Harvard Business Publishing

Wow, Supreme Court for Hilary, that is quite an idea. More on that, please.

I think the most compelling reason for Obama appointing Clinton Secretary of State is found in the old saying: keep your friends close and your enemies closer.

Hillary Clinton should not be an active part of this new administration. Simply put, her ex-president husband is too much baggage.
I will personally never forgive any president who looks me directly in the eye, (via TV), shakes his finger at me, and lies through his teeth.
Hillary, I think, is a good person. That isn't the only qualification necessary for a high office.

Hm. I'm quite surprised at the shallow 4-point analysis presented here - I would have expected more from content appearing on an HBS site.

Here are some counterpoints:

Influence. By appointing her, Obama inevitably would limit his ability to put his own stamp on foreign policy.

NO. By appointing her, Obama shows that he is secure enough in his leadership that he can acknowledge Hillary's strengths and value, and appoint a FORMER bitter rival in one of the top positions in this country. It is also a great move for Obama to show UNITY, not just within the party (and not just for all the women who felt left out when Clinton was not elected), but it's also a great demonstration of what UNITY means to all of America.

Incentives. A Clinton appointment would put someone into a critical role who has an inherent conflict of interest. She wants to be President, and we are not talking 2016 here.

AGAIN, NO. Hillary has been a TEAM-PLAYER. She has FERVENTLY campaigned on behalf of Obama, and gave a most powerful speech supporting him and unifying the party during the Democratic National Convention. If you believe your own argument - then Obama should NOT have appointed BIDEN as his VP, given that Biden ran for the Presidency and wanted the Presidency. The point is, WE ARE NOT IN HIGH SCHOOL ANYMORE. It is so key that you have some faith in the PROFESSIONALISM of these leaders, and their ability to put the country above personal needs or wants.

Baggage, Part I. The new team is already in danger of looking like a recycled Clinton Administration, with all the associated baggage.

NO. This is like a non-argument, or if it's even considered an argument, it's a truly WEAK one. It's not based on facts, purely based on speculation.

Baggage, Part II. Even if Bill Clinton's business dealings pass muster, his new role as spouse-of-the-Secretary is bound to create headaches for the administration. If there is one thing we can count on, it's that Bill can't be counted on.

NO. Bill Clinton is professional enough to keep himself out of the way of Hillary Clinton's work as Secretary of State. This is a terrible argument. Hillary Clinton has been her own independent political figure for 8 years - as an outstanding Senator of the State of New York - and this is INDEPENDENT OF BILL CLINTON. Why can you not give her credit for having an independent identity? If a man were running for office, would the dealings and affairs of the wife even be called into question? I doubt it.

And it's an interesting observation to me that it's mostly been MEN who have objected to Hillary's running for office (always using Bill Clinton and Bill's baggage as an excuse). Grant her credit for having built her own political reputation, which has been an outstanding one.

Even if I voted for Obama and supported Obama in the last election, at the very least, I could credit Hillary for what she has accomplished.

Lastly, my two cents:
Obama is a powerful leader with an independent mind. I voted for him, and believe that he has the ability to pick the BEST CANDIDATES possible to help him run this country. And for all these candidates who truly believe in building a stronger America, it's not about the baggage they carry - it's about the challenging road ahead.

The question is - does Obama want the best possible people on his team, or is he too insecure to appoint to office his strongest rival? I believe in Obama, and therefore, believe that he is SECURE ENOUGH.

Obama needs to build the BEST POSSIBLE TEAM comprised of the BEST POSSIBLE PEOPLE that this country has to offer. Hillary Clinton is an outstanding choice for Secretary of State. Have the objectivism to recognize that.

@ HBS Alum 2005

Agreed.

Hey,

she has already dodged sniper fire. That's qualification enough. Get real.

Michael,

I agree with every point made by Harvard Alum 2005 and would add:

1. Leadership. Obama has the strength and intelligence to understand that Hillary Clinton as a memeber of his team is preferable to Hillary Clinton in the Senate with a free voice to criticize his policies and actions; while promoting her own agenda. He can manage a star performer.

