President Trump has once again hired a new chief of staff, to bring needed order to a White House rocked by infighting and missed opportunities. Many people hope that John Kelly, a veteran Marine general known for his organizational rigor, will now provide “adult supervision.” Critics voice pessimism: rigor or not, no chief of staff will ever discipline this famously impulsive celebrity president.
But Kelly has gotten off to a promising start, moving swiftly last week to improve White House information flow and meeting protocols. So far, so good — but will Trump tire of yet another new manager? And even if Kelly survives, can he change the game? Will new rules about memos and staff access in the West Wing be enough to lift today’s presidential leadership to a higher, positive level?
A Living Case Study
Trump’s personality is reason enough to be bearish. But suppose the coming of John Kelly were to make a significant difference. What would that actually look like?
The question might seem like just one more inside-the-Beltway parlor game. But as a thought experiment, it might actually hold relevant lessons for organizational life today. As the story unfolds, we are watching a living case study, offering an opportunity to consider anew how managers and leaders find success in working together.
Rethinking The Default Assumption
Early day aspirations for Kelly & Trump seem modest and uninspiring. Many believe the Marine general will simply take more control of the fractious White House staff, but “Trump will still be Trump.” Kelly might also be able to exercise his standing to “guide the President towards some non-partisan problem-solving.” But the default assumption will still be that president and chief of staff will remain a fundamentally old-fashioned hierarchical relationship, where Trump always has the last word. If so, the best hope is that the subordinate will exercise enough career confidence to gently improve the daily operating context for his leader, nudging periodically to limit damage, and help the boss put a few more points up on the board.
Alas, it’s an organizational model from the Wax Museum of Mad Men Era Management.
A More Modern And Strategic What-If
But suppose instead, some magic dust fell from heaven — and then the White House began to operate like leading-edge organizations now pacing transformation in every sector? In such cases, how do managers and leaders work together to win?
In brief, they operate more like partners, not Boss and Apprentice. As partners, they commit themselves to common goals. And then they collaborate to build effective strategies and innovate, to drive results and create major impact.
Let more fairy dust now fall. How in this magical world would Kelly and Trump develop such a partnership in the White House?
Here are a few principles from a more aspirational playbook:
1. Begin by defining success, not personal prerogatives. White House watchers, obsessed with palace intrigue, chatter about how much authority Kelly will wrest from Trump, and whether Trump will allow the chief-of-staff to control him in any way. It’s a debate bereft of higher purpose. Leader and manager must clearly find a way to work together, but a more partner-like relationship can form if these two men first agree on longer-term goals for this administration– not simply who gets to do what.
Leaders and managers start right by identifying, and then clarifying for all stakeholders, the vision and goals of success. It’s the necessary prelude to developing the strategy and organization to make it happen.
2. Think about roles not rules. The best organizations frame leadership and management in terms of differentiated function, not relative power — leader for vision, inspiration and change; managers for process, tracking goals, delivering results. That’s not to say a leader — e.g., a president — won’t have authority over his managerial chief-of-staff. But instead of arguing about turf and battling about restrictions, Trump and Kelly might emphasize the different roles each must play to achieve the most strategic impact, even if those roles will sometimes (and necessarily) overlap.
Trump captured the enthusiasm of many voters with a preliminary vision about “making America great again” — but he now needs to develop it further. Kelly knows how to turn ideas into programs and get results from people. He too faces major challenges to do that. Manager and leader will make the most progress by calling on their relative strengths and functional differentiation, working together in pursuit of higher strategy, not dueling about visitor access to the Oval Office.
Like the best CEOs and COOs Trump and Kelly should emphasize roles ahead of rules.
3. Build process and trust through real work. Sure, leaders and managers do have to finally agree about who does what and when. But figuring that out should be done over time, with partners forging and adjusting the collaboration through practice — together developing strategy, learning what works and doesn’t work, managing talent. Bureaucratic, ego-enhancing negotiation about status, conducted in a theoretical vacuum, is just a fast ticket back to the Management Wax Museum.
4. Develop the partnership into a broader organizational platform. A good manager-leader partnership goes beyond feel-good collaboration between the two main parties. It stands or falls on the basis of the broader impact it creates. Both roles must contribute, and both roles must be accountable for the tone, tempo and broader organizational culture driving strategy.
To achieve impact together, leaders and managers grow the extended enterprise they share, turning it into a foundational platform to influence a broad ecosystem of stakeholders. Business leaders and managers build organizational platforms to shape networks of customers, governing directors, networks of experts, market influencers, members of broader value chains — as well as continuing to recruit and develop talent for their own company.A collaborative president and chief of staff will create a White House platform to guide policy and transform action across Congress, cabinet agencies, branches of the military, voters, foreign leaders, the press, and more. It’s not about better staffing of edicts or modulating Twitter feeds. The right strategic partnership must mobilize people, ideas and focused talents, creating more influence and followership in every critical arena.
OK, maybe now even Heaven has run out of fairy dust. But as Trump and Kelly struggle along to find the right kind of “adult supervision,” ask yourself what your own potential for a more strategic partnership might be — with your favorite manager? Or maybe your favorite leader. What’s your playbook for that?
Originally published on Forbes.com