barack obama leadership case study

Jump to navigation

SDSUnbound Scholarship. Research. Heritage. -->

Search sdsu repository.

Transformational Leadership and Communication: Barack Obama Case Study

We've Moved!

Visit SDSU’s new digital collections website at https://digitalcollections.sdsu.edu

Description

This case study contends communication is the key element that enables transformational leadership. This research examines President Barack Obama's rhetoric in six of his speeches, which demonstrate his transformational leadership is manifested through his communication, specifically that of the African American jeremiad. While transformational leadership is explored thoroughly in the literature, few have focused on the communication aspect. Obama's transformational leadership is assessed through his charismatic, visionary, unifying, motivating, hopeful, innovative, and guilt laden communication framed within the African American jeremiad and his transformational rhetoric. This thesis contributes to the field of communication by raising awareness about the close relationship between transformational leadership and rhetoric.

In collections

SDSU Theses and Dissertations

Hanson, Sonja Lucinda

Geist-Martin, Patricia J.

Goehring, Charles E. Minifee, Paul A.

2014 Spring

Communication

Professional Studies and Fine Arts

San Diego State University

Master of Arts (M.A.), San Diego State University, 2014

http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11929/sdsu:2765

About Stanford GSB

The Leadership
Dean’s Updates
School News & History
Commencement
Business, Government & Society
Centers & Institutes
Center for Entrepreneurial Studies
Center for Social Innovation
Stanford Seed

About the Experience

Learning at Stanford GSB
Experiential Learning
Guest Speakers
Entrepreneurship
Social Innovation
Communication
Life at Stanford GSB
Collaborative Environment
Activities & Organizations
Student Services
Housing Options
International Students

Full-Time Degree Programs

Why Stanford MBA
Academic Experience
Financial Aid
Why Stanford MSx
Research Fellows Program
See All Programs

Non-Degree & Certificate Programs

Executive Education
Stanford Executive Program
Programs for Organizations
The Difference
Online Programs
Stanford LEAD
Stanford Innovation and Entrepreneurship Certificate
Seed Transformation Program
Aspire Program
Seed Spark Program
Faculty Profiles
Academic Areas
Awards & Honors
Conferences

Faculty Research

Publications
Working Papers
Case Studies

Research Hub

Research Labs & Initiatives
Business Library
Data, Analytics & Research Computing
Behavioral Lab

Research Labs

Cities, Housing & Society Lab
Golub Capital Social Impact Lab

Research Initiatives

Corporate Governance Research Initiative
Corporations and Society Initiative
Policy and Innovation Initiative
Rapid Decarbonization Initiative
Stanford Latino Entrepreneurship Initiative
Value Chain Innovation Initiative
Venture Capital Initiative
Career & Success
Climate & Sustainability
Corporate Governance
Culture & Society
Finance & Investing
Government & Politics
Leadership & Management
Markets & Trade
Operations & Logistics
Opportunity & Access
Organizational Behavior
Political Economy
Social Impact
Technology & AI
Opinion & Analysis
Email Newsletter

Welcome, Alumni

Communities
Digital Communities & Tools
Regional Chapters
Women’s Programs
Identity Chapters
Find Your Reunion
Career Resources
Job Search Resources
Career & Life Transitions
Programs & Services
Career Video Library
Alumni Education
Research Resources
Volunteering
Alumni News
Class Notes
Alumni Voices
Contact Alumni Relations
Upcoming Events

Admission Events & Information Sessions

MBA Program
MSx Program
PhD Program
Alumni Events
All Other Events
Operations, Information & Technology
Classical Liberalism
The Eddie Lunch
Accounting Summer Camp
Videos, Code & Data
California Econometrics Conference
California Quantitative Marketing PhD Conference
California School Conference
China India Insights Conference
Homo economicus, Evolving
Political Economics (2023–24)
Scaling Geologic Storage of CO2 (2023–24)
A Resilient Pacific: Building Connections, Envisioning Solutions
Adaptation and Innovation
Changing Climate
Civil Society
Climate Impact Summit
Climate Science
Corporate Carbon Disclosures
Earth’s Seafloor
Environmental Justice
Operations and Information Technology
Organizations
Sustainability Reporting and Control
Taking the Pulse of the Planet
Urban Infrastructure
Watershed Restoration
Junior Faculty Workshop on Financial Regulation and Banking
Ken Singleton Celebration
Quantitative Marketing PhD Alumni Conference
Presentations
Theory and Inference in Accounting Research
Stanford Closer Look Series
Quick Guides
Core Concepts
Journal Articles
Glossary of Terms
Faculty & Staff
Researchers & Students
Research Approach
Charitable Giving
Financial Health
Government Services
Workers & Careers
Short Course
Adaptive & Iterative Experimentation
Incentive Design
Social Sciences & Behavioral Nudges
Bandit Experiment Application
Conferences & Events
Get Involved
Reading Materials
Teaching & Curriculum
Energy Entrepreneurship
Faculty & Affiliates
SOLE Report
Responsible Supply Chains
Current Study Usage
Pre-Registration Information
Participate in a Study

Obama and the Power of Social Media and Technology

See the Current DEI Report
Supporting Data
Research & Insights
Share Your Thoughts
Search Fund Primer
Affiliated Faculty
Faculty Advisors
Louis W. Foster Resource Center
Defining Social Innovation
Impact Compass
Global Health Innovation Insights
Faculty Affiliates
Student Awards & Certificates
Changemakers
Dean Jonathan Levin
Dean Garth Saloner
Dean Robert Joss
Dean Michael Spence
Dean Robert Jaedicke
Dean Rene McPherson
Dean Arjay Miller
Dean Ernest Arbuckle
Dean Jacob Hugh Jackson
Dean Willard Hotchkiss
Faculty in Memoriam
Stanford GSB Firsts
Certificate & Award Recipients
Dean’s Remarks
Keynote Address
Teaching Approach
Analysis and Measurement of Impact
The Corporate Entrepreneur: Startup in a Grown-Up Enterprise
Data-Driven Impact
Designing Experiments for Impact
Digital Business Transformation
The Founder’s Right Hand
Marketing for Measurable Change
Product Management
Public Policy Lab: Financial Challenges Facing US Cities
Public Policy Lab: Homelessness in California
Lab Features
Curricular Integration
View From The Top
Formation of New Ventures
Managing Growing Enterprises
Startup Garage
Explore Beyond the Classroom
Stanford Venture Studio
Summer Program
Workshops & Events
The Five Lenses of Entrepreneurship
Leadership Labs
Executive Challenge
Arbuckle Leadership Fellows Program
Selection Process
Training Schedule
Time Commitment
Learning Expectations
Post-Training Opportunities
Who Should Apply
Introductory T-Groups
Leadership for Society Program
Certificate
2023 Awardees
2022 Awardees
2021 Awardees
2020 Awardees
2019 Awardees
2018 Awardees
Social Management Immersion Fund
Stanford Impact Founder Fellowships and Prizes
Stanford Impact Leader Prizes
Social Entrepreneurship
Stanford GSB Impact Fund
Economic Development
Energy & Environment
Stanford GSB Residences
Environmental Leadership
Stanford GSB Artwork
A Closer Look
California & the Bay Area
Voices of Stanford GSB
Business & Beneficial Technology
Business & Sustainability
Business & Free Markets
Business, Government, and Society Forum
Second Year
Global Experiences
JD/MBA Joint Degree
MA Education/MBA Joint Degree
MD/MBA Dual Degree
MPP/MBA Joint Degree
MS Computer Science/MBA Joint Degree
MS Electrical Engineering/MBA Joint Degree
MS Environment and Resources (E-IPER)/MBA Joint Degree
Academic Calendar
Clubs & Activities
LGBTQ+ Students
Military Veterans
Minorities & People of Color
Partners & Families
Students with Disabilities
Student Support
Residential Life
Student Voices
MBA Alumni Voices
A Week in the Life
Career Support
Employment Outcomes
Cost of Attendance
Knight-Hennessy Scholars Program
Yellow Ribbon Program
BOLD Fellows Fund
Application Process
Loan Forgiveness
Contact the Financial Aid Office
Evaluation Criteria
GMAT & GRE
English Language Proficiency
Personal Information, Activities & Awards
Professional Experience
Letters of Recommendation
Optional Short Answer Questions
Application Fee
Reapplication
Deferred Enrollment
Joint & Dual Degrees
Entering Class Profile
Event Schedule
Ambassadors
New & Noteworthy
Ask a Question
See Why Stanford MSx
Is MSx Right for You?
MSx Stories
Leadership Development
Career Advancement
Career Change
How You Will Learn
Admission Events
Personal Information
Information for Recommenders
GMAT, GRE & EA
English Proficiency Tests
After You’re Admitted
Daycare, Schools & Camps
U.S. Citizens and Permanent Residents
Requirements
Requirements: Behavioral
Requirements: Quantitative
Requirements: Macro
Requirements: Micro
Annual Evaluations
Field Examination
Research Activities
Research Papers
Dissertation
Oral Examination
Current Students
Education & CV
International Applicants
Statement of Purpose
Reapplicants
Application Fee Waiver
Deadline & Decisions
Job Market Candidates
Academic Placements
Stay in Touch
Faculty Mentors
Current Fellows
Standard Track
Fellowship & Benefits
Group Enrollment
Program Formats
Developing a Program
Diversity & Inclusion
Strategic Transformation
Program Experience
Contact Client Services
Campus Experience
Live Online Experience
Silicon Valley & Bay Area
Digital Credentials
Faculty Spotlights
Participant Spotlights
Eligibility
International Participants
Stanford Ignite
Frequently Asked Questions
Founding Donors
Location Information
Participant Profile
Network Membership
Program Impact
Collaborators
Entrepreneur Profiles
Company Spotlights
Seed Transformation Network
Responsibilities
Current Coaches
How to Apply
Meet the Consultants
Meet the Interns
Intern Profiles
Collaborate
Research Library
News & Insights
Program Contacts
Databases & Datasets
Research Guides
Consultations
Research Workshops
Career Research
Research Data Services
Course Reserves
Course Research Guides
Material Loan Periods
Fines & Other Charges
Document Delivery
Interlibrary Loan
Equipment Checkout
Print & Scan
MBA & MSx Students
PhD Students
Other Stanford Students
Faculty Assistants
Research Assistants
Stanford GSB Alumni
Telling Our Story
Staff Directory
Site Registration
Alumni Directory
Alumni Email
Privacy Settings & My Profile
Success Stories
The Story of Circles
Support Women’s Circles
Stanford Women on Boards Initiative
Alumnae Spotlights
Insights & Research
Industry & Professional
Entrepreneurial Commitment Group
Recent Alumni
Half-Century Club
Fall Reunions
Spring Reunions
MBA 25th Reunion
Half-Century Club Reunion
Faculty Lectures
Ernest C. Arbuckle Award
Alison Elliott Exceptional Achievement Award
ENCORE Award
Excellence in Leadership Award
John W. Gardner Volunteer Leadership Award
Robert K. Jaedicke Faculty Award
Jack McDonald Military Service Appreciation Award
Jerry I. Porras Latino Leadership Award
Tapestry Award
Student & Alumni Events
Executive Recruiters
Interviewing
Land the Perfect Job with LinkedIn
Negotiating
Elevator Pitch
Email Best Practices
Resumes & Cover Letters
Self-Assessment
Whitney Birdwell Ball
Margaret Brooks
Bryn Panee Burkhart
Margaret Chan
Ricki Frankel
Peter Gandolfo
Cindy W. Greig
Natalie Guillen
Carly Janson
Sloan Klein
Sherri Appel Lassila
Stuart Meyer
Tanisha Parrish
Virginia Roberson
Philippe Taieb
Michael Takagawa
Terra Winston
Johanna Wise
Debbie Wolter
Rebecca Zucker
Complimentary Coaching
Changing Careers
Work-Life Integration
Career Breaks
Flexible Work
Encore Careers
D&B Hoovers
Data Axle (ReferenceUSA)
EBSCO Business Source
Firsthand (Vault)
Global Newsstream
Market Share Reporter
ProQuest One Business
Student Clubs
Entrepreneurial Students
Stanford GSB Trust
Alumni Community
How to Volunteer
Springboard Sessions
Consulting Projects
2020 – 2029
2010 – 2019
2000 – 2009
1990 – 1999
1980 – 1989
1970 – 1979
1960 – 1969
1950 – 1959
1940 – 1949
Service Areas
ACT History
ACT Awards Celebration
ACT Governance Structure
Building Leadership for ACT
Individual Leadership Positions
Leadership Role Overview
Purpose of the ACT Management Board
Contact ACT
Business & Nonprofit Communities
Reunion Volunteers
Ways to Give
Fiscal Year Report
Business School Fund Leadership Council
Planned Giving Options
Planned Giving Benefits
Planned Gifts and Reunions
Legacy Partners
Strategic Initiatives
Giving News & Stories
Giving Deadlines
Development Staff
Submit Class Notes
Class Secretaries
Board of Directors
Health Care
Sustainability
Class Takeaways
All Else Equal: Making Better Decisions
If/Then: Business, Leadership, Society
Grit & Growth
Think Fast, Talk Smart
Spring 2022
Spring 2021
Autumn 2020
Summer 2020
Winter 2020
In the Media
For Journalists
DCI Fellows
Other Auditors
Academic Calendar & Deadlines
Course Materials
Entrepreneurial Resources
Campus Drive Grove
Campus Drive Lawn
CEMEX Auditorium
King Community Court
Seawell Family Boardroom
Stanford GSB Bowl
Stanford Investors Common
Town Square
Vidalakis Courtyard
Vidalakis Dining Hall
Catering Services
Policies & Guidelines
Reservations
Contact Faculty Recruiting
Lecturer Positions
Postdoctoral Positions
Accommodations
CMC-Managed Interviews
Recruiter-Managed Interviews
Virtual Interviews
Campus & Virtual
Search for Candidates
Think Globally
Recruiting Calendar
Recruiting Policies
Full-Time Employment
Summer Employment
Entrepreneurial Summer Program
Global Management Immersion Experience
Social-Purpose Summer Internships
Process Overview
Project Types
Client Eligibility Criteria
Client Screening
ACT Leadership
Social Innovation & Nonprofit Management Resources
Develop Your Organization’s Talent
Centers & Initiatives
Student Fellowships

No internet connection.

All search filters on the page have been cleared., your search has been saved..

