Skip to content

I was surprised to learn in Good to Great that outside CEOs were not associated with the transition from good companies to great companies. Harvard Business School Professor Joseph Bower picks up on this theme in his recent Marketplace commentary:

What companies really need is what I call in my new book, The CEO Within, an "inside outsider" -- that is, an outstanding inside performer who has retained his or her objectivity. They have energy, ambition and intellectual integrity. They see the magnitude of change needed, and because they are insiders they can move quickly with a real chance of success because they know the people, systems, culture and assets of the company.

Why aren't there more candidates like this available? To begin, a surprising number of companies don't have a real succession process. They treat succession as an uncomfortable event. Managing the development of leaders inside the company requires investment in every aspect of the way the firm is managed: who is recruited, how businesses are organized, how executives are paid and promoted, and how operations are planned and resources allocated. The process requires years, not days, of preparation. Companies need to change their ways on CEO succession or pay a price that goes far beyond the new CEO's compensation package.

At Dartmouth, the Board of Trustees are gearing up for a search for a successor to Jim Wright as the College's president. I wonder if this will have any bearing on the selection of Dartmouth's next president.

Last evening, the Ethics Institute and the Dartmouth Centers Forum hosted a public lecture by Barbara Ehrenreich, "Working for Change," based on her book, Nickel and Dimed: On (Not) Getting By in America.

She's a compelling story teller. Here's an example of something that I had not previously appreciated--paying rent. For the working poor, the monthly payment isn't the only or even the main challenge. Coming up with the first and last month's payments is more than most can manage. So this puts them into a different type of housing--the residential motel, which is less cost effective but allows more of a day-to-day payment. These facilities often lack a refrigerator and a microwave, which in turn means that nutrition suffers as well, with fast food taking the place of better meals. Problems cascade, and keeping it all together becomes more of a struggle, to say nothing of actually getting ahead. The Dartmouth has more of a recap of her talk.

She's also an occasional blogger. Here's her rather unconventional take on the economic stimulus plan, from a month ago.

Mark McClellan will be on campus tomorrow to deliver the Rockefeller Center's first lecture in a series commemorating the 100th birthday of Nelson Rockefeller. (Read more here.) Mark's will lecture on "Universal Health Care," a topic that Governor Rockefeller championed more than four decades ago and that remains a leading policy issue today.

In doing some research for the event, I came across this Nixon-era article in Time magazine from May 11, 1970. Here's the big finish:

While every American may be entitled to at least adequate health care, he is not getting it, and will not, until a momentous national debate reaches election-year levels of acrimony and is somehow resolved.

The issue has already been injected into this year's elections by Democrat Theodore C. Sorensen, campaigning for the U.S. Senate from New York, who last week announced his own plan for "universal health insurance." Apart from such standpatters as the A.M.A. and its arch-conservative Republican allies, there is a growing consensus that some national insurance blanket must be thrown over the ailing body of health care.

It may prove to be more of a patchwork quilt, with multicolored squares for sections covered by contracts with a variety of private insurers. If administration is not made too cumbersome, that would be far better than the present non-system with its huge gaps. Walter McNerney, president of the Blue Cross Association and head of a task force soon to report to the President on the nation's health needs, believes that a monolithic system operated by HEW would be wildly inflationary—and not sufficiently innovative. He wants a flexible, pluralistic plan.

But when? The principal difference between proponents of progress is over whether to put the cart of medical-care delivery before the horse of manpower resources, and let the resources catch up with the overburdened cart—or to take the time to breed more medical horses. That means waiting years for the country's health education system to produce many thousands more doctors and tens of thousands more paramedical personnel. Secretary [of Health, Education, and Welfare Robert H.] Finch sincerely believes that the modest expansions of federal health programs that he has submitted to Congress are important steps in the right direction, but will not commit himself to true national insurance. His chief assistant for health affairs, Under Secretary Roger O. Egeberg, thinks that some such plan may very well evolve in "six to seven years." His prognosis is as good as any.

