http://www.flickr.com/photos/davelau/ / CC BY 2.0

Last year was an excellent one for the funds management industry in Hong Kong, which notched up several all-time records with gross sales hitting US$45.5 billion and net sales reaching U$6.9 billion – both a whopping 80 per cent plus up from the levels achieved one year ago in 2006.

In addition, total net asset value of all funds authorised by Hong Kong’s Securities and Futures Commission (SFC) breached the US$1 trillion mark for the first time, amounting to US$1,060 billion as at end-2007; while the number of SFC approved funds just crossed the 2,000 level at 2,040, also a first.

The industry in Hong Kong has come a long way since it started in the late 1960s and early 1970s when funds investment was brought into the then-British colony by British commercial banks that wanted to provide fund management services to pension funds and expatriates living in Hong Kong.

Later in the 1970s, US fund managers joined the industry and as mutual funds became more popular among retail investors by the end of that decade, the Hong Kong government formulated the Code on Unit Trusts, which provided the regulatory framework for retail funds. In 1989, the administration of this code was assigned to the newly-established SFC, which issued a more comprehensive Code on Unit Trusts and Mutual Funds (UT Code) a couple of years later.

Meanwhile, unit trusts were starting to enjoy fairly rapid growth in Hong Kong and by December 1987, there were 268 broad funds covering almost 500 sub funds under the management of 30 management groups. Of these, about 40 per cent were registered locally, with the rest domiciled overseas.

Over time the funds market in Hong Kong has proven to be a fairly resilient one. While the October 1987 global stock market crash had a significant impact on unit trusts in the territory, with some funds having to suspend redemptions and some unable to provide quotes; the later June 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre in Beijing, which shaved more than 580 points off the Hong Kong Hang Seng Index in a single day, seemed not to have affected the industry as much – no uncharacteristic redemptions were recorded during that time.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/soschilds/ / CC BY 2.0

The growth of the unit trust industry in Hong Kong is strongly linked to the development of the city as a regional investment management centre. According to the Hong Kong Investment Funds Association (HKIFA), established in 1986 to represent the fund management industry in Hong Kong, the combined fund management business of the city grew by 36 per cent year-on-year, to reach HK$6,154 billion as at end-2006.

The Mandatory Provident Fund (MPF), set up by the Hong Kong government in December 2000 to help ensure some financial security for the working population during their retirement, also gave a boost to unit trusts, which was the medium that employees must choose in which to invest their savings under the MPF system.

Hong Kong’s fund industry continues to attract investment capital from non-Hong Kong investors, a sign of the city’s maturity as a regional financial centre. HKIFA’s latest figures show that in 2006, of the total HK$6,101 billion worth of non-REIT fund management business recorded, 62.1 per cent or HK$3,786 billion was sourced from non-Hong Kong investors. In fact, funds sourced from these investors have consistently accounted for more than 60 per cent of the fund management in Hong Kong,

Today, China plays a major role in Hong Kong’s funds sector and is expected to provide a sustained source of growth for the industry going forward. This is due largely to a memorandum of understanding signed between the China Banking Regulatory Commission and Hong Kong’s SFC in April 2007, which makes Hong Kong the only non-Mainland equity market in which Mainland commercial banks may invest on behalf of their clients.

Asian assets remained the favoured investment vehicle for fund managers in Hong Kong. According to the HKIFA, of the HK$2,315 billion worth of assets managed in Hong Kong at end-2006, 80 per cent was invested in Asia, an indication of the strong performance of the regional markets and the amount of regional expertise that is resident in Hong Kong.

Hong Kong gained its preeminence as a funds centre thanks its truly liberal and disciplined philosophy with regard to being an offshore centre. While there are no foreign exchange or capital control movements in place, there is a sound and flexible regulatory framework on unit trusts, and all the legal and financial ancillary facilities necessary to organise and manage funds are securely in place.

In addition to this, Hong Kong’s tax system favours income and capital gains from the ownership of securities – taxes are not imposed on dividends or the capital gains made on the disposal of securities, which is of significance to unit trusts that have their income or gains arising from within Hong Kong. Furthermore, no revenue related charges are imposed on the running of unit trusts in Hong Kong.