All content
Dictionaries
Encyclopedias
Sign in to my profile My Profile

Sign in Signed in
My profile My Profile

Business Ethics & Corporate Social Responsibility
Diversity, Equality & Inclusion
Entrepreneurship
General Business & Management
Human Resource Management
Information & Knowledge Management
International Business & Management
Operations Management
Organization Studies
Other Management Specialties
Research Methods for Business & Management
Strategic Management
Australasia
Cases with Enhanced Learning Tools
Content Partners
Information for authors
Information for instructors
Information for librarians
Information for students and researchers
Submit Case

Leader–Member Exchange Theory: Barack Obama

By: John Baker & Charles Baker
Publisher: SAGE Publications: SAGE Business Cases Originals
Publication year: 2017
Online pub date: May 08, 2017
Discipline: Leadership Styles , Leadership Theory , Power & Influence
DOI: https:// doi. org/10.4135/9781526426680
Keywords: Barack Obama , Chicago , exchange theory , Illinois , leader-member exchange theory , staff , White House Show all Show less
Contains: Teaching Notes Length: 4,210 words Region: Australia and New Zealand , Northern America , Northern Europe , South-Eastern Asia , Eastern Asia Type: Indirect case info Industry: Professional, scientific and technical activities | Administrative and support service activities | Public administration and defence; compulsory social security Organization: Government of the United States of America Organization Size: Large info Online ISBN: 9781526426680 Copyright: © John Baker and Charles Baker 2018 More information Less information

Teaching Notes

Supplementary resources.

Barack Hussein Obama was elected the 44th President of the United States in 2008. During his presidency, his leadership style was described at times as transformational, servant, charismatic, dysfunctional, extreme, and non-existent. Regardless of different perceptions, leaders must interact with many to accomplish goals and advance organizations. Leaders also interact with a small group of close advisors or confidants who lend guidance and support in return for increased loyalty and/or favoritism. This dynamic of interacting with a small group yet having to rely on the support of a larger group is critical to the leadership process and known as leader–member exchange theory (LMX). This case study examines President Obama’s use of LMX throughout his political career, especially during his years as President of the United States.

Leader–Member Exchange Theory: Barack Obama

Learning outcomes.

By the end of this case study, students will:

gain a better understanding of the leader–member exchange theory;
gain insight to the importance of managing in- and out-groups within an organization;
examine the leadership-making process through developing effective dyadic relationships (Northouse, 2016).

Introduction

Barack Hussein Obama has used a variety of leadership styles throughout his career. A Harvard Law School graduate, his path to the Presidency included a stint as a community organizer in Chicago, brief careers as a civil rights attorney and as an instructor of constitutional law at the University of Chicago, an initial foray into politics as an Illinois state senator for eight years, and his final step as a US Senator from Illinois. He has used a variety of leadership styles throughout his career. His 2008 campaign for President earned him the nickname of “no drama Obama” because of the campaign’s exceptional organization that was due in part to Obama’s considerable administrative talents. “He was the CEO of one of the most organized, if not the most organized, campaigns in history” remarked Hill Harper, a Harvard Law classmate of Obama’s (Carter, 2009). During the eight years of his Presidency, his leadership style has been described at times as transformational, servant, charismatic, dysfunctional, extreme, and non-existent—depending on one’s political views. A leader must interact with many to accomplish goals and advance organizations, and in these interactions, a leader often assembles a small group of close advisors or confidants who lend guidance and support in return for increased loyalty and/or favoritism from the leader. This dynamic of interacting with a small group while continuing to rely on the support of a larger group is critical to the leadership process and known as the leader–member exchange theory (LMX). This case study examines how President Obama applied LMX throughout his political career.

Leader–Member Exchange Theory

LMX focuses on the interactions between leaders and followers. The key to LMX is the dyadic, or vertical, relationship the leader establishes with those they lead. This relationship generally takes place in three phases according to LMX: Phase 1 is the stranger phase, Phase 2 is the acquaintance phase, and Phase 3 is the partnership phase (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995). In the stranger phase leaders communicate more directly to followers, their roles are more scripted, and the interactions are lower in quality. During the acquaintance phase the leader and follower become more familiar with each other and they begin to test their relationship, communication becomes more two-way, and their exchanges are of medium quality. If the relationship progresses to the partnership phase roles are negotiated, high-quality exchanges emerge and both are more interested in achieving organizational rather than personal goals. The type or strength of relationship leaders establish with those they lead leads to the second key aspect of LMX.

According to LMX, leaders establish dyadic (a group of two) working relationships with each follower. Relationships with members that grow to be based on expanded and negotiated role responsibilities become an in-group, while members with relationships that were based only on the formal employment contract became the out-group (Northouse, 2016). Those who are part of the in-group have a closer relationship with the leader and the leader expects more from them. Most members of the in-group have either acquaintance or partnership relationships with the leader that lead to increased effort and productivity by members of the in-group. In exchange for increased effort and productivity, members of the in-group enjoy more perks and benefits from the leader not afforded to those in the out-group. Those in the out-group either elect to be in this group or are placed in the out-group by the leader.

The key learning point for leaders regarding LMX is awareness. Leaders must know that the in- and out-group dynamic exists in any organization and the leader must manage these groups carefully. The in-group may feel that they are doing more and not receiving as much as they should for their efforts and productivity while the out-group may feel unfairly treated by the leader as they see the in-group receiving perks and benefits not afforded to them. Membership in both groups is dynamic and the leader may exchange members from one group to the other to ensure the health and welfare of both groups and the organization (Northouse, 2016).

Obama’s Background

Obama graduated from Columbia University in 1983 and then in 1984 accepted an offer as a community organizer in Chicago, a low-paying job whose mission was to empower the poor and disenfranchised through grassroots organization. He had once confided to his grandmother “Toot” that “he wanted to leave the world a better place” but was unsure how to go about it (Mendell, 2007, p. 63). Community organizing provided him that opportunity. One of his first responsibilities was to push the Chicago Housing Authority to repair toilets, windows, and heating systems in the Altgeld housing project, and to some extent he was successful. The key project he spearheaded was the removal of asbestos from the buildings. He stayed behind the scene, but worked closely with a small group of influencers and led meetings that eventually caused the housing authority to hire workers to seal off the asbestos. “He was our motivator” resident Callie Smith said of Obama (Mendell, 2007, p. 73).

His experiences as a community organizer were key to developing his desire for public service. He once commented that this work in Chicago on political empowerment, economic development, and grassroots community organizing was “the best education” he ever received. He noted, “Organizing teaches as nothing else does the beauty and strength of ordinary people” (Wilson, 2008, p. 3). He also learned from his organizing experiences the concept of being predisposed to other people’s power. This idea of seeking to empower others, and not simply accumulate personal power, helped Obama to develop a new approach to politics and leadership. He came to realize from these experiences that his life would be measured through public service and working closely with those who have the ability to influence others.

In 1987 Obama left Chicago to attend Harvard Law School. At 27, his years of community organizing in Chicago provided him a maturity and a degree of self-discipline that would propel him to the top of his law class; he graduated magna cum laude. His career there included a tenure as writer, editor, and president of the Harvard Law Review (he was the first black president of the review). This experience provided him valuable lessons in managing both electoral politics and the personal agendas of individuals. He initially resisted appeals to run for president of the law review; he believed it would do little to enhance his future as a lawyer. His goal at the time was to return to Chicago and use his degree to help the city’s disadvantaged (Mendell, 2007, p. 88). He began practicing law at Miner, Barnhill, and Galland, a firm that handled discrimination and civil rights cases, and one whose mission was to rectify social and economic injustice through court action.

He eventually realized that social change through the practice of law was extremely slow and time consuming; he came to believe such change could be achieved much faster through the political system. Judson Miner, one of the law firm partners, had served as council at one time for Harold Washington, the first Black mayor of Chicago. Miner, through his work with Washington, had developed a network of contacts within Chicago’s political circles—an in-group. Obama saw firsthand how effective Washington had been in altering the racial and social dynamics of Chicago during his mayoral term. This kindled Obama’s interest in politics as a tool for change and empowerment of people. He ran for Illinois state senator in 1995, won the election, and thus launched a political career that eventually propelled him into the White House (Mendell, 2007).

Leadership Style

Obama’s strengths and leadership traits were obvious. He was tall and slender, handsome, and he was quick to smile when talking to people. He was intelligent and articulate; he became known as a good listener and communicator. He had charisma and was a powerful speaker. He held strong beliefs; for one, he believed in the potential of multiculturalism in society: races working together to solve issues. He was convinced that blacks would do better to infiltrate mainstream power structures and work together with whites, rather than continually fight against white interests. “Any solution to our [Chicago] unemployment catastrophe must arise from us working creatively within a multicultural, interdependent, and international economy,” Obama said (Mendell, 2007, p. 113). Although popular with his in-group, his thoughts and actions did alienate others who saw him as an activist not representing the greater good (his out-group).

It was during his time in the Illinois state senate that Obama began building close relationships with advisors and legislators. One was with his first Illinois senate aide, Dan Shoman, who would later become his close political advisor. Shoman was a former wire service reporter who left that profession to work for Democrats in the Illinois state capital. Shoman’s key contribution to Obama’s political development was making Obama realize that he needed to understand all of the political cultures of Illinois if Obama had any ambition to advance farther in Illinois politics beyond the state legislature. Illinois in 1997 was divided into two main political arenas: greater Chicago and everywhere else. Central and southern Illinois, particularly the latter, were the so-called “red state” parts of Illinois. The central and southern parts of Illinois were similar to the Chicago area in terms of religious and educational beliefs but differed as the area was less diverse and populated mainly by rural, small-town, blue-collar whites who tended to have more conservative views and values. After many trips with Shoman to the small cities and towns in these regions, meeting and talking to residents, Obama became convinced he could compete politically in such a rural environment. He was comfortable with the residents of central and Southern Illinois, and they in turn reacted warmly to him. Obama would later develop strong relationships with the following people who in turn would have greater influence with Obama during his 2004 US Senate campaign: David Axelrod, a highly regarded political consultant; Jim Cauley, who became Obama’s campaign manager; Pete Giangreco, who ran the direct mail operations; and pollster Paul Harsted (Mendell, 2007).

Campaign and Presidential Staffs

A campaign for President is a vast political and logistical operation but, more importantly, the candidate must bring in capable advisors who provide expertise in many areas of campaign policy development (economics, immigration, politics, national security, the environment, health care, and legal affairs) and rely on their recommendations. These advisors help formulate and define policy positions for the candidate. Often, many of those involved will be appointed by the successful candidate to positions within the new administration. The Obama campaign included many nationally-known advisors: Robert Gibbs, David Plouffe, and Valerie Jarrett (political advisors); Austan Goolsbee and David and Christina Romer (economics); and Susan Rice (national security) (Obama’s Inner Circle, n.d.). Many of these people later became some of Obama’s first appointments to his staff and cabinet. One, Valerie Jarrett, remained with Obama through his final year in office and held significant influence with him (The White House, 2016).

A President has three administrative groups that form their leadership staff: the Senior White House Leadership (the President’s staff and senior advisors); the Cabinet (led by the President); and the Executive Office of the President (overseen by the White House Chief of Staff). The appendix identifies these positions. Obama’s Senior White House Leadership team, in 2016, consisted of Denis McDonough (Chief of Staff); Anita Decker Breckenridge and Kristie Canegallo (Deputy Chiefs of Staff); and Valerie Jarrett, Brian Deese, and Shailagh Murray (Senior Advisors). He also had close ties (both politically and personally) with Vice President Joe Biden who, by virtue of his title, was included in every major discussion Obama held with his Senior Leadership team (The White House, 2016). Of the other advisors, Valerie Jarrett emerged as his closest and most trusted advisor.

Obama’s Inner and Outer Circles

Jarrett, who headed the Office of Public Engagement, was a part of the Obama inner circle for the entire eight years of Obama’s presidency—an almost unheard of tenure for a senior advisor. She met Obama in 1991 when, as deputy chief-of-staff for then Chicago Mayor Daley, she interviewed and hired Michelle Robinson—the future Mrs. Barack Obama. Jarrett and the Obamas met socially several times, and she and Barack Obama soon developed a bond based on mutual governance philosophies. She began introducing Obama to the activists and donors he would need to help him with his state legislature and later US Senate bids (Becker, 2012). They became close friends and she would continue to advise him throughout his career leading up to the Presidential election in 2008. Shortly after that election Obama urged her to join him in Washington, and she became his “senior adviser to the president and chief liaison to the business community, state and local governments and the political left” (Becker, 2012, p. 17). This relationship followed an LMX pattern: Jarrett and Obama passed quickly through the stranger phase, stayed several years in the acquaintance stage, followed by a quick conversion, when she joined his White House staff, to the partnership phase as his closest advisor. Obama was heavily influenced by Jarrett and managed the relationships carefully, allowing her to mentor him furthering their relationship.

Obama has said he consulted with Jarrett on every major decision, something former aides corroborated. “Her role since she has been at the White House is one of the broadest and most expansive roles that I think has ever existed in the West Wing,” says Anita Dunn, Obama’s former communications director. Jarrett held a key vote on cabinet picks, as well as had a major say on ambassadorships and judgeships (Scheiber, 2014). A confidant of both Barack and Michelle Obama since the 1990s, the three of them became even closer after Obama’s election in 2008, which explains in part her oversized influence on Obama’s inner circle. Shortly after being elected, it gradually became clear that Jarrett had Obama’s blessing to challenge his top brass. A good example of this was the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010. Donna Brazile, a Democratic official from New Orleans, believed the administration was not going after BP hard enough to force it to contain the spill. “One of the problems I have with the administration is they are not tough enough,” she said. “They are waiting for BP to say, ‘Oh, we’ve got a new plan to stop the leak’. They need to stop it, contain it, clean it up” (Scheiber, 2014). This began a debate in the White House, with some advisors arguing the President should call Brazile, until Rahm Emanuel, Obama’s chief of staff at the time, shut it down. Jarrett, however, did not consider the matter settled, and she convinced Obama that calling Brazile was a good idea, which he then did. This incident suggests that Jarrett held more influence with Obama than did his chief of staff. She once defined her relationship with Obama: “My role is to ensure that a wide and diverse range of perspectives are heard to inform the president’s decision making process,” she said, and to “give the president candid advice” (Becker, 2012, p. 20). John W. Rogers Jr., a longtime friend of both Ms. Jarrett and the president, offered a theory about her relationship to Obama:

In their [the Obamas’] small social circle, Ms. Jarrett, who would go on to run a Chicago real estate company and sit on numerous civic and corporate boards, “was always seen as the adult in the room,” the one looked to for guidance (Becker, 2012, p. 25).

The chief of staff position is usually considered the most powerful on a President’s staff, as that person controls much of the access to the President. One incident in 2010, however, early in Obama’s first term showed the extent of Jarrett’s influence compared to the then chief of staff, William Daley.

Leaders of the Roman Catholic Church were up in arms last fall over a proposal to require employers to provide health insurance that covered birth control. But caving in to the church’s demands for a broad exemption in the name of religious liberty would pit the president against a crucial constituency, women’s groups, who saw the coverage as basic preventive care.

Worried about the political and legal implications, the chief of staff, William M. Daley, reached out to the proposal’s author, Kathleen Sebelius, the health and human services secretary. How, he wondered, had the White House been put in this situation with so little presidential input? “You are way out there on a limb on this,” he recalls telling her.

“It was then made clear to me that, no, there were senior White House officials who had been involved and supported this,” said Mr. Daley, who left his post early this year.

