I have a good deal of respect for your typical line of discussion, this one...seems back end loaded with bias. You do a huge disservice to the political landscape by not expressing the Marxist views and socialism degradation to the American political landscape that Kamala would bring, and both have potential to cause harm to the American way of life politically and emotionally.
Unfortunate you hate someone so much you seek to find them in spaces they just dont exist. This is actually an article about business leaders. This is about their fitness for politics. Kamala is not a business leader. Your comment is not on topic or relevant in this space. Take the whatabout-ism and election fear mongering elsewhere.
@Emily How is her comment not relevant? Adam lliterally opened the piece talking about Trump. Look beyond your bias to see how much bias this article had. Adam is incredible but he is not immune to bias. Wouldn’t you say calling a person a nazi, totalitarian, fascist, who will turn on his own people fear mongering? “It’s unfortunate you hate someone so much you seek to find them in spaces that don’t exist.” Pot, meet kettle.
I'm actually republican so you might be projecting your own biases. Adam's piece is NOT about Trump. It's about business leaders in politics. What is one example that is relevant to this topic of his years of research on this? That's right, that's where trump comes in. I cant read for you, so if you cant see this you probably dont belong here. If Republicans can't see this and acknowledge it for what it is we won't have a chance at winning an election. I wont speak for a candidate like a lamb and I can't speak to Adam's Biases either. He's human. Politics is longstanding. The research is longstanding. There is always context to consider. Seems like you too are removing all context once you read your cult leaders name. Turning on his own people is cited from a separate resource. One worth listening to. DJTs own appointment in 2016. He has only recently spoken out publicly like this. That is to this "why now?" Question. So, have the opinion you will but I was trying to help Debra see herself. My comment as a mirror is not irrelevant but there is little to it to critique because it doesn't reflect me but her. The same could be said for yours. If she or you can't see yourself in the mirror I can help you any further and I won't keep responding unless I deem it worth my time. There seems to be many confused by my response so this is my last effort to add context and explanation for you. I live in rural Minnesota ("rocks and cows"). I own firearms, I am female, I am a mother of twin boys. I am a hairstylist (business owner) turned engineer that enjoys philosophy and research and learning, free thought and long form conversation. I will ring the freedom bell all day long and back the blue but I will jot vote for someone that tells me they will point the military "inside". This is disgusting. If someone tells you they will abuse you, believe them. If someone tells you they are selfish and will trash anyone they need to to get what they want, believe them. They hold nothing sacred. Not even freedom. Not even democracy. Not even spirituality or religion. Someone that stands for self, stands for nothing and no one else.
Opinion she clearly has and has expressed on the site. She's not been deleted or censored. Misplacement is what I'm pointing out. This is in her best interest to note as it demonstrates significant vulnerabilities to her constitution.
your comment does not have any relevance whatsoever, in that I did not express hatred, rather doubt that the expose on one candidate over another shows bias.
Please provide the Democratic candidate with the respect she deserves just as much as our former president. The fact that you refer to her as "Kamala" instead of "Vice President Harris," "Ms. Harris," or even simply "Harris" is not only disrespectful to an elected official who holds the nation's second highest office but also betrays your own bias (and perhaps latent sexism.)
Melissa, I often refer to Donald and Kamala. Using the first name is not disrespectful. Having said that, our society does love hierarchies and titles. Truth and virtues, not so much.
Very original. So half of the US is in a cult? 90% of the media is left leaning. Where do you think your cognitive dissonance, trigger words (cult, fascist,etc) come from?
Cognitive dissonance? I am not seeing you ponder the points he makes and responding with well researched objective points in either support or to contradict, but I see your cognitive dissonance shining through (90% of the media being left leaning with zero data). If General John Kelly is saying Trump meets the definition of a Fascist and he worked side by side with him, I am going to trust his assessment over you any day. Not sure how you ponder that with your cognitive dissonance. How do you?
Yes, and most of us in Europe are watching it with concern. Cults are also growing elsewhere but not as extreme as in the US, with a very dangerous combination of social Darwinism, religious fanaticism, over valuing own opinion w.r.t. science and close mindedness. To me it appears like it is growing to the same threatening appearance as religious fanaticism e.g. in Islam, communism in its early days in Russia, and Nazism in the 1930's in Germany. I also think that most people in this movement can't help this and are victims of manipulation of some central figures.