It was also the UT Code that has helped the industry expand. This code has been amended several times since its inception to accommodate new trends and market developments, such as guaranteed funds and futures and options funds. The current UT code is a result of a complete revamp in 1997 to allow for a new and more flexible structure for the authorisation of funds.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/soschilds/ / CC BY 2.0

It clearly sets out the authorisation requirements making the process more transparent. In order to build a critical mass of funds, the SFC expanded its list of recognised jurisdictions, whose authorised retail funds may be recognised in Hong Kong under a simplified process. The SFC also recognises regimes where the supervision of investment managers is broadly equivalent to its own standards of supervision so that the managers from these countries could qualify as managers of retail funds that the SFC authorises.

This way, overseas funds with overseas managers are able to gain authorisation in Hong Kong, greatly increasing the universe of retail funds available in the city.

In the last two years, the SFC granted 130 new fund manager licenses and authorised 480 new fund products. According to HKIFA data, a total of 223 unit trusts and mutual funds, excluding REITS, were authorised in 2006, bringing the number of SFC-authorised funds to 1,973 by the end of that year, with a total net asset value of about HK$7,100 million, up 36.4 per cent year-on-year. Several of the new funds offered exposure to countries such as Brazil, Mainland China and India in line with global interest in emerging markets.

Currently, the SFC is conducting another comprehensive review of the UT Code with the aim of revamping and modernising it, so that it is up to date with market innovation and financial technology. The SFC wants to make it easier for funds and talents to congregate in Hong Kong, and if it has its way, Hong Kong will soon become the fund supermarket of Asia.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/linh_rom/ / CC BY 2.0

With slightly more than US$1.19 trillion worth of total net assets of mutual funds at the end of 2007, Australia last year began a concerted push to export its funds management services, not unlike what Ireland and Luxembourg have done.

According to Australia’s Investment and Financial Services Association Limited (IFSA), a national organisation established ten years ago to represent the retail and wholesale funds management, superannuation and life insurance industries, Australia is in an enviable position to achieve this.

Among the country’s advantages, the IFSA states in a 2007 report on The Export Potential of the Australian Funds Management Services, are a large domestic pensions or superannuation industry, a skilled work force, a robust regulatory environment, being in the same time zone as a large Asian market and highly developed financial markets with a stable banking system. In particular, the enormous growth of the middle class in both China and India is expected to boost its case, with funds under management in Asia expected to grow by 14 per cent per year.

As an indication of the spectacular development of managed funds industry in Australia, funds under management by IFSA’s 143 members shot up to about A$1.26 trillion in 2007, up from just A$427 billion ten years ago.

While Australia’s managed funds industry dates back to the period of the Second World War, it was in the 1980s that its investments in unit trusts started to experience tremendous growth, expanding from A$1 billion in 1978 to A$26 billion by 1988, according to data from the Reserve Bank of Australia. The number of licenses issued to companies or individuals providing investment advice, too, grew dramatically in the late 80s, rising from 599 licenses as at end June 1987 to a whopping 25,000 licenses just one year later.

The current Australian government has set its sights on developing the country as a financial hub in the Asia Pacific region. Just as Ireland made aggressive use of its tax regime to develop Dublin as a financial centre for Europe, the Rudd government’s main budget announcement last year focussed on providing tax cuts to foreigners investing in the country. This move is expected to cost A$630 million over the budget period, an amount which the government believes is a prudent investment for Australia’s future as regional financial centre.

The country’s funds management industry came of age in 2006 when its funds under management passed the A$1 trillion mark, equalling the Gross Domestic Product of the entire Australian economy. Thanks to its small population, this translates to about A$50,000 worth of funds under management per person, more than in any other country in the world. Australia today is, thus, very much a shareholder society where most of its workers are indirect investors in the stock market.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/phototram/ / CC BY 2.0

A significant part of this is due the contribution of the far-sighted Superannuation Guarantee scheme initiated in 1992 by the previous Keating Labour government. Introduced in anticipation of major demographic shifts in Australia and as part of a major reform package to address the country’s retirement income policies, the scheme makes it compulsory for employers to contribute a proportion of their employees’ salaries – currently nine per cent – into a superannuation fund every three months. Employees, meanwhile, are free to make voluntary contributions into their own funds. There are about 300,000 superannuation funds in operation in Australia today with 362 of these having assets of more than A$50 million.

