Obama: the real change - from sales to delivery

Much has been made of the marketing force that was the Obama campaign. Reaching out to and energising new audiences. Effective utilisation of new and multiple social media channels. Trigger marketing (or at least creating the perception of responsiveness) but all the time tirelessly pushing the core message of change.

Within any business, a considerable investment is made in ensuring that the marketing messages concord with customer experience. The handover from sales to delivery is optimised to be efficient and delight the client. However, the new president's room for manoeuvre to implement his key promise - change - will be very restricted. Being long on rhetoric and big on charisma will not provide the answers needed on the economy, security and international affairs. Will the inevitable dissonance that arises as a result of the difference between promise and reality be as expertly managed as the campaign?

Experience from the UK suggests there may be no reason to worry. The 1997 New Labour landslide was delivered on the back of a change message. The 11 years since has shown that apart from a propensity to waste massive quantities of voters' cash very little has changed. We still have lack of leadership, sleaze, poor decision-making and lack of imagination in abundance. Voters become inured to lack of delivery on promises. Perhaps because Obama is who he is that's enough change for the electorate anyhow.

One has to hope that the abovementioned campaign approach of rhetoric, charisma and lack of policy detail isn't taken on board by the UK Tories as a winning formula. Cameron has been excelling for some time with the latter factor (and let's not forget that new UK governments don't get a several weeks handover period) but to the extent that the second (charisma) is to a large extent required to carry off the first, they wouldn't have a hope.

The electoral college system means that, despite the fact that nearly 47% of voters plumped for McCain, Obama achieved a sweeping victory. The UK doesn't have a gearing system like the electoral colleges that amplifies differences; however, the first-past-the-post system means that usually the majority of the electorate is disenfranchised when it comes to installing a government. It's an imperfect system but presumably the knowledge that we get an opportunity to boot them out a few years down the line and the immutable law that every action has a reaction (viz. the rise of Newt Gingrich in response to the first 2 years of Clinton liberalism) is enough to sustain the disenfranchised through those years of pain.

Initial thoughts on what the new regime will mean for our industry. As far as biopharma is concerned in Obamadom, the industry can look to increasing cost controls with expensive biotech drugs in the firing line whilst a greater role for generics and general price controls can be expected. DTC (direct-to-consumer) advertising is also likely to feel the heat with greater regulation. Pharma donated approximately $10m to the Obama campaign.

Unqualified to lead

In the next few days we'll see who is to be the next President. According to the polls Obama is a shoo-in. Whatever the result it is a widely recognised fact that both candidates are deeply flawed. Highlighted in the media: McCain lightness on economic literacy; Obama has been swotting hard on international affairs.

Here in the UK we have Brown - a calamitous leader. He even had 10 years to prepare. He's only started to look slightly statesman-like with a single issue to focus on. His response to that issue (the economy) has somehow, on the international stage and according to opinion polls, made him appear decisive.

Although Brown's straw-clutching has not been particularly impressive* it sets him miles apart from the weak and the spineless response from the Opposition. What choice does the voter have - the Brown Terror (becoming more terrifying by the day) or Cameron/Osborne effeteness? All with the decision-making capacity of a paper plate of jelly.

What is it about the political systems on both sides of the Atlantic that produce leaders that are patently unqