side further, especially in fashion and business, so I can create something of my own one day.

Continue Reading

Trending