Other parts of the world should make sure that they can defend themselves when the unique military capability of the US, once used to make things better in the world, falls into the hands of these central manipulators. Si vis pacem, para bellum
Did you notice the title of the piece? It’s about business leaders who become politicians. Kamala Harris was never a business leader. Hence the reason she’s not in this article.
Can you be more specific? How would shoring up those who need help and evening out the wealth harm you? You have enormous benefits from the evening... your health would be better your air your property value public education improves your pay your social safety net...the tax system would benefit you more than harm you. Only billionaires and the uber rich
It baffles me how the cognitive dissonance has taken over people’s minds so much so that any bit of criticism of their dear leader is rejected. It’s a cult.
You’re the second person on this chain to use the word cult. You all just repeat the same words your media brainwashing overlords say. I would say THAT is a cult.
Yes because you people just parrot the same words…”weird, cult, fascist, etc” I voted for Harris because I don’t like Trump policy, not because of what the media told me and I certainly don’t regurgitate nonsense.
As a Canadian reader with no participation of the US politics (ie objective), a lengthy biased email on a political candidate is not what I signed up for. It's poor taste to spin it as an analysis when it's clearly propaganda. This is unfortunate as I've been a fan of your content until this. Unless your next email is a similar biased breakdown on the other party, you've turned into a political content vehicle that I'm sure none of your readers asked for.
Writing a critical analysis of Trump is not propaganda. I've been reading the research on the challenges that business leaders face in politics for two decades, and it helps to shed light on what's unfolding right now.
Speaking as a Brit without a vote in this election but heavily impacted by the outcome, how much more evidence of the impacts of poor leadership and narcissism do you need than Trump’s previous term in office? The Conservative Party lost the UK election in July because that was the first available opportunity to kick out incompetent leaders - the US got your opportunity to do that straight after the first year of the pandemic.
Well, now that you point it out, it's clear to me that the author is a Trumper. He trashed the Democrats - in the NYT, no less! - but the nasty article about the Republican candidate was only sent to his subscribers. Hmmm.
Adam the way you wrote it is what got me a tizzy. Trump was a poor choice of example, as that detracts from your point by bringing up a loaded and divisive subject when the point of your writing was about business leaders.
Not only that, the opening line:
"When Donald Trump talked about deploying the military against "the enemy within," critics sounded the alarm—again—about his increasingly authoritarian rhetoric."
A guy who's already served as president is now on the crash course for trumping totalitarism to American? This is an oft-repeated talking point I've only heard one side use. Not only that, the 'increasingly' suggests that not only was he, of course, doing what you just accused him of, he will get even worse. It's a prediction, in the same sentence as an unfounded accusation that I can only imagine one side of your audience having.
My first thought reading that sentence is 'oh I know which side he's on now,' and it wasn't tracked to organizational psychology at all. To me, I saw a little Adam Grant waving his democrat flag. A sign that deplorables are not welcome.
And then you make it even worse:
"-Many- see his escalating threats as proof of a growing thirst for power."
One of the biggest annoyances I have with democrat-speak is the sudden shift from portraying one side as unforgivable, and then distancing language as if the writer has no opinion.
Then you go on to write Trump's history in your own words, multiple times, as if these glaring flaws are obvious.
Please read the below and tell me this is a good way to open an attempt at explaining psychology:
"When Kamala Harris talked about deploying the military against "the enemy within," critics sounded the alarm—again—about her increasingly authoritarian rhetoric. Many see her escalating threats as proof of a growing thirst for power."
""-Many- see his escalating threats as proof of a growing thirst for power."
One of the biggest annoyances I have with democrat-speak is the sudden shift from portraying one side as unforgivable, and then distancing language as if the writer has no opinion."
hahahaha
That's totally djt. " *everyone* has been trying for 52 years to send abortion back to the states." he's the only one I hear speaking vaguely about "people", "portraying one side as unforgivable, and using distancing language." Who are they all? Why did neither he nor his inner circle ever produce any evidence of voter fraud?
J. D., tRUMP is a #POS and that tell you pretty much everything you need to know about him. That he has a good chance of being elected, tells you pretty much everything U need to know about us, and it's an extremely ugly portrait that it paints!