2. Spokesperson for America's foreign policy. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has the credibility, intelligence and experience to carry America's message to the leaders of the World. Think about the impact this lady will have on a world stage. She is a strong voice with a vision. Obama is a leader that listens. A great combination. A foreign policy that evolves from the combined wisdom of Clinton, Biden and Powell, among others will help America reclaim its position as a world leader; without the use of force.

3. Bill Clinton. A unified Democratic Party with the Clintons and Obama on the same page. Wow! Bill seems committed to doing whatever is necessary to promote Hillary's candidacy for Secretary of State. Would you prefer to have a measure of control over Bill Clinton's agenda as part of your team with Hillary as Secretary of State?; or a Bill Clinton delivering his own message to the world. What a powerful spokesman for the Obama Presidency.

4. The Paul Volker connection. Is it a good idea to eliminate the most qualified person for a cabinet position because of "Clinton Administration" on a resume? If so, then how would you respond to Obama seeking advice and counsel from Paul Volker on economic issues, knowing what is on his resume? No one will ever confuse the Obama Presidency with the Bushies; or characterize it as Clinton II.

I followed the primaries and general election very closely. Hillary Clinton had the strength and courage to transform herself from a robotic candidate to a person that truly connected with the American People. Hillary Clinton has demonstrated time and again in the Senate, and after her bitter primary defeat that she IS a team player. She energized her political base to throw their support to Obama, while campaigning tirelessly on his behalf.

It's time to give this wonderful, intelligent lady the benefit of the doubt. This is a real life example of everything HBS teaches about leadership.

Thanks for raising this important issue in your usual thought provoking and provacative way. Nicely done.

Obama is trying to model his administration after Abraham Lincoln's - he has read Doris Kearns Goodwin's book - and he admires Lincoln. Lincoln's political genius lay in him assembling a cabinet made up of opponents for the Republican nomination in 1860, all for the sake of the greater good. These men were accomplished, nationally known, but disdained Lincoln. Over the next four year years, the team Lincoln assembled led the US through one of its toughest periods. In the end, all of these men came to respect and love Lincoln.
Obama, at this stage, faces the same choices. Should he select rivals to the center of his governing circle?

Ciprian Patrulescu

Hmm! its a tough call, but i am one of those who believe Obama should rise above the primary strife and appoint Hillary to office of Secretary of State. Irrespective of the past i know they both can make America greater than it is by working together. I am not a supporter of Hillary but i believe she has all and what it take to serve in foreign service capacity as Secretary of state. Lets pray!

The original post says more about a lack of belief in Obama than any fear fear of Clinton. As a male 40-something business leader sitting in Europe with a center right political perspective and with no partisan view I think the President Elect is going the right way about restoring some credibility to the cpomposition of the US administration that has been sadly lacking from this viewpoint over the past eight years.

I agree that Mr. Obama should not appoint Mrs. Clinton as Secretary of State, but for different reasons than those mentioned in the original commentary:

1. She is probably not the most qualified candidate for this position; several of the others on the "short list" being mentioned in th press have more extensive government and foreign policy experience

2. Even assuming that such an apointment is not a form of "pay back" for cooperation during the final stages of the recent campaign (and it may be that...), such an appointment could create this impression, and hand hard-line Republicans fodder for several years of trouble-making

This has nothing to do with limiting Clinton-era personalities - from where else would any Democrat president-elect look to draw experienced associates, if not to the most recent group of Democrats with some level of experience? And this has nothing to do with being anti-Hillary - I agree with all that has been written above about her effectiveness as a senator and as a candidate, and then a team player. What Mr. Obama must focus on is building the strongest possible team, and on appointments which reinforce his message of change, both in reality and in perception.

While I agree with lawrence berezin's comments, I would rather Hilary stay in the Senate. There is a lot of reform that must be done domestically and although there is much to do internationally, it is time to get our house in order first. And certainly if a seat on the supreme court showed itself, she would be outstanding.

You are focussing on Clinton's drawbacks rather than her skills and Obama's management and leadership skills. Abraham Lincoln did it very successfully with Seward and Chase.

