With Donald Trump taking
office it is important to ask what kind of leader and negotiator he will be as
he leads the United States. There is
certainly ample evidence from his past to draw from. In this month’s blog post, I will begin by
looking at his leadership style and how it can be characterized. Then I will shift slightly and look at his
negotiation approach and the way he tries to develop deals at the table. In the end I will weave them together to see
if we can understand what the next four years will look like.
In terms of leadership
style, this is a rather tricky one to characterize. However, lets give it a try. There are a number of different leadership
styles. Lets use these five approaches
as explained by Rose Johnson on the website Chron (http://smallbusiness.chron.com/5-different-types-leadership-styles-17584.html)
The five styles are Laissez-Faire,
Autocratic, Participative, Transactional, and Transformational. Briefly here is a summary of each:
·
A laissez-faire leader lacks direct supervision of their
followers and fails to provide regular feedback to those under their
supervision. The laissez-faire style produces no leadership efforts from those
also capable of exercising leadership. This often leads to poor performance and
a lack of control.
·
The autocratic leadership style allows managers to make
decisions alone without the input of others. Leaders possess total authority and
impose their will on their followers. No one challenges the decisions of
autocratic leaders.
·
The participative leadership approach values the input of
team members and peers, but the responsibility of making the final decision
rests with the participative leader. Participative leadership boosts follower morale
because they make contributions to the decision-making process.
· The transactional
leadership style focuses on certain tasks to perform and provide rewards or
punishments to followers based on results. Goals are predetermined together and
the leader possesses the power to review results and train or correct followers
when they fail to meet goals.
· The
transformational leadership style depends on high levels of communication.
Leaders motivate followers and focus on the big picture to accomplish the goal.
Given these five styles, where does Trump fit? At first glance, he seems to be a combination
of the autocratic approach and the transactional style. There is little doubt
that he has a top down style where he is in charge. He certainly wields his authority and imposes
his will on others. Further, it is fair
to say that the transactional approach is one that Trump talks about
often. Wanting new deals that benefit
America and other approaches that see agreements as transactions rather than
part of a larger relationship. However,
if we listen to his own words we find quite a different characterization that
leads one to believe that he actually has a laissez-faire style. Consider these comments he made about his own
leadership style, "Most
people are surprised by the way I work. I play it very loose. I don't carry a
briefcase. I try not to schedule too many meetings. I leave my door open. You
can't be imaginative or entrepreneurial if you've got too much structure. I
prefer to come to work each day and see what develops." Or consider this characterization of how he
plans to deal with the media if he were to be elected president, “I’ll wing it
and things will work out.” As we watch
Trump ascending to the Presidency these statements do seem to reflect his
leadership approach in many ways. The
lack of details around policies during the campaign and the confidence he has
in himself lend credence to this perspective holding truth.
Now lets weave that together with his negotiation approach. To do that we can turn to various snippets
from his book the Art of the Deal.
To begin, it is clear that Trump is a transactional negotiator and takes
a very positional or distributive approach to negotiation. “My style of
deal-making is quite simple and straightforward. I aim very high, and then I
just keep pushing and pushing and pushing to get what I’m after.” (pg. 45) Take the example of the wall he wants to build
with Mexico. The fact that he has stated
he will get Mexico to pay for the wall is aiming very high…to the point that
people are talking less about the building of the wall and more about who will pay for
it. He also seems to know how to
manipulate people – playing on their sense of self. As he stated, “I play to
people’s fantasies. People may not always think big themselves, but they can
still get very excited by those who do. That’s why a little hyperbole never
hurts. People want to believe that something is the biggest and the greatest
and the most spectacular. I call it truthful hyperbole.” (pg. 58) Trump also suggests that he is unafraid to
dig in and may even take a deal past what may make sense or be rational (AKA
the psychological concept of entrapment).
As he explains, “I fight when I feel I’m getting screwed, even if it’s
costly and difficult and highly risky.” (pg. 236) Finally, one can hope there is some truth in
this statement. “You can’t con people, at least
not for long. You can create excitement, you can do wonderful promotion, you
can get all kinds of press…but if you don’t deliver the goods, people will
eventually catch on.” (pg. 60)
Practically, his willingness to take risks has resulted in some great 'deals', such as the
purchasing of the dilapidated 40 Wall Street in 1995 for $1 million, followed
by $35 million in renovations, which resulted in a current value of $500 million
today. Juxtapose that with other ventures, in which his laissez-faire approach
(and later recalcitrance), have resulted in problems which eclipse any possible
gains (e.g. all the problems with Trump University).
What we seem to have in our next
president is a laissez-faire leader who likes to sense and feel his way through
situations and believes he is more than capable of doing so very
effectively. Now, couple that with a
very positional negotiator, who is unafraid to take risks, but ultimately knows
he needs to produce results, and you have a very uncertain four years in the
offering.