Then why make it about Trump and not politics in general? I’m not a Trump supporter (or Kamala), but you’re very one sided. I used to love your content, but also agree this is propaganda, especially during a sensitive time of year. Did the Democrats pay you for this content?
The expectation for influencers to remain unbiased is unrealistic. We are facing, and that “we” includes Dr. Adam Grant, an unprecedented shift in our American way of life should Donald Trump get re-elected. The fact that you can’t see how Adam’s thoughtful and measured expression of opinion is at risk is hilarious; what’s even more jarring is how you fail to see the irony in the point you’re trying to make. You’re almost there… Try again, fella.
How are we facing an unprecedented shift when he has already been president. If it were 2015 that language might work but you either don’t understand the definition of unprecedented (which I know you do) or you’re just fear mongering and brainwashed by your media overlords. Adam can express whatever he wants but it’s irresponsible not to acknowledge his bias in the article.
Of course it's bias, it's his writing lmfao - you can chose to subscribe or not... he writes for his audience, not for you! 😱 clutch your pearls unsubsidized and leave those of us who like it alone... for those that need to hear it "Trump sheep need not apply".
Cool. So nothing about how you just said unprecedented shift when there actually is precedent? Didn’t think so. You’re literally the opposite of a free thinker. You can’t criticize people or ideas that are generally in line with your views. That is a cult. That is sheep. Oh btw, I voted for Harris…I’m just capable of critical thinking.
Yup, Adam wrote a biased political hit piece against Trump. This is propaganda. Adam has no intention of offering counter arguments. I am dissapointed Adam stooped this low. I did not sign up for this.
Wait, whaaat?? Interesting comment. I mean, how many political emails have you received?? I don't recall any others from this newsletter. I enjoy the content. I welcome critical thinking by brilliant minds no matter the topic or the conclusion (sometimes despite topic / conclusion).
I commend you for including the example of how Lincoln performed in office. He is the standard by which most go by for Presidential leadership. If some bothered to read that far in your essay and really absorbed what you said, they would know that all Presidents make mistakes in office. It is their character that determines how they respond to mistakes. Thank you.
Adam, I really appreciate the historical analysis and perspective. It also makes intuitive sense. Regarding some of the comments about politicization of your comments, I think you do us a service by applying sociological and behavioral principles to help us interpret current events. This one lets us rethink the common belief that business leaders are to be good at politics and collaboration.
However, I am well aware that I suffer from the confirmation bias so take it with the grain of salt. Carla
Interesting take on leadership. Yes, it's about a specific candidate and it's also generally applicable to any public office - as well as non-profit and non-profit board positions. I found it valuable and thought-provoking.
Supporting Emily in refocusing the discussion to the main point.
Fundamentally, the article is about role specific competency alignment. The core competencies and environmental conditions that drive business success are fundamentally different from those required for effective political leadership. Success in one domain does not naturally translate to the other due to distinct role requirements and operational contexts. Different roles require different skills. This holds true for all roles not just the role of president. That is why job descriptions detail skills/compencies and experience requirements in an attempt to ensure a potential candidate is "fit for purpose".
When our skills, experience, and behavioral competencies align with our role requirements we're in the best position to excel and that's true for everyone, even the US president.
and yet, for most Americans, life under Trump was pretty good. Employment good, inflation and prices low, stock market returning decently, illegal immigration lower, and less military confrontation to name some. Contrast to a career politician in Biden, who should be better according to your article's argument and clearly wasn't.
Actually, the data doesn't support that at all. Inflation was caused by global factors and Trump's inability to effectively manage the pandemic. He cut taxes and spent more money than any President in a term. Inflation doesnt happen instantly... its a delayed response to the spend/revenue policies of Trump. GDP growth is higher than the Trump economy even excluding the pandemic. Economists point to Trump's plan to mass deport, tarrif, and cap credit card interest rates as devastating for future growth. And that comes from the not liberal Wall Street Journal.
You are in a cult. Try doing some research and challenge what you read on Fox News.
Justin, the Ukraine and Russia war, which upset the global demand and supply chains, along with the significant printing of money during covid19 are likely the two largest contributors to high inflation. This high inflation was a global experience.
