John Bolton and Management Styles

John Bolton was on the repeat of The Daily Show yesterevening. On the one hand, he argued that the permanent bureaucracy should be required to implement the president’s policies without question and to adopt his positions. On the other hand, his closest advisors should be able to communicate with him in confidence. Why would they need to keep their advice secret if it consists merely of telling the president what he wants to hear at all times. Surrounding yourself with a posse of yes men was the best way to assure good government per Bolton.

When I have been in a leadership position, I have welcomed dissenting points of view. If you don’t, your staff will watch you screw up without lifting a finger to help you. At times, it was annoying, but I was better off for listening to a wide range of views. Now that I am a staffer, I am helpful to the managers who welcome my advice even when it goes against their views, but I will let a manager who is an arrogant prick implode as long as I’m sure none of the debris will get on me. I pick my battles. On the crap that doesn’t matter (about 90% of what a holding company does), I hold my peace and cheerfully implement even the most idiotic policies and procedures. On the “important” stuff, I voice my concerns. I like to think that this helps me in the credibility department.

How do guys who hate dissent get ahead so often? They work for the same kind of douchebags and get promoted based on their perceived loyalty and cooperativeness. If they find themselves under a more open minded manager, they may get stuck. They are often found in rigid bureaucracies where they are most at home and in administrative departments and holding companies of businesses where they are evaluated based on activity rather than results. If the function that they oversee is important, their deficiencies as managers will become manifest quickly. The Bush regime is a spectacular example of how bad management leads to failure.

The intolerant manager finds himself cut off from intelligence and information that might be helpful. His decision-making becomes progressively divorced from reality. He comes to view failures as manifestations of disloyalty or incompetence of subordinates in carrying out his agenda when his own program is itself to blame.

I wouldn’t let John Bolton manage a taco stand.