This week as President Obama parks the tour bus and travels to Martha's Vineyard for a break with his family, he is undergoing some criticism. Some question whether the chief executive should be taking a break at all, amid stock market volatility, a "crisis" economy, and dropping poll numbers.
Cheif among the president's critics, of course, are the declared GOP candidates for his job. Newt Gingrich blasted Mr. Obama for taking vacation, as Gingrich himself headed off to Hawaii for a "fundraising" trip. A more credible objection was voiced by the Washing Post columnist Colbert King, who says that the president already enjoys two taxpayer-subsidized residences and should devote his time off to talking with hard=pressed citizens, not rubbing elbows with the elite on Martha's Vineyard.
This "controversy" is probably more about PR than reality. After all, the man's completely accessible, and Congress doesn't get anything done even when it is in session - honestly. Plus, he does have 'vacation' time away from his job. But, it raising an interesting question, should chief executive take time off during rough times? If a company is being downgraded, your customers are losing confidence and your recovery prospects are uncertain do you take a trip or cancel it? Probably not.
Leadership is often conveyed through images. A CEO in crisis shouldn't be photographed in luxury surroundings, but neither should be be seen as desk-bound, beleaguered, or overwhelmed. A strong leader needs to be seen as engaged, committed, but also independent. This says, Rosabeth Kanter in her book Should Leader Vacation?
I think Obama should be able to take a vacation and enjoy time with his family. He is working hard no doubt and he is due for time off. Also, like previously said he is accessible at all times. He never truly tunes out. However, from a PR standpoint, this doesn't look the best and I would advise him to think of a way to do a working vacation in not such a 'wealthy' spot.
No comments:
Post a Comment