What he did not realize was that while he was trying to put out what he considered a fire, the person fanning the flames was sitting just one flight up from him: Valerie Jarrett, the Obamas’ first friend, the proposal’s chief patron and a tenacious White House operator who would ultimately outmaneuver not only Mr. Daley but also the vice president in her effort to include the broadest possible contraception coverage in the administration’s health care overhaul (Becker, 2012, pp. 2–5).

The Jarrett relationship was an example of Obama’s preference for working with a few close advisors to resolve issues. Another example involves the 2014 Ebola outbreak in Africa. Rather than delegating the issue to Cabinet members, Obama instead appointed Ron Klain as “Ebola Czar,” tasked with overseeing the government’s response to the crisis. Few questioned the need for such a position, but some, like Senator Lamar Alexander, questioned the lack of delegation to existing officials and agencies:

You get the impression that everything is run out of the White House, and that’s an understandable urge, to trust only the people 10–15 feet away from you. But if you want to be successful, you have to delegate. He’s often the smartest guy in the room, (referring to Obama) but the wisest guy in the room will only reserve the biggest problems for himself, and push out the other problems to members of the Cabinet (Eilperin & Nakamura, 2014, para. 7)

The White House responded by stating that the Ebola crisis required special attention, that a whole-of-government approach was needed to utilize all the resources the government could throw at the issue, and that Klain was the expert implementer needed to ensure this approach was successful. Still, several Cabinet members at the time of the crisis went on record to say that, even though they were empowered to pursue specific projects, they were often excluded from key decision-making sessions. When Obama called together a Cabinet meeting to discuss the Ebola outbreak, the secretaries of Labor and the Veteran’s Administration were excluded, despite the fact that the VA has an extensive medical system and Labor oversees worker safety (Eilperin & Nakamura, 2014).

There were also criticisms of the administration’s control in other policy areas. Vali Nasr, an aide to former State Department special envoy Richard Holbrooke, was critical of the lack of support for Holbrooke by the administration:

Across the board, the administration views all these people as there to implement decisions made by a much smaller cabal. Policy was made above the rank of all these people. When it comes to critical decisions, it was always made by people inexperienced in foreign policy (Eilperin & Nakamura, 2014, para. 22).

Obama’s preference for a close-knit group of advisors was revealed in his 2013 appointment of Denis McDonough as his chief of staff. McDonough had served with the President in a variety of capacities since 2004, including advising on the 2004 and 2008 elections, and serving a stint as deputy national security advisor. Aides reported that Obama and McDonough had forged an almost fraternal bond over the years, making McDonough a safe choice, but the appointment brought mixed reviews. Some said the appointment reinforced a presidential style that had grown more insular, with Mr. Obama installing a corps of confidants and allies in the government’s top echelon, with few outsiders or strangers tapped for jobs (Nicholas & Lee, 2013). It was this sense of isolation that concerned some observers. “It worries me the degree to which the president has such a tiny inner circle that has been unchanged for so long,” said Rosa Brooks, the Pentagon from 2009 to 2011 (Nicholas & Lee, 2013, para. 10).

“The potential for danger is isolation,” said John Podesta, a White House chief of staff in the Clinton administration who is close to the Obama team. “They have to make sure he’s not isolated and that he’s getting a wide-range of opinion in front of him” (Nicholas & Lee, 2013, para. 11). Another potential issue with a very small inner circle is like-mindedness as it has the potential to be less inclusive of diverse opinions and ideas.

President Obama has relied on a close circle of confidents and advisors during his presidency—as done by previous presidents. Obama’s close confidants have provided him with guidance and assistance when making difficult decisions. This close group has also created criticism from those inside and outside his administration regarding the openness and transparency of Obama’s decision-making process and has created the perception of allowing less participation while deciding critical matters facing the United States. President Obama has a strength of creating effective relationships with those closest to him while also establishing good relationships with many others. He also has a potential blind spot by having an inner circle that may keep him from being transparent, inclusive, and allowing others to participate in the decision-making process.

Discussion Questions

1. List two people (or groups) from the case study that President Obama has established a stranger, acquaintance, or partner relationship according to LMX. Explain why they are at that phase in the leadership-making process.
2. Who is in President Obama’s in-group and why? Is his in-group an asset or detriment to the perception of his presidency?
3. Who is in President Obama’s out-group and why are they considered in his out-group?
4. Discuss how President Obama has managed his in- and out-groups. Has he been effective in managing who is in his in- and out-groups?
5. How important are in-groups in regards to the leadership process? Are they more of an asset or liability for the leader and why?

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day free trial, more like this, sage recommends.

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Have you created a personal profile? Login or create a profile so that you can save clips, playlists and searches

Navigating away from this page will delete your results

Please save your results to "My Self-Assessments" in your profile before navigating away from this page.

You must have a valid academic email address to sign up.

Get off-campus access

View or download all content my institution has access to.

view my profile
view my lists

SUGGESTED TOPICS
The Magazine
Newsletters
Managing Yourself
Managing Teams
Work-life Balance
The Big Idea
Data & Visuals
Reading Lists
Case Selections
HBR Learning
Topic Feeds
Account Settings
Email Preferences

Leadership Lessons from Barack Obama’s Speech

John Baldoni

The praise from both sides of the political aisle for Barack Obama’s speech on race was generally positive. Both former presidential aide David Gergen and Daily Show host Jon Stewart noted that Obama spoke to us “like adults.” How refreshing, the commentators implied, to trust people to evaluate a serious message and make their own […]

John Baldoni is an internationally recognized executive coach and leadership educator. His most recent book is MOXIE: The Secret to Bold and Gutsy Leadership .

Partner Center

Staff Publications Online

Include your Publications
Trust research
Browse by Year
Browse by Subject
Browse by Department
Browse by Author
Browse by Item type
Advanced Search

Learning leadership from Barack Obama: A short case study.

Western, Simon (2008) Learning leadership from Barack Obama: A short case study. Management Online Review, Novemb . ISSN 1996-3300 Full text available [display full text icon] [full text coming soon] [not allowed] [no full text available] -->

In a recent case study I asked if America would vote for a Messiah Leader (Management Online REview, Feb 2008), well the answer has been a huge yes. In that case study I argued that it wasn’t enough to be a Messiah leader, that promising hope, being charismatic and a wonderful orator was never going to deliver on its own. So what took Barack Obama to the Whitehouse and what leadership lessons can be learnt from his victory?

Strategies and Leadership Values in Obama’s Apology Discourse

This study analyses leadership apologies to gain insights into effective leadership performance from the perspective of apologising. The study explores Obama’s leadership qualities that are projected through his apology discourse mainly the strategies used to construct his apologies and values that emerge from them. The study concluded that leadership should be versatile for a leader to be able to perform efficiently in crucial situations. It is important for a leader to have the ability to blend strategies to display good values to perform the speech act of apology well because in doing so, they will be able to bind themselves in good rapport with their followers which creates unity in the relationship. The significance of the study can be viewed in the potential to reframe apology as an empowering act that can positively impact leaders’ image rather than an act that is viewed as taboo or ineffective for leadership.

1 Introduction

Apologies are powerful and are of great importance in reuniting the relationship between divided communities and nations, as exampled by Obama in his reconciliation speeches at Hiroshima, Laos, Cuba, Argentina, France and Egypt. Lazare ( 2004 , p. 42) emphasised on this potential power when he stated “as the world becomes a global village, apologies are growing increasingly important on both national and international levels. In this international community, apologies will be vital to the peaceful resolution of conflicts.” Consequently, an apology performed at this level has significant changes both domestically and internationally by universal morality and ethics (Bagdonas 2010 ). Therefore, an apology from a political leader is a hope that it will foster a welcoming communal bond and future relation. It is important that a political leader believes and practises the virtuous act of apology on his behalf as a frontrunner of the country. Liu ( 2010 , p. 233) pointed out that “mistakes and failures are weighed against not only the leader’s capabilities but also their character and moral integrity.” In this prospect, apologies are awarded as the chief of a moral act (Luke 1997 , Robinson 2004 , Harris et al. 2006 ) and even a form of healing (LeCouteur 2001 ). Davis ( 2002 , p. 171) supported this belief by recognising that “apologising can therefore be a lynchpin of moral growth,” which has been crucial in the past, present and future times of this world.

However, a decision to apologise has potentially higher risk for a political figure than it would for a commoner. This is largely because society tends to associate errors with incompetence (Edmondson 2000 ) rather than regarding them learning steps. Kellerman ( 2006 ) acknowledges that even the wisest of leaders face the complexity of knowing when and how to apologise for their mistakes.

The leader chosen for this study is Barack Obama. Obama, as the previous President of the United States, performed many apologies during his reign in the political arena. It is a common practice that most political speeches and press statements are written by paid script writers to be read by leaders. However, the case was not so with Obama.

Obama was not accustomed to using a speechwriter. From the time he was in state senate, he actually used to prepare texts, write remarks to himself, often in longhand on a yellow legal pad or on the back of scrapes of paper. He crafted most of his major speeches by himself, among them were Dreams from My Father, The Audacity of Hope, and his personal penned best-selling autobiography. (Berry and Gottheimer 2010 , p. xxv)

Among the most remarkable attitude that Obama has as a leader is the nature to not withhold an apology when one is needed to resolve a misunderstanding. Obama’s habit of apologising became a popular tease that it became the theme of Mitt Romney’s unsuccessful presidential campaign (Obama’s Apology Tour) and book biography ( No Apology: The Case for American Greatness ). The book was centred on Obama’s diplomacy tour around the world apologising for America. This political framing suggests that for a president to apologise is to deny America’s power and greatness. According to Maass ( 2018 ), President Obama was the first president who is not afraid to being perceived as weak by apologising.

2 Research problem

According to Mayfield and Mayfield ( 2017 , p. 19), “many leadership communication problems are not intentional, but a reflection of educational deficit which can be corrected” in the area of language and leadership. Discourse is acknowledged as a crucial aspect of leadership performance to examine leadership from the perspective of language use. Schnurr ( 2009 , p. 2), for instance, noted that “discourse is more than simply an ancillary aspect of leadership performance – it affects leaders’ effectiveness on various levels and it lies at the heart of the leadership process.” In fact, “imagining leadership outside of language is all but impossible” (Schnurr 2009 , p. 2). However, in spite of this intricate relationship between leadership and language, there are very few studies which look at leadership performance from a linguistic perspective (Holmes 2000 , Harris et al. 2006 , Mullany 2007 ). Mayfield and Mayfield ( 2017 ) also believed that leadership communication constraints can be lifted when leaders mindfully expand and enrich their linguistic ranges. Schnurr and Schroeder ( 2018 ) noted that fresh air may be brought into leadership research from potential cross-fertilisation with fields beyond disciplinary boundaries and venturing into largely ignored areas of inquiry such as applied linguistics and pragmatics. According to them, this is one particular field that has been repeatedly identified for its potential to bring much needed fresh air to current leadership research, and where this cross-fertilisation promises to be particularly fruitful, namely, discourse analytical approaches to leadership. Research conducted in these disciplines also share an interest in understanding how leadership is actually done and – in contrast to much of the earlier mainstream leadership research – reject attempts to establish “grand theories of leadership” (Alvesson 1996 , Clifton 2006 ). However, in spite of these shared interests and considerable overlaps, there is currently very little engagement between scholars in these disciplines (Schnurr and Schroeder 2018 ). Even though there are efforts for this intertwinement, studies conducted in applied linguistics and pragmatics fail to be acknowledged outside of their own discipline for their findings tend to be overlooked.

Therefore, there is a call for more research to approach the apologies of a leader from the linguistic angle. This study serves to fill in this gap of literature by adding not only to the literature of apology as a speech act but also to apology as used by a leader from a linguistic approach. However, there is a minimum account on Obama’s apologies. Therefore, this warrants an investigation to study how Obama apologises as a political leader from a linguistic insight. This study also intends to fill in the gap of literature in Obama’s apology discourse for leadership qualities in the light of his political career.

3 Literature review

As noted earlier, a decision to apologise or not has potentially higher stakes for a political figure than it would for a commoner in everyday life. Brubaker ( 2015 ) too specified that organisational leaders especially often choose to avoid apologising to protect themselves. In the Harvard Business Review article, Kellerman ( 2006 ) acknowledges that even the wisest of leaders have the difficulty of knowing when and how to apologise. After analysing a few situations, she makes an effort to address this dilemma by presenting a framework of apology leading to favourable and unfavourable outcomes. Her findings reveal that characteristics of an effective apology should include an acknowledgement of the wrongdoing, acceptance of responsibility by the offender, an expression of regret and a promise that the offense will not be repeated.

Likewise, studies by Hargie et al. ( 2010 ), Hearit (2010) and Roberts (2007) have attempted to produce similar situation assessment tools to guide leaders in apologising. Hargie et al. ( 2010 ) studied high-profile public apologies of banking CEOs to the Banking Crisis Inquiry of the Treasury Committee of the UK House of Commons in 2009. Following a gradation list of apology strategies, Hargie et al. ( 2010 ) claimed that the bad apologies of the CEOs lacked two prime necessities of an apology: blameworthiness and regret. This finding supports Darby and Schlenker’s ( 1982 , p. 742) most influential study on the defining features of apology, which are “admissions of blameworthiness and regret for an undesirable event.” The analysis of CEO apologies depicted a context of blame attribution, avoidance of responsibility and heightened public anger. Proposing a resolution, the authors suggest a model for the CEO apologies to include explanation of the misfortune, statement of complete responsibility and a direct request for pardon. In addition, the CEO apologies should have a denial of intentionality, a self-rebuke at the error committed and description of personal remorse for the damage caused.

One well-known early study that is often cited regarding the importance of an expression of regret in an apology is by Fraser ( 1981 ). However, Fraser ( 1981 ) reckoned that the offender has to both admit responsibility for committing the offending act and express regret for the offence caused. This is because a statement of responsibility shows that the offender is alert of the violation of social norms, and so will be wary of committing such offence henceforth. It also implies that the wrongdoing should not be related to the personality of the offender because it was not the “true-self” that committed the offense.

Edwards ( 2010 ) also agreed that regret and responsibility is the main ingredient of a political apology. Edwards ( 2010 ) examined collective apologies by U.S. President Bill Clinton, Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper for historical wrongdoing. The findings revealed a few commonalities in the three leaders’ apology: expressions of regret, acknowledgement of wrongdoing, mortification and corrective action (pledged to prevent recurrences). To further explain, the acknowledgement of wrongdoing is done by discussing the crimes committed and the victims of those crimes. Mortification in this context is the acceptance of responsibility for the crime committed and an expression of remorse in the aftermath. Finally, in the effort of preventing recurrences, the offender offers solutions to rectify and repair the damage of the crimes (Edwards 2010 ).

