2024 U.S. Election - Leadership and Competency

Article 4 of 5

There are many schools of thought on what competency in leadership really is. Some prioritize industry expertise over social and people skills, while others emphasize soft skills over technical knowledge. While it is important to note that competency in leadership differs from technical competency, the truth is that leadership competency is an intricate balance of experience, information, skills, and emotional intelligence.

Leadership decisions often hinge on the interplay between values, strategy, and effectiveness. The recent political landscape provides a compelling case study that will excite educators and pollical pundits for decades when discussing and analyzing the role of competency in Presidential leadership.

Looking back at the campaign and the month following the elections, it is apparent that the Harris campaign’s decision-making processes were significantly more compromised than those of the Trump campaign. Decisions appeared reactive rather than strategic, leaving the public desperately searching for reasons to validate the campaign’s direction and leadership choices. This perception not only reflected a lack of clarity but also weakened overall confidence in the Harris team’s ability to adapt under pressure.

The Harris Campaign: A Struggle with Competency and Public Perception

It has been over a month since the election, and the Harris campaign continues to be under intense scrutiny—not only for its campaign execution but also for its strategic approach and inability to effectively navigate the aftermath of its election loss. At the heart of this critique is a perceived lack of strategic decision-making competency in campaign execution and post-defeat strategic response.

• Questions of Leadership Criteria: Critics have raised concerns about the democratic process and decision-making criteria used to elevate Kamala Harris to her leadership position. Despite efforts to defend these decisions, public and intra-party confidence remains shaken.
• Public Discontent: The perception that leadership decisions were politically motivated rather than merit-based has eroded confidence among the electorate and key stakeholders. This misalignment highlights a common challenge: failing to balance values with demonstrated strategic capability.

While Harris has checked certain boxes regarding experience, education, and party support, the assessment of her lack of effectiveness raises critical questions about her competencies for one of the most prominent offices in the world. More so, her ability to function under pressure has been a recurring point of contention, with many scrutinizing her laughter as nervous laughter—a behaviour often interpreted as a lack of the professional gravitas necessary for high-stakes environments. This scrutiny is amplified by historical comparisons to leaders who demonstrated exceptional composure and decisive action during crises. Franklin D. Roosevelt’s leadership during the Great Depression and Winston Churchill’s resolve in World War II are benchmarks for effective crisis management. These leaders thrived under immense pressure, using clarity, strategy, and poise to inspire confidence and navigate turmoil. In contrast, Harris’s public perception struggles to align with these historical examples, raising deeper concerns about her capacity to lead effectively in similarly demanding circumstances – in today’s chaotic global conditions.

Business Insight: Effective leadership combines strategic vision, executing strategic vision, decision-making grounded in merit, and skills of influence. Leaders must ensure that their choices align with organizational goals and stakeholder expectations. A respected business coach once said that anyone can lead a well-performing organization to maintain its performance; however, only a strong leader can turn around a poor-performing business. Leadership is more than maintaining performance when the business is stable; it is about excelling under intense scrutiny and pressure to execute your strategic objectives while driving growth. Overreliance on political or expedient strategies at the expense of proven competency can undermine trust and performance.

Trump’s Leadership Strategy: A Focus on Capability

Donald Trump’s leadership capabilities have also been debated. While his approach sparked polarized opinions, one notable distinction during his administration was the emphasis on competency and results-driven leadership. This stands in contrast to trends in other sectors, where, while important, diversity, inclusivity, and equality initiatives occasionally overshadow the need for proven skills and merit.

• The Noble Intention vs. Results Dilemma: Promoting diversity is vital for equity and inclusion, but organizations must also ensure leadership appointments must possess relevant leadership performance capabilities. Sometimes, leadership roles are filled without a rigorous evaluation of competency, resulting in decreased productivity and efficiency. Historical examples, such as the 2008 financial crisis, highlight how misaligned leadership decisions by underqualified executives exacerbated systemic failures. In contrast, leaders like Lee Iacocca, who turned around Chrysler in the 1980s, exemplify how capable leadership can steer organizations back from the brink.
• Strategic Prioritization of Results: Trump’s administration underscored a results-driven focus on leadership, with decisions that can favour expertise and measurable outcomes over political or symbolic gestures. This approach is a critical lesson for businesses: prioritizing capable leadership fosters long-term success and adaptability. It recalls historical precedents, such as Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal programs, which prioritized pragmatic solutions and competent leadership during a time of crisis. This comparison reinforces the necessity of aligning leadership decisions with strategic priorities and proven effectiveness.

