Whats with the bus?

Credit: Thomas Peter/Reuters

Sometime back in the 90’s, William Raspberry wrote a column about leadership. I haven’t been able to find the column again, but I’ll never forget the gist of it. He said leadership is like a bus.

A bus has a route that announces to all passengers where it’s going and how it will get there. And if that’s not where people want to go, they need to find another bus.

A taxi isn’t like that. You tell a taxi where you want it to go. That sure seems convenient, and personal service is something that’s highly valued today.

The problem comes in when public purposes are involved. To keep the analogy going, imagine a baseball game at Wrigley or the Cell. Think of how many people get to the game on buses or the train, which serves a very similar function. Now imagine trying to fill up the stadium for a game if people were only allowed to take taxis or had to drive themselves. It would be chaos and very likely, gridlock.

Unfortunately, part of the gridlock of our political system comes from too many politicians who take the taxi approach: “What do I need to do to get your vote? And you, sir? And you, ma’am?” It’s about trying to be all things to all people and fulfill such a high number of personal requests that they’ll get elected next time.

That’s not leadership at all. And just like you can’t fill up a ballpark using taxis, you can’t run a government well with that approach.

Leadership is like a bus. Loudly and clearly proclaim the principles that matter most (where the bus is going), and then apply those principles consistently to the day-in-and-day-out (drive the bus down the route). No, nobody gets individual service, but big public purposes are far better served this way.