Robert Hargrove

Leaders in government, business, education, and other domains who have a vision of a brave new world have often wound up frustrated because they cannot manifest the political and economic will to bring transformational change about.

Examples: Woodrow Wilson’s failure to get the United Stated Congress to ratify the League of Nations, Jimmy Carter’s struggles with driving through a national energy policy to relieve us from dependence on Mid East oil, Bill Clinton’s failure to pass a national health care program. The same kind of things happen in corporations every day.

If you want to become an extraordinary leader and an effective change agent, you may discover some invaluable lessons in James MacGreggor Burns new book, “Running Alone.” Burns shows that almost every President from JFK to Ronald Regan and from Bill Clinton to George W. Bush have failed in many respects to achieve their mission because of a phenomenon he calls “narrowing the base.”

Burns point is that for leaders to have an impact, it takes more than getting elected and depending on one faction, such as Bill Clinton did with healthcare reform in depending almost exclusively on liberal Democrats, or as George W. Bush has done with right wing Republicans. As John Naisbitt has pointed out, change doesn’t come from one force pushing on something, but from many forces pushing together.

For a president, CEO, or director of a non profit to bring about transformational change rather than transactional improvement, it requires broad based support from many quarters. Burns points out that the reason FDR was so effective in passing his New Deal legislation was because of the Great Electoral Coalition of 1936 that included Democrats, Southern Republicans, Labor, business and so on.

It is interesting to note that JFK ran his electoral campaign with his family and friends, ignoring the rest of the Democratic Party, with FRK often refusing to help fellow Democrats in their electoral campaigns. As a result, Kennedy was not able to bring in on his long coat tails a powerful Democratic majority in Congress and he ended up having to tread carefully when it came to passing his legislative agenda, such as getting federal aid for education.

Other presidents such as Jimmy Carter, Ronald Regan, Bill Clinton, and even George W. Bush specifically ran as Washington outsiders, which helped to get them elected, but in other ways hampered their effectiveness. In most cases, instead of seeking to broaden their base of support, they narrowed it to a few staunch supporters—left wingers, right wingers, PACS, etc.

For them, taking a stand often looked liked just digging in their heels and thumbing their nose at the opposition. Witness George W. Bushes, “I don’t care what you think” attitude toward the Democrats and his dwindling support for the war on terrorism.

It is my observation that many business leaders suffer from the same problem as our politicians. They get hired as CEO, VP, team leader, or whatever, develop a series of change initiatives, and then rather then creating a broad base of support, they narrow it.

For example, some may say, “If I can get the CEO to support this, these other guys will just have to go along with it; they will have no choice.” Unfortunately for them, rarely does it turn out that way. The CEO is usually politically savvy enough to know not to drive an idea through unless it has the support of the board, executive committee, etc.

Perhaps the underlying lesson is that a visionary leader is not enough, nor is being a top performer who can move mountains through sheer might. Making a difference in your world depends on learning to master the political chessboard. And the first step toward mastery may be to embrace the opposition, especially as change comes not from one force pushing on something, but many forces pushing together.