"Black Elephant in the Race: Biden’s Fight for Democracy and the Crisis of Timing"
Patrick Trancu, CBCI
Crisis management advisor & evangelist. I help organizations prepare, navigate and recover from crisis. Curator & co-author ?Lo Stato in Crisi. Pandemia, caos e domande per il futuro? (2021). TEDx speaker.
Vinay Gupta’s concept of a "Black Elephant" event aptly describes the situation surrounding President Joe Biden’s age and ability to lead the United States for another term. Concerns about Biden’s age and health have been prominent, yet the Democratic Party has continued to support his candidacy, perhaps hoping these issues would not escalate into major crises. However, Biden’s recent debate performance has intensified these concerns, illustrating the potential consequences of procrastination in addressing evident issues【1】【2】.
This scenario exemplifies a Black Elephant event in several ways:
1. Visibility and Awareness: Biden’s age and its impact on his leadership abilities are widely recognized. Despite this, there has been a reluctance within the Democratic Party to address these concerns head-on.
2. Procrastination in Decision-Making: The Democratic Party has delayed making critical decisions regarding Biden’s candidacy, leaving the party vulnerable to crises that could have been mitigated with proactive measures.
3. Impact of Delayed Action: The delayed response to these concerns has now resulted in heightened doubts about Biden’s capacity to campaign and govern effectively, leading to internal discussions about potential successors and the future strategic direction of the party【1】【3】.
In crisis management, decision-making is often about choosing the lesser of two evils rather than finding an ideal solution. This concept is crucial in understanding the Democratic Party’s current predicament. In complex crises, such as managing a political campaign with an aging candidate, there are rarely clear-cut good or bad decisions. Instead, leaders must weigh the potential outcomes and choose the option that minimizes harm and maximizes benefit, even if both choices have significant drawbacks【1】【3】.
Adding another layer to this complex situation is the concept of "kairos". the opportune moment. In Greek, "kairos" refers to the right, critical, or opportune moment for decision-making. This concept emphasizes the importance of timing not just in a sequential sense (as in "chronos") but in terms of seizing the most appropriate moment for action. In the context of Biden’s candidacy, "kairos" highlights the critical need for timely and strategic decisions. Addressing concerns about Biden’s age and health at the right moment could have allowed the Democratic Party to navigate these challenges more effectively and avoid the current crisis. Delaying these decisions has now brought the party to a point where options are limited and the stakes are higher【3】【4】.
The irony is pronounced in that Biden’s effort to protect democracy by staying in the race might inadvertently contribute to a Trump victory. Biden has framed his candidacy as essential for safeguarding democratic values against the perceived authoritarian threat posed by Trump. However, the practical realities of his age and health are raising significant doubts among voters and within the Democratic Party. This could undermine his campaign's effectiveness and voter confidence, potentially weakening his position against Trump in the Presidential election【1】【2】.
From a crisis management perspective, one could argue that the ultimate decision rests with Joe Biden himself, highlighting "the agony of decision." This concept refers to the intense personal struggle and the heavy burden of responsibility that leaders face when making critical, high-stakes decisions under pressure. Biden’s decision to run for re-election, despite concerns about his age and health, and the post-debate crisis he is now confronting exemplify this agony. As the incumbent president, Biden bears the responsibility of not only his political fate but also the broader implications for the country and his party. This personal decision is deeply intertwined with the fate of the Democratic Party, the overall political landscape, and - one could argue - the future of democracy in the US itself - placing Biden at the center of this crisis【1】【2】.
By failing to address the “elephant in the room” — Biden’s age and health — the Democratic Party has allowed a manageable concern to escalate into a significant crisis. This mirrors Gupta’s definition of a Black Elephant event, where visible but unaddressed issues lead to severe outcomes due to procrastination and wishful thinking. Addressing a Black Elephant event like Biden’s candidacy requires acknowledging the problem early and making timely decisions to mitigate potential crises. This approach helps prevent manageable concerns from escalating into severe issues that could jeopardize the organization’s or party’s future success【1】【3】【4】.
The concept of "kairos" underscores the importance of seizing the right moment to make crucial decisions. For Biden and the Democratic Party, recognizing and acting upon the opportune moment could have made the difference in addressing the concerns about his candidacy and preventing the current crisis. The interplay of Biden's personal decisions, the party's strategic considerations, and the timing of these actions reflects the intricate dynamics of crisis management and the profound impact of making timely and well-considered decisions.