Subsequently, leadership values such as trust (Savolainen et al. 2014 ), visionary, credibility and integrity are pertinent in any leader–follower relationship (Mussig 2003 ). This is in fact the practice of transformational leadership, whereby a leader leads and inspires his followers with higher order values. According to Basford ( 2012 ), humility and transformational leadership are important mediators of trust in the relationship of the followers with the leader. Followers who appraised their leader’s apology as sincere perceived their leader as humble, which in turn generates positive follower reactions. This helps to reject feelings of resentment and dissatisfaction towards the leader.

Besides that expressions of regret by political leaders may encourage a transformation in the relationship dynamics between communities where the relationship moves forward from victimiser/victim to one built on common ground (Edwards 2010 ). Fraser ( 1981 ) considered that the apologiser has to both admit responsibility for committing the offending act and express regret for the offence caused. A statement of responsibility shows that the transgressor is aware that social norms have been broken and so will be able to avoid committing such a transgression in the future. Harris et al. ( 2006 ) suggest that apologies that minimise responsibility and blame are often perceived as insincere or lacking in morality and have higher chances of generating further public controversy and debate. Therefore, the value of responsibility and accountability should come hand in hand in a leader to be able to demonstrate effective leadership at its full potential.

4 Methodology

One area where research in applied linguistics and pragmatics is particularly strong is in its ability to identify, trace and eventually capture the specific processes through which leadership roles and identities are claimed. The analysis should adopt a data-driven approach that allows themes to emerge from the data. The methodological approaches of current leadership research conducted in applied linguistics and pragmatics have much to offer in this respect. Researchers have to equip their research with the tools and processes to capture these complexities and to describe how leadership is accomplished is one concrete way by applying linguistic and pragmatic research, which can make important contributions to leadership.

This research design is qualitative, and the data were collected through purposive sampling. The study examines the apology strategies that are used to construct his apologies and the leadership values that emerge from them. The study employed pragmatics and positive discourse analysis as approaches to discourse analysis. Within pragmatics, the speech act theory (Searle 1969 ) and apology strategies (Murphy 2014 ) are employed to analyse the apology texts. Positive discourse analysis is an approach that constructively and optimistically values a social context in a positive perspective. Within positive discourse analysis, grounded theory (Strauss and Corbin 1990 ) is used to perform a thematic analysis of leadership values from the apology texts using coding techniques (Halliday and Hasan 1976 , Fairclough 1995 ) to derive humane values such as responsibility, accountability, sympathy, trust, regret, forgiveness and reconciliation. These values alike were highly expected to be practised by a leader through his leadership behaviour culled from leadership literature. Appendix shows the frameworks used.

Thematic analysis is transparent and directly data driven. It identifies, analyses and reports patterns (themes) through the coding process. The coding process involves axial and open coding to obtain emerging values from the text. During thematic analysis, the researcher inspects the apology texts for humane values using Table 3 in Appendix as a guide and kept vigilant for new emerging values as expected from raw data. After several rounds of coding, a saturation of values was achieved. These values are closely related to values such as responsibility, accountability, sympathy, trust, regret, forgiveness, trust, reconciliation and others that a leader should uphold as a good example (see Table 3 in Appendix). Thematic analysis involved a vocabulary analysis where the researcher seeks the vocabulary, specifically lexical repetition and meaning relations, as a device to organise and shape themes in a discourse (Halliday and Hasan 1976 , Fairclough 1995 ), so as to uncover the underlying leadership values for the present study. The researcher labels the repeating words/concepts with codes and then compares them to see how they relate to one another through meaning relations. The researcher addresses the “why” and “how” questions to the themes to identify how the themes relate to the background of the story. An inference is then drawn on the relevancy and purpose of the themes resonating in the text. The results help to conclude on what Obama as a leader values and how he expresses those values in his apologies. According to Lancaster ( 2015 , p. 146), great leaders know how to harness and use these values to lead others. Table 4 explains the procedure of analysis.

To study Obama from the apology perspective, a list of Obama’s apologies ranging from year 2007 till 2016 was inventoried. Then two data were chosen from electronic websites based on their availability of text and extensive news coverage for contextual information to assist the case study of each apology. The two data are listed as follows:

Apology Text 1

A note of apology by Obama posted on a website addressed to the Indian-American community (year 2007). Website address: http://observer.com/2007/06/obamaapologizesfordpunjab/ .

Apology Text 2

Transcription of statement of apology by Obama on the deaths of two hostages in U.S. counterterrorism operation (year 2015). Website address: https://www.whitehouse.gov/thepressoffice/2015/04/23/statementpresidentdeathswarrenweinsteinandgiovanniloporto .

These two apologies were chosen from contrasting background to avoid a similarity in ideology, so that a fair deduction of Obama’s leadership styles can be drawn from different crises. One apology was contextualised from a voting campaign while the other was from a counterterrorism war operation. Both apologies were issued years apart: year 2007 and year 2015. The reason for years apart selection was to note whether Obama’s apology behaviour and rhetoric changed when he was a Senator in the State House (first apology text) as opposed to when he was the President serving his second term in the White House (second apology text). The apologies were chosen because they demonstrated a good spread of apology strategies, spoke of the importance of core morals and values, had sufficient background stories behind them and both resulted in a peaceful aftermath by the public. Each datum was first examined using Murphy’s ( 2014 ) felicity conditions that warrant an apology speech act. This was to ensure the validity of the chosen speeches as appropriate for the study.

5 Contextual background of Apology Text 1

Democratic candidates Senator Barack Obama and Senator Hillary Clinton were chief rivals for the 2008 U.S. presidential election. During the campaign, Obama’s research team circulated an attack memo entitled Hillary Clinton (D-Punjab) to ridicule her as a Senator from the Indian region of Punjab. The memo referred to the former President Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton’s close ties with India, her financial investments in Indian companies, her efforts on fundraising among Indian–Americans and outsourcing. The memo implied that given her close Indian connections, she was better suited to represent the state of Punjab instead of America. According to The New York Times on 19 June 2007 , “the memo created a fury in the Indian–American community and raised questions about Obama’s claims that he is above attack politics.” Dave Kumar, the spokesman of the “South Asians for Obama” group told the Times that “the issue people had with the memo was the implication that having close ties with the Indian–Americans in the U.S. is a problem.” As a result, the memo caused Obama’s followers to doubt his pledge to run an attack-free campaign. Before long, Obama’s followers posted a devastating note on the “South Asians for Obama” fan page website saying that they were “shocked and dismayed by the memo” and “less than satisfied” with the campaign’s initial responses. To worsen the situation, the U.S.-India Political Action Committee sent a letter to Senator Obama, accusing his campaign of using racial stereotypes. The letter read,

We have been encouraged by your message of inclusion and your promise to bring a new kind of politics to our country. This is why we are so concerned about media reports indicating your staff may be engaging in the worst type of anti-Indian American stereotyping. ( The New York Times , 19 June 2007 )

As soon as Obama learned of the memo, he disavowed and criticised the memo’s content. He quickly apologised and revealed that he was unaware about the existence of the memo. It was reported by news networks from the two press conferences that were organised to clarify the matter; the editorial board of the Des Moines Register and The Associated Press and Obama claimed “It was a dumb mistake on our campaign’s part,” “[…] it wasn’t anything I had seen or my senior staff has seen” and “[…] it didn’t reflect my view of the complicated issue of outsourcing. I and my campaign take full responsibility for it and we apologize” ( The New York Times , 19 June 2007 ). Obama also released an official written apology for the Indian–American supporters on the website of the South Asians for Obama at http://observer.com/2007/06/obama-apologizes-for-dpunjab/ .

These efforts paid off well because the apology made its amends. According to The New York Times , the spokesman of the South Asians for Obama group, Dave Kumar, said that the community was satisfied that Obama was sufficiently and sincerely upset about the memo’s content. In the election that followed, the BBC News reported that an impressive 84% of the 2.85 million of the Indian–American community voted for Obama in the 2008 presidential election. Eventually, America also witnessed a growth in the Indian–American population. The U.S. Census recorded a 2.8 million of American–Indians in 2010 to a 3.1 million of American–Indians in 2013. Therefore, it is evident that this apology made its reparation well and was successful in convincing the Indian–Americans of Obama’s goodwill and clean political standards.

6 Findings and discussion: Apology Text 1

Apology Strategy: A statement of desire, recognising H as entitled to an apology

Value: Responsibility, accountability

According to Searle ( 1969 ), the objective of the assertive class is to obligate and commit the speaker to the truth of the expressed proposition. Obama in line 1 recognises the other party as deserving an apology. Obama puts out his intention with “I wanted to respond personally” because he feels accountable and wants to take responsibility. Besides the first line, the apology on the whole made a heavy use of the first-person singular. This shows personal accountability. Leaders who are accountable are trusted and respected by their followers to keep their word. Accountability also displays humility because the leader has to put aside his pride to address his mistake. Lines 1 and 2 express the sub-formula of the apology speech-act model by Olshtain and Cohen ( 1983 ) as well, which is “to recognize the other party as deserving an apology.” According to Murphy ( 2014 ), “recognising H as entitled to an apology” means that the perpetrator feels guilt over the wrongdoing towards the victim and has the genuine desire to apologise. This is depicted with the referrals of “I” as the offender and “you” as the victim. Obama put out his intention with “I wanted to respond personally […]” as a statement of desire and also as an initiation of a responsible move, because the matter was concerning “you,” the victim.

Apology Strategy: Explanation, expressing lack of intent

Value: Relationship, Reconciliation

As identified above, Obama has used the assertive speech act to transmit a piece of information that was used to correct the audience’s knowledge and expectations of the word. The assertive illocutionary force is realised in lines 4–10 where Obama clarifies his belief that was previously perceived negatively. He asserts in the imperative manner that the content of the memo did not reflect his belief of America’s relationship with India. He further emphasises what he believes by stating each of them down in order to provide a clearer view for the audience to understand him from his perspective.

An intense reflection of Obama’s self-agreement and self-disagreement along with the use of strong verbs such as “did not reflect my own views,” “I have long believed,” “ignored my longstanding relationship” and “I consider myself responsible” is portrayed in Obama’s representatives. These firm statements are straight forward and not long-winded; they do not run-around-the-bush and create confusion. This helps to provide clarity and assertion to the readers of Obama’s stand in this matter. The excerpt shows Obama giving an explanation of what he believed in, which was unfortunately portrayed in contrary to the truth in the incident. Lines 4–10 were a reinforcement of assertion that Obama used to his defence, expressing his lack of intent of the incident’s negative outcome, and also that the memo failed to display his honest perception of America–India friendship ties.

Apology strategy: A statement of non-recurrence, An offer/statement of repair/redress, a request for acceptance of apology/forgiveness, a statement of desire, to appreciate/comfort/conciliatory expression

Value: Reconciliation, responsibility, relationship, visionary

The illocutionary goal of the commissive speech act is to commit the speaker to perform some future action. According to Searle ( 1983 , p. 178), the communicative purpose of commissives is that the hearer shall be orientated as to a certain future behaviour of the speaker. He further adds that the social purpose of the commissive category, which he regards as “extra-linguistic,” is to create stable expectations of people’s behaviour. This is depicted in the lines of the apology excerpt: lines 20 and 21 and later in lines 24 and 25. The tone of the statement above is authoritative and legal. As a politician, Obama has promised to obligate himself to take the appropriate actions in preventing errors as similar as this from reoccurring. A promise by a politician is often given a higher regard and expectation often because the integrity of the politician is judged based on the capability to fulfil the promise made to the followers. A hint of obligation as a leader and responsibility is applied in the prior part of line 20, “We have taken appropriate action […],” with assurance given in the latter part of line 20, “[…] to prevent errors like this from happening in the future.” Obama kept his word and issued a new policy for campaigning purposes. The Fox news reported that this new policy requires every document irrespective of its purpose has to be first authorised by senior researchers before being released to the press or the public. Through this policy, a recurrence of a similar situation would be impossible in the near future.

According to Scher and Darley ( 1997 , p. 130), a promise of forbearance increases the effectiveness of an apology by assuring hearers that the speaker will not repeat his transgression. If the function of an apology is to remedy the social breach and bring the transgressor “back in the fold,” then it is important for social interactants to feel that the transgressor is aware of the violated rule and will strive to follow the rule henceforth. A promise of forbearance also shows the character of the leader whereby followers will be able to judge for themselves in the long run if the leader is trustworthy of his word or vice versa. The purpose of Obama requesting for the letter to be widely shared within the community is to ask for forgiveness. Obama wants the community to know and accept his apology in goodwill.

Commissives carry the future tense and also use words that refer to the future, as depicted in line 21 “[…] happening in the future,” and in lines 24 and 25 “I look forward […], and beyond.” A hint of responsibility is applied in the prior part of sentence 20, “We have taken appropriate action […],” with assurance given in the latter lines 20 and 21, “[…] to prevent errors like this from happening in the future” sounds like a genuine promise. To assure (in the commissive use) is to commit oneself to something with the perlocutionary intention to convincing someone who has doubts. The presupposition of these doubts is a preparatory condition and the attempt to try to have the hearer “feel sure” of the commitment is, as in the assertive use, a special mode of achievement in giving assurance. Obama, in the above, calls for reconciliation. He hints for a lasting relationship between both sides. The above lines are voiced as a request for assistance. The request above will only be able to be fulfilled if the victims have agreed to spread the word of the apology within their community and also grant forgiveness for a continuity of friendship. Line 25 shows a hopeful yet confident Obama for a continuity in the relationship “during the course of this campaign, and beyond” given the reason for a continuous “[…] exchange of ideas […]” impresses a win–win relationship, a give and take, where both parties are equally in need of each other, not one party exercising dominance on the subordinate other.

Line 20 shows that accountable leaders who take “responsibility” for their actions focus on making the situation better, taking initiative to influence the outcome. By demonstrating “accountability,” it allows everyone to move on and focus on the end goal rather than the problem. The next sentence that follows in the apology text is Obama informing the readers that they have taken appropriate action to prevent such an error as this from occurring again, which is the strategy of “a promise of forbearance.” This is regarded as self-awareness, which according to Twain ( 2014 ), is an excellent form of strategy for an individual to identify his strengths and improve his weakness. Truly enough, as a lesson from this incidence, a new policy was established whereby all materials before their distribution to the public have to be first reviewed by senior staff. This example of Obama’s action shows how improvement can be made from a mistake, which indirectly will have a positive influence on his followers.

Another value that Obama emphasises is the importance of the “relationship” between a leader and his followers. The apology depicts Obama emphasising on the relationship between him and the Indian–Americans. Lines 22 and 23 express a request in the directive speech act to help Obama share the apology with all the other Indian–Americans who missed out the apology to repair the tarnished relationship. The strategy “offer of repair” here is the magnitude of the apology itself to the victims. In lines 24 and 25, Obama shows that he values the relationship that he had with the Indian–Americans prior to the incident and requests for a reconciliation of that close relationship.

