Justin S. Vaughn

Manager-in-Chief: Applying Public Management Theory to Examine White House Chief of Staff Performance

In an effort to examine the causal determinants of performance dynamics for the administrative presidency, the authors apply empirical public management theory to White House administration to explain managerial performance. Utilizing original survey data that measure the perceptions of former officials from the Reagan, George H. W. Bush, and Clinton administrations, we conduct quantitative analyses to determine the extent to which a chief of staff’s background, relationship with the president, and internal as well as external management approaches shape overall perceptions of White House administrative efforts. The authors find that managerial dimensions matter considerably when explaining the dynamics of White House organizational performance.

Presidential Staffing and Public Opinion: How Public Opinion Influences Politicization

Scholars traditionally frame presidential efforts to politicize the federal bureaucracy as the result of divergence between the presidents preferences and an agencys output. The authors argue that presidential concern with agency output is dynamic and is in part conditioned by the presidents relationship with the public. To assess the relationship between politicization and public opinion, the authors use a data set that combines information on presidential efforts to politicize the Council of Economic Advisers from 1989 to 2004 with that of public attitudes concerning the presidents handling of the economy. Their results indicate that public opinion does indeed bear a marginal, yet statistically significant, influence on presidential efforts to manage the federal bureaucracy, thus, providing a new contribution to the debate concerning presidents and the politics of bureaucratic structure.

Obama's Empty Cupboard: Contending with Vacancies and the Threat to Neutral Competence

Abstract In this essay, we focus on the public administration challenge concerning the rising number of politically motivated administrative vacancies resulting from George W. Bushs tenure in office with which President Barack Obama must now contend. We argue that the hyper-politicization of personnel decision-making during the presidency of George W. Bush left many parts of the federal bureaucracy understaffed, yet more densely populated by staffers chosen more for ideological and political congruence than administrative competence. For President Obama to achieve key aspects of his policy agenda, he must first attend to fixing these staffing problems and then to reforming the personnel process to prevent similar problems from plaguing future presidential administrations.

Undermining the Message: How Social Media Can Sabotage Strategic Political Communication Actions

As the strategic use of social media by politicians and other political actors approaches ubiquitousness, scholars have responded by chronicling the various ways in which social media can be harnessed successfully. We argue that the high propensity for strategic communication failure is too often overlooked, however, and attempt to address this by using a contemporary case as a lens through which to view how social media use can also undermine an actor’s message. Focusing on the first several months of Donald J. Trump’s presidency, we advance a four-part argument using specific examples from the early Trump Administration that showcase ways large and small that unstrategic use of social media can derail political and policy objectives.