ABSTRACT
The cases examined here demonstrate that once a president establishes a particular advisory system and sets that system in motion, it is rare that he will change the system or the decision-making process mid-stream. Only after prolonged periods of ineffectiveness in policy formulation, or after a massive policy failure, do presidents reevaluate the advisory system and its operation. Quite often it is not even the president that advocates for a change in the decision-making process, but, instead, it is advocated by an advisor or advisors that are painfully aware of the administration’s difficulty in formulating policy. National Security Advisors who are tasked with the management and coordination of the deliberation process are key individuals that advocate for reforms to the process. Anthony Lake and John Poindexter both identified problems in the way that their respective administrations made policy and sought to make adjustments in order to streamline and enhance the effectiveness of the process. Poindexter’s changes came far too late to reinvigorate the policy process while Lake was successful at improving the policy process on the issue of Bosnia by taking a lead. Despite the ability to make changes, it is clear that a president’s management style influences the decision-making process, but, what is important to keep in mind is that once established presidents are bound by the systems that they create.