Prior to the Superannuation Guarantee, there was already a fairly widespread superannuation arrangements that had been in place for several years under industrial awards negotiated by trade union movements between 1986 and 1988. Even back in the 80s, a great majority of the managed funds were handled by superannuation and pension funds.

Data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) show that superannuation funds contributed A$798,958 million to the total consolidated assets of managed funds of A$1.319 trillion as at end June 2008. Public unit trusts were the second largest source of funds with A$275,155 million, followed by life insurance offices (includes superannuation funds held and administered by life insurance offices) at A$182, 695 million with all other managed funds making up the difference of A$62,651 million.

The ABS data reflects consolidated assets of the managed funds which means that any cross investment between the different types of funds are eliminated. As an example, investments by superannuation funds in public unit trusts are excluded from the assets of superannuation funds in the consolidated figures.

Superannuation funds are expected to continue to be the biggest contributor to the total funds market in Australia with the total superannuation market expected to reach A$3.2 trillion, without accounting for inflation, in 2022, according to a 2008 report by Rice Warner Actuaries, an Australian actuarial and management consultancy firm. In its Asia-Pacific Pensions 2007:  Systems and Market report, Allianz Global Investors predicts that Australia will remain the largest pensions market in Asia until 2015.

While the key driver of growth in Australia’s funds management industry is its compulsory superannuation funds, its other strengths include an increasingly sophisticated investor base, innovative investment products and strong regulatory bodies.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/johanl/ / CC BY 2.0

Funds management is estimated to account for about 40 per cent of the contribution that the finance and insurance industry makes to the Australian economy, which puts its share of the GDP at about 3.4 per cent of the value added in the economy. This makes funds management a larger contributor to the economy than industries such as agriculture, utilities and communications.

Australian fund managers are increasingly looking outwards and have been progressively busy buying foreign equities on behalf of local firms and individuals. The proportion of Australian investment abroad as part of portfolio investment has been rising for a couple of decades now, increasing from 15 per cent in 1988 to 38 per cent in 2006.

Fund managers in Australia have also been actively engaged in buying Australian equities on behalf of foreign investors. Foreign investment as part of portfolio investment in Australia, too, has grown. In 1988 portfolio investment accounted for 47 per cent of total foreign investment in the country, a figure that had increased to 62 per cent by last year.

Today, Australia has become one of the major markets in the world for managed funds and the largest market in the Asia Pacific region.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/celso/ / CC BY 2.0

At US$12 trillion worth of assets under management as at end 2007, the United States is currently the world’s largest market for mutual funds, making up almost half of the total worldwide net assets of mutual funds of US$26.2 trillion.

According to data from the Investment Company Institute (ICI), the trade association of the American mutual fund industry, the US had 8,029 mutual funds by the end of 2007 with close to 299 million shareholder accounts.

There are more mutual funds in the US today than there are stocks on the New York Stock Exchange. The US mutual fund industry has come a long way since 1924 when three Boston executives pooled their money together and created the first modern mutual fund called the Massachusetts Investors Trust.

Still in operation today, the Massachusetts Investors Trust was successful from the beginning, growing almost eight times from an initial US$50,000 in assets to US$392,000 with around 200 shareholders, within the first year of its inception.

By 1929, there were 19 open-ended mutual funds and 700 closed-end funds. Then, that year the stock market crashed, causing the closed-end funds to lose their appeal while the open-ended mutual funds gained ground.

The abuses that led up to the 1929 crash, and the resulting Great Depression, encouraged the authorities to re-examine and tighten the regulatory climate. At this point, there was little in the way of federal regulation in the US securities and capital markets.

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) was set up in 1934 to protect investors and maintain fair and orderly market practices. In order to protect consumer investments in mutual funds, all mutual funds now had to be registered with the SEC before investors could invest in them.

