8 Steps Barack Obama Can Take for a More Effective Government

Reader Comments
Back to article

is it just me... or is there a lot of unsolicited Obama Advice floating around out there inthe media?...it seems everyone and their mother has 2 pennies of "wisdom" on what he SHOULD do.....I find it interesting. And they speak so authoritatively as if they are telling HIM how to do his job!
I don't recall in recent political history so much unsolicited advice for an incoming president. I would love to know what it is attributed to?...it's almost as if they feel he's not intelligent or savvy enough (ha!) to already know what he's doing and meditatively consult with his top notch cabinet on what he want's to do and how to do it......
I wonder if this is the same phenomenon that many minorities and some women in high positions in the corporate world claim they face from time to time as well....constant second-guessing, unsolicited advice based on an an assumption of incompetence/ignorance.......heck...or maybe it's due to the fact that people feel this pres and his administration may be a little more open to suggestions and advice than the previous one......all in all, I still find it very curious.....
And this from the press that failed to do it's job during the ramp-up to a war based on faulty evidence and hidden agendas.

Jonny Mac of CA 4:42PM January 03, 2009

My comments are in relation to number 7 of the eight suggested steps "collaboration". In some locations the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Mangement through a consistent and persitient general need have taken on a successful collaborative process with the owners of the National Forests and Public Lands (the Citizens of the United States). This collaboration, assisted and moved forward by the reinvention of government, revolves around attempting to make sense of the desires of the land's "owners" who are decidedly not of one mind about any matter. I feel this model that exists in the field could be emulated and adapted to the need for new executive branch leadership for quick and effective trasition.
From experience I firmly believe if a representative sampling of formal and informal leaders of an agency were given a space and questions to ponder and answer together, answers would emerge that would yeild a smoother and more effective and efficient transition than previous ones. I support the authors suggestion for the innovative use of this valuable tool for leadership.

MJ of AZ of AZ 6:10PM December 03, 2008

A while back, when the Homeland Security Bill was being thrashed out, President Bush wanted authority to move people in civil service in response to threats. I haven't looked up the specifics, but I do remember the Democrats raising up in anger because this meant abolishing many of the protections that unionized civil service members had. In effect, President Bush was told that if he needed people in other areas, hire same, but don't you dare try to draw down anywhere, because those same unionized civil servants were a Democratic power base. In similiar light with the current Big Three auto companies and the UAW, Obama is going to have some fun choices if he really means what he says. Because any move to improve or streamline government means telling some unionized civil servants, "You are fired!" I can see that selling well to his party. Just like with the Big Three when the UAW is told that they will have to really trim body count or benefits for any bailout. For a president who as much as stated that he would support unions, Obama will redefine the term "tough love". Can't wait to see the reaction from Pelosi and Reid when the details start coming out. Which is why I agree with many of the commenters above. This is all smoke/mirrors.

Tom V. of VA 8:57AM December 03, 2008

I hope you voted for McCain since a straight across the board cut is what he advocated...But don't expect that kind of change from the Obama administration. I think the most telling comment is that we need "less of old government"--we need less of government. Government by its very nature is confining. We need to get federal government back to its basic roles, move more to the state governments, and get back to fiscal responsibility--and no, George W. Bush did not do any of this.
And while we are at it, we need to get the family physician back in medical care... and put in the insurance companies in the supportive role they belong in. When health care reform includes doctors and nurses instead of just insurance company wonks and bureaucrats we might actually take care of patients.
And does anyone else notice the lack of diversity in terms of actual backgrounds of this Cabinet? Let's see, does it really make a difference if I went to Yale or Harvard, or live in NYC, Washington,DC, or Chicago? Do you think we might get someone other than Ivy League and urbanites? We used to admit to the limited experience of those in "ivory towers" now we think we should all live in one. Let's see real diversity--someone who thinks differently on this Cabinet!

MontanaMountainWoman of MT 11:50PM December 02, 2008

As a government employee this all sounds like the usual empowering, revitalizing, re-imagining, re-inventing, thinking out of the box crap, etc. I've been hearing since I joined in 1983. This is all just a cover for management to give the appearance of doing something while not doing anything at all. If Obama wants the government under him to be more efficient he should just reduce its size and scope. Anything else is just a joke.

of NJ 1:34PM December 01, 2008

These 8 steps are the old, rehashed, business planning stuff that management gurus and scholars have been teaching for decades. Simply put, they say come up with a vision, mission statement, goals and objectives, performance plan, and metrics. Problem is that it is too inflexible and the plan and metrics become the work, not the vision and mission. A vision, broad goal outlines and innovation is what we need.

Indpependent of AZ 5:57PM November 29, 2008

During my tenure in DC, I was generally impressed with the Federal Civilian workforce. The same could not be said of many of the contractors, whose main goal often seemed to be to extend the contract rather than fulfill it. All too often the success of a department was measured by how much the staff and budget increased during the tenure of management. I hope Pres Obama will enforce a phrase upon our governemtn not just DOD that was frequently heard among military units during past democratic administrations - DO MORE WITH LESS. The real challenge will be to cut the fat out of Congress, where OUR representatives measure success in terms of dollars brought back to their district.

Joe not the Plummer of NY 3:26PM November 28, 2008

We need an across the board by 25%. Then we can take a look at what we really need for the future. If there is a real need we can add more resources or the private sector may wish to pick up on it.
America needs an intelligent approach to what government handles business. We can not continue to pork up by district nor by state. However,if a particular investment can help move the economy then again partner with the private sector to invest for the people. What we need is less old government and more opportunity development.
Actually, we do not need an old our old model of government, we need a system that makes opportunity for America and the the world. America needs jobs, education, health care and security. Our nation will be a true system of opportunity. Each tax dollar is an investment for the people.
We need dramatic change. Bush has paved the way in clearly illustrating through Katrina that our government simply does not work in the present. Plus the stupid war. America can not fight another dumb war. Let us cut now and cut deeply. Then Allow the private sector by it if it is worth it.

Dr. James of IL 3:12PM November 28, 2008