True, though you did include "and Trump's inability to effectively manage the pandemic". The handling of the pandemic was a dismal gong show around the world. For three months, folks were flowing into Canada from China in great numbers, with the government saying the public risk was very low. Then, in one day, the public risk became very high. lol
And he gutted the agencies and plans that were available to better contain and manage pandemics. I'm not suggesting that if Trump didn't do everything right, there wouldn't be impact, but his handling and strategy was abysmal. He also constantly harped on the feds to reduce interest rates, which made it difficult to absorb the pandemic inflicted recession. I guess my primary issue though is that Biden and Harris aren't responsible for inflation. They inherited the conditions and have brought them back in the range of historical normalcy.
Justin, I would suggest the monetary policy of high interest rates, which lasted for a very long time, brought inflation under control. On a positive note, it appears we may have avoided a recession, though the uncertainty is lingering.
According to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, Trump's tax cut was the 8th largest in US history. Also, LBJ spent the most money (inflation adjusted) in a single term (knowing that Congress, not the President, spends the money).
More wisdom from #AdamGrant founded in practical research and written from a mindset of good emotional self-regulation, something hard to find in writing about Trump. So thank you Adam in making sense and not being reactive!
Excellent article and consistent with my experience as a leader of three businesses. This needs to be shared more broadly. Perhaps behind an airplane criss crossing the nation between now and 11/5.
I have a good deal of respect for your typical line of discussion, this one...seems back end loaded with bias. You do a huge disservice to the political landscape by not expressing the Marxist views and socialism degradation to the American political landscape that Kamala would bring, and both have potential to cause harm to the American way of life politically and emotionally.
Unfortunate you hate someone so much you seek to find them in spaces they just dont exist. This is actually an article about business leaders. This is about their fitness for politics. Kamala is not a business leader. Your comment is not on topic or relevant in this space. Take the whatabout-ism and election fear mongering elsewhere.
@Emily How is her comment not relevant? Adam lliterally opened the piece talking about Trump. Look beyond your bias to see how much bias this article had. Adam is incredible but he is not immune to bias. Wouldn’t you say calling a person a nazi, totalitarian, fascist, who will turn on his own people fear mongering? “It’s unfortunate you hate someone so much you seek to find them in spaces that don’t exist.” Pot, meet kettle.
I'm actually republican so you might be projecting your own biases. Adam's piece is NOT about Trump. It's about business leaders in politics. What is one example that is relevant to this topic of his years of research on this? That's right, that's where trump comes in. I cant read for you, so if you cant see this you probably dont belong here. If Republicans can't see this and acknowledge it for what it is we won't have a chance at winning an election. I wont speak for a candidate like a lamb and I can't speak to Adam's Biases either. He's human. Politics is longstanding. The research is longstanding. There is always context to consider. Seems like you too are removing all context once you read your cult leaders name. Turning on his own people is cited from a separate resource. One worth listening to. DJTs own appointment in 2016. He has only recently spoken out publicly like this. That is to this "why now?" Question. So, have the opinion you will but I was trying to help Debra see herself. My comment as a mirror is not irrelevant but there is little to it to critique because it doesn't reflect me but her. The same could be said for yours. If she or you can't see yourself in the mirror I can help you any further and I won't keep responding unless I deem it worth my time. There seems to be many confused by my response so this is my last effort to add context and explanation for you. I live in rural Minnesota ("rocks and cows"). I own firearms, I am female, I am a mother of twin boys. I am a hairstylist (business owner) turned engineer that enjoys philosophy and research and learning, free thought and long form conversation. I will ring the freedom bell all day long and back the blue but I will jot vote for someone that tells me they will point the military "inside". This is disgusting. If someone tells you they will abuse you, believe them. If someone tells you they are selfish and will trash anyone they need to to get what they want, believe them. They hold nothing sacred. Not even freedom. Not even democracy. Not even spirituality or religion. Someone that stands for self, stands for nothing and no one else.
re: "I was trying to help Debra see herself". Were you?
I believe that this platform promotes free speech and Debra is entitled to have an opinion.
Opinion she clearly has and has expressed on the site. She's not been deleted or censored. Misplacement is what I'm pointing out. This is in her best interest to note as it demonstrates significant vulnerabilities to her constitution.
Right on, Mo, right on!
your comment does not have any relevance whatsoever, in that I did not express hatred, rather doubt that the expose on one candidate over another shows bias.
Take your desire for controlled speech and totalitarianism elsewhere.