Read the whole thing, to get an idea of what has changed and what has remained the same in this debate, and be sure to stop by Mark's talk tomorrow evening if you are on or near campus.

From around the web:

  • Greg Mankiw lets New Hampshire Senate candidate Jay Buckey into the Pigou Club for proposing a gas tax of roughly 7 cents per gallon at current prices. Read about the National Security Levy here. It's as good a place as any for an aspiring politician to start.
  • Closer to home, Dartmouth's president, Jim Wright, will receive the Semper Fidelis Award from the Marine Corps Scholarship Foundation for his work on behalf of wounded veterans. Read more here.

That's where Dartmouth Professor of English Emeritus Jeffrey Hart is sitting, according to this article in today's local Valley News. There's no questioning his conservative bona fides. Here's his reasoning about Senator Obama's candidacy:

And so it is that Jeffrey Hart counts himself a member of Obama's “new American majority” -- a group of voters the Illinois senator says are fed up with the partisan excesses and wrangling of the last two decades and eager for a practical, cooperative approach to the issues that have divided Washington.

“It turns out that these political parties are not always either liberal or conservative, Democratic or Republican,” Hart, a 77-year-old with thick white hair who lives in Lyme, said in an interview at his home yesterday. “The Democrat, under certain conditions, can be the conservative.”

Hart's estrangement from George W. Bush's brand of conservatism -- which Hart describes as “radicalism,” citing an expansion of federal spending and aggressive foreign policy -- began some time ago. After voting for Bush in 2000, Hart says he supported Sen. John Kerry in 2004. In the 2006 Congressional elections, Hart cast a ballot for Democrat Paul Hodes -- not Charlie Bass, the Republican whom Hart had voted for six times — out of frustration over the Iraq War, which he says has been mishandled.

“It's all wrong,” Hart said. “It's not going to be a beacon of liberty. There's no indication that Bush or Wolfowitz or Cheney looked at Iraq and said, ‘What are the problems here?' It’s as if Eisenhower did D-Day not knowing whether they had a cliff or a swamp on the other side.”

There are other problems with today's Republicans, according to Hart. He said his erstwhile party allied itself too closely with activist evangelical Christians. Perhaps more significantly, Hart said, the party has failed to adapt in order to address urgent domestic issues such as healthcare policy and the future of Social Security, thus forgetting Burke's famous caveat to conservatives: “A state without the means of some change is without the means of its conservation.”

The current Republican field does nothing to raise Hart's hopes. He said McCain is “candid and authentic” but too committed to keeping up the U.S. military presence in Iraq; former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, Hart said, “would say anything to get the nomination.”

In Obama, by contrast, Hart sees a Great Communicator in the mold of Reagan, John F. Kennedy and Franklin D. Roosevelt, a leader who can inspire Americans to work together on the problems of the 21st Century.

By the end of the line, that train car might be very crowded.

Read the whole thing.

Listening to the radio this morning, I heard a quote from Martin Luther King Jr. that I think captures his legacy very well, particularly for students and young people observing the day:

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.

More quotes here. Dartmouth's schedule of events here.

The VoxWife and I cast our ballots this morning. There was one vote for Senator McCain and one vote for Senator Obama. It seems like that's where a lot of people are today. Consider the end of this article in The New York Times today:

In the Republican ranks, Mr. McCain, 71, is a curious bookend to Mr. Obama. He is the oldest candidate in either party besides Ron Paul, another Republican, who is 72. Yet he draws hundreds of young people at some events.

Mr. McCain drew many hundreds when he spoke at Dartmouth, a number exceeded only by the 2,000 students who showed up for Mr. Obama.

“He is seen as Washington but not in it,” said Ronald G. Shaiko, an associate director of the Nelson A. Rockefeller Center at Dartmouth who works with focus groups. “They think he’ll upset the apple cart.”

Mr. McCain admits to admiring Mr. Obama’s appeal as a “wonderful thing” and has taken to borrowing a line or three. He has been channeling Mr. Obama, calling on Americans to “serve a cause greater than their self-interest,” a theme from his campaign in 2000.