Joe Biden is at his last crossroads, another crucial concept in understanding decision-making in crisis.
In crisis management, the concept of "crossroads" represents a pivotal moment where leaders face critical decisions that will determine the future trajectory of an organization or situation. This juncture requires careful evaluation of available options, each with its own set of potential risks and benefits. The crossroads metaphor highlights the urgency and weight of these decisions, emphasizing that the choices made at this point can lead to significantly different outcomes. Effective crisis management at a crossroads involves not only assessing the immediate implications of each option but also considering long-term impacts, stakeholder perspectives, and alignment with overarching strategic goals. Leaders must navigate these moments with a clear vision, decisive action, and often, the courage to make difficult choices in the face of uncertainty. This approach ensures that the decision made is not merely a reaction to the crisis but a strategic move that positions the organization for resilience and recovery.
Moreover, in crisis management, the rapid development of crises means that once a junction is reached and a direction is chosen, there is often no turning back. This concept underscores the irreversible nature of decisions made during high-stress, high-stakes moments. When a crisis hits, events can unfold swiftly and unpredictably, leaving little time for thorough deliberation. At such critical junctures, the decisions made can set a course that fundamentally alters the trajectory of the organization or situation.
领英推荐
Once a path is chosen, the organization commits resources, time, and often its reputation to that course of action. Reversing a decision can be practically impossible due to the rapid progression of events and the cascading effects of the initial choice.
This article has been written by ChatGPT based on a set of successive prompts based on the author's knowledge. Text was then edited by the author.
#crisismanagement #JoeBiden
Prendre le bon angle d'attaque pour aligner vision stratégique et opérations - Gestion de la continuité et des risques - Prise de décision - Consultant Senior, coach de groupes & Conférencier
8 个月Thank you so much, Patrick Trancu, CBCI, for having raised those interesting ideas: the black elephant, the Kairos concept. In any organisation, it is often difficult to point the finger at the leader or the person who claims to be the leader. This role often leads those persons to refuse to accept criticism, to question their decisions and precepts. ?? Anticipating crises, however, requires an analysis of the risks posed by the persons who positions themself as the organisation's leader, whether through their official position or through compromise. ?? When an organisation relies too heavily on one person, its survival is extremely critical. If, on top of this, these people impose uncompromising dogmas, it's a safe bet that they will end up in denial of everything and that their supporters will find their salvation in fleeing voluntarily to better circumstances or opportunities. ?? When planning the risks for an organisation, nothing should be ruled out, especially not the loss of the leader. ?? A resilient organisation should function even in the absence of the leader, for a certain period of time...
Business Resilience Consultant @ Air New Zealand | Crisis Management, Resilience
8 个月Thanks for the insightful real time example. This direction in particular I’m tossing around at the moment to germinate a crisis exercise for an airline. “In crisis management, decision-making is often about choosing the lesser of two evils rather than finding an ideal solution” We rearly exercise to this level, where decisions have consequences within the development of the exercise event, but this is a very real stress and challenge within aviation - when time is short and your options only getting more limited.
Practical Theorist in Risk, Crisis, and Consequence Management / Inductive Thinker and 10th Man/ Paid to be Paranoid so You Don't Have To
8 个月Melissa Agnes - Case Study Prompt here.
Security and Risk Manager
8 个月A very interesting and valid post Patrick, thank you for sharing your thoughts and observations. A Black Elephant indeed, but one that has been "in the room" since Biden defeated Trump to become the 46th President of the United States back in 2021. Basically two of your examples: 1) Visibility and Awareness, and 2) Procrastination in Decision-Making have led to example 3) Impact of Delayed Action having been taken to an extreme. Given the potential consequences - which I not insult anyone's intelligence by listing, by failing to address the “elephant in the room”, the Democratic Party has offered us a perfect case study in exactly how not to deal with a Black Elephant. The "crossroad" moment came and went, the choice was not to address the challenge in a direct, efficient and logical manner.
Patrick, very interesting article. Is this a case of paralysis by policy or constitution? Perhaps a clear reason for the strategic decision to be in the hands of a group and not an individual - especially not an individual who is wholly subjective.