Please provide the Democratic candidate with the respect she deserves just as much as our former president. The fact that you refer to her as "Kamala" instead of "Vice President Harris," "Ms. Harris," or even simply "Harris" is not only disrespectful to an elected official who holds the nation's second highest office but also betrays your own bias (and perhaps latent sexism.)
Melissa, I often refer to Donald and Kamala. Using the first name is not disrespectful. Having said that, our society does love hierarchies and titles. Truth and virtues, not so much.
Where do truth and virtues come into this discussion?
Melissa, you are making inferences which are not true. Truth is relevant in this discussion.
You’re in a cult.
Very original. So half of the US is in a cult? 90% of the media is left leaning. Where do you think your cognitive dissonance, trigger words (cult, fascist,etc) come from?
Cognitive dissonance? I am not seeing you ponder the points he makes and responding with well researched objective points in either support or to contradict, but I see your cognitive dissonance shining through (90% of the media being left leaning with zero data). If General John Kelly is saying Trump meets the definition of a Fascist and he worked side by side with him, I am going to trust his assessment over you any day. Not sure how you ponder that with your cognitive dissonance. How do you?
Yes, and most of us in Europe are watching it with concern. Cults are also growing elsewhere but not as extreme as in the US, with a very dangerous combination of social Darwinism, religious fanaticism, over valuing own opinion w.r.t. science and close mindedness. To me it appears like it is growing to the same threatening appearance as religious fanaticism e.g. in Islam, communism in its early days in Russia, and Nazism in the 1930's in Germany. I also think that most people in this movement can't help this and are victims of manipulation of some central figures.
Other parts of the world should make sure that they can defend themselves when the unique military capability of the US, once used to make things better in the world, falls into the hands of these central manipulators. Si vis pacem, para bellum
Yep. You’re in a cult.
Did you notice the title of the piece? It’s about business leaders who become politicians. Kamala Harris was never a business leader. Hence the reason she’s not in this article.
Can you be more specific? How would shoring up those who need help and evening out the wealth harm you? You have enormous benefits from the evening... your health would be better your air your property value public education improves your pay your social safety net...the tax system would benefit you more than harm you. Only billionaires and the uber rich
DONT want a fair tax system.
I would suggest that you learn a bit more about European history and learn what Marxist means. Don't spend too much time on twitter
It baffles me how the cognitive dissonance has taken over people’s minds so much so that any bit of criticism of their dear leader is rejected. It’s a cult.
You’re the second person on this chain to use the word cult. You all just repeat the same words your media brainwashing overlords say. I would say THAT is a cult.
Funny how the term is replicating around you. Interesting observation.
Yes because you people just parrot the same words…”weird, cult, fascist, etc” I voted for Harris because I don’t like Trump policy, not because of what the media told me and I certainly don’t regurgitate nonsense.
As a Canadian reader with no participation of the US politics (ie objective), a lengthy biased email on a political candidate is not what I signed up for. It's poor taste to spin it as an analysis when it's clearly propaganda. This is unfortunate as I've been a fan of your content until this. Unless your next email is a similar biased breakdown on the other party, you've turned into a political content vehicle that I'm sure none of your readers asked for.
To set the record straight, I've published not one but two critical analyses of Democratic leadership, both of which I shared in this newsletter:
www.nytimes.com/2024/07/03/opinion/joe-biden-president-election.html
www.nytimes.com/2024/07/14/opinion/biden-leadership-truth.html
Writing a critical analysis of Trump is not propaganda. I've been reading the research on the challenges that business leaders face in politics for two decades, and it helps to shed light on what's unfolding right now.
so factually speaking
1) Your previous articles were in NY Times, not your own newsletter
2) You timed your newsletter specifically on Trump close to the election
Will there be an analysis of the Democratic leadership specifically on Harris before the election as well?
Speaking as a Brit without a vote in this election but heavily impacted by the outcome, how much more evidence of the impacts of poor leadership and narcissism do you need than Trump’s previous term in office? The Conservative Party lost the UK election in July because that was the first available opportunity to kick out incompetent leaders - the US got your opportunity to do that straight after the first year of the pandemic.
Well, now that you point it out, it's clear to me that the author is a Trumper. He trashed the Democrats - in the NYT, no less! - but the nasty article about the Republican candidate was only sent to his subscribers. Hmmm.