In addition, an added value that Obama portrays as a leader is his vision of the future. He uses the commissives wherein the future tense speaks his vision for the people. Vision is essential in leadership for it radiates optimism whereby a future outcome is anticipated for people to participate as partners in flourishing the expected outcome. Lines 24 and 25 show how positively Obama speaks of the future with the American Indians. He promotes a continued social interaction between both parties within a give and take concept. This is shown in the phrase “exchange of ideas.” With the usage of “future” and “I look forward,” Obama is hopeful and pushing for a reconciliation and renewed friendship to take place. This is an indirect manner of the strategy “an explicit expression of apology: a request for forgiveness.” This is seen as he emphasises a continuity in the long-lasting relationship with the phrase “during the course of this campaign, and beyond.” This shows the positivity of a visionary leader.

7 Contextual background of Apology Text 2

With the intention to wipe out a compound linked to al-Qa’ida militants in Shawal Valley in North Waziristan, a tribal area of Pakistan, the Central Intelligence Agency (C.I.A.) of the U.S. “authorized a counterterrorism operation with no idea that two hostages were being held captive by al-Qa’ida despite hundreds of hours of surveillance” (Baker 23 April 2015 ). The two hostages who were killed were aid workers devoted to improve the lives of the Pakistani people. Besides the hostages, the operation also reportedly killed an American al-Qaeda, Ahmed Farouq, leader of its branch in the Indian subcontinent, and another American al-Qaeda member, Adam Gadahn, a California native who converted to Islam and helped run al-Qaeda’s propaganda department (Washington Post, 23 April 2015). The two American al-Qaida operatives killed in the strikes “were al-Qaida leaders plotting against America as they held hostages,” House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman, Ed Royce, said in a statement (Washington Post, 23 April 2015).

The two hostages who were kidnapped by al-Qa’ida were Warren Weinstein, an American whom the C.I.A. had long sought to rescue since 2011 that al-Qa’ida terrorists released videos of, and Giovanni Lo Porto, an Italian national. Weinstein, aged 73, was a business development expert working on contract for the “United States Agency for International Development” when he was kidnapped in August 2011 in Lahore, Pakistan, just 4 days before he was scheduled to return to his family in the United States. Lo Porto studied at London Metropolitan University and worked on aid projects in the Central African Republic and Haiti before travelling to Pakistan to help rebuild a flood-ravaged area. Shortly after arriving in January 2012, he was abducted. The Italian government had been working with the U.S. to secure Lo Porto’s release.

According to The New York Times dated 24 April 2015, Obama’s aides said that the President did not sign off on this specific strike, because he had authorised the C.I.A. and military to carry out drone attacks without further consultation if the mission is befitting the guidelines. After the intelligence officials discovered the mistake, they informed President Obama who ordered the episode to be declassified to the public. A very regretful Obama then called the Prime Minister of Italy and Weinstein’s wife to inform them of the deaths. Weinstein’s wife said that her husband’s captors bore responsibility, “The cowardly actions of those who took Warren captive and ultimately to the place and time of his death are not in keeping with Islam, and they will have to face their God to answer for their actions” ( The New York Times , 24 April 2015). She also expressed her disappointment in the U.S. Government. In the aftermath of the situation, the government conducted two reviews of the drone strike to determine what went wrong, and if the episode could have forced a broader rethinking of President Obama’s approach to fighting al-Qa’ida. President Obama said a full review would identify any changes that should be made to avoid similar errors being repeated. The U.S. conducts counterterrorism strikes based on protocols called “near certainties,” White House spokesman, Josh Earnest, said at a press briefing after the official apology by Obama ( The New York Times , 24 April 2015). These include situations in which the officials are highly certain that targets are at the site of a strike and that there will not be collateral damage. Earnest said the hostages’ deaths may lead to a change in these protocols. The White House secretary added that the families will receive financial compensation.

Members of Congress criticised the administration and called for more oversight. The Republican of California argued that “Warren’s death is further evidence of the failures in communication and coordination between government agencies tasked with recovering Americans in captivity – and the fact that he’s dead, as a result, is absolutely tragic” ( The New York Times , 24 April 2015). The deputy legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union criticised that the government was not parallel with the regulations that it says it uses and the regulations that are actually being used. However, he was remarked by the unusual transparency of the government in disclosing their mistakes and information of the drone strikes. Human rights groups have also criticised Obama’s administration by claiming that the deaths of the hostages highlighted the flaws in the policy. On 23 April 2015, according to The Washington Post , the White House released a written statement:

It is with tremendous sorrow that we recently concluded that a U.S. Government counterterrorism operation in January killed two innocent hostages by al-Qa’ida. Our hearts go out to the families of Dr. Warren Weinstein, an American held by al-Qa’ida since 2011, and Giovanni Lo Porto, an Italian national who had been an al-Qa’ida hostage since 2012. Analysis of all available information has led the Intelligence Community to judge with high confidence that the operation accidently killed both hostages. The operation targeted an al-Qa’ida associated compound, where we had no reason to believe either hostage was present, located in the border region of Afghanistan and Pakistan. No words can fully express our regret over this terrible tragedy.

Shortly after the apology statement, Obama took to the White House podium in a briefing to provide some details on the operations 3 months prior, details of which he had ordered to be declassified. President Obama also made a personal apology in the James S. Brady Press Briefing Room, White House. The following analysis is based on the apology by Obama which has been transcribed.

8 Findings and discussion: Apology Text 2

Apology strategy: A statement of obligation, a commissive with ‘apology’ as a direct object, recognising H as entitled to an apology.

Value: Responsibility and accountability, Determination (to work hard), Dedication (to duty), Trustworthiness/Transparency.

The highlight of this sentence is the fragment “deepest apologies.” The apology expressed at this juncture is not a gesture of condolence, rather an apology for making a mistake that caused the loss of both men. Obama as a leader is obliged to apologise on behalf of the country to both families. He recognises the families are entitled to an apology, and though he is the symbol of America’s superpower, he does not try to hedge or down tone the apology.

Obama displays a strong sense of responsibility and accountability in this apology text. He reinforces the usage of first person pronoun referring mainly to himself and the U.S. Government as solely responsible for the deaths of both innocent hostages. Obama chiefly held himself responsible because of his position of authority as the Commander-in-Chief. He felt accountable of the grief that the family is going through as a consequence of his administration’s mistake, which he does not deny but further acknowledged. The weight of responsibility was previously shown in the effort and determination that was channelled by the security team to rescue both hostages prior to their death. Obama’s sense of accountability was further demonstrated as he promised to work on the measures of improvement to avoid similar casualties in the future.

In an interview with Jameel Jaffer, deputy legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union, despite criticising the government’s policies, he noted that the disclosure was remarkable.

I was going to say that one other thing that’s remarkable about yesterday’s disclosures is the very fact of the disclosures, because normally the government doesn’t disclose information about individual drone strikes, at least not on the record like this. This is a very unusual thing, where the government is actually disclosing information about who was killed and a little bit of information about the operation. ( www.democracynow.org )

Disclosing information that makes the leader appear more human improves the understanding relationship between the leader and the follower (Gardner and Stough 2002 ). Obama uses the representative speech act in line 31 to order the officials to report about the operation to the public. To order and to command require invoking from a position of authority and power which is often responded with an obligation of obedience. Obama ordered the existence of the operation to be declassified not only because he feels obliged to the families who are not entitled only to an apology, but also because they deserve to know the truth. Therefore, as a leader in a crisis, Obama had made the right commitment to reveal the truth and be transparent.

Obama also depicts the dedication to duty and the determination to work hard. Based on the analysis, an impression of relentlessness was portrayed not only by Obama but also by all the forces at work such as the national security team and dedicated professionals across the U.S. Government. As Obama revealed parts of the operation’s activity, a sense of serious commitment is realised where they focused for years on Shawal Valley because it was the home of al-Qaeda’s militants. The phrase “including hundreds of hours of surveillance,” either metaphorical or otherwise, demonstrates the time and work that were consumed before the operation unit was ready to launch an attack. However, notwithstanding the hours of tireless labour since the abduction in 2011, the loss and further repercussions is a tarnished image that Obama has to deal with and repair.

Another leadership trait displayed is trustworthiness and the obligation as a leader to be truthful no matter the cost. Though the truth made the counterterrorism unit seem irresponsible in carrying out their duty efficiently, Obama made it a point to be responsible in disclosing the truth, being as transparent as possible about the details of the tragedy. The U.S. News reported that Republican Duncan Hunter said Weinstein’s death was a casualty of the communication failures between government agencies like the F.B.I. and the C.I.A. ( Brody 2015, April 23). It is undeniable that leadership roles are complex and leave possibilities for occurrences of mistakes. The body of literature suggests that not only are leaders vulnerable to committing mistakes, they are in fact in higher tendency to commit mistakes because of the given complexity of their status as a leader in making decisions (Finkelstein 2003 , Hogan and Kaiser 2005 ). The strains of a mistake can cost a healthy relationship the leader once had with the followers. According to Bedell-Avers ( 2008 ), relationship mistakes (social errors) have a more negative impact on the leader’s performance, resulting in loss of support from followers.

Apology strategy: To sympathise/recognize victim’s affliction, To appreciate/to comfort/to offer conciliatory expressions

Value: Appreciative (of the service and sacrifice), Sympathy (to comfort), Forgiveness

Obama compares and contrasts the hostages against their captors: the humanitarians versus the terrorists. Obama points out the issue of selflessness and selfishness. Warren served to the people in need irrespective of their faith; in contrast, al-Qaeda captured Warren and mocked him for his faith that was unparalleled to the extremists. Warren, aged 73, would have suffered from health issues as a result of being treated poorly as a hostage. The videos of him released by the terrorists did not show Warren being in a good state of health. To hold him hostage at an old age away from his family further shows of how unmerciful and unsympathetic they were. These sentences in the expressive speech act bring out the unspoken agony that the victims must have endured silently.

The new findings to these strategies against the apology text were the emergence of two other strategies: “To sympathize/recognize victim’s affliction” and “To appreciate/to comfort/to offer conciliatory expression.” The strategy “to sympathize/recognise victim’s affliction” is to acknowledge and sympathise with the victim’s suffering, while the strategy “to appreciate/to comfort/to offer conciliatory expression” focuses on appreciating the service/sacrifice, comforting the hearer and moving towards expressions that initiates reconciliation and closure. The sentences that represented these strategies were composed of hedging confessions, metaphorical expressions, sympathetic/empathetic/comforting statements, conciliatory expressions and emotion embedded adjectives. Both these strategies were pathos-like, emotional, and expressive in nature. Pathos represents an appeal to the emotions of the hearer and kindles feelings that are already resided in them.

Obama in lines 73–88 uses the expressive with the intention to comfort the families of Warren and Giovanni who are mourning in grief of their deceased beloved. He consoles them with phrases such as “will find some small measure of solace,” “legacy will endure,” “their service will be remembered,” “lives that they touched and made better,” “their spirit will live on,” “shining example” and “as a light to people all over the world.” Some phrases highlighted the difference that these men impacted on people to “see suffering and answer with compassion,” “see hatred and offer their love” and “see war and work for peace.” In other words, these men had a positive perspective of life, which stands as a “shining example” to people all around the world. There were antonyms present in the text where Obama used the positive to win over the negative, for example “suffering-compassion, hatred-love, and war-peace.” This shows the spirit of positivity and optimism; to see the silver lining amidst crisis. Obama uses the future tense “will + verb” in these sentences, for instance, “will find some small measure of solace, will be remembered, will live on, will stand as a light” to signify a sense of never dying legacy, a continuity of the power of goodness. His final words mixed hope for closure for the victims with expressions of gratitude for them.

Besides that, a strong sentiment of appreciation was shown towards the sacrifice that Warren and Giovanni had made in their service as humanitarians. Obama also comforts and lends sympathy to the mourning families. This is seen in the references used to address them such as “brave” and “selfless men.” A number of positive values were spoken personally of them as well. They were pictured as a “shining example” and as a “light” to others. These two men were able to see hope in the face of crisis. Obama encouraged the people who have hearts burdened with humanitarianism to view the service of Warren and Giovanni as an example of those “who see suffering and answer with compassion, who see hatred and offer their love, who see war and work for peace.”

The apology bears witness to Obama lending his sympathy through the expressives in his apology. To sympathise is to be able to empathise with the pain of others and to have the desire to help ease those in pain. A feeling of helplessness and guilt is realised in between these lines (lines 73–88) whereby Obama can only express sympathy because he is powerless to undo the agony that the families were enduring. Sympathy is effective in comforting people in pain. Since the situation was out of Obama’s hand as President, he related himself as a husband and father who could relate to the feeling of losing a family member.

Obama calls for forgiveness from the families through this apology text. He admits to being responsible, apologises for the tragedy, practices transparency throughout the apology and vows to learn from the tragedy. In other words, being unable to escape the consequences of the mistake but willing to learn and do better, he calls for trust to be bestowed once again upon him as the leader of the nation. This is explained in Kidder’s ( 2007 ) definition of forgiveness whereby the situation moves the leader to see the situation in a new light which leads to restorative measures towards reconciliation. Forgiveness finally leads to reconciliation, where it continues to restore the injured relationship which leads to social healing as well as governance, stabilisation and economic reconstruction (Worthington Jr 2013 ). Obama as a leader was in need to receive forgiveness to continue pursuing constructive efforts for the betterment of the country.

9 Concluding remarks

The discussion in both apologies above demonstrates that effective leadership involves a leader’s dynamic and versatile skill in apologising through the blend of speech acts, strategies and values to inspire others. Obama used diverse strategies to facilitate a well-meant apology that helped to reduce the dissatisfaction of his angered followers. The use of strategies such as “a statement of desire,” “a statement of obligation,” “a commissive with ‘apology’ as a direct object,” “a statement of non-recurrence,” “an offer/statement of repair/redress,” “a request for acceptance of apology/forgiveness,” “a statement of desire,” “recognising H as entitled to an apology,” “explanation” and “expressing lack of intent” sided the construction of the apologetic statements. Two new additional strategies that were found were composed from the raw apologetic statements: “to sympathize/recognize victim’s affliction” and “to appreciate/to comfort/to offer conciliatory expressions.” Speech acts such as representatives, expressives and commissives composed the tone of the apologetic statements. The combination of this duo between strategies and acts in his apology construction birthed moral values, which addressed the followers’ emotional needs. Among the values found from the physical construction of the apologetic statements are appreciativeness (service and sacrifice of victims), sympathy, forgiveness, responsibility, accountability, determination and dedication to duty, trustworthiness/transparency, reconciliation, relationship value and visionary. The angered victims were then able to receive the apology well. It is important that a leader’s apology should be able to tap on values that are important and that matter to people.