Several major legislations were also enacted, including the Securities Act of 1933, the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 and the Investment Company Act of 1940.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/bfishadow/ / CC BY 2.0

These laws require that mutual funds have to meet certain specified operating standards. They also make it compulsory for funds to provide potential investors with a prospectus stating the fund’s investment objectives and policies, its management team, its fees and other information. Mutual funds are also constrained regarding what they are allowed to say in their advertisements.

The different legislations determine how a mutual fund is to be set up. According to the laws now in place, there has to be a custodian whose job it is to safeguard the fund’s assets. The custodian, usually a bank, makes and receives payments during securities transactions.

Another pillar in the mutual fund set-up is the transfer agent which may or may not be the same institution as the custodian. The job of the transfer agent is to handle all the back office requirements in administering shareholders’ account records – the transfer agent issues new shares, cancels redeemed shares, and distributes dividends and capital gains to the fund shareholders.

The third party, and the public face of the mutual fund, is the management company which is also the investment adviser that makes all the buy and sell decisions for the fund. They are usually paid a fee that is based on a percentage of the fund’s assets.

In 1940, with the legislation in place, there were 68 mutual funds in the US managing a total net asset value of US$450 million. This had increased to 361 funds in 1970 with total net assets of US$48 billion.

In 1976, John C. Bogle started the first retail index fund, called the First Index Investment Trust, after he discovered in his undergraduate thesis at Princeton that about three-quarters of mutual funds do not make any more money than if they invested in the largest 500 companies simultaneously. The First Index Investment Trust has been renamed the Vanguard 500 Index and in November 2000, became the largest mutual fund ever with US$100 billion in assets.

The mutual fund industry received a big boost in 1981 when the Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs) were developed. These allowed individuals, including those in corporate pension plans, to contribute up to US$2,000 a year. Mutual funds are now a significant part of company retirement plans, such as 401k and 403b plans, as well as IRAs and Roth IRAs. Mutual fund assets held in IRAs were US$2.2 trillion as at end 2007, an increase of 13 per cent from the year before. They represent 47 per cent of total IRA assets of US$4.7 trillion.

Since 1980, when the mutual fund industry started to really take off, mutual fund fees and expenses have been heading south, with paid fees and expenses on equity funds declining by more than half, from an average of 2.32 per cent of fund assets in 1980 to 1.02 per cent in 2007, according to the ICI. Bond funds have also seen their fees and expenses fall by a similar amount.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/video4net/ / CC BY 2.0

This dramatic fall in fees and expenses can be attributed, in part, to the increasing economies of scale and the intense competition within the mutual fund industry, as well as to the steep drop in sales loads brought about by the growth of mutual fund sales through employer-sponsored retirement plans. Load funds often do not charge loads for purchases of fund shares through such retirement plans. No-load funds, sold through mutual fund supermarkets and discount brokers as well as the employer-sponsored retirement plan market, also grew in popularity.

Today the US mutual fund market is made up of several different types of funds. Stock funds are still the most popular with total net assets of US$6.2 trillion at the end of April this year. This is followed by taxable money market funds at US$2.9 trillion, taxable bond funds at US$1.4 trillion, hybrid funds at US$699 billion, tax-free money market funds at US$479 billion, and municipal bond funds at US$380 billion.

Investor demand for mutual funds increased significantly in 2007, with new net cash flow to all mutual funds at US$883 billion, up significantly from US$474 in 2006 and US$255 in 2005. This demand has been fuelled by investor desire to meet long-term financial objectives such as preparing for retirement.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/shinythings/ / CC BY 2.0

Singapore has been actively promoting its fund management industry since the early 1990s. Unlike Hong Kong, where the growth of the funds sector has been mostly market driven, the industry in Singapore has been largely government-led.

At the height of the Asian financial crisis in 1998 when its fund management industry was struggling with a difficult investment climate, the Singapore government introduced a slew of incentives and reforms in an effort to turn the republic into a premier fund management hub in Asia within five to ten years.

