The New Administration and the Meaning of Change

T

Careful listening to the presidents talk of change holds the

key for public managers and their programs.

his discussion invites interested parties to listen in new ways to the messages

and metamessages coming from the new administration. The talk is more than

just talk: it is also intended to create new ways of thinking and acting. A central

theme in all the talk is change. The type of change requested is more than

temporary fixes or incremental improvements. Rather, the call is for political

and administrative leaders to transcend divisions and difficulties and transform

their programs and policies in fundamentally new and different ways.

With every new presidential administration, the political and bureaucratic

establishments attempt to anticipate, respond to, and sometimes counter

its agenda. What are we to make of the new Obama administration? On the

campaign trail, the commentary by politicians and pundits alike was about the

talk of change. Obama was promising not only change, but change we can believe

in. This was countered by those who pointed out that candidate Obama

gave great speeches, but actually hadnt done much. His resume was thin.

The innuendo was that he was all talk and no action. Now that the election is

over and the new administration under way, what should we expect?

This article leaves to others the range of policy initiatives and what they

might mean to various stakeholders. Instead, it focuses on the two defining

topics of the Obama campaign: change and talk.

Talking Change

To begin, lets consider what is meant by the overarching promise of

the new administration: we will bring change to Washington. Now, as many

have asked, what exactly does that mean? In asking that question, people are

searching for the substance of the promised changes or looking for the track

record of previous changes to provide signposts for the future. Another question,

and the one we will explore here, is what is meant by change? Exactly

what will change, in what ways, and to what degree? After all, the word

change has a variety of dictionary definitions connoting varying processes, inby

cluding

to substitute, replace, switch,

alter, become different, convert, and

transform. It is a word that is used in

so many different ways that about all

we know for sure is that something is

intended to be different in some way

in the future.

What then should we anticipate

about the changes promised by the

new administration? One way to

think about this question is in terms

of the intended scope or magnitude.

In other words, if one of our policies,

programs, processes, or agencies is

targeted for change, we could think

in terms of the following:

Fixing something that is broken

in how the program operates,

for example, ensuring

payments are sent out on time

to the correct recipients

Developing or enhancing a current

programs performance, for

example, increasing efficiencies,

effectiveness, scope, or impact

Transitioning or shifting from

one way of performing the current

program to another way,

or even to another program, for

example, shifting from decentralized

to centralized operations

or from the current program

scope, structure, or systems to

new and different ones

Transforming current ways of

operating by rethinking fundamental

aspects of policies,

programs, and ways of working.

This would involve applying

new mindsets to create the

new and different possibilities,

for example, transforming from

wedge politics that focus

on accentuating differences to

politics that focus more on what

stakeholders have in common.

Transforming fundamental aspects

of health care, energy,

environmental, and national

security premises, policies,

politics, or programs are other

examples.

In all likelihood, all of these types

of change will be in the offing at

one time or another from the new

administration. Given the campaign

and early administration rhetoric and

promises, however, when President

Obama or key officials speak about

change in high-priority areas, they are

likely to be talking about fundamental

rather than incremental change,

about transformational change rather

than temporary fixes. This will invite,

and in some cases require, people in

the agencies and on the Hill to transcend

current limitations, adopt new

premises and mindsets, and thereby

transform governmental policies and

programs. Initially, this will be difficult

or misunderstood as the business

as usual ways of thinking focused

on program stability and incremental

adjustments manifest themselves

in agency, congressional, and interest

group responses.

However, if the new administration

lives up to its billing, it will not

accept these responses. Increasingly,

the president and other loyal officials

will demand new ways of thinking

and acting that transcend and transform

many of the political and administrative

givens that define the

old-style political game. People and

programs that respond to the challenge

of developing new ways of

thinking and operating will presumably

be rewarded with budgets, slots,

promotions, and influence. How well

and how quickly this new alignment

occurs, if at all, will be the key test of

the new administrations promise of

fundamental change.

Changing Talk

Another hallmark of the Obama

campaign was the emphasis on talk

versus action; opponents implied

the new president was mostly talk

and no action. Here, social scientists

may provide useful ideas about what

to expect and, more important, how

to read the new administration.

The ways in which languageor

talknot only reports information,

but also shapes or frames our thinking

and actions has been studied and explained

in many settings. The cognitive

linguist George Lakoff, for example,

has provided both scholarly and

popular treatments of how this works

in American politics. What people

say can evoke subconscious images,

themes, and storylines that then influence

the ways we see and interpret

events. These interpretations, or

frames of reference, then guide our

reactions and resulting predispositions

and behaviors. In that sense, talk is

also a form of action.

For example, if the rhetoric of the

president and other top officials succeeds

in creating a new partisan and

post-partisan image of how politics

and government should work, other

actors in the political and administrative

systems may have to change not

only what they say, but eventually what

they do. In that sense, the new presidents

talk could rewrite the scripts

governing how Washington currently

works. This is more than the art of persuasive

rhetoric or even political spinning.

It is a leadership tool for chang

ing behaviors by first changing how

people talk and think about things.

Clearly, the art of rhetorical framing

is one of the great skills of the new

president. This means that listening for

the underlying themes, or storylines,

in the presidents speeches and other

messages will be an important way of

discerning the transformational intentions

of the new administration.

Understanding the specific words or

budget items enumerated in a speech

will not be enough. Instead, listening

for the frameworks that suggest how

things should be interpreted and the

actions to take will be more revealing

of intentions than specific words or

phrases. For example, will the framing

in recent years about running the

government like a business continue?

Or, will we hear new ways of thinking

about how the government should

manage public programs? What if the

new administration suggests that government

executives should manage

their programs not like business executives,

but like community organizers?

How might that change the

expectations of how programs should

be managed and the kinds of competencies

and tools to be employed?

Such a new storyline, if accepted,

might transform the way government

programs are administered, just like the

run the government like a business

story has done in recent administrations.

More specifically, it might compel

administrative and political officials

to seek greater involvement from

a broader range of stakeholders than in

the business model or perhaps search

for common ground among competitive

interest groups rather than pursue

a win-lose mentality. The true influence

in this example is accomplished

by changing the storyline that shapes

specific actions, more than attempting

to deal with the specifics directly.

A Possible New Storyline

The complete storylines and

agendas intended by the new administration

have not been specifically

laid out and will certainly evolve

and change over time in response

to events. What was said during the

campaign and in the days before and

after the inauguration, however, certainly

provide some clues. For purposes

of illustration, then, lets assume

some of the prominent themes associated

with President Obama will

continue in one form or another into

the near future. In that case, we might

assume that the new administration

will pursue all or parts of the agenda

displayed in Table 1.

In these examples, if we listen

only to the specific words, we will

miss the implicit messages and may

head in the wrong direction. If we

want to better anticipate what is important

to the new administration,

we need to learn how to hear the

frames and storylines and then figure

out what that means for programs

and policies. We may disagree with

the implied directions, but at least we

know what we are dealing with.

Conclusion

The purpose of this short discussion

is to invite interested parties to

listen, perhaps in new ways, to the

messages and metamessages coming

from the new administration. This

talk is more than just talk: it intends

to create new ways of thinking and

acting. Furthermore, a main theme

in all the talk will be the need for

change. At the start of the new administration,

this call for change almost

certainly needs to be heard as

a call for political and administrative

leaders to transcend the divisions and

difficulties of the past and transform

their programs and policies in fundamentally

new and different ways.

Finally, we need to keep in mind

that President Obama is not just bringing

change to Washington. Symbolically,

the new president is the change.

Through word, deed, and presence,

he, himself, intends to be the change

we can believe in. His election casts

him potentially as both a transcendent

and transformational character in an

American political novel still being

written. As an intentionally transcendent

and transformational political

leader, his words, deeds, outlook, and

demeanor will seek to inspire new

ideals, frame the range of possibilities,

and provide a role model for others

to emulate. A great deal of the action

of this new administration will be in

their talk. Pay careful attention to what

they say as much as what they do.