What Psychological Science Says about Obama and What Makes an Effective Leader in Trying Times

Until George Bush Jr. became president, the word "incurious" was seldom linked with American Diplomacy. From all accounts, Bush was extremely loyal to the people and groups he identified with, respectful of authority and order, and extremely committed to his values of security and tradition. Yet blatantly absent was the curiosity, the openness to change, that makes a president good.

In less than a decade, we experienced the terrorist attacks of 9/11, collapse of the subprime lending market, and the genome project where for the first time a species mapped out the recipe for creating itself. History is a sequence of novelty, surprising events, and discoveries. A leader who needs certainty and fails to be curious is at a major disadvantage. During the incurious George administration, government officials were consistently pressured to corroborate reports with the steadfast beliefs and gut feelings of Bush and his cronies. For eight long years, this presented an unsuitable climate for people to inquire, test hypotheses, consider alternatives, and interpret data before arriving at a conclusion. Bush's legacy is a lesson on the danger of power in the absence of curiosity: the international community views us as a country that imposes its will without sufficient rationale.

But that's in the past, let's move to now, right now. It's refreshing to hear Obama speak of his uncertainty about the future of the economy or foreign relations because anything less would be dishonest. For many, the image of him extending his hand to Chavez or talking with the leader of Iran is repulsive and inappropriate. At this exact moment, people from other political parties, media pundits, and even a growing section of the general public are lambasting him for being timid, for thinking instead of being rash and aggressive.

As a scientist who studies strengths of character, I view these events differently. He is exercising the least common strength in the United States, self-control, along with one of the most common strengths, curiosity. He is assessing instead of trying to dominate the situation. He recognizes that a strong stance would curry favor of people who crave an immediate resolution but history says that it might backfire. Governments such as Iran control information. Interventions by foreigners are used as pre-packaged propaganda. When foreigners are blamed it's easy to escalate the violence and destruction. When it appears that he is not acting, Obama is acting. Obama is letting things unfold and patiently waiting for the right opening so that this crisis is handled effectively. By exercising his self-control and curiosity, Obama gains new perspectives to make informed judgments instead of premature commitments to temporary solutions that might be ill-informed in the long run. This level of willpower is far too rare in an era of impatience and immediacy. Because soon the cameras will stop rolling as the media moves on to the next international crisis. When Obama shows a combination of openness and restraint, the international community in turn, shows a readiness to meet him and improve existing relationships. This approach requires someone to always be thinking two to three moves ahead on the chess board.

This is how to lead in an evolving world. Be wary of so-called experts who approach new problems with the old tools of past solutions. When we carefully observe other people and situations with an open, receptive attitude, our attention is broadened, we draw a greater number of connections between ideas, resulting in flexible and creative thinking. As if this weren't enough, when we are open-minded, negative emotions fail to linger or derail us from making progress toward our goals.

If you want to diffuse conflicts and negotiate with seemingly hostile leaders, you don't avoid them until they agree to your demands. Instead, you take the time to be genuinely curious about their perspective. What are the values and interests that motivate them? Where is there agreement? How can areas of disagreement be recognized as opposing principles that on balance could work? The past administration assumed a firm stance that "opponents" -- especially "The Axis of Evil" -- would eventually submit to American power and perspective.

Obama has a keen curiosity about allies and opponents alike. This doesn't mean he agrees with everything they say and do. This doesn't mean he is committed to altering or changing his position based on what he learns. Instead, he gathers insights that allow him to decide on the best course of action.

Obama's approach to diplomacy is backed by laboratory research by psychologists. Ask a clarifying question about the other person's view to let them know you are listening. That's it. One question and suspend your beliefs for a short period of time so that the other person doesn't become defensive and shut down. Probe for details and you will be viewed as warm and open-minded and in turn, compromises benefiting everyone become more likely. Curiosity is contagious. Show interest in what "opponents" care about and they will do the same. The takeaway lesson is that Obama's behavior sets the stage for the win-win outcomes of a benevolent society.

Obama is surrounded by what leaders need: advisors chosen based on credentials and who are ready to dissent in the appropriate situation. To be curious in a stressful situation a person needs to harness the ability to tolerate pain and discomfort. Far too many atrocities, wars, and societal ills can often be traced to the absence of curiosity.

