Public Office: Visionaries vs. Analytical Thinkers

[TygrBright]

"Some men see things as they are and say why. I dream things that never were and say why not."

Robert F. Kennedy



(hypothetical) "I see things as they are and say 'OK, what can I do with this?'"

Barack H. Obama


It's an interesting contrast. I think it's at the root of the divergent opinions of the President here on DU. I'm not saying either version is "better." Sometimes one is better, sometimes the other. Both may be rooted in a desire for positive change. Both may be powerful ways to bring about change, and both may be ineffective and damaging.

I loved Kennedy and would have voted for him had he lived to complete his run for President. I often fantasize a little wistfully about the might-have-been, but I know that there is no way of knowing how it would really have turned out. I get impatient with the President sometimes when his style appears to compromise things I believe should NEVER be compromised. Yet I cannot deny that he has accomplished many things in a short time, and that some of what he has accomplished holds the potential for long-term change in a direction I like.

It's just fascinating to watch the styles of highly intelligent, caring, thoughtful and tough human beings as applied to human progress via U.S. Politics.

observantly,
Bright

[lumberjack_jeff]

1. The challenge with the former is there are a lot of "why nots"

I'm an analytical thinker. I find that visions are, more often than not, unproductive time wasters.

My beef with Obama isn't that he's analytical, it's that his analysis of what is possible is too pessimistic, and that his tendency is to aim for the sure thing rather than the goal. Sometimes, it's appropriate to aim for the stands, and not just the gap in left field.

Yeah, it advances the runners, but it's not inspiring to bunt at every at bat.

[JoePhilly]

2. The best leaders understand both statements.

A VISION, is an outcome that you can not achieve in the near term. A VISION guides your high level priorities, but does not determine practical actions.

A VISION is not a PLAN. A PLAN requires detailed steps. And a PLAN usually focuses in intermediate goals such that they move towards a visionary goal, or try to prevent the lose of ground towards that goal.

True leaders know that at times, to continue to move towards a VISION, you may have to alter the lower level plans. You may need to DELAY some. You may get to charge ahead on others. Some will stall. And for some, you may actually need to BACK UP, and shift the plan so that it intersects the VISION at a different point.

The difference between strategy and tactics is a critical one for any leader of an organization.