100%
It is a very thoughtful account on the difference between being a successful private sector leader and a successful public servant. Well done.
Adam the way you wrote it is what got me a tizzy. Trump was a poor choice of example, as that detracts from your point by bringing up a loaded and divisive subject when the point of your writing was about business leaders.
Not only that, the opening line:
"When Donald Trump talked about deploying the military against "the enemy within," critics sounded the alarm—again—about his increasingly authoritarian rhetoric."
A guy who's already served as president is now on the crash course for trumping totalitarism to American? This is an oft-repeated talking point I've only heard one side use. Not only that, the 'increasingly' suggests that not only was he, of course, doing what you just accused him of, he will get even worse. It's a prediction, in the same sentence as an unfounded accusation that I can only imagine one side of your audience having.
My first thought reading that sentence is 'oh I know which side he's on now,' and it wasn't tracked to organizational psychology at all. To me, I saw a little Adam Grant waving his democrat flag. A sign that deplorables are not welcome.
And then you make it even worse:
"-Many- see his escalating threats as proof of a growing thirst for power."
One of the biggest annoyances I have with democrat-speak is the sudden shift from portraying one side as unforgivable, and then distancing language as if the writer has no opinion.
Then you go on to write Trump's history in your own words, multiple times, as if these glaring flaws are obvious.
Please read the below and tell me this is a good way to open an attempt at explaining psychology:
"When Kamala Harris talked about deploying the military against "the enemy within," critics sounded the alarm—again—about her increasingly authoritarian rhetoric. Many see her escalating threats as proof of a growing thirst for power."
""-Many- see his escalating threats as proof of a growing thirst for power."
One of the biggest annoyances I have with democrat-speak is the sudden shift from portraying one side as unforgivable, and then distancing language as if the writer has no opinion."
hahahaha
That's totally djt. " *everyone* has been trying for 52 years to send abortion back to the states." he's the only one I hear speaking vaguely about "people", "portraying one side as unforgivable, and using distancing language." Who are they all? Why did neither he nor his inner circle ever produce any evidence of voter fraud?
J. D., tRUMP is a #POS and that tell you pretty much everything you need to know about him. That he has a good chance of being elected, tells you pretty much everything U need to know about us, and it's an extremely ugly portrait that it paints!
Then why make it about Trump and not politics in general? I’m not a Trump supporter (or Kamala), but you’re very one sided. I used to love your content, but also agree this is propaganda, especially during a sensitive time of year. Did the Democrats pay you for this content?
The expectation for influencers to remain unbiased is unrealistic. We are facing, and that “we” includes Dr. Adam Grant, an unprecedented shift in our American way of life should Donald Trump get re-elected. The fact that you can’t see how Adam’s thoughtful and measured expression of opinion is at risk is hilarious; what’s even more jarring is how you fail to see the irony in the point you’re trying to make. You’re almost there… Try again, fella.
How are we facing an unprecedented shift when he has already been president. If it were 2015 that language might work but you either don’t understand the definition of unprecedented (which I know you do) or you’re just fear mongering and brainwashed by your media overlords. Adam can express whatever he wants but it’s irresponsible not to acknowledge his bias in the article.
Of course it's bias, it's his writing lmfao - you can chose to subscribe or not... he writes for his audience, not for you! 😱 clutch your pearls unsubsidized and leave those of us who like it alone... for those that need to hear it "Trump sheep need not apply".
Cool. So nothing about how you just said unprecedented shift when there actually is precedent? Didn’t think so. You’re literally the opposite of a free thinker. You can’t criticize people or ideas that are generally in line with your views. That is a cult. That is sheep. Oh btw, I voted for Harris…I’m just capable of critical thinking.
different Emily.
Yup, Adam wrote a biased political hit piece against Trump. This is propaganda. Adam has no intention of offering counter arguments. I am dissapointed Adam stooped this low. I did not sign up for this.
I don’t suppose you read far enough to see the example of Jimmy Carter, perhaps the ultimate Democrat, also a relatively unsuccessful president?
Wait, whaaat?? Interesting comment. I mean, how many political emails have you received?? I don't recall any others from this newsletter. I enjoy the content. I welcome critical thinking by brilliant minds no matter the topic or the conclusion (sometimes despite topic / conclusion).
A marvellous read with lots of learnings applicable to life and work .
