The first debate of the 2016 Presidential race promises to be a spectacular competition for American hearts and minds. If for a moment we attempt to filter out the marketing messages, hyperbole and the worldview differences between the Presidential candidates and look at leadership style, there is still a vast and illuminating difference between the candidates.
The Wonk
On the one side we have Clinton, long an analyst steeped in data for every decision. In the age of big data, an analyst seems to be made for these times. However, an engineer can mean to convince company decision makers (that is us in an election) to change direction using a complex set of data they’ve analyzed, and manage to confuse or put the them asleep by miring them in the detail instead. It’s the engineer that had the O ring data about the Challenger space shuttle before its catastrophic launch. The right answer might have been there but no one was persuaded.
It’s the engineers that ran the flight simulations for flight 1549 and concluded the pilot could have made it back to the airport instead of landing in the frigid Hudson river. Go see Sully to feel this problem. Engineers, like finance people, can do tremendous work and still get exactly the wrong answer by leaving out one parameter. They do hours and hours of work, culminating in a decision that may or may not feel like the right one. Executives sometimes feel that something is missing, even if they can’t spot the missing variable in the computer program. The downside of analysis is time taken in hard work, and the need for speed. Sometimes engineers are accused of lack of judgement when they can’t stop and make decisions when data is left unknown. A leadership class once explained to our class in great detail how analysis could be wrong, and cited the company Apple as one that would never rely on such studies to kill a good idea, but would be patient and supportive until the numbers came out right.
Somehow, it is not surprising that a hard working analyst would need help to pace themselves in a way that allowed them to stay healthy ‘till the end. It is one of many ways of going down a rabbit trail vs. seeing the broader picture at hand.
Will Hillary rise above miring us in detail and be the idea person that can set direction and find flaws in big data conclusions?
The Instinctive
On the other side we have Trump, who relies on gut instinct for many decisions. In Blink, Malcom Gladwell calls in sting “thinking without thinking”. That is what it feels like, but that is not what it is. It is thinking with parts of your brain that don’t cause conscious reflection and traceable lines of logic in thought. Gladwell makes a convincing argument for why this type of thought will remain the norm in sales, in human decisions that requires speed. Decisions are made based on trust and conditioning. Great managers often listen to the analysts and then make decisions that also leverage instinct. They excel in determining competent delegates for the analysis and shun ever being mired in detail themselves.
Abraham Kuyper, in an essay called Our Instinctive Life, calls analysis “reflection”, and he argues that all the greatest art, all the greatest thinking, is not based on reflection but instinct. Animals use instinct because they don’t have anything else, but humans also use instinct when creating. Even engineers use instinct when they invent…we believe in backing off the data and going out to wash the car if we want to allow the brain to produce its best ideas. It’s not surprising it is the instinct based leader that would avoid detailed debate preparation, choosing instead to focus on broad principles and direction.
The downside of instinct is that it relies on conditioning. It can and does reflect prejudice and inappropriate bias. That is why decision makers may not be able to be fair in hiring without help. For musicians, the pianist can be put behind a curtain so that decision makers can only hear the music, not see the gender or race of the artist. Many presidential decisions don’t have “the curtain” option and other strategies are needed to prevent bias —an executive branch example would be the bias New York City displayed during stop and frisks.
Will Trump rise above bias and show a convincing leadership that can make great decisions for America?
Conclusion
For some voters, it won’t matter. The worldview differences are great and the decision between candidates is not just a choice of decision making style but a choice of the worldview of the entire team of the executive branch. Even for these voters though, it promises to be a fascinating debate.
Order historical fiction novel Rekindled with the button below.