We need leaders who search for fresh solutions instead of recycling old ideas. We need leaders that take an interest in how to modify their behavior and feelings to match the demands of situations. When human rights are being stifled and innocent people are being killed, the world should be skeptical of everything that is being done by leaders. Knowing that real lives are on the line, I suggest that critics follow Obama's lead and check to see whether seemingly good interventions are more than pawns on the grand chessboard.

Dr. Todd B. Kashdan is a clinical psychologist and professor of psychology at George Mason University. He is the author of Curious? Discover the Missing Ingredient to a Fulfilling Life. Details about his book and research can be found at www.toddkashdan.com

Follow Todd Kashdan on Twitter: www.twitter.com/toddkashdan

Comments

[2lib4oh]

During the elections I read a book that helped me to analyze the leadership styles of all the candidates.I believed there had to be a better way to choose a president. The book by Barbara Kellerman, BAD LEADERSHIP, looks at the leadership styles of past presidents.She makes a point that many people confuse "strong" leaders with good leaders.Not all leadership is good leadership.Bush was forceful at making decisions but he make bad decisions.Hitler was a "strong " leader but boy did he make rotten decisions.
We are lucky that we got a thoughtful leader this time who can not be goaded into bad decisions. I watched Chris Matthews complain about President Obama not coming out quickly against Iran and I thought," does he think this is a game of chicken"? Chuck Todd tried the same thing.These guys should try reporting news for a change instead of trying to manipulate the president into doing something stupid.Sometimes,no action is better than bad action.

[Todd Kashdan - Huffpost Blogger]

Reflective, careful activity outside of the public arena isn't newsworthy. We shouldn't be privy to how terrorism is being combated and how alliances are being formed before their time.

I absolutely agree that it's a pleasure to watch a president resist the pressure to show his cards and instead, focus on the best strategy to obtain the best outcome.

As for Iran in particular, I keep thinking about Sophie's Choice. Nobody wants innocent people to be hurt or killed but what's incredibly difficult to keep in mind is there is a reaction to every action. Immediate intervention will save innocent people today but potentially at the cost of losing vastly greater numbers of innocent people in the weeks, months, and years down the road. I feel like a caricature discussing this when my life and the lives of my loved ones aren't at risk. But then I watch the protesters risk everything for a cause bigger than any person and from what I can see, they get this.....

[John Burik]

Yep, I'll take curiosity over certainty any day!

[Todd Kashdan - Huffpost Blogger]

Joan, if you return to this site, can you re-post your comment? I might have accidentally deleted your comment. Here's my response:

The pleasure is mine. My favorite segment from Obama's briefing a few days ago was his response to Chuck Todd (NBC) who asked why he doesn't take a stronger stance. Obama said, "I know you guys are on a 24-hour news cycle but I'm not". The silence in the room was palpable.

When you think of great presidents from the past....Jefferson, Franklin and Theodore Roosevelt, Lincoln, and so on, I wonder how the 24-hour news cycle and endless sea of talking heads might have perverted their potential. Based on personalities, I suspect that Theodore Roosevelt and Lyndon Johnson would have been effective regardless of the influx of impatient media questioning and criticizing their every move or lack thereof. But who knows, its something that nerds like me reflect on while drinking a beer on the patio....

[Joan Young]

Thanks for a refreshing and honest look at our leader who can actually weigh options, think critically, admit when there is no easy answer and be brave enough to risk ridicule by challenging the status quo. We need more leaders like Obama who will step away from the "quick response" and investigate and take the time to make the best decisions for our country. Thanks for focusing our attention on the hope of what can happen given these criteria. It's going to take some time and people to stay engaged as they did in electing Obama. Great article!

[ForVivi]

Thank you for your article. I agree with your assessment of our President's qualities and hope it will be read by many people. I shudder at the thought of Insane McCain having won the election, but then come back to reality after I pinch myself. I have hope again!

