Asma Kullavanijaya or “Dr. Paeng” posted on Facebook about the complex and problematic situation in Thailand's government technology sector.

What’s happening to the Thai IT industry?

Last month during a regular CEO Talk that I host multiple times a month, I shared with my team what’s going on in Thailand’s public sector IT. I wanted everyone to understand why our company is taking this direction, and where our mission stems from.

There are five main parties involved in government IT procurement in Thailand:

  1. Lobbyists – People close to organizational executives or board members who advise on investment directions and draft project proposals. Many Thai tech firms act as lobbyists without having their own development teams. These projects are often driven more by connections than technical merit, leading to poorly tailored solutions. Some lobbyists don’t even do their homework, being better at entertaining than delivering results.
  2. Government Executives – Operate top-down, instructing subordinates on what to do. This means most projects don't solve ground-level operational issues, since they’re designed based on what the executives and lobbyists want, not what’s actually needed.
  3. SI Companies – Often treat themselves as gatekeepers. Whether developing a data warehouse or an app, they aim for long-term maintenance fees. This leads to knowledge hoarding and data ownership staying with the SI, not public employees. Projects become fragmented because SIs don’t want to share or integrate—fearing it might reduce their future income.
  4. Tech Development Firms – These often work as subcontractors for lobbyists and SIs, giving up 30–50% of the project’s value just to participate. Most are small businesses and end up going bankrupt due to low margins, late payments, and increasing demands. The only upside is that if the contract has an SI as lead, the SI is also liable for penalties. Still, it's often better than working directly with state executives and having no leverage.
  5. Government Staff Involved in Projects – Perhaps the unluckiest group. They must define requirements and sign off on deliveries, even though projects often don’t align with their actual needs. As this cycle continues, many of these well-meaning individuals burn out or adapt to the grey areas just to please their bosses—eventually becoming part of the same system.

I believe no tech firm in Thailand hasn’t been misled into writing a TOR (Terms of Reference). I’ve already been duped four times this year—asked to draft them only to see the job handed to another company. We did all the groundwork, built mockups, and invested resources, yet the contract went to a firm that’s not even capable. Why? Because they just don’t care about quality. They only care about spending the budget. It’s heartbreaking for our country.

I understand this issue runs deep and may be unsolvable. I accept the existence of lobbyists because executives don’t have the time or knowledge to assess tech or choose vendors. Still, it’s frustrating.

That’s why I want Coraline to grow beautifully. All of our projects this year are with the private sector. I refuse to be part of a system that disregards quality and runs on top-down orders without considering real impact. I have kids, and I want them to grow up in a better society. At the very least, I want to be a good example for them.

Coraline’s growth proves that you can choose the right path. If you offer real quality, there is room for you—even if it requires more work. Let your work reflect your value, not your willingness to accept 30–50% cuts for intangible outcomes.

Eventually, when Coraline reaches its full potential, our clients will also benefit. Quality attracts quality. Clients who seek quality will find us—and that will be our mutual success.

Thank you to every Coraline client who has believed in us. Even if the progress seems small now, the picture is getting clearer.

Everyone in Coraline knows our direction. I believe it’s why they stay—because we share the same dream: to grow with pride and be a quality alternative. Our turnover rate is just 3–5% annually.

I still hope for change one day. The real danger isn’t the “processing fee,” it’s the lack of care for quality, the misuse of budgets, and self-interest at the cost of the organization’s future. While the State Audit Office’s building shows physical signs of failure, IT projects are harder to inspect. But if public agencies don’t upgrade their IT approach, our country will surely fall behind beyond recovery.

P.S. I feel deeply sorry for the citizens funding these projects, and those affected by all the useless initiatives.

Source: https://www.facebook.com/share/1ZkhQmimXT/