Archive for February, 2008

An Insight into How Clinton Will Manage the Presidency

Sunday, February 24th, 2008

A recent article from CBS News provides good insight into how a Hillary Clinton presidency might be managed. As we have pointed out in an earlier blog, the Clinton approach to management is basically transactional. That means there will be enforced standard operating procedures, clearly defined and rigid organizational structure, reliance on loyalty to the detriment of ability, and reluctance to make meaningful changes in operation. These characteristics are clearly pointed out in the CBS article defining some of the operational problems exhibited by the Clinton campaign.

            As pointed out in the article, the disciplined and leakproof operations of the top five campaign managers “have kept an iron grip on everything from ideas to access.” In particular, Penn is targeted for his “myopic focus on issues, his dismissal of the need for Hillary to get personal and address her likeability problem, his unusual dual role as top strategist and pollster, and his famously rough manner.” These issues have impacted significantly and detrimentally on the morale of other members of the campaign team. While there have been some changes in the organizational makeup of the team, these changes have been too late in coming and were not significant in scope. The transactional focus of the Clinton campaign indicates that this is the dominant style of the candidate and will carry over into the White House if she is elected.

            Clinton’s position that she will bring change to the administration was largely forced on her by the charismatic and transformational approach of her adversary, Barack Obama. Transformational leaders, such as Obama, are comfortable with change and are able to provide the structure necessary to make the needed changes succeed. Obama’s definition of change is quite different from that of Clinton’s. His will be a more far reaching approach that will impact on the directional change in government ask for by the voters during the last congressional elections. Sadly, Clinton will only be able to make minor visionary changes that will, in the long run, not be significant in changing the direction of our government. Her staff, if she is elected, will suffer the same ailments exhibited by her present campaign team and her administration will fail miserably.

Defining the Leadership Style and Organizational Cultural of the Bush Administration

Thursday, February 7th, 2008

“My job is a job to make decisions. I’m a decision — if the job description were, what do you do — it’s decision maker….. I’m the decider, and I decide what’s best.” George W. Bush

It is undeniable that change rather than maintenance of the status quo is the major theme in the run for the White House http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/. Taking into account that a commonly accepted practice in finding new direction and moving forward involves an examination of one’s current situation  it seems appropriate to take some time to analyze the leadership style and organizational make-up of our current administration.

  • Within the Bush administration formality and structure are important and decisions are made based on hierarchy,  values , and  loyalty .

  • Great emphasis is placed on : stability, reliability, functionality, and pragmatism.

  • There is mistrust of theory, the abstract, and the complex.
  • A great deal of energy is exerted in establishing and guarding one’s “turf” .
  •  Importance is placed on adapting what exist rather than creation of something new, when things are modified it is usually done incrementally rather than starting over.
  • Those within the organization who do well like time-tested methods and work hard to ensure protection of the past and traditional ways of doing things. 
  • Decisions are made behind closed doors—not just out of necessity, but also by preference.

 

 

Thursday, February 7th, 2008