[Todd Kashdan - Huffpost Blogger]

thanks! Reminds me of my favorite New Yorker cartoon after the 2000 election. Al Gore sitting in his masterpiece theatre chair reading a paper where the headlines include the fall of the twin towers and rampant terrorism. There's a thought bubble over Gore's head saying something to the effect of "whew! glad I lost".

[Claudette Chenevert]

Great article. Being of curious nature, I really understand where Obama
comes from. How can you do anything constructive if you are not interested
in the issue? How can you negotiate with people if you're not interested in
understanding how they work, what their values are, what they believe in? As we
saw from incurious George, it just alienated the world against this nation.
It created mistrust and fear within this country.

There is also power in letting people know you don't have all the answers.
People won't put you on a pedestal, for if you fall, you most definitely
will break your neck. In fact, what this does, is that it let's the nation
feel closer to the Administration and feel more comfortable asking questions
and coming forth with offers to help out.

Personally, this has restored my hope in this country to the point where for
the first time in my existence, I am willing to consider becoming a citizen
of this country, based on the fact that having Obama as the kind of
President this country is willing to elect, gives me lots of hope in the
ability for this nation to do the good it can finally do.

Claudette

[mfaris]

I wonder how you'd describe Jimmy Carter's strengths. He, in my opinion, is also a wise man who shares Obama's vision in many ways, yet is generally not viewed as a "successful" president. Less curious or talented or articulate? I'm curious.

[Todd Kashdan - Huffpost Blogger]

Quoting a great thinker, "anyone speaking outside of their area of expertise is just as stupid as everyone else". With that in mind, I don't think I have the knowledge or wisdom to list Carter's strengths or weaknesses as a president. But I would love for you or anyone to comment and add some tidbits to my nearly saturated lobes.....

[DouglasDraeger]

Jimmy Carter ran a "wagon wheel" administration where as the hub, he vetted every decision. Not an effective means of management as leader of the free world. He also passionately believed that the ultimate good in people could be appealed too. An admirable character strength that has served him well post-presidentaly but crippled his foreign policy in the '70s.

I am less anamored by Obama's policy & especially the ideas and ideals that ground them than perhaps many here at the Hpost. I am always cautious of a politician's words versus his deeds (or those actions that he/she is able to influence in congress, the pentagon, state department, etc.) especially if coupled with a complicit (or hostile) press. Often the motivations of other governments are not what they appear on face. I only hope Obama's curiosity reaches that deep. But I am hopeful.

Curious Americans question their governement, question their leaders, question the political beliefs they (perhaps ignorantly?) hold so dear.

But mostly, I am curious as to the dress Michelle will wear next.

Good Day!- Dg

[majii]

Thanks, Dr. Kashdan,
I can understand why the president behaves the way he does. He thinks, examines multiple sides of an issue, seeks the advice of others who have expertise in certain areas, and then makes a decision. Many Americans do not understand this process and tend to label his actions and decisions without first analyzing them. I've sincerely had enough of our leaders operating on gut instincts, and truly believe that an effective leader must have a curiosity about the world and the ability to communicate well with people whose views differ from his. That many see this not as a strength but as a weakness speaks more to their view of the world than the president's more realistic view.

[Todd Kashdan - Huffpost Blogger]

Majii, I agree. I try to imagine when it would be of value to lack self-control, restraint, and an open, receptive attitude when attempting to curb violence in a foreign country. No situation comes to mind.

[silverball]

thanx for the more "clinical" analysis...incurious george was more like a spoiled child that ALWAYS had to get his way....obama is often spoken of as "cool"...sometimes too cool, but it's obvious his mind is like a computer on ultra high speed...taking in everything and using it all to help evaluate his (our) position..it's obvious in his speeches and press conferences that he is always well prepared....not surprising that his administration is composed of people with qualifications willing to speak their minds and not just blind loyalty....and governance for WE, THE PEOPLE....what a concept, eh? again, thanx for giving me a better understanding of the man...it's truly who he is and not an act for personal or political gain....

[Todd Kashdan - Huffpost Blogger]

thanks silverball. My hope is that people can appreciate his strengths and strategies without being blinded by their allegiance to a particular party or set of ideas. Same goes for any effective leader inside or outside of politics.