To be a good leader, one must be able to perform the speech act of apology well. A significant political apology should be connected with meaningful action in terms of rectifying the damage caused by the offence and displaying an indication of the seriousness of the politician’s sense of remorse (Harris et al. 2006 ). If a political apology is to be regarded as valid by those to whom it is addressed, it should be sincere and morally grounded with an explicit acceptance of personal responsibility for the act committed. It is our contention, that in doing so, leaders will be able to bind themselves well in good rapport with their followers which creates unity in the relationship. As a reward of his ethical leadership, Obama managed to redeem a good image and reputation after the damage with the truth behind the incidents that took place. Previous studies (Kellerman 2006 , Brubaker 2015 ) suggest that leaders are resistant to apologise in fear that it will reflect weakness and undermine authority. However, this study has demonstrated how the language of apology can display leadership through it. Leaders should be aware that an apology can function as a tool for “image restoration and ethos repair” (Holling et al. 2014 , p. 279). By apologising, one attempts to heal the victim and in turn redeems himself and restores his image and ethos. Leaders should not be ignorant or have an egoistic attitude by avoiding the rightful act to apologise if a transgression has been committed. It is crucial for leaders to understand that apology is an important leadership behaviour and practice; it is not to be viewed as taboo or ineffective for leadership.

Acknowledgments

The authors received financial support for the research, authorship and publication of this article from the UPM Putra Grant No. 9581300.

Searle’s ( 1969 ) categories of illocutionary speech acts

Murphy’s ( 2014 ) apology strategies

Leadership values

Procedure for data analysis

Alvesson, Mats. 1996. “Leadership studies: From procedure and abstraction to reflexivity and situation.” The Leadership Quarterly 7(4): 455-485. 10.1016/S1048-9843(96)90002-8 Search in Google Scholar

Augsburger, David. 2000. The New Freedom of Forgiveness. Chicago, IL: Moody Publishers. Search in Google Scholar

Bagdonas, Azuolas. 2010. “The practice of state apologies: The role of demands for historical apologies and refusals to apologize in the construction of state identity.” Unpublished PhD Manuscript. Department of International Relations and European Studies, Central European University. Search in Google Scholar

Baker, Paul. 23 April 2015. “Obama apologizes after drone kills American and Italian held by Al Qaeda.” The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/world/asia/2-qaeda-hostages-were-accidentally-killed-in-us-raid-white-house-says.html. Search in Google Scholar

Basford, Tessa E. 2012. Please Accept My Sincerest Apologies: Examining Follower Reactions to Leader Apology (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest LLC. (UMI Number: 3498211). 10.5465/AMBPP.2012.21 Search in Google Scholar

Bedell-Avers, K. E. 2008. Leader Errors: An Examination of the Implications. Doctoral dissertation, University of Oklahoma. (Dissertation Abstracts International, AAT 3307950). Search in Google Scholar

Berry, Mary Frances, and Josh Gottheimer. 2010. Power in Words: The Stories Behind Barack Obama’s Speeches, from the State House to the White House. Boston, Massachusetts: Beacon Press. Search in Google Scholar

Brody, R. “Views You Can Use: A President’s Apology.” U.S. News. 23 April 2015. https://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2015/04/23/obama-apologizes-for-the-death-of-two-hostages-in-pakistan-drone-strike). Search in Google Scholar

Brubaker, Matthew. W. 2015. Apology as a Leadership Behavior: A Meta-analysis with Implications for Organizational Leaders (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest LLC. (UMI Number: 3712131). Search in Google Scholar

Cho, Yoon Jik, and Theodore H. Poister. 2014. “Managerial Practices, Trust in Leadership, and Performance: Case of the Georgia Department of Transportation.” Public Personnel Management 43(2): 179–96. 10.1177/0091026014523136 Search in Google Scholar

Clifton, Jonathan. 2006. “A Conversation Analytical Approach to Business Communication: The Case of Leadership.” The Journal of Business Communication (1973) 43(3): 202–19. 10.1177/0021943606288190 Search in Google Scholar

Coombs, W. Timothy, and Sherry J. Holladay. 2008. “Comparing Apology to Equivalent Crisis Response Strategies: Clarifying Apology’s Role and Value in Crisis Communication.” Public Relations Review 34(3): 252–7. 10.1016/j.pubrev.2008.04.001 Search in Google Scholar

Daicoff, Susan. 2013. “Apology, Forgiveness, Reconciliation & Therapeutic Jurisprudence.” Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal 13: 131. Search in Google Scholar

Darby, Bruce W., and Barry R. Schlenker. 1982. “Children’s Reaction to Apologies.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 43(4): 742–53. 10.1037/0022-3514.43.4.742 Search in Google Scholar

Davis, Paul. 2002. “On Apologies.” Journal of Applied Philosophy 19(2), 169–173. 10.1111/1468-5930.00213 Search in Google Scholar

Edmondson, Amy C. 2000. “Learning from Mistakes is Easier Said than Done: Group and Organizational Influences on the Detection and Correction of Human Error.” In Strategic Learning in a Knowledge Economy, Robert L. Cross, Sam Israelit, 203–30. Woburn, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann. 10.1177/0021886304263849 Search in Google Scholar

Edwards, Jason A. 2010. “Apologizing for the Past for a Better Future: Collective Apologies in the United States, Australia, and Canada.” Southern Communication Journal 75(1): 57–75. 10.1080/10417940902802605 Search in Google Scholar

Fairclough, Norman. 1995. Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language. Essex: Longman. Search in Google Scholar

Ferch, Shann Ray. 2011. Forgiveness and Power in the Age of Atrocity: Servant Leadership as a Way of Life. Plymouth, United Kingdom: Lexington Books. Search in Google Scholar

Finkelstein, Sydney. 2003. Why Smart Executives Fail: And What You Can Learn From Their Mistakes. New York: Penguin. Search in Google Scholar

Fraser, Bruce. 1981. “On Apologizing.” In Conversational Routine, ed. Florian Coulmas, 259–73. The Hague: Mouton. 10.1515/9783110809145.259 Search in Google Scholar

Gardner, Lisa, and Con Stough. 2002. “Examining the relationship between leadership and emotional intelligence in senior level managers.” Leadership & Organization Development Journal 23(2): 68–78. 10.1108/01437730210419198 Search in Google Scholar

Halliday, Michael Alexander Kirkwood, and Ruqaiya Hasan. 1976. Cohesion in English. London: Longman. Search in Google Scholar

Hansson, Robert O., Warren H. Jones, and Wesla L. Fletcher. 1990. “Troubled Relationships in Later Life: Implications for Support.” Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 7(4): 451–63. 10.1177/0265407590074003 Search in Google Scholar

Hareli, Shlomo, and Zvi Eisikovits. 2006. “The role of communicating social emotions accompanying apologies in forgiveness.” Motivation and Emotion 30(3): 189–97. 10.1007/s11031-006-9025-x Search in Google Scholar

Hargie, Owen, Karyn Stapleton, and Dennis Tourish. 2010. “Interpretations of CEO Public Apologies for the Banking Crisis: Attributions of Blame and Avoidance of Responsibility.” Organization, 17(6): 721–42. 10.1177/1350508410367840 Search in Google Scholar

Harris, Sandra, Karen Grainger, and Louise Mullany. 2006. “The Pragmatics of Political Apologies.” Discourse & Society 17(6): 715–37. 10.1177/0957926506068429 Search in Google Scholar

Hogan, Robert, and Robert B. Kaiser. 2005. “What We Know About Leadership.” Review of General Psychology 9(2): 169. 10.1037/1089-2680.9.2.169 Search in Google Scholar

Holling, Michelle A, Dreama G. Moon, and Alexandra Jackson Nevis. 2014. “Racist Violations and Racializing Apologia in a Post-racism Era.” Journal of International and Intercultural Communication, 7(4): 260–86. 10.1080/17513057.2014.964144 Search in Google Scholar

Holmes, Janet. 2000. Politeness, Power and Provocation: How Humour Functions in the Workplace. Discourse Studies 2(2): 159–85. 10.1177/1461445600002002002 Search in Google Scholar

Horowitz, J. 2007, June 18. Obama Apologizes for D-Punjab. Observer. Retrieved from http://observer.com/2007/06/obama-apologizes-for-dpunjab/. Search in Google Scholar

Kellerman, Barbara. 2006. “When Should a Leader Apologize and When Not?” Harvard Business Review 84(4): 72–81. Search in Google Scholar

Kidder, Deborah L. 2007. “Restorative Justice: Not “rights”, but the right way to heal relationships at work.” International Journal of Conflict Management 18(1): 4–22. 10.1108/10444060710759291 Search in Google Scholar

Kymenlaakso, Ilkka Virolainen. 2012. “Forgiveness as a Leadership Tool.” Global Conference on Business and Finance Proceedings 7(1): 432–45. Search in Google Scholar

Lancaster, Simon. 2015. Winning Minds: Secrets From the Language of Leadership. London: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/9781137465948 Search in Google Scholar

Lazare, Aaron. 2004. On Apology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Search in Google Scholar

LeCouteur, Amanda. 2001. “On saying ‘sorry’: Repertoires of Apology to Australia’s Stolen Generations.” In How to Analyze Talk in Institutional Settings: A Casebook of Methods, 146–158. London, UK: Continuum. Search in Google Scholar

Lee, Betty Kaman. 2005. “Hong Kong Consumers’ Evaluation in an Airline Crash: A Path Model Analysis.” Journal of Public Relations Research 17(4): 363–91. 10.1207/s1532754xjprr1704_3 Search in Google Scholar

Lichtenwalner, B. 17 November 2012. “Don’t Confuse Accountability with Responsibility.” (Weblogcomment). Retrieved from https://www.modernservantleader.com/servant-leadership/dont-confuseaccountability-with-responsibility/. Search in Google Scholar

Liu, Helena. 2010. “When Leaders Fail: A Typology of Failures and Framing Strategies.” Management Communication Quarterly 24(2): 232–59. 10.1177/0893318909359085 Search in Google Scholar

Luke, Allan. 1997. “The Material Effects of the Word: Apologies,‘Stolen Children’ and Public Discourse.” Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education 18(3): 343–68. 10.1080/0159630970180303 Search in Google Scholar

Maass, Matthias. 2018. The World Views of the Obama Era: From Hope to Disillusionment. Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1007/978-3-319-61076-4 Search in Google Scholar

Mayfield, Jacqueline, and Milton Mayfield. 2017. Motivating Language Theory: Effective Leader Talk in the Workplace. Cham: Palgrave MacMillan. 10.1007/978-3-319-66930-4 Search in Google Scholar

McAllister, Daniel J. 1995. “Affect-and cognition-based trust as foundations for interpersonal cooperation in organizations.” Academy of Management Journal 38(1): 24–59. Search in Google Scholar

Mullany, Louise. 2007. Gendered Discourse in the Professional Workplace. UK: Palgrave MacMillan. 10.1057/9780230592902 Search in Google Scholar

Murphy, James. 2014. Apologies in the Discourse of Politicians: A Pragmatic Approach. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from Manchester eScholar. Search in Google Scholar

Mussig, Dennis James. 2003. “A Research and Skills Training Framework for Values-driven Leadership.” Journal of European Industrial Training 27(2/3/4): 73–9. 10.1108/03090590310468895 Search in Google Scholar

Newman, Alexander, Kohyar Kiazad, Qing Miao, and Brian Cooper. 2014. “Examining the cognitive and affective trust-based mechanisms underlying the relationship between ethical leadership and organisational citizenship: a case of the head leading the heart?” Journal of Business Ethics 123(1): 113–23. 10.1007/s10551-013-1803-2 Search in Google Scholar

“Obama apologizes over ‘Hillary Clinton (D-Punjab)’ memo.” The New York Times. 19 June 2007, Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/19/world/americas/19ihtobama.1.6203898.html?r=0. Search in Google Scholar

Olshtain, Elite, and Andrew D. Cohen. 1983. “Apology: a speech act set.” In Sociolinguistics and Language Acquisition, ed. N. Wolfson, E. Judd, 18–36. Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Search in Google Scholar

Orenstein, Aviva. 1998. “Apology Excepted: Incorporating a Feminist Analysis into Evidence Policy Where you Least Expect It.” Sw. UL Rev. 28: 221. Search in Google Scholar

Patel, Ameeta, and Lamar Reinsch. 2003. “Companies can Apologize: Corporate Apologies and Legal Liability.” Business Communication Quarterly 66(1): 9–25. 10.1177/108056990306600103 Search in Google Scholar

Petersen, Rodney L. 2009. “Forgiveness and Religion: A Schematic Approach.” ARA Journal, 2005–2009: 29–33. Search in Google Scholar

Podsakoff, Philip M., Scott B. MacKenzie, Robert H. Moorman, and Richard Fetter. 1990. “Transformational leader behaviors and their effects on followers’ trust in leader, satisfaction, and organizational citizenship behaviors.” The Leadership Quarterly 1(2): 107–42. 10.1016/1048-9843(90)90009-7 Search in Google Scholar

Robbennolt, Jennifer K. 2003. “Apologies and Legal Settlement: An Empirical Examination.” Michigan Law Review 102(3): 460–516. 10.2307/3595367 Search in Google Scholar

Robinson, Jeffrey D. 2004. “The Sequential Organization of “explicit” Apologies in Naturally occurring English.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 37(3): 291–330. 10.1207/s15327973rlsi3703_2 Search in Google Scholar

Saunders, Rebecca. 2011. “Questionable associations: The Role of Forgiveness in Transitional Justice.” International Journal of Transitional Justice 5(1): 119–41. 10.1093/ijtj/ijr003 Search in Google Scholar

Savolainen, Taina, Palmira Lopez-Fresno, and Mirjami Ikonen. 2014. “Trust-Communication Dyad in Interpersonal Workplace Relationships – Dynamics of Trust Deterioration and Breach”. Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management 12(4): 232–40. Search in Google Scholar

Scher, Steven J., and John M. Darley. 1997. “How effective are the things people say to apologize? Effects of the realization of the apology speech act.” Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 26(1): 127–140. 10.1023/A:1025068306386 Search in Google Scholar

Schnurr, Stephanie. 2009. Leadership Discourse at Work: Interactions of Humour, Gender and Workplace Culture. UK: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/9780230594692 Search in Google Scholar

Schnurr, Stephanie, and Andreas Schroeder. 2018. “A Critical Reflection of Current Trends in Discourse Analytical Research on Leadership across Disciplines. A Call for a More Engaging Dialogue.” Leadership 15(4): 445–60. 1742715018767687 . Search in Google Scholar

Searle, John R. 1969. Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language (Vol. 626). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139173438 Search in Google Scholar

Searle, John R. 1983. Intentionality: An Essay in the Philosophy of Mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139173452 Search in Google Scholar

Strauss, Anselm, and Corbin, Juliet M. 1990. Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques. Thousand Oaks, CA, US: Sage Publications, Inc. Search in Google Scholar

Twain, A. 2014. Self Awareness. London: Kindle Unlimited Press. Search in Google Scholar

Weiner, Bernard. 1986. An Attribution Theory of Motivation and Emotion. New York: Springer-Verlag. 10.1007/978-1-4612-4948-1 Search in Google Scholar

Weiner, Bernard, Sandra Graham, Orli Peter, and Mary Zmuidinas. 1991. “Public Confession and Forgiveness.” Journal of Personality 59(2): 281–312. 10.1111/j.1467-6494.1991.tb00777.x Search in Google Scholar

Why do Indian-Americans flock to the Democratic Party? BBC News. 6 September 2012. Retrieved from http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-19473368. Search in Google Scholar

Wilmot, William W., and Hocker, Joyce L. 2011. Interpersonal Conflict (8th edn). New York, NY: McGrawHill. Search in Google Scholar

Wispé, Lauren. 1986. “The Distinction between Sympathy and Empathy: To Call Forth a Concept, a Word is Needed.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 50(2): 314. 10.1037/0022-3514.50.2.314 Search in Google Scholar

Worthington Jr, Everett L. 2013. Forgiveness and Reconciliation: Theory and Application. United States of America: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203942734 Search in Google Scholar

Zhu, Yue, and Syed Akhtar. 2014. “The Mediating Effects of Cognition-based Trust and Affect-based Trust in Transformational Leadership’s Dual Processes: Evidence from China.” The International Journal of Human Resource Management 25(20): 2755–71. 10.1080/09585192.2014.934885 Search in Google Scholar

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

X / Twitter

Supplementary Materials

Please login or register with De Gruyter to order this product.