The idea was to attract more internationally reputable fund management companies to set up operations in the country. Singapore wanted to become a centre for managing the Asian investment portfolios of both Asian and Western clients, and to manage the global investments of Asian clients.

Among the reforms were those geared towards liberalising the unit trust industry and increasing the pool of domestic funds available for professional management. Approval procedures for new unit trusts were streamlined and made more transparent, cutting down approval time from 2-3 months to 4-6 weeks. Restrictions on unit trusts savings plans were also scrapped. Regular savers no longer needed to contribute a minimum monthly amount, which paved the way for the lower income group to invest.

In 1998, the government also enhanced distribution channels for unit trusts and liberalised the Central Provident Fund Investment Scheme (CPFIS) to encourage more Singaporeans to invest their mandatory monthly retirement savings in CPF-approved unit trusts.

As a result, the unit trust industry in Singapore grew from S$1.2 billion as at end-1994 to reach S$14.1 billion by end-2002. In response to globalisation, product innovation and technological advances in the financial services industry, the government further relaxed unit trust sales in 2002, by allowing funds domiciled in an offshore jurisdiction to be offered for sale locally to the general public. More than 50 foreign domiciled unit trusts were registered for sale in the Singapore retail market in 2003.

In its latest 2006 Singapore Asset Management Industry Survey, the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) said that total assets under management (AUM) invested in unit trusts had reached S$30 billion by 2006, with a total of 374 collective investment schemes (CIS).

Copyright 2010 Eileen Lian

CPF money was recognised very early on as a source of funds that could help promote the fund management industry in Singapore and attract global fund managers to set up shop in Singapore. In 2006, CPF-approved unit trusts accounted for the bulk of CIS investments at 69 per cent of total CIS AUM, the MAS survey added.

Last year, bringing fees down was a hot topic in the Singapore fund management industry with the CPF board showing the way. The board announced in December 2006 that it would be implementing a cap on fee charges for new investments in funds that use CPF monies. Sales charges will no longer be allowed to exceed 3 per cent from July 1, 2007; while annual total expense ratios will be capped at between 0.65 and 1.95 per cent, depending on how risky the fund is, from this January 1.

Funds that are unable to meet these fee limits will not be permitted to take in new CPF monies and investors who are already committed to these funds can either leave their money where they are or switch to other CPFIS funds, at no cost to them, within a stipulated time period.

The CPF explained that the new rules were meant to help members build up their retirement savings faster. Sales charges and expense ratios erode investment returns, the board explained, adding that the sales charges and expense ratios of CPF funds were high compared to other markets.

The industry responded by de-listing several funds, which were unable to meet the fee cap criteria, from the CPFIS; including are the First State Global Property fund, the Lion Capital Korea fund, the Lion Capital Taiwan fund, the PRU Japan Smaller Companies fund, the Schroder Japanese Equity fund, the SGAM Asian Real Estate Dividend fund, the UOB United Japan Growth fund, the UOB United European Equity fund, the AllianzGI Asia Tiger fund and the AllianzGI Global Internet fund.

The Investment Management Association of Singapore (IMAS), a representative body of investment managers, set up in 1997, to spearhead the development and growth of the fund management industry in the republic, said that it expected about 30-40 per cent of CPFIS funds to be pulled out from the scheme by this year.

Meanwhile a Lipper Insight Report on Singapore Fund Flows reported that in 2007 the Singapore unit trust market recorded a robust aggregate inflow of S$5.581 billion, up considerably from S$2.058 billion in 2006.

While equity unit trusts represented the majority of the increase in funds under distribution recording a net inflow of S$3.830 billion for the year, the continued uncertainty of the global markets saw flows into equity unit trusts slowing to S$720 million in the fourth quarter of 2007, after topping S$1.694 billion in the third quarter.

Sim Lim Square. http://www.flickr.com/photos/tim_uk/ / CC BY 2.0

Domestic Singapore dollar funds of about S$113.8 million contributed to the bulk of flows into bond products while interest in quasi-government securities led to a larger S$88.4 million aggregate increase for fixed income offerings and inflows into mixed-asset products increased further to S$543.6m for the fourth quarter. Money market funds grew S$160.2 million, while guaranteed and protected unit trusts contracted further, with net outflows of S$26.30 million and S$43.01 million, respectively.