HBS Alum 2005's personal support of Obama notwithstanding, the first rule is "never hire someone you can't fire".

I believe Obama and is team of advisers are making good decesions even about Hilary for Secretary of State, diversity is a must and is doing just right that, the pass is the pass just that, move forward.

Dear friends.I also support the arctile "Posted by HBS Alum 2005
November 19, 2008 3:17 PM "

Actually,I am searching help that who can help to get the book named "Managing Yourself Collection (2nd Edition) ".
I am living in China.but want to get this book ASAP.My contact NO. is 86 158 1131 8150.My e-mail address is : teddy.b@live.cn.Thank you so much for your great help!Regards!

Its important to realise that senator clinton has immense experience as a polititian,besides she ran a good campaign and show cased her political muscle and her judgement particularly on foreign policy.Therefore president elect Obama has made the right decision to appoint her as secretary of state,this should be embrased as a good will gesture and enhances the fundamentals of a true democratic state.

Good points.
With so much talent to choose from, why do so many Americans on the left insist on wanting to live in the past.
The Clinton's are long past their "best before" dates, and having had the courage to elect a black president with obvious talent, Americans must encourage Obama to break with the past and embrace the future.

In essence appointing her will result in Supervising Someone Who Applied for Your Current Position. So far in my career I have had to do so five times and it is not easy.

This resulted in me writing a book to offer other professionals ideas to be successful while dealing with politics.

I beleive that Clinton is a right cndinate for said post given her past experiences in related field. her conflictes with obama were limited to only democratic candinature, after that she had campaigned for obama. Now result is in favour in obama so clinton need to be rewarded.

I have followed the arguments and I see the logic in every point made for and against Mrs. Clinton's participation in Mr. Obama's Administration. However, I feel it will be to the eternal glory of the American people for Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton to work together. Indeed, if Mr. Obama finds accommodation for Mr. McCain in his Administration, he would have demonstrated uncommon wisdom which is required now more than any period since the birth of America. Patriots must create melting pots to forge working alliances for the love of country and examples of this are legion in history. I am a Nigerian but I admire how Senators Daniel Webster (Massachusetts), Henry Clay (Kentucky) and John Calhoum (Carolina) forgot their diferences in the Mid-Nineteenth Century American Senate and stopped slavery from disintegrating the USA.

It is a good discourse as this is a guide for decission making even outside the government. While I agree that "you should not hire who you can't fire" I wish to state that in this circumstance Hilary's competence and positive contribution/input to the team is a high interest and the issue of fireing am sure Obama can manage! It is not only for you to be able to fire a team member that inform you decission to hire the candidate! You need to also look at the effectiveness of the appointment in terms of your organisational long term and short term objectives which Obama and the Democrats have suposedly done. Some of those who are opposed to a Hilary as Sec. Of State do this for reasons based on bias and stereotype because she is a woman (am sorry to say this). She is more remnembered in her own personal character and not that of Bill!I believe so much in this woman!

Its simply payback for her support and it smacks of inside trading which does nothing to set the Obama administration apart from any other administation. It is the same old same old all over again, we have just re-schuffled the players.

I wish politicking in my country (Nigeria) and Africa at large could be this value oriented!I believe the whole world can learn from the attitude of the politicians in America who put country first before individual selfish/myopic interest.This selfishness has cost my country and families great losses as politicians become sworn enemies once they are opponents even in the same party!I like the fact that even a Mccain could be consulted to make his input if needed because of the openess of the politicians in America.Let us all view this from the long run value adding opportunity that the collaboration will bring to the progress of the Organisation Called The American Government.

A) As Secretary of State, Clinton must carry the voice of the President - Tom Friedman has written some good info on this. Obama is smart, and he will ensure Clinton is lock step loaded with his agenda.

B) Bill Clinton is the real maverick, I agree. But no one carries as much weight around the globe as he does, and he could positively influence US policy around the world - look at what his foundation is doing now. They are just about as impressive as the Obama campaign team.

