Graciousness

Index 2012 Prepared by Blackbox Research

For the Singapore Kindness Movement

March 2012

2

The Road to Graciousness

1996 2001 2008

PM Goh Chok Tong,

New Year’s Speech 1996

“To have a gracious living

environment which matches our

material prosperity, we must

improve our social behavior.”

“Let us now complement our

economic achievements with

social, cultural and spiritual

development. Then by the 21st

century, Singapore will be a truly

successful, mature country, with a

developed economy and a

gracious society.”

National

Courtesy

Campaign is

subsumed under

Singapore

Kindness

Movement

(which was founded in 1997)

SKM conducts the

first national

Graciousness Index

An effort to measure

how gracious a society

Singapore is

Graciousness

Behaviour that is consistent

with social standards and

expectations based on the

time, place and people

around you

3

The Graciousness Index is derived from SKM’s Kindness Model

Singapore Kindness Movement’s

Kindness Model

Graciousness

Social behavior

Kindness

Intrinsic Attitudes

Able to

measure

Easy to

promote, hard

to measure

4

What is the Graciousness Index?

Singapore Kindness Movement’s

Kindness Model

Graciousness

Social behavior

Kindness

Intrinsic Attitudes

Able to

measure

Easy to

promote, hard

to measure

The Singapore

Kindness

Movement’s

Graciousness

Index

Experience

Acts of

graciousness

carried out,

witnessed and

performed

Perceptions

How we perceive

our fellow citizens

in terms of

consideration,

courteousness and

displays of

appreciation /

gratitude

Evaluation

Are we becoming

more or less

gracious?

Co

mp

iled &

we

igh

ted

5

2009

58

2010

61

2011

60

2012

61

Over four years, the Index has shown the level of graciousness to be relatively stable.

For 2012, the Index stands at 61, indicating a small rise from the previous year’s 60.

Tracking the Index 2009-2012

4 years of the

Graciousness Index

▲

3

▼

1

▲

1

6

2012

61

2012 Index Highlights

Men

61

Women

60

Under 40

years old

60

Above 40

years old

62

Graciousness

sensitivity rising

fastest amongst the

young

Middle class

households more

attuned to gracious

behavior

Singaporeans still

think graciousness

on public transport

falls short

Story Highlights

7

Gen Y (those aged 16-29 years)

showed the greatest increase in

graciousness amongst Singaporean

adults of all ages.

Gen X has been overtaken by the

generation behind them (Gen Y) in

terms of their sensitivity to gracious

behaviour.

Older Babyboomers still score

highest overall, but there is no

increase (or improvement) this year.

Index Study Insights 2012: Gen Y Gains

6.3

6.1

6.7

Graciousness Ratings

▲

0.4

▲

0.1

▲

0

Gen Y

(aged 16-29 years)

Gen X

(aged 30-50 years)

Babyboomer

(aged above 50 years)

Gen Y base, n=387 | Gen X base, n=706 | Babyboomer base, n=307

8

Gen Y: The Gracious Generation?

“I think being young

doesn’t mean we can’t

set an example for the

elderly – sometimes they

can be old and grumpy.

And also [I believe] in

being a role model for

other kids like primary

school students who look

up to us.”

18-24yo, Male

“I think we advertise the

bad points too much.

Even on Stomp, people

like to take photos of

those who don’t give up

their seat, but what about

those who do give up

seats?

You do 10 good things

nobody will praise you.

You do 1 bad thing, that’s

it, you are famous.”

25-30yo, Female

“I think values will drive

behaviour, so ultimately

you need to cultivate a

good value system in

kids.

Let’s say being

considerate. What

behaviours will come out

of that? You will give up

seats, you will help

people hold the lift, keep

left on the escalator. It

becomes a way of life.”

25-30yo, Male

9

This year’s results show that it is Singapore’s growing middle class who are most conscious of gracious

behaviour. Are they leading the way in setting new standards of social behaviour?

