Trump and the Challenge of the Insular Coalition

The very coalition, the supporters who can bring you initial success, sometimes can seed insularity. Insularity can lead to inertia and failure. In business and in government, a close group of supportive individuals are critical to success. The strong bonds that sustain such a coalition give the effort focus and direction. These strong ties may hamper the agility necessary for long-run durability. Examining the current administration, it is clear that the coalition–the collection of actors–that made possible President Trump’s electoral success is now going through some turmoil. This is a clear one of the tests of the president’s political competence will be his ability to manage his in-house coalition as the uncertainty of governance sets in. This is not unlike the entrepreneur, whose initial success and traction is built on the creation of a like-minded group of supporters, but whose long-term ability to grow and expand necessitates gingerly moving beyond this initial group.

The insularity problem can affect every organization, from a Fortune 500 company to the White House. The insularity problem is borne of success. Having win after win can get the better of an organization and complacency sets in. Politically competent leaders are aware of and guard against psychological inertia, which is a sense of complacency that comes with success, a clear feeling that since victory is achieved on a particular issue (or string of issues) that the leader or the organization is invincible. Poor coalition leaders actively feed the illusion of invulnerability. They have the sense that they can triumph–even though there are warning signs that they are going in the wrong direction. There is a certain drunkenness of power that comes with success–a sense that anything can be overcome. This sense of protection leads leaders to ignore threats and to rationalize mistakes. In the worst case, it leads to a sense of self-righteousness, and an inability to reflect or be self-critical. Cogent warnings and cooler heads will be ignored. This is the danger of an insular coalition.

In an insular coalition, the coalition itself, from leaders to rank-and-file members shift, cease viewing the coalition as a means to achieving a specific end to viewing the coalition as an end in itself. There is a sense that the very coalition that was meant to create momentum becomes a self-serving oligarchy, where leadership is primarily concerned with retaining their own power and pushing its own specific agenda. At this point, coalition leadership and the coalition itself become susceptible to the forces of counter-coalitions. At this point, they can easily be accused of having a narrow focused vision and having lost their sense of drive and momentum–which, is, in fact, true.

Politically competent leaders encourage open dialogue and will constantly try to incorporate information from the outside. They may even go so far as to make sure that core coalition listens to outside speakers who may not agree with the coalition’s agenda or who may be in a position to know the perspectives others. Politically competent leaders need to constantly play the role of devil’s advocate, pointing out flaws of the coalition’s position, to get others in the coalition to continually question their approach. In creating this balance of voices from within and outside of the coalition, politically competent leaders have to be careful not to undermine the goals of the coalition.

While coalitions are great for gaining support and getting things done, insular coalitions pose a threat to the coalition itself. Politically competent leaders are alert to the signs of a coalition that only hears what they want to hear, and works to bring in diverse voices–which not only can enhance the goals of the coalition, but increase the mass and reach of the coalition.