C) For the first time in forever, I intuitively feel Obama wants to be remembered as the people's President, and he is going to surround himself with the best, not just his friends.

I also can see the pros and cons of the decision to name her SOS. I believe that Obama has the leadership skills and emotional intelligence to handle his former rival. It is not as if there will be no others in the equation as she will have to work with other constituency leaders in the Cabinet.

There is another reason why it could work out well for her and Obama. She has received a rather cold shoulder from her colleagues in the Senate as she has returned to work there following the campaign. It is clear that her first love for health care is not an area for which she would have a big leadership role. So, by giving her the State position, Obama is giving her a large stage that lines up well with her skills and interests. This could engender a feeling of loyalty in her toward Obama that she otherwise would not feel she owes him. If she is smart and works hard on the foreign policy issues with Obama and his other team members, the administration could go down in history as moving forward dramatically to reshape our world. This will be a powerful incentive for someone driven to make an impact and have her name be a legend.

Having said all that I hope she can find a group of second in command to help manage the Department better than the campaign was run. Perhaps some mentoring from Obama's team??!

I agree that bringing Hillary has its pros and cons.. I believe her influence was one of the main reason for not considering her for the Vice President post inspite of so many Hillary followers and woman factor...

I dont know what now making Obama to bring Clinton to the post.. I believe he must have some strategy behind this also.. otherwise its going to be tough.

I have three additional reasons Hillary Clinton should not be appointed as Secretary of State.

Bosnian sniper fire story.
When First Lady Hillary Clinton visited Bosnia in 1996 she was greeted at the airport by a small girl holding flowers and reading a poem. Eleven years later HC recalled being greeted with sniper fire and having to run, ducking, to her vehicle. When the video disproved her she said she misspoke. A 'misspoke'n remark transformed a poem recital into gunfire.

She claimed her husband’s time in office as her own experience.
She claimed her experience in the Arkansas Governor’s Mansion and in the White House prepared her for the Presidency. Carla Bruni has accompanied Nicholas Sarkozy on many trips abroad. Accompanying him on these trips does not qualify her for his job. HC was the First Lady, nothing more. Carla Bruni is France’s first lady, nothing more. Denis Thatcher left 10 Downing Street with the same qualifications to be the UK’s prime minister he possessed when he entered the residence.

Overstated Irish peace accord’s role.
She claimed a role in the Irish peace accords. David Trimble referred to her comments as being a “wee bit silly”. Irish historian Tim Pat Coogan claimed her role was “ancillary”.

She overstated her experience and was disproven by videotape, common sense, and the true participants in historical events. For her to be a secretary of state would be to reward her folly. Let us find someone who is honest and can righfully claim their own experience before sending them to represent our interests.

Hi, I partly agree with the views of Michael Watkins. Particularly the point number 1 would come out as true very shortly and with most probability, Hillary would not be completing her 1st stinct as Secretary of State.

This would happen like this, Hillary being outspoken will have her own voice prior to nay Obama policy is announced. So Obama may not be able to assuage or contradict Hillary's statements or the views already been circulated from foreign office desk.

The beginning would be bit critical in silent mode and then crop up gradually up-surface, leading to separation.

No doubt she has the grace and intelligence to hold any post in US (I am a great supporter of her), but an international opening for her which affects the US image globally, would not be that smooth with Obama whose thinkings come out after great thought and after a good deal of calculation. He is not a slow decision taker but he would be fast decision maker by his 2nd yr only.

Hope & wish the combination works.

Michael Watkins, I would have to agree with you. Appointing Hilary clinton would not be a very smart thing to do,Period.

Obama first grave error..appointing Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State...it will bite him in the a**, poor decision

As a non-US citizen looking on from afar (Australia), I would have thought Obama was recruited by a group desperate not to have Hillary Clinton as President. They found in Obama someone who could beat her. While all politicians are skilled truth avoiders when it suits them, Hillary and Bill have told some very public whoppers. And now she is secretary of state. What is that saying: keep your friends close and your enemies closer?????

Bush Jr. appointed his dad's old cronies - so what's different?