Obama's vision for America's leadership examined

President Obama's commencement address  to the graduating 2014 class at West Point is generating  much debate because it lays out his vision for America's global leadership. Predictably, the responses to it were along party lines with the Republicans dismissing the speech as rhetoric. However, his speech received mixed reactions even from the press.

Obama's West Point speech offers an interesting example to examine his vision using the theories of leadership. Of course, there is a caveat - we are only analyzing his speech- and not his actions that will follow. Nevertheless, examining the speech along with its critique can be insightful in understanding how effective leaders should communicate their vision. 

What is a vision? According to Bennis and Nanus (1985), a leader's vision must be clear, attractive, realistic and about the believable future. The vision must however emerge from the needs of the organization, and should  belong to both the leader and the followers. Friedman echoes the views of Bennis and Nanus, and states that a vision must be compelling, vivid,  achievable, and have a not too distant time frame. In their influential book on Leadership, Kouzes and Posner (2002) also identify the ability to inspire a shared vision as an important practice of exemplary leaders. According to Kouzes and Posner, great leaders communicate vivid and compelling visions that serve as a guide for action for their followers. From the above, Obama's speech can be examined on the four criteria of clarity, vividness, achievability and a realistic time frame.

Obama starts off by making a case for America's undisputed status as a global leader because of its military power, its vibrant economy, its innovative capabilities, and its multiple alliances with other countries. America continues to attract immigrants looking for a better future, and is looked upon to intervene when basic human rights are in danger across the world. Obama also cautions against complacency  in face of competition from the rising middle class across the world, the ability of terrorists to wreck havoc due to technology.

 
The question we face, the question each of you will face, is not whether America will lead but how we will lead, not just to secure our peace and prosperity but also extend peace and prosperity around the globe.

So let me spend the rest of my time describing my vision for how the United States of America, and our military, should lead in the years to come, for you will be part of that leadership.

CLARITY: (8/10) He conveys the gist of America's future leadership in a four distinct points: use force only when US interests are directly threatened, need for shift in counter-terrorism strategy by moving away from direct action to building coalitions and training countries at risk of rising terrorism, need to strengthen international institutions like the UN to global peace, America's willingness to act of behalf of human dignity. The test for direct action was clear : We must not create more enemies than we take off the battlefield.


VIVIDNESS (8.5/10): Some memorable quotes are below.

Here’s my bottom line: America must always lead on the world stage. If we don’t, no one else will. The military that you have joined is, and always will be, the backbone of that leadership. But U.S. military action cannot be the only, or even primary, component of our leadership in every instance. Just because we have the best hammer does not mean that every problem is a nail.

We are going to deepen our investment in countries that support these peacekeeping missions because having other nations maintain order in their own neighborhoods lessens the need for us to put our own troops in harm’s way. It’s a smart investment. It’s the right way to lead. (Applause.)

I believe in American exceptionalism with every fiber of my being. But what makes us exceptional is not our ability to flout international norms and the rule of law; it is our willingness to affirm them through our actions. (Applause.)

Now, ultimately, global leadership requires us to see the world as it is, with all its danger and uncertainty. We have to be prepared for the worst, prepared for every contingency, but American leadership also requires us to see the world as it should be — a place where the aspirations of individual human beings really matters, where hopes and not just fears govern; where the truths written into our founding documents can steer the currents of history in the direction of justice. And we cannot do that without you. 

Leaving here, you carry with you the respect of your fellow citizens. You will represent a nation with history and hope on our side. Your charge now is not only to protect our country, but to do what is right and just. As your commander in chief, I know you will. May God bless you. May God bless our men and women in uniform. And may God bless the United States of America. (Cheers, applause.)

ACHIEVABILITY (5/10): Obama proposed a 5 billion counter terrorism fund for America's counter-terrorism strategy to train other countries to stand on their own feet to combat terrorism in their soil. Obama gives some vague examples here like Burma, Afghanistan. But more detail on the why and how of the five billion could have made the difference between rhetoric and vision. Discussing what he proposed to achieve in his four points during his remaining term was crucial. Post Snowden, when Americans are very concerned about their digital privacy, Obama should have made a more convincing case on how he planned to do this.



TIME FRAME: (4/10) Except for the deadline for pull out of Afghan troops by the end of this year, no other time frame was set. Since the President has a limited time in office now, it was important to not lose sight of that time frame.


Much of the criticism of his speech centers on the achievability and time frame. As noted by NPR  Obama was not able to frame the reality. As noted by the BBC, the rationale behind the five billion is not clear.  Also, it appears more of a restatement of his current policy than a vision for change.

In closing, Obama scores high on clarity and vividness, but low of achievability and the realistic time frame. Perhaps a good commencement address needs to weigh heavily on the former, but Obama will have to address the latter if his vision is to be taken seriously. Until then it will remain as a good commencement speech, rather than a proclamation of a new vision for America's leadership as Obama had hoped.

Picture 1 credit
Picture 2 credit
Picture 3 credit
Picture 4 credit