by Cody Gustaveson
One topic that is really gathering the attention of the public right now is that of Ebola. I would like to discuss one particular facet of this media craze and that is the aspect of
leadership on such a large scale. Without getting particularly drawn into the debate or discussion of the virus itself, I want to look at how the various organizations have interfaced in response to a growing public fear. Afterwards, I would like to analyze the response of those high in the political hierarchy.
Managing the national response to something like a infectious outbreak seems like a task that would require the cooperation of nearly every individual in the healthcare field. There are massive government agencies that operate on daily basis such as The Center for Disease Control (CDC), The Food and Drug Administration (FDA), state and local medical organizations, Transportation Security Administration (TSA), and many more. As you can see, the overarching authority can give rise to disagreements and even create limitations on who should be doing what. The major concern is that resources are being handled as efficiently as possible and that the people who are most equipped to be making the decisions are doing so. This organization seems to be pretty flat, although at first glance it certainly looked like the CDC was taking a primary leadership role, the National Institute for Health (NIH) seemed to struggle with that perception. What does all this mean? When you first think about so many specialized agencies coordinating efforts towards one common objective, you might think it sounds great, but the results are many local agencies failing to conduct business properly. Quite simply, resources were not being managed appropriately.
One interesting word I heard thrown around on the news was that of “manager”. This word seems vague and almost unimportant when brought into terms of how one might manage a viral outbreak, but when you consider the level of confusion that might exist amongst so many different organizations and government agencies, it almost seems necessary for someone to “manage” them. However, as with all other political speak what does it mean to be a good “manager”? In this case being a manager means being Ron Klain, the newly appointed Ebola Response Coordinator. This isn’t a commentary on whether or not Mr. Klain is a good choice for this role or not, but simply what function does a non-specialist with no medical background provide as a manager of such a topic?
With these sort of flat organizational structures it is imperative that someone step out and take control of resources in order to direct actions and resources where they need to go (view a commentary from Jeffery Pfeffer on this topic here). Particularly in government, we know that communication is often obstructed by theoretical walls that exist between different governmental departments, and for this reason it is an excellent idea for an outsider to step into a unique circumstance, such as this one, to play the middleman and increase efficiency and productivity. One other aspect is that efforts can be made by the specialists to develop policy and guidelines while someone else manages the implementation of them.
To conclude, the Ebola crisis has many different agencies acting to protect the public, all of these agencies have had difficulties in utilizing their resources effectively and efficiently. As discussed by Jeffery Pfeffer (here) in flat organizational structures there is a need for someone at some point to take a leadership role in order to promote effective use of resources and more efficient movement towards the common objective.
Tiffany-kay L Mccartney says
In the news today, Ebola is a disease that can cause anyone infected by it to have flu like symptoms with temperatures rising above 105 degrees and in some cases cause death. In the last 6 months, an outbreak of this virus has taken the lives of a few people and unfortunately the no cure has been found as yet. At the initial moment when it was discovered that a passenger from overseas travelled to the U.S and was infected with the virus, no major action was taken. After doing some research, the CDC was contacted and a leader was appointed to announce this information to the public.
As Gladys mentioned, not all individuals are able to adequately perform the tasks of a leader. While many would have liked the CDC and the hospital that first treated the patient with ebola to have reacted faster and educated all nurses and doctors around the country about this disease and how to identify it, it is clear that the communication between leader and follower was lacking.
Transformational leadership shows how important it is for a leader to identify the needs of a follower in a crisis and help that individual to overcome the obstacle that is preventing their goal. By having a close relationship, communicating well, setting clear expectations, being encouraging and supportive it leads to a better environment for both parties and a better reaction to the situation they are both involved in. The follower will be more likely to trust in the leaders vision of the future and will work harder to ensure that the vision is made reality.
Should the leadership style of Mr. Klain change, time will tell whether a cure will be made and how well hospitals will respond to future cases such as this.
Gladys M Cooper says
This is an interesting way to look at the Ebola outbreak. There is a lot of panic going on and it seems that even though there has been one leader/manager being Ron Klain named to get control of the situation, he is not having much success. Sometimes in times of panic, to put a person in charge that has a lot of power and control based on his title, it does not mean that the people will believe what they are saying. There still seems to be a power struggle going on, plus you add in political interests and news ratings, it is very difficult for the public at large to get information that is correct.
Mr. Klain being named to bring all of the parties from the CDC to the TSA, FDA, and NIH together with not being educated on the medical side of things does not really give me a “warm fuzzy” about the ability he has to manage the situation. He seems more of a political man that is being put out as a face person that if things go wrong, there is someone to blame and if things go good then everyone wins. He seems to be a leader that is more politically sided, hence he does not seem to be as trustworthy, hopefully I am wrong.
It is hard to pick a leader to bring all of these groups together when in so many ways these groups have their own agenda’s that they are looking out for and their own leaders that may want to use this to make a name for themselves. This reminds me of the saying “Too many hands in the pot can make the soup spoil.” Only time will tell the ending to this situation and how the leaders involved are able to come together for the safety of all.