I commend you for including the example of how Lincoln performed in office. He is the standard by which most go by for Presidential leadership. If some bothered to read that far in your essay and really absorbed what you said, they would know that all Presidents make mistakes in office. It is their character that determines how they respond to mistakes. Thank you.
Adam, I really appreciate the historical analysis and perspective. It also makes intuitive sense. Regarding some of the comments about politicization of your comments, I think you do us a service by applying sociological and behavioral principles to help us interpret current events. This one lets us rethink the common belief that business leaders are to be good at politics and collaboration.
However, I am well aware that I suffer from the confirmation bias so take it with the grain of salt. Carla
A refreshing and somewhat different insight that makes some scary behavior more understandable.
Bravo, Adam.
Interesting take on leadership. Yes, it's about a specific candidate and it's also generally applicable to any public office - as well as non-profit and non-profit board positions. I found it valuable and thought-provoking.
Thank you for sharing this. It's important and takes courage in this day in age to speak up. Even with facts.
This is a stimulating read.
Supporting Emily in refocusing the discussion to the main point.
Fundamentally, the article is about role specific competency alignment. The core competencies and environmental conditions that drive business success are fundamentally different from those required for effective political leadership. Success in one domain does not naturally translate to the other due to distinct role requirements and operational contexts. Different roles require different skills. This holds true for all roles not just the role of president. That is why job descriptions detail skills/compencies and experience requirements in an attempt to ensure a potential candidate is "fit for purpose".
When our skills, experience, and behavioral competencies align with our role requirements we're in the best position to excel and that's true for everyone, even the US president.
Thanks Adam for highlighting this core truth.
This is a unique and novel take. I hadn't heard it so eloquently before. It makes a lot of sense.
and yet, for most Americans, life under Trump was pretty good. Employment good, inflation and prices low, stock market returning decently, illegal immigration lower, and less military confrontation to name some. Contrast to a career politician in Biden, who should be better according to your article's argument and clearly wasn't.
Actually, the data doesn't support that at all. Inflation was caused by global factors and Trump's inability to effectively manage the pandemic. He cut taxes and spent more money than any President in a term. Inflation doesnt happen instantly... its a delayed response to the spend/revenue policies of Trump. GDP growth is higher than the Trump economy even excluding the pandemic. Economists point to Trump's plan to mass deport, tarrif, and cap credit card interest rates as devastating for future growth. And that comes from the not liberal Wall Street Journal.
You are in a cult. Try doing some research and challenge what you read on Fox News.
Justin, the Ukraine and Russia war, which upset the global demand and supply chains, along with the significant printing of money during covid19 are likely the two largest contributors to high inflation. This high inflation was a global experience.
That is what I said? I said Global factors and fiscal policy.
True, though you did include "and Trump's inability to effectively manage the pandemic". The handling of the pandemic was a dismal gong show around the world. For three months, folks were flowing into Canada from China in great numbers, with the government saying the public risk was very low. Then, in one day, the public risk became very high. lol
And he gutted the agencies and plans that were available to better contain and manage pandemics. I'm not suggesting that if Trump didn't do everything right, there wouldn't be impact, but his handling and strategy was abysmal. He also constantly harped on the feds to reduce interest rates, which made it difficult to absorb the pandemic inflicted recession. I guess my primary issue though is that Biden and Harris aren't responsible for inflation. They inherited the conditions and have brought them back in the range of historical normalcy.
www.barrons.com/amp/articles/trump-harris-economy-inflation-jobs-c1d411b1
Justin, I would suggest the monetary policy of high interest rates, which lasted for a very long time, brought inflation under control. On a positive note, it appears we may have avoided a recession, though the uncertainty is lingering.
re: “Biden and Harris aren't responsible for inflation.” To suggest the fiscal policy did not contribute is not true.
According to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, Trump's tax cut was the 8th largest in US history. Also, LBJ spent the most money (inflation adjusted) in a single term (knowing that Congress, not the President, spends the money).
More wisdom from #AdamGrant founded in practical research and written from a mindset of good emotional self-regulation, something hard to find in writing about Trump. So thank you Adam in making sense and not being reactive!
Character always matters.
Excellent article and consistent with my experience as a leader of three businesses. This needs to be shared more broadly. Perhaps behind an airplane criss crossing the nation between now and 11/5.
Thanks for your observation