With markets generally experiencing great volatility last year, fund managers in Singapore agree that investors here are becoming more resilient when faced with market corrections. They are better adapted to the changes in the market, they said – a sign of growing investor maturity.

New funds launched in Singapore last year tended to be more thematic in nature, for example, there were funds based around resources, commodities, environmental change and the Middle East region; again signalling increasing maturity and sophistication in the Singapore unit trust market.

In an effort to attract more large players to set up shop in Singapore, the MAS last year did away with the 80:20 rule, which required that non-Singaporeans make up at least 80 per cent of investments in a fund for it to be tax exempt. With the abolishment of this rule, as long as certain conditions are satisfied even if there is only one non-Singapore person investing, the fund will be exempt from tax.

Photo courtesy of Corporate Adventures

The excitement builds. Your colleagues scream enthusiastically at each other to hurry up with tying the twine. You tear your hair out because you were elected the team leader and now are responsible for making sure that the raft is completed within the alloted time.

Meanwhile, you can’t help but notice and enjoy around you the soft breeze, white sand and bright sunshine. The tide is coming in and the raft needs to go out very soon. And to think this is all part of your job. What better treat for stressed-out office workers than to go on a company sponsored team building workshop in an exotic destination.

Offsite team building programs give employees the opportunity to enjoy the easy charm of resorts like Phuket and Bali; the energy of cities such as Bangkok, Tokyo, Hong Kong or Singapore; or the outdoor excitement of New Zealand, India and Lantau Island; all while “working”.

Offsite team building is also a good way for businesses to reward their employees with overseas trips and some companies have integrated their incentive programs with their team building activities. “It shows that management takes care of their staff in more than just monetary terms,” observes Alvin Quah, manager at Singapore Team Building.

Sports goods maker Adidas makes it a point to send its Hong Kong staff on at least one team building workshop a year. “We definitely want them to have a good time,” declares Simpson Wong, Assistant Learning and Development Manager at Adidas Hong Kong.

Wong, who organised last December’s offsite team building event in Bangkok for 110 the company’s Hong Kong employees, adds that the workshop was also meant to help develop trust among staff. “It was 70 per cent fun and 30 per cent learning,” he estimates.

Companies are increasingly finding that important business skills such as the ability to form good relationships, and to cooperate and work well with others are best nurtured away from the office, in an environment that is both fun and challenging.

It is little wonder then, that offsite team building has become an increasingly popular human resource tool for both multinational and local companies in Hong Kong.

Photo courtesy of JW Marriott Phuket

“Companies that have staff who work together across countries but who have no opportunity to meet often, take advantage of offsite team building workshops where their people can get together and meet face to face,” explains David Simpson, director of training at Hong Kong-based Team Building Asia, which organises and runs team building programs around Asia.

This has important ramifications when back in the office. “Information is power,” observes Philippe Millieret, business development manager at Corporate Adventures, a four-year old company that provides team building programs to companies in Hong Kong. “People tend not to share it because they lose their competitive edge. When they know each other better they tend to share it.” Offsite team building activities are designed to break the ice and get the team well acquainted with each other.

Being offsite is an important element in getting the right atmosphere for employee bonding and learning to take place – emails and all the other accoutrements of one’s work life are left behind and forgotten for the duration. “The idea is to remove all barriers connected to work,” remarks Millieret.

“One of the most important aspect of team building is relationship building,” declares Quah. “Going to a non-work related venue will help to convey the message that while this is about work, it is also about dealing with the issues that not just work related. The new environment helps participants open up to new ideas.”

Team building activities such as building a Formula 1 race car, abseiling down a cliff or running around a city hunting down clues, serve to strengthen teamwork and build on individual strengths.

The benefit of offsite team building is that people tend to go back with a sense of achievement. “They would have discovered something about themselves and their colleagues that they couldn’t have in the boardroom,” says Millieret.

“The programs are also very useful for managers. They really discover things about their staff. For example, a really shy secretary becomes a leader during an activity and this is very positive,” he adds.