Index Study Insights 2012: Middle Incomers Driving Graciousness

Graciousness

Ratings

2012 6.3

All Singaporeans

By Monthly Household Income

6.2

Lower Income

(Less than $3k)

6.5

Middle Income

($3-$7k)

6.1

Upper Middle to

High Income

(More than $7k)

Below $3k, n=394 | $3k-$7k, n=544 | Above $7k, n=462

10

Index Study Insights 2012: Travel Behaviour Still Bugs Us

Behavioural Norms: How do we rate ourselves?

We’re Good Need to Improve

6.6

6.5

6.2

Respect for other

religions and

races

Thanking those

who have helped

us

Simply saying

‘excuse me’

5.3

5.3

5.4

Make space for

incoming passengers

when taking public

transport

Give way on the road

Allow others to

alight/board public

transport first

11

Experience of Graciousness

A8a. Have you been a recipient of a random act of graciousness in the last 6 months? | A8b. Have you done a random act of graciousness in the last 6 months? |

A8c. Have you witnessed a random act of graciousness in the last 6 months?

Received act of

graciousness

Carried out act of

graciousness

Witnessed act of

graciousness

Gender Men

66%

Women

65%

Men

84%

Women

81%

Men

73%

Women

72%

Age Under 40yo

64%

Over 40yo

68%

Under 40yo

80%

Over 40yo

86%

Under 40yo

70%

Over 40yo

75%

12

Major Drivers & Barriers of Kindness

The top drivers of kindness showed an inclination towards its positive effects on mental

and emotional well-being, as well as being aligned with a standard of morality. Barriers

were usually associated with a lack of knowledge or ability.

It is the

natural/moral

thing to do

It makes me

happy

It makes me feel

good

I feel compassion

for others in need

It adds meaning

to my life

The Kindness Definition

Any voluntary action with an unselfish intention

to benefit others that comes from the heart,

and does not expect anything in return

18% 14% 13% 9% 12%

Dri

vers

I am not sure

whether the person

is in genuine need

of help

I am suspicious

of whether it is a

fraud or not

I am not sure

how to help

I don’t have the

money

I am afraid of

experiencing

unnecessary

trouble

19% 17% 10% 7% 10%

Barr

iers

A2. Please rate the following reasons in terms of the influence it has over you in motivating you to do kindness. (Rank allocation) | A3. Please rate the following

reasons in terms of the influence it has over you in motivating you not to do kindness. (Rank allocation)

13

Major Drivers & Barriers of Graciousness

While drivers of Kindness and Graciousness are very similar, their barriers are markedly

different. Interestingly, the top barrier reveals a latent belief that recipients of graciousness

should be deserving.

Right thing to do

It makes me feel

good

It is natural

Others needed it

To help others

The Graciousness Definition

Behaviour that is consistent with social

standards and expectations based on the

time, place and people around you

9% 8% 7% 5% 6%

Dri

vers

Don't deserve my

graciousness

No time, or in a

rush

I am too

reserved/ shy

Too tired

Too busy or

engrossed with

other things to

notice

11% 10% 4% 3% 3%

Barr

iers

A2. Please rate the following reasons in terms of the influence it has over you in motivating you to do kindness. (Rank allocation) | A3. Please rate the following

reasons in terms of the influence it has over you in motivating you not to do kindness. (Rank allocation)

14

Index Study Insights 2012: Different Perspectives on Graciousness

Older &

Wiser

Age brings

greater

understanding

Higher

Income

Earners

Give something

back

Young

Adults

More

sophisticated

viewpoints

“I think when you grow older,

you tend to be kinder. You

are more gentle. Somehow,

you see more maybe, as you

grow older, maybe you

mellow down.”

50-54yo, Male

“Singapore has the

highest density of well-to-

do and they should lead

in doing charity work and

philanthropy.”

35-44yo, Male

“For me graciousness is

done in good taste. Good

taste as in, it is accepted

by society and reflects well

on a person.”

18-24yo, Female

Appendix

16

The index covers a comprehensive cross section of Singapore society, including Permanent Residents and long-term pass holders. The sample size was a statistically robust and nationally representative n=1,200.

A sample of 200 tourists were also polled for additional analysis but their responses are not factored in the actual Index.

Target Respondent Sample

2011 & 2012

Citizens

Citizens

Citizens Citizens Citizens

PR

PR

Tourists

Tourists

WP / EP

WP / EP