Mac-Coleman

20 November 2013  - 

         

A Military Commander Would Be Fired By Now 

The President’s attempts to sell his Affordable Care Act to the public remind me of Robert F. Brunner’s delicious lyrics in “The Merchants’ Song” from the 1978 Disney movie, “The Small One.”   

“Oh, clink, clink, clank, clank, get your money to the bank,

“Telling little stories you can trust. 

“We never ever fail when we go to make a sale,  

“We simply cheat a little if we must!”  

The President told stories we could trust and made the sale.  But, did he cheat a little to get his signature legislation passed and protected from repeal?  Can he be trusted?  Let’s examine those questions in light of leadership principles I relied on in my Air Force career. 

First, when I led Air Force units, I learned that the commander’s standards dictate how the rest of the organization works.  The commander leads her people to success or leads them to failure.  The airmen in the organization expect to be led.  The commander must deliberately adhere to regulations and communicate honestly and openly to all in her organization, something President Obama famously promised he would do.  If some of the people mess up—and people always do—or if the commander personally does something wrong, she should take the blame.  If the bad actions are severe enough, she should expect to be relieved of command. 

Next, to ensure that the organization accomplishes its mission, the commander must entrust his deputy and division heads with power to run their operations according to the clear, open policies he establishes as commander.  He also expects that they will continually inform him about what they are doing, how those actions apply to the organization’s overall goals, and on potential or actual problems with the implementation of the organization’s operational plan.  This style of leadership demands regular, two-way communication between upper and lower levels of the organization.  This process instills in leaders on all lower levels a sense of loyalty to their bosses.  More importantly, it demands loyalty to honest principles and to the organization’s mission.  It is a time-consuming and difficult leadership approach, but it ties an organization together.  

  

Finally, the commander works harder than anyone in her organization.  She wears herself out in the job because she instinctively “goes to the sound of the guns.”  Her orders are executed faithfully because she is as dedicated to the mission as anyone working for her.   She does not expect anything of her subordinates that she wouldn’t do herself.  This creates an unswerving loyalty up and down the chain of command, loyalty based on lawful and honest principles, not on cronyism.  

    

President Obama either told deliberate lies about the effects of the Affordable Care Act or he was woefully uninformed by his White House staff, by the applicable agencies in the Executive Branch of government, and by those who wrote the law.   

    

If President Obama has lied, then he and his organization—his staff and the agency heads in his executive branch—are corrupt and should not be trusted.  He shows that he uses self-serving designs to deceive and to acquire power; he does not serve the public.  His team also shows that it follows his lead.  No one who had daily contact with the development and execution of the Affordable Care Act blew the whistle on the President.  They protected themselves and their corrupt boss.    

If President Obama has been misinformed for the last 3 ½ years, then he is incompetent as a leader and should not be trusted.  If he ignores his staff and agency heads, those within his immediate span of control who brief him on the Affordable Care Act’s problems, then the President shows himself incapable of running any organization, let alone the executive branch of the US government.  If his staff withheld information from him for years and he does not fire them for the deception, then the President shows he is incapable of selecting and inspiring subordinates to serve the American public. 

Why does the President find himself in this no-win leadership crisis?  One of the biggest reasons, I would say, is because he doesn’t work very hard.  His public remarks show only a vague understanding of events, suggesting a lack of preparation; so of course, he doesn’t inspire confidence.  It’s easy to talk about open, honest conduct and communication when trying to get elected, but establishing and maintaining such standards requires hard work.  He shows by all measures that he is simply unwilling to work hard enough to do that. 

Whatever crises in confidence, loyalty and trust that result from the President’s lies, incompetence, or inaction, he deserves.  As does any poor commander.