Agencies need leadership

As the second Obama Administration is being prepared, we have numerous qualified candidates to assume direction of our critical financial regulatory agencies.  I hope that when these candidates are vetted, however, their ability to supply internal leadership to the agencies they will join is carefully considered.  We are fairly well aware of the qualifications needed regarding a candidate's ability to contribute publicly to the agencies' missions.  But the agencies themselves are in a high degree of flux and their effectiveness, especially in times of uncertain budgetary support, turns largely on the culture instilled by top management.

Many of the agencies have had their authority vastly expanded in the last several years, and some of them did not even exist until recently.  Bidding against the private sector for top talent will make recruiting and retaining high quality staff extremely difficult.  Maintaining morale and a sense of purpose is difficult when constricted budgets limit even the most basic support --travel and continuing education, for example.  Being a public advocate for the mission of an agency while also leading agency personnel is a huge challenge -- probably too great for all but the most exceptional leaders.  But good leaders are also good at choosing capable lieutenants, giving them scope to operate, and holding them accountable for results. 

I suggest that those who judge the potential of our incoming crop of agency officials will ask probing questions about how the candidates will instill and maintain a commitment to the agency mission by those in the ranks who will do the most to accomplish it.

Update:  Concerning my post of October 7, discussing the need for more flexible remedies for violations of the law, the University of Maryland Carey Law School has posted video of its recent, superb 2012 Ward Kershaw Symposium, "Too Big to Jail: Roadblocks to Regulatory Enforcement," available at this link.