Barack Obama was not my first choice for president, but his affinity and instinct for communication -- a la Reagan, JFK, and FDR -- stand in stark contrast to his predecessor and will surely serve him well in the difficult days ahead.
It's for history to judge former President Bush and future historians will take a dispassionate look at the man and his times. Still, it's unlikely they'll say that he did his administration and the country any favors with his anti-PR temperament and inability to articulate, explain and persuade. These are things every leader must do to generate the support needed for success. Indeed, he may have been his own worst adversary in this department.
There's a lesson here for CEOs and CMOs. As in business, when you enable your competitors (or critics) to define who you are and what you stand for, you're doomed. This is what happened to Bush in his second administation and in too much of his first. A leader is supposed to sell a vision of the future. At the very least, he or she is obligated to explain what's being done, why it's necessary and how the critics (or the competitors) are wrong.
Standard equipment in the American Presidency has always included the most powerful public-relations and media-outreach machinery on earth. The key to its effectiveness, of course, is the user. How Bush could be so tone-deaf and/or inept in building and maintaining his own brand and "value proposition" during some of the most contentious years in history, will occupy generations of future historians and students of U.S. history. In the meantime, if you want people to buy -- don't ever believe you can afford to stop selling. Just ask President Obama.
Comment Preview