GE2025: Singapore General Election, 3 May 2025

The People’s Action Party (PAP) returned with 87 out of 97 seats.
The Workers’ Party (WP) held their 10 seats.
The rest of the opposition candidates lost it all – many even losing out on their deposits.

Beyond headlines and vote counts, GE2025 offers a real-world example of how strategy works – or fails – in high-stakes environments.

In this post, I’ll break it down using the Playing to Win™ framework – and explore what every business can learn from how the political parties made their choices.

🧭 1. Winning Aspiration – What Does “Victory” Really Look Like? 

PAP’s aspiration wasn’t just to win – it was to win convincingly and validate PM Lawrence Wong’s leadership.

They explicitly sought a “strong mandate” to steer Singapore through global uncertainty. With a 65.6% vote share (up from 61% in 2020) and a stronger seat majority, they achieved it.

This level of clarity gave coherence to their entire campaign, from messaging to resource deployment. Notice how anchor ministers were deployed to rallies at GRCs they weren’t contesting in – while this wasn’t the case in established ‘strongholds’.

WP’s aspiration was about credibility and entrenchment – defending their 10 seats and pushing to gain new ones.

While they didn’t break new ground, they came close in several key areas (48.53% in Jalan Kayu, 47.37% in Tampines, 44.83% in Punggol) – and secured the last 2 NCMP slots.

They defined success as a “responsible opposition” that strengthens democracy – a message that aligned with their positioning. Clearly, many Singaporeans were won over by the quality of the candidates they fielded.

As for the rest of the opposition, the dismal results are enough to paint the whole picture. Their drop in vote share across the board showed that the aspiration wasn’t supported by the capabilities or market belief needed.

📝 Takeaways for businesses:

👉🏼 Do your people know what a “win” looks like for your company this year? If the goal is vague, execution will be too.
👉🏼 It’s not always about growth. Sometimes, holding ground and earning trust is the strategic win.
👉🏼 When your aspirations outpace your core capabilities and executional ability, strategy breaks down.

📍2. Where to Play – Focus is Power 

PAP contested every seat – but didn’t fight every battle equally.

They focused their leadership attention and strongest talent on swing constituencies like East Coast, Punggol and Tampines, where they reversed prior losses and improved vote share across the board.

In safer wards, they intentionally kept a low profile – a strategic “do no harm” choice.

WP picked its battles too, contesting just 26 seats out of 97 (unfortunate for the residents of Marine Parade – Braddell Heights). This decision allowed them to concentrate resources and field strong, credible teams where they had history, traction and strong potential.

Their near-misses in Tampines and Jalan Kayu weren’t accidents – they were the result of clear analysis and smart bets.

And the results of the 4-way fight in Tampines just exposed the weaker parties, proving that voter support consolidated around credibility.

📝 Takeaways for businesses:

👉🏼 Where do your best people need to be deployed right now? Strategy is often about resource concentration, not expansion.
👉🏼 In business, you can’t serve every customer or market. Playing to WinTM is about choosing the most optimum path to win, where you have the highest fit and advantage.
👉🏼 Sometimes, the market sentiment matters more than where you choose to play.

🧠 3. How to Win – Clarity, Credibility and Contrast 

PAP’s strategy to Win was centred on stability and continuity.

They warned voters that swinging to the opposition might cost Singapore future ministers and policy momentum – a clear message that resonated during uncertain times.

They stayed focused on issues, relied on their incumbency to project competence… and were confident in the “silent majority” – and they were proven right!

WP presented itself as a 𝙘𝙤𝙣𝙨𝙩𝙧𝙪𝙘𝙩𝙞𝙫𝙚, 𝙥𝙧𝙞𝙣𝙘𝙞𝙥𝙡𝙚𝙙 𝙤𝙥𝙥𝙤𝙨𝙞𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣.

They spoke to the centre – voters who want checks and balances, not confrontation.

They positioned themselves not as disruptors, but as nation-builders, showing they could support the incumbent government responsibly, while still challenging the status quo.

And they backed this up with solid candidates, many of whom spoke on rally stages for the first time.

And the opposition parties who took more populist stances lacked the credibility to be seen as a viable alternative.

📝 Takeaways for businesses:

👉🏼 Winning isn’t always about louder messaging – sometimes it’s about reinforcing trust and staying the course.
👉🏼 How you position yourself in the minds of your audience matters more than what you claim in your ads.
👉🏼 In a crowded field, overlapping messages without clear differentiation create confusion – and lost votes (or sales).

🛠️ 4. Core Capabilities – Your Strategy is Only as Good as Your Strengths 

PAP, as always, had the institutional advantage of being the incumbent: experienced candidates, deep grassroots networks, lots of feedback from the ground, not to mention their resources.

They executed a tightly controlled, somewhat incident-free campaign across all 33 constituencies – no small feat.

WP showed growing capability and maturity: grooming high-calibre candidates, running effective local operations, and mastering digital engagement on social media and numerous podcasts.

Their track record in Aljunied, Sengkang & Hougang reinforced their credibility, and their messaging was both 𝙝𝙪𝙢𝙖𝙣 𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝙘𝙤𝙢𝙥𝙚𝙩𝙚𝙣𝙩.

The opposition lacked institutional depth and consistent leadership. For many such parties, their poor showing at live rallies all but sounded the death knell of their campaigns.

📝 Takeaways for businesses:

👉🏼 If your team had to run a mission-critical campaign tomorrow, would your structures, processes and systems hold?
👉🏼 Over time, investing in operational depth builds momentum. Strategy compounds when trust compounds.
👉🏼 Charisma is not a capability. Sustainable strategy needs systems and people that work beyond the founder or business owner.

🧩 5. Management Systems – Strategy Lives (or Dies) in Execution

PAP ran a military-grade campaign machine: message discipline, rapid-response units, daily intelligence from the ground, and controlled media engagement. Structures, Processes, Platforms and Rhythms integrated.

Safe zones were managed quietly. Hot zones saw top leadership deployed with precision.

WP managed a lean but professional operation.

They had succession planning, data-driven fieldwork, and high internal alignment.

They managed a mid-term MP resignation transparently and still retained the trust of Sengkang voters – a test many organisations would fail (e.g. look at how Intel’s share price was affected when past CEO, Pat Gelsinger was ousted in December 2024).

And honestly, all the other opposition parties showed strain. Leadership changes, inconsistent messaging, horrendous rally speeches that were mocked, and unclear follow-through, all became visible during the campaign.

They seriously need to rethink how they develop talent, manage internal roles, responsibilities and campaign at scale – or risk disappearing off the map.

📝 Takeaways for businesses:

👉🏼 You can’t “out-strategise” poor execution. Every strategic choice needs a system behind it.
👉🏼 Trust isn’t just earned in good times. It’s managed through how you handle bad news and bumps.
👉🏼 If your internal systems can’t support your ambitions, even the best strategy slides into irrelevance.

 

In summary, Strategy isn’t theory. It’s made of Choices + People + Execution.

Are you actively and systematically making the right choices in your business, based on the objective data? Or are you stuck in an echo chamber of daily fire-fighting, where 100 hours of operation work each week doesn’t really move the needle?

To find out more about myself and the Playing to Win™ Strategy to Execution framework for SMEs, check out https://scalingupventures.com/about-playing-to-win