“You see different sides of your colleagues, things you never knew about them. You get keen insights and this helps to bring down resistance in the workplace,” Simpson elaborates.

Photo courtesy of Team Building Asia

Fun is another important cornerstone of offsite team building programs. Bonnie Wong, Associate Creative Director at advertising agency Dentsu Hong Kong, said that she had fun at a company organised workshop in Bangkok last August.

“Yes, of course I enjoyed myself,” she declared. “It was the case studies that I really liked. There were case studies set up throughout the three days and we would work the challenges out with our colleagues.

“We attended classes and listened to speeches by trainers. We also made many site visits. It allowed a common language to develop between the different departments. The program was very detailed and it really worked,” Ms Wong described.

Towards A Common Goal

Photo courtesy of Team Building Asia

The Amazing Race meets Mission Impossible in Team Building Asia’s Mission Possible city-based team building activity. Groups are divided into teams of five people who act as secret agents for their company. Each team views a customised DVD explaining the mission assignment and receives an attache case containing the mission brief, a SIM card to receive clues, a map, a digital camera, a compass, binoculars, and a list of specific tasks and clues that will lead them around the city.

As part of their mission, participants will make use of the city’s public transportation systems. In Bangkok, for example, these would include the city’s tuk-tuks, water taxis, MRT and the skytrain. They are also required to visit some of the city’s attractions, such as Lumpini Park, the Chao Phraya River, Chinatown, the railway station and the Bangkok markets; sample local snacks, and talk to the locals.

Mission Possible encourages teams to work together toward a common goal. Participants learn to prioritise their time and pick up such management skills as planning, communicating and delegating. They also develop leveraging skills and team spirit. Participants are put up in five-star hotels like the Shangri-La, Mandarin Oriental or The Peninsula.

Team Building Asia has also run the same program in Tokyo, Hong Kong, Hanoi and Shanghai.

Executives Rally In Survivor Phuket

Photo courtesy of JW Marriott Phuket

With 11 hectares of lush tropical garden and 17 km of natural beach front, the JW Marriott Phuket Resort and Spa integrates scenic resort-style activities, such as snorkelling and island-hopping, into its team building programs. Participants enjoy the ambience of Phuket – the ‘Pearl of the Andaman Sea’ – while engaging in team building activities run by the resort’s recreation team.

Reminiscent of the TV reality show Survivor, the resort’s signature program is Survivor Phuket, an executive team building experience which combines sightseeing with team work. It is designed to provoke all of the responses and emotions present in a group environment. Groups of between 10 to 250 people, are divided into teams that compete against each other by navigating their speedboats to five different islands.

They are provided with instruction documents and maps and on each island the teams are expected to complete a combination of mental, physical and trust-based activities that give them the opportunity to work together and also to have a good time together. Participants also get to see each other in different situations. Survivor Phuket takes guests out of their comfort zone and challenges them to demonstrate team characteristics of leadership, decision making, planning and communications.

Serious Adventure on Lantau Island

Photo courtesy of Corporate Adventures

Located just 45 minutes from Central, Pui O Beach and its surrounding terrain on Lantau Island are rugged enough to provide a dose of serious adventure to spice up any corporate team building session. The beach has been leased by Hong Kong-based Corporate Adventures for their team building programs which include a rope course and climbing wall, raft building, beach olympics, and gorge climbing at the San Shek Wan Gorge.

These team building activities encourage the development of core skills such as communication, problem-solving, teamwork, support, trust, team initiative, decision-making and foresight.

The company also operates a beach restaurant and bar called Ooh La La!, which provides the venue for much of the socialising and camaraderie at the end of many a tiring team building day. “When people work together, they don’t really know each other. We need to create a memory together,” says Philippe Millieret, business development manager at Corporate Adventures.

The company has designed attractive routes that take advantage of the location. “For example, there is no other gorge like this in the world,” declares Mr Millieret. “Most of the people from Hong Kong have absolutely no idea how diverse Hong Kong is. They can’t believe that this is Hong Kong. They are really amazed.”