At forums, he may hand the microphone to a young man with ONE, a group dedicated to eradicating what it calls “stupid poverty” and disease. The group has more than 17,000 members in New Hampshire.

At Dartmouth, Emily Goodell, 18, sat astride a strange fence, contemplating a vote for Mr. McCain or Mr. Obama.

“It is kind of a strange thing since they have different views on many of the issues,” Ms. Goodell said. “They come across as genuine. I trust them.”

Nearly as striking is the absence of young people on the trail traveled by Mitt Romney and Rudolph W. Giuliani. Mr. Romney visited Dartmouth, but the earth did not shake.

“He went straight to the medical school,” Professor Shaiko said. “He wanted to talk to adults. He has no presence here.”

Still, the youth vote has an uncertain mojo. For the moment, Mr. Obama is like catnip for many people younger than 30. Less certain is if his “it moment” will be sustained.

The results of the Rockefeller Center focus group before the Democratic debate in September at Dartmouth may be instructive. Mr. Obama’s stock dropped after he stood shoulder to shoulder with more experienced rivals.

“His talking about his work in the state legislature while another candidate is talking about negotiating with the North Koreans was a turnoff,” Professor Shaiko said. “They found him coming up short on experience.”

It has been an interesting turnaround for Senator Obama in those three months, and it has been equally interesting to see this aura emerge around him and Senator McCain. It does not seem to have much to do with the two parties, either. The longest line at the polling place was still the one to change affiliations back to undeclared.

Senator McCain included Dartmouth on this weekend's slate of town hall meetings, speaking to a capacity crowd in Alumni Hall last evening. I may not agree with him on some issues, but there's no arguing that he's an authentic statesman with a record in public service that does merit presidential consideration. That experience puts him in select company in this campaign. It was nice to see so many students at the event. Several of them asked good questions.

The event focused on two topics, the war in Iraq and federal spending. On both of these topics, McCain began with a sincere acknowledgement that it has been Republicans in the majority who have made major mistakes. On the war, McCain pinned the blame on Rumsfeld and insisted that the "surge" strategy was working. In response to a question by a student, however, I think McCain stumbled a bit in trying to describe how the war would eventually come to an end. Is it nothing more than we leave and declare victory when the troops are home? I don't think the Republicans, even the authentic ones, will have much chance for electoral success until they can paint a picture of a successful end to the war.

On federal spending, McCain linked runaway spending to corruption and the jail time now being served by former members of Congress. He sounds really good when he's talking about this, but he showed no signs of addressing my big frustration with federal spending. Does he really think we can close the budget deficit only by eliminating pork barrel projects? If so, then he must think that a big chunk of the defense budget is pork. He must think that plenty of health-related and entitlement spending is pork. And if that's the case, then he shouldn't tell me about a $233 million bridge to nowhere. He should be telling me about $233 billion (or more) in cuts that he's willing to make. And, of course, he cannot combine silence on that with the combination of "not wanting to raise your taxes" and "needing to spend more on defense." I've heard worse, but I still would have liked a bit more "straight talk" on the budget. If he were saying that, I'd be working for him.

Overall, a great event. As John Gregg wrote in his recent "Primary Sources" column for The Valley News, the Republican candidates have passed through this area, but they haven't had much of a presence. So it was particularly nice to see one stand up and answer direct questions.

UPDATE: An article from the student paper on the event.

On Friday, the Rockefeller Center and the Hopkins Center at Dartmouth presented The Capitol Steps, a political comedy troupe that tries to be "more ridiculous than whatever's in the news" and "put the mock in democracy." It's a tall order, but I think they managed just fine and provided welcome relief from the stress of primaries.

Here's a sampling of their work, on their YouTube page. Take a look at their website for more, particularly "Lirty Dies," which will sit your splides. You can also pick up their CDsat Amazon.

I haven't laughed that hard at something other than "what the kids just did" in a long time.

UPDATE: A contrary point of view in the student newspaper. Evidence of a generation gap?