Jordan Peterson’s “Hierarchy of Competence” and Its Business Implications

Jordan Peterson discusses the?hierarchy of competence?as a conceptual framework to explain how competence organizes societies and hierarchies.?

Key Aspects of the Hierarchy of Competence:

1. Competence vs. Power: Peterson argues that hierarchies in human societies are primarily based on?competence?rather than power or exploitation. Competence refers to an individual’s ability to solve problems, contribute to the group, and succeed in a given domain. These hierarchies are often meritocratic, rewarding those who demonstrate skill, reliability, and value in their roles.
2. Specialization of Competence: Individuals excel in specific areas based on their talents and efforts. Over time, society rewards those who perform exceptionally well in their field, leading to the emergence of hierarchies. For example, someone who demonstrates exceptional leadership, creativity, or technical ability naturally ascends to higher positions within organizations or social structures.
3. Pareto Principle in Hierarchies: Peterson highlights the?Pareto Principle (80/20 rule)?to explain the distribution of competence and success within a hierarchy. A small percentage of people (the most competent) achieve the majority of outcomes or rewards. This principle contributes to inequality in hierarchies but reflects the natural result of varied competence levels across individuals.
4. Stability and Productivity of Competence Hierarchies: Properly functioning competence hierarchies are essential for societal stability and progress. They allow for the efficient division of labour and reward systems that motivate innovation and hard work. Dysfunction arises when hierarchies become corrupt, favouring nepotism, deceit, or exploitation rather than genuine competence.
5. Iterative Development: People develop competence through discipline, responsibility, and iterative improvement over time. Peterson stresses personal responsibility as a cornerstone for ascending the hierarchy.
6. Ethics of Hierarchies: While Peterson defends the necessity of competence hierarchies, he also acknowledges the potential for abuse when hierarchies become too rigid or corrupted. He suggests that ethical vigilance is crucial to maintaining fair and functional systems.

Jordan Peterson’s hierarchy of competence highlights societies' natural and necessary organization around skills and capabilities. It emphasizes meritocracy and personal responsibility while warning against the dangers of corruption within these systems. While this may appear complex for small and medium-sized businesses, the relevant insights can be extracted and adapted to smaller organizations’ resource constraints and operating models.

Lessons for SMBs and Organizational Leaders

An analysis of the leadership strategies from both the Harris and Trump camps provides critical insights for businesses:

1. Competency Matters: Strategic leadership relies on placing individuals with the right skills and expertise in key roles—not merely those with political affiliations or good intentions.
2. Balance is Key: Diversity and inclusivity are essential but should not compromise leadership performance or organizational productivity. Strategic decisions must integrate values with proven expertise.
3. Effective Leadership Signals Confidence: Leaders prioritizing measurable outcomes, strategic skill, and transparency build trust and align teams toward sustainable success.

The Trump administration’s emphasis on skill-based hiring and results-driven leadership highlights a strategic model that organizations can emulate. Prioritizing proven leadership and focusing on results provides stability, accountability, and competitive advantages in times of uncertainty or competition. We may disagree with how he chooses competency over other criteria; however, given the strategic approach taken, we can conclude that the evaluation criteria go above what is discussed in the public domain.

NM Corporate Strategy Inc.: Empowering Leaders

At NMCS, we believe that business success hinges on results. Regardless of individual preferences, year-end performance is always measured by outcomes. That’s why we focus on equipping leaders with the tools to manage progress proactively. Instead of waiting for results to reveal losses, we enable leaders to take timely, decisive action to course-correct and realign their businesses with strategic goals.

Our approach integrates practical solutions to address brand, people, and culture challenges cost-effectively, saving time and minimizing disruption. By combining strategic intelligence with a focus on competency, we help drive results that reflect your business vision.

Subscribe to Follow the Series. Stay updated and be notified when Article 5, “Forecasting 2025,” is published.