Journal and Issue

Articles in the same issue.

Barack Obama gave his speechwriter career advice that set him on the path to becoming a LinkedIn VP. Now he’s using that to identify the framework for a long-lasting career

When Aneesh Raman was working as Barack Obama’s speechwriter there was one piece of career advice the president would often share that stuck with the former CNN war correspondent: “Worry about what you want to do, not who you want to be.”

You only have to glance at Obama’s career to see his motto in action. The first African American president in U.S. history worked in community organizing and law for decades before being inaugurated in 2009.

“He wanted to build communities in a different way,” Raman told CNBC Make It , “and it led him on his path that led to this moment where he became president.”

It’s why instead of focusing on your dream title, Raman recommends thinking about the impact you want to make through your work first and then honing the skills you’ll need to get there.

That advice has taken Raman from writing Obama’s speeches from 2011 to 2013 to partnering with NGOs as Facebook’s head of economic impact to coauthoring several books.

Now he’s heading up LinkedIn’s Opportunity Project, which is focused on building a more dynamic and equitable global labor market, as a vice president.

Your twenties and thirties are for learning skills

Using Obama’s mantra for career success, Raman advises those in their twenties and early thirties to forgo titles completely to focus on skills development, before specializing in their mid-thirties.

This framework is the “safest” way to think of a long-lasting career, Raman said, “because you can control all of those levers, versus job title. You might want to be a VP of something at somewhere, but you can’t control any of that, and that job might not even exist in 20 years.”

And don’t worry if your career path looks all over the place on paper. Raman recommends embracing a “squiggly line” approach—where your career isn’t quite linear—as long as it has a connective thread.

“My job titles as a career don’t make sense,” he said, “but my skills across the board are storytelling and coalition building” around economic opportunity.

Here’s his framework for long-lasting career success:

Ages 20 to 35

This is the time to find out what you’re excited about, what you’re good at, and what you want to get better at, Raman said. Evaluate whether certain jobs or employers will help you acquire the skills you need.

Ages 35 to 45

Now it’s time to use your unique skill set and apply it to an issue of expertise, whether that’s in a specific field like health care or something broader like Raman’s focus on “economic opportunity.”

Only after hitting 45 years old should you be thinking about what kind of impact you want to make on your organization and on the world, Raman said. After all, Obama was 47 when he took the presidency, and he was one of the nation’s youngest leaders.

‘Worry about learning, not your next job’

Obama’s not the first leader to tell aspirational people to stop worrying about their next job title. Shaid Shah, the global president of the $50 billion global food and pet care giant Mars Food & Nutrition, previously told Fortune that “ career success is more than just hierarchy .”

“It’s about acquiring the experiences that you need to realize your ambition, to realize what makes you happy, what makes you tick, what inspires you to get out of bed every day,” explained Shah, who steadily climbed the ranks from sales director to the helm of Mars Food & Nutrition department.

In doing that, you’re more likely to choose roles that move you closer to where you ultimately want to be and attain long-term success, instead of taking what just looks like a promotion on paper now.

Similarly, Pret’s CEO told Fortune that looking forward with his feet firmly on the ground, instead of dreaming too big with his head in the clouds, is what set him up for success.

“I’ve watched people that have been so fixated on the next role that they really take their eye off the job they’re doing,” Pano Christou said. “My philosophy has always been if you do a great job, people will notice you.”

By focusing on excelling in his current job and being the best within his cohort, the promotions ( from shop floor manager to CEO ) swiftly followed. “If you work hard and put your head down, things can happen.”

Latest in Success

0 minutes ago

Inside the cockpit at Boeing: Here are the top 5 candidates for CEO as Dave Calhoun exits

You’re more likely to make more money if you’re an older sibling—and now researchers think they know why

Google’s founders didn’t market test Alphabet’s name before launching the now $1.9 trillion juggernaut. Here’s the advice Steve Jobs gave Larry Page

NEW YORK, NEW YORK - MARCH 20: Olivia Colman attends Sony Pictures Classics And The Cinema Society Screening Of "Wicked Little Letters" at Crosby Street Hotel on March 20, 2024 in New York City. (Photo by Dimitrios Kambouris/Getty Images)

Oscar winner Olivia Colman said she’d make ‘a f— of a lot more’ if she were a man—and she’s spot-on. Here’s the latest on pay disparity between men and women

Clinging to hybrid working has a price—it’ll take $22,000 off your paycheck according to new study

For the first time in 50 years, Democrats and Republicans are both embracing industrial policy–but that doesn’t mean it will pay off for workers

BlackRock CEO Larry Fink wants Boomers to fix ‘retirement crisis’: ‘It’s no wonder younger generations, Millennials and Gen Z, are so economically anxious’

Nearly half of all investors expect a ‘no landing’ scenario for the economy where inflation remains but there’s no recession, Deutsche Bank survey shows

The key to a long life is avoiding the ‘poisonous 5 P’s,’ says one of the world’s top anti-aging experts

Stellantis uses ‘mandatory remote work day’ to cut 400 white-collar jobs: ‘It was a mass firing of everybody that was on the call’

Trump’s Truth Social company starts trading on Nasdaq with a market value near $6.8 billion after SPAC deal

Share full article

Supported by

White House memo

Obama Feared a ‘One-Term Presidency’ After Passing Health Care Law

A set of oral histories released on Friday documents the behind-the-scenes drama of President Barack Obama’s drive to pass the Affordable Care Act, his most important legislative achievement.

President Barack Obama raises his left arm to wave as he is surrounded by a crowd of politicians at the White House.

By Peter Baker

Peter Baker covered Barack Obama’s presidency for The Times.

By the time his ambitious health care legislation was introduced and carved up and cursed and left for dead and revived and compromised and passed and finally signed into law, the whole process had taken a toll on President Barack Obama.

The passage of the Affordable Care Act would be his signature legislative achievement, but it propelled Republicans to a sweeping midterm election victory and control of the House. And Mr. Obama thought he might be the next to pay the price at the ballot box. “This is shaping up to be a one-term presidency,” he told an aide in late 2010.

He turned out to be wrong, but the fatalism Mr. Obama expressed privately that day captured the weighty consequences of one of Washington’s most high-wire legislative battles in modern times. A new set of oral histories released on Friday , on the eve of its 14th anniversary on Saturday, documents the behind-the-scenes struggle to transform the nation’s health care system to cover tens of millions of Americans without insurance.

The interviews of key players in the drama were conducted by Incite, a social science research institute at Columbia University, and were made public as the second tranche of a yearslong effort to document the eventful times under the nation’s 44th president. The transcripts posted online on Friday included recollections from 26 members of the White House staff, his cabinet and Congress as well as activists, interest group figures and a handful of Americans who made their voices heard, but not from the former president himself or, for that matter, his Republican opponents.

The oral histories chronicle Mr. Obama’s journey from an uninformed candidate embarrassed by the banalities he found himself spouting on the campaign trail to a besieged president gambling his political future on all-or-nothing legislative brinkmanship. They also flesh out a portrait of Mr. Obama as a steady-as-she-goes, hyper-disciplined but not especially warm, policy wonk who scrolled the Brookings Institution website for ideas and had to overcome his own political mistakes.

The story of the Affordable Care Act in some ways started at a candidate forum on health care in 2007 when Mr. Obama was running against Senators Hillary Clinton, John Edwards and Joseph R. Biden Jr., among others, for the Democratic presidential nomination. “Senator Obama was terrible,” remembered Neera Tanden , who worked for Mrs. Clinton at the time. “He was vapid. He had no facility with the issue, so he kept talking about, ‘This is why we need to come together.’”

Mr. Obama knew he had done badly, and it drove him to take the issue more seriously, she said. “I honestly think if he did not have his butt kicked that he would not have put out such a detailed plan,” Ms. Tanden said.

After Mrs. Clinton lost and Ms. Tanden joined the Obama campaign in 2008, she said, “a lot of his advisers were like ‘We should just drop this health care thing.’ He said very clearly, ‘I am doing health care when I’m president. You guys have to figure out how we succeed in the campaign to build a mandate, but I’m doing it.’”

Upon taking office in January 2009, Mr. Obama tackled a challenge that had vexed presidents of both parties, most recently Bill Clinton, whose first term nearly collapsed after his own failure to pass sweeping health care legislation. Mr. Obama’s advisers were determined to learn from the mistakes of the past.

By developing their own plan in public and involving major players with stakes in the issue like insurance companies and congressional chairmen, the Obama administration hoped to build support rather than simply springing a plan crafted in secrecy on Congress as the Clintons had done in the 1990s.

“The Clinton administration was focused inward on the perfect policy — and I was part of that, so I don’t want to sound ‘otherworldly’ about it,” said Nancy-Ann DeParle , a Clinton administration veteran who became director of Mr. Obama’s White House Office for Health Reform. “The Obama administration was the opposite. It focused much more on stakeholders and people and getting Congress to do the work of debating the policy and passing a bill.”

But Mr. Obama made his own misjudgments. Ms. Tanden, who became a senior adviser at the Department of Health and Human Services and admired Mr. Obama’s determination to pass sweeping reform, said his team nonetheless spent “an inordinate amount of time” on smaller issues rather than systemic questions and did not initially anticipate the “big problem” abortion would become.

Ezekiel J. Emanuel , a special adviser on health care, who likewise appreciated that Mr. Obama “never wavered,” said the White House should have sent members of Congress home for their summer recess in 2009 with a slide deck to describe the plan to constituents. “We did not do our work, and I think that was a big mistake,” Dr. Emanuel recalled. “They needed better tools to explain it to people.”

Peter R. Orszag, the director of the Office of Management and Budget, got a taste of the misunderstandings and distortions of the plan while vacationing that summer in Maine, where he saw signs in front of shops falsely warning about “death panels” that supposedly would be created by the legislation.

“That was probably the first time it really hit me,” he said, “just seeing sign after sign after sign about things that — you can see why people might think that that’s where it would go.”

Hopes of gaining Republican support all but evaporated after that, leaving Mr. Obama to work only with Democrats. He was deeply involved in the haggling. Kathleen Sebelius , then secretary of health and human services, recalled a key meeting in January 2010 to reconcile different versions of the plan. “The president led those negotiations from start to finish,” she said. “He was negotiator in chief.”

Eventually it would pass, but not without painful concessions and legislative machinations. Ms. Sebelius recounted the champagne celebration on the Truman Balcony at the White House the night that it passed. Mr. Biden, then the vice president, told her, “This is the most important thing that the president will do for the international community.”

She asked what he meant. “The world will now know when this young president says, ‘I will do something,’ that he will do it,” Mr. Biden answered.

Still, Mr. Obama was not sure how much time he would have to do something more. Ms. DeParle was the aide who remembered Mr. Obama musing about having only a single term while trying to persuade her to stay at the White House after health care.

“That’s OK with me,” he said of a possible four-year presidency, “as long as we’re able to get the things that I think are important to get done.” But Ms. DeParle found his comment “very surprising” and thought to herself, “Gee, this is my fault.”

Ms. DeParle offered some of the most personal observations of the ascetic president. Among other things, she said, he refused to eat in public and only ate at his set times each day. When he did eat with his staff, “you ate with him silently” while he sat reading or preparing for his next event. And his meal was almost always the same — either salmon or dry chicken breast, brown rice and broccoli.

“Trust me,” she said. “That was it.” His only nod to taste? “Lemon juice on the side, or something lemon.” And never dessert. “Food to him, it’s like putting a coin in the meter,” she said. He would not even eat pie, even though he said he liked pie. “He has no weaknesses that I can tell,” she said.

Ms. DeParle found him a mystery and only came to understand Mr. Obama when she accompanied him to his home state of Hawaii. “The waves come in, and they go out,” she said. “He has a calm demeanor that’s like that to me. He doesn’t get too upset about anything. And the fact that he was located in a place that was as close to Tokyo as it was to New York — he’s got an international vantage point,” she added. “He sees the world differently than many American presidents have.”

As it turned out, of course, he had two terms to do so after all. And the Affordable Care Act, for all of its birth pangs and flaws and the Republican efforts to repeal it, remains the law of the land.

Peter Baker is the chief White House correspondent for The Times. He has covered the last five presidents and sometimes writes analytical pieces that place presidents and their administrations in a larger context and historical framework. More about Peter Baker

Trump Repeats Obama’s Mistake

Political parties suffer when their focus narrows to the presidency.

Michael Whatley, chair of the North Carolina Republican Party, during the Republican National Committee spring meeting in Houston, Texas, US, on Friday, March 8, 2024

Listen to this article

Produced by ElevenLabs and News Over Audio (NOA) using AI narration.

Donald Trump has long detested Barack Obama and sought to present himself as the opposite of his presidential predecessor in every way. But in his takeover of the Republican National Committee, he risks echoing one of Obama’s biggest political mistakes.

Last night, Trump’s handpicked leadership of the RNC took charge and conducted a purge. The new regime, led by the new chair, Michael Whatley; the vice chair, Lara Trump; and the chief of staff, Chris LaCivita, fired about 60 employees—about a quarter of the staff—as part of “ streamlining .” The “bloodbath” includes members of the communications, data, and political departments. Insiders told Politico they anticipate that existing contracts with vendors will be voided.

When the new leaders were announced last month, I suggested that the GOP was ceasing to function as a political party , and becoming another subsidiary of Trump Inc. But there is another way to view it. For years now, the RNC has struggled. Republicans might have lost the 2016 presidential election if not for the emergence of Trump, who shook up the party’s longtime platform and forged a new coalition, turning out voters no other recent candidate had. Since then, however, Republicans have continued to lag, even with Trump juicing turnout. Republicans got slammed in the 2018 midterms, lost the 2020 presidential race, and missed expectations in 2022. Special elections have been a Democratic playground. The RNC is entering the 2024 election with a third of the Democratic National Committee’s reserves .

From this perspective, it’s about time that Trump took charge and cleared out the deadwood. Allies such as Charlie Kirk and Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene were jubilant at the overhaul. Although Trump’s appointments of his daughter-in-law and a top campaign aide are unusual, nominees typically take over the campaign apparatus ahead of a presidential election, the better to align aims.

David A. Graham: Republicans are no longer a political party

Truth be told, Trump can’t really distance himself from the recent mismanagement. The deposed chair, Ronna McDaniel, was Trump’s pick in 2017, and his main complaint about her is that she was insufficiently compliant. If Trump just wants more of the same, that’s bad news for the party. Trump critics within the GOP also fear that he intends to use the party coffers as a personal defense fund, underwriting his substantial legal bills. Last week, the committee pointedly rejected a proposal by an old-line member to prevent that.

Let’s take the best-case scenario for Republicans, though. In the past, the RNC seemed like the professionals compared with the chaotic, amateurish Trump campaigns of 2016 and 2020. (There’s a reason Trump resorted to appointing RNC Chair Reince Priebus as his first White House chief of staff, despite Priebus representing the establishment Trump hated.) This year, however, the Trump campaign has seemed organized and disciplined, and LaCivita is reportedly a big part of that. National committees tend to be bloated and old-fashioned. A more focused, streamlined operation could fix what ails the GOP.

The problem is that Trump sees his own success and the success of the Republican Party as bound up together. But some things that are good for Trump are not good for the Republican Party over the long run. This is where Obama offers a cautionary tale.

When he won the Democratic presidential nomination in 2008, Obama was an insurgent; the DNC had long been dominated by allies of Hillary Clinton, whom he defeated in the primary. He wasn’t as deeply embedded in the old way of doing things. Obama viewed the Democratic Party as essentially a national organization, with the goal of supporting his political goals and his reelection. Upon winning the presidency, he moved key DNC functions to Chicago , his hometown and political base, despite the protests of party insiders who worried that downballot efforts would be overshadowed by Obama’s reelection campaign. He also created a group outside the DNC, Organizing for America, to support his political movement.

The result was a badly weakened DNC. The national focus led to a neglect of other elections. After Senator Ted Kennedy died, Democrats managed to lose a 2010 special election for his seat in Massachusetts, of all places—a failure that some Democrats blamed on the national party . The loss delayed the passage of the Affordable Care Act and required congressional Democrats to water it down to pass it.

The Bay State special was a harbinger. As Matt Yglesias calculated in 2017, the Obama years saw Democrats lose 11 Senate seats, 62 House seats, and 12 governorships. The damage was especially bad at the state level. Democrats lost nearly 1,000 seats in state legislatures, the worst loss since Herbert Hoover dragged down the GOP. Republicans captured 29 separate chambers and gained 10 new trifectas—control of both chambers of the legislature and the governor’s mansion. All of this happened at the same time that Democratic presidential candidates won the national popular vote in the 2008, 2012, and 2016 presidential elections (as they would again in 2020).

Read: What happens to the Democratic Party after Obama?

Democrats, including Obama, suffered for their missteps. As the Obamacare experience shows, it’s harder to push a policy agenda when you lose elections. Losing control of the Senate makes it difficult to confirm judges, especially to crucial spots such as the Supreme Court—just ask Justice Merrick Garland . And implementing policy is challenging if governors and state Houses are working against you.

An excessive focus on presidential races is also the danger of Trump’s RNC takeover. He and his aides have announced that, like Obama, they see the party committee as basically an instrument for the presidential election. “Our mission is straightforward: maximize the Republican Party’s resources to get President Trump elected,” LaCivita told The New York Times last month . Echoing Obama’s Chicago move, the RNC is reportedly already moving most of its operations to Palm Beach, Florida, near Trump’s Mar-a-Lago headquarters. All of this makes sense. Trump is a narcissist who can’t and won’t separate his self-interest from the party’s or the nation’s.

Slashing the national footprint of the RNC may weaken the party at lower levels. Several state parties are already a mess. The chair of the Florida GOP was recently ousted amid a sex scandal. Michigan’s GOP chair, a fervent Trump backer, was also deposed after a tumultuous stint, and the state party is reportedly broke. The Arizona GOP also recently lost its chair and has been racked by feuds. But more MAGA is unlikely to be the solution to these problems, because infighting and obsession with Trump’s election denial have been at the center of several blowups. The most effective wing of the GOP apparatus right now, the National Republican Senatorial Committee, has succeeded by managing to create some insulation from Trump, allowing it to select strong candidates. In 2020, Republican congressional candidates mostly ran ahead of Trump .

And even if Trump’s theory of the RNC works out in 2024, what happens next? Trump will not always be the president or the nominee. Someday, Republicans will need to choose a new leader, and they may be left with only a shell of a party committee, gutted and stretched to be part of Trump’s personal election apparatus. It’s a hard and long road to rebuilding from there. Just ask a Democrat.

COMMENTS

Transformational Leadership and Communication: Barack Obama Case Study
This case study contends communication is the key element that enables transformational leadership. This research examines President Barack Obama's rhetoric in six of his speeches, which demonstrate his transformational leadership is manifested through his communication, specifically that of the African American jeremiad. While transformational ...
Obama and the Power of Social Media and Technology
Obama and the Power of Social Media and Technology. 2009 | Case No. M321 | Length 40 pgs. In early 2007, Barack Obama was a little-known senator running for president against Democratic nominee and household name, Hilary Clinton. But on November 4, 2008, Obama made history as the first African American to win the election against Republican ...
Sage Business Cases
Barack Hussein Obama was elected the 44th President of the United States in 2008. During his presidency, his leadership style was described at times as transformational, servant, charismatic, dysfunctional, extreme, and non-existent. Regardless of different perceptions, leaders must interact with many to accomplish goals and advance organizations.
Transforming Leadership and the Obama Presidency
The findings of this study suggest that President Obama does seek to use transformational leadership but that this transformational leadership is more often found in rational persuasion than inspirational appeals. Conclusion. The informal powers of the presidency do include the power to inspire.
Confronting an Unprincipled America: Lessons in Leadership from Barack
well (Haidt, 2012). Early in his campaign for the presidency, Obama appeared committed to forming a relationship of reciprocity with the mass public; this interest in connecting with Americans is considered an indicator of ethical leadership. Obama demonstrated promise as an ethical leader in a second way: by being a good listener.
Transformational leadership and communication: Barack Obama case study
Transformational leadership and communication: Barack Obama case study. Hanson, Sonja L. San Diego State University ProQuest Dissertations Publishing, 2014. 1552336.
Leadership Lessons from Barack Obama's Speech
His most recent book is MOXIE: The Secret to Bold and Gutsy Leadership . The praise from both sides of the political aisle for Barack Obama's speech on race was generally positive. Both former ...
The Leadership Style of Barack Obama: An Early Assessment
This article presents a highly distilled account of the formative experiences and political rise of Barack Obama. It draws on the sources that were available at the time of his inauguration. The article concludes by examining Obama's leadership qualities in the realms of public communication, organizational capacity, political skill, policy vision, cognitive style, and emotional intelligence.
Learning leadership from Barack Obama: A short case study
Western, Simon (2008) Learning leadership from Barack Obama: A short case study. Management Online Review, Novemb . ISSN 1996-3300 Full text available. Preview. PDF (Sample of case study) Simon_Western-learning_leadership_barackobama_MORE_Nov2008_final.pdf - Supplemental Material Download (134kB) | ...
The Leadership Style of Barack Obama: An Early Assessment
This article presents a highly distilled account of the formative experiences and political rise of Barack Obama. It draws on the sources that were available at the time of his inauguration. The article concludes by examining Obama's leadership qualities in the realms of public communication, organizational capacity, political skill, policy vision, cognitive style, and emotional intelligence.
PDF Learning Leadership from Barack Obama
In a recent case study I asked if America would vote for a Messiah Leader ( Management Online REview , Feb 2008), well the answer has been a huge yes. ... Barack Obama is clearly the Messiah Leader, learning this leadership style from his ... (Eco-leadership). Barack Obama's tremendous achievement was to distribute and mobilize leadership, to
Leadership and Legacy : The Presidency of Barack Obama
Leadership and Legacy. : Tom Lansford, Douglas M. Brattebo, Robert P. Watson, Casey Maugh Funderburk. State University of New York Press, Feb 1, 2021 - Political Science - 364 pages. Historic, intriguing, and important in so many ways, the Obama presidency will be studied by scholars and students for years to come.
Bridging Theory and Practice Leadership/Barack Obama
Obama's leadership style in this study in order to bridge the theory and practice of . ... Barack obama case study (Order No. 1552336) Jan 2014; S L Hanson; Hanson, S. L. (2014). Transformational ...
Strategies and Leadership Values in Obama's Apology Discourse
The leader chosen for this study is Barack Obama. Obama, as the previous President of the United States, performed many apologies during his reign in the political arena. ... "Managerial Practices, Trust in Leadership, and Performance: Case of the Georgia Department of Transportation." Public Personnel Management 43(2): 179-96. 10.1177 ...
Successful Leadership Case Study: Barack Obama
Leadership is action,not a position"(Donald H. McGannon 1).On November 4, 2008, senator Barack Obama was elected as the first African-American of the United States of America. It was then on that he would lead the country for two terms and finally leave his legacy in 2017.Barack obama impacted most of the american peoples lives in a positive ...
Transformational Leadership and Communication: Barack Obama Case Study
This case study contends communication is the key element that enables transformational leadership. This research examines President Barack Obama's rhetoric in six of his speeches, which demonstrate his transformational leadership is manifested through his communication, specifically that of the African American jeremiad. While transformational leadership is explored thoroughly in the ...
Bridging Theory and Practice Leadership/Barack Obama
Where the largest share of the study was to Traits Theory and the Transformational Leadership Theory, with the aid of the Behavioral Theories in analyzing the personal behavior and leadership style of President Obama. The study tries to bridge between theory and practice in harmonizing behaviors and theoretical assumptions, using the Behavioral ...
(PDF) THE LEADERSHIP OF BARACK OBAMA
Abstract. This study discusses the advantages, disadvantages and threats and also barriers obtained in the United States against the victory of Barack Obama in the Democratic Primary Election in ...
Case Study
Case Study. When Jaime Escuder, a University of Chicago law student, was searching for a professor to supervise an independent project on prisoners' rights, he turned to Barack Obama, but not ...
Barack Obama Leadership Style & Principles
Even before becoming the 44th US President and holding 2 terms at the office, Barack Obama was a prolific politician and was revered by the American public especially from his home state of Illinois and city of Chicago from where he was elected as Senator as well.. Barack Obama boosts of qualities and habits of effective leaders that made him a statesman and a leader of the highest repute ...
PDF The Influence of Emotional Intelligence in Leadership. Case Study
The case study was based on Barack Obama's analysis in terms of emotional intelligence, as a methodology using articles from the American press with screenshots, interviews with Barack Obama and speeches given throughout his career. With their help, it was shown that Barack Obama has a high level of emotional intelligence by identifying the
Analyzing Barack Obama's Leadership Types: A Case Study
8 Section 03- The analysis of leadership theories According to the case study the most commonly applied theories are Trait, Transformational, Great man, Charismatic, Contingency, Cross-cultural and Postmodernism. Thus it was been mentioned by Dorsey (2012), Obama was a born leader through his intellectual, self-confidence, charisma, dedication and loyalty which made his win the 2008 ...
Barack Obama gave his speechwriter career advice which set ...
When Aneesh Raman was working as Barack Obama's speechwriter there was one piece of career advice the president would often share that stuck with the former CNN war correspondent: "Worry about ...
Obama Feared a 'One-Term Presidency' After Passing Health Care Law
Upon taking office in January 2009, Mr. Obama tackled a challenge that had vexed presidents of both parties, most recently Bill Clinton, whose first term nearly collapsed after his own failure to ...
Trump Repeats Obama's Mistake
But in his takeover of the Republican National Committee, he risks echoing one of Obama's biggest political mistakes. Last night, Trump's handpicked leadership of the RNC took charge and ...

SDSUnbound Scholarship. Research. Heritage. -->

We've Moved!

Description

In collections

About Stanford GSB

About the Experience

Full-Time Degree Programs

Non-Degree & Certificate Programs

Faculty Research

Research Hub

Research Labs

Research Initiatives

Welcome, Alumni

Admission Events & Information Sessions

Obama and the Power of Social Media and Technology

No internet connection.

Leader–Member Exchange Theory: Barack Obama

Teaching Notes

Leader–Member Exchange Theory: Barack Obama

Introduction

Leader–Member Exchange Theory

Obama’s Background

Leadership Style

Campaign and Presidential Staffs

Obama’s Inner and Outer Circles

Discussion Questions

Further Reading

Sign in to access this content

Leadership Lessons from Barack Obama’s Speech

Partner Center

Staff Publications Online

Learning leadership from Barack Obama: A short case study.

Strategies and Leadership Values in Obama’s Apology Discourse

1 Introduction

2 Research problem

3 Literature review

4 Methodology

5 Contextual background of Apology Text 1

6 Findings and discussion: Apology Text 1

7 Contextual background of Apology Text 2

8 Findings and discussion: Apology Text 2

9 Concluding remarks

Acknowledgments

Supplementary Materials

Journal and Issue

Barack Obama gave his speechwriter career advice that set him on the path to becoming a LinkedIn VP. Now he’s using that to identify the framework for a long-lasting career

Your twenties and thirties are for learning skills

Ages 20 to 35

Ages 35 to 45

‘Worry about learning, not your next job’

Latest in Success

Inside the cockpit at Boeing: Here are the top 5 candidates for CEO as Dave Calhoun exits

You’re more likely to make more money if you’re an older sibling—and now researchers think they know why

Google’s founders didn’t market test Alphabet’s name before launching the now $1.9 trillion juggernaut. Here’s the advice Steve Jobs gave Larry Page

Oscar winner Olivia Colman said she’d make ‘a f— of a lot more’ if she were a man—and she’s spot-on. Here’s the latest on pay disparity between men and women

Clinging to hybrid working has a price—it’ll take $22,000 off your paycheck according to new study

For the first time in 50 years, Democrats and Republicans are both embracing industrial policy–but that doesn’t mean it will pay off for workers

BlackRock CEO Larry Fink wants Boomers to fix ‘retirement crisis’: ‘It’s no wonder younger generations, Millennials and Gen Z, are so economically anxious’

Nearly half of all investors expect a ‘no landing’ scenario for the economy where inflation remains but there’s no recession, Deutsche Bank survey shows

The key to a long life is avoiding the ‘poisonous 5 P’s,’ says one of the world’s top anti-aging experts

Stellantis uses ‘mandatory remote work day’ to cut 400 white-collar jobs: ‘It was a mass firing of everybody that was on the call’

Trump’s Truth Social company starts trading on Nasdaq with a market value near $6.8 billion after SPAC deal

Obama Feared a ‘One-Term Presidency’ After Passing Health Care Law

Trump Repeats Obama’s Mistake

COMMENTS