Tuesday, September 27, 2005

Business acumen






Hi everybody!!! : )

It seems like taking potshots at President Bush is in vogue right now, which is sad given the troubles facing our nation. I didn't vote for President, and would certainly rather have a Democrat, but while President Bush is our President I think we all need to get behind him. So it's a little depressing to see
an article like this one written by David Olive for the Toronto Star.
The legacy of the Bush administration may well be that government can no longer be entrusted to business people.

That would be a shame, given that business savants as varied as Kennedy treasury secretary Douglas Dillon and Silicon Valley legend Dave Packard served ably in Washington.

Many of the most prominent CEOs in the current administration aren't real business people at all, but faux CEOs who after a lifetime in politics cashed in on brief stints as trophy CEOs at Fortune 500 firms before returning to public life in George W. Bush's White House.

With few exceptions, those CEO stints — at Halliburton Co. (Dick Cheney), rail operator CSX Corp. (John Snow), and George "dry hole" Bush's string of oil-exploration flops in Texas — were not models of exemplary corporate stewardship.

Just the same, future historians will make the connection between the most CEO-heavy administration in memory, headed by the first MBA president (Harvard, no less), and a White House of unsurpassed fiscal recklessness, flawed strategic thinking, failure to execute even on its best ideas (its unrealized goals of education reform and energy self-sufficiency, for instance), and a stubborn unwillingness to change course when conditions dictate.
Is it really worth mentioning, at this late date, President Bush's business failings? I mean he's been running the United States of America for the last five years; I'd say that qualifies him as a successful leader. ; )

Some of the criticisms in that last paragraph, on the other hand, are pretty spot on, I'd say. I'm not sure this is the best time to be focused on Bush's failures, but when the time comes to analyze this presidency, some of those statements may be very relevant.

No comments: