Barack and Hillary: Good Cop vs. Bad Cop, or High I/High S vs. High D/Low I?

May 11th, 2010

It seems that the press loves to trot out the “Good Cop, Bad Cop” concept whenever President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton are mentioned together. Newsweek, The Telegraph UK, The Atlantic Sentinel, and a host of other publications and blogs have all used the metaphor to compare the styles of these two public figures as they engage in the nation’s foreign policy interests. Why do they do it? It’s an easy idea to remember and the archetype relationship is fairly well understood, but when it comes to describing behavioral styles, DISC provides us with some finer tools.

If we look at a stereotypical politician it would not be surprising to assume that this person scores high in the D column as ambition, authority, ego and drive are all associated with the profession. It would also not surprise you to learn that many politicians score highly in the I column as well. To get elected one must shake a lot of hands, influence a lot of people, have magnetism, charisma, and generally enjoy the company of others. After all, no politician gets elected alone. S and C are tougher to assume when it comes to a politician, one might campaign as an advocate for change (low S), or one might be a strong advocate for maintaining the status quo (high S). Many politicians come from the legal field where meticulous attention to detail is in demand, but few lawyers who go into politics are those high C‘s – the need to occasionally sway with changes in the political breeze can run counter to the urge for uncompromising perfectionism.

If we look at the press on President Obama we often see him characterized as a diplomat, a consensus-builder, and he is certainly charismatic to the point where he was labeled “the celebrity” candidate during the lead-up to his election. Hillary is often described in articles as forceful, driving with a “push for a deal” style – unafraid to “play the heavy” or as Newsweek puts it, “political hardball, Hillary style”. Based on these adjectives one could surmise that the President is a highly charismatic, influential and empathetic high I, who also happens to be the former president of the Harvard Law Review and likes to be thorough and meticulous in his fact gathering before making a decision – it seems unlikely that his C would be low. Yet there are those who say he often gathers his facts from the same sources and that despite the emphasis on change in his campaign he hasn’t actually changed much since taking office – is this evidence that he may really be more of a natural high S? Additionally his D is certainly high, no many persons with the ambition to become president would have a low one, but is it as high as Ms. Clinton’s?

The Secretary of State is forceful and accomplishment-oriented with an ego that seeks center stage. She’s unafraid to drive policy and take action making the most of the power and authority that come with her position. Clearly her D is near the top of the scale. On the other hand is her I perhaps adjusted in the public eye to one that is higher than natural for her? When contrasting the two political figures, Obama’s charisma seems to flow naturally from his always cool-as-cucumber presence, whereas even in celebration Clinton often seems to present a deliberateness in her smile. Is her I naturally low?

Regardless of politics or individual behavior profiles, the measure of any good cop – bad cop pairing is in their effectiveness together. History will tell us if they can channel their natural and adapted styles into policy that builds a stronger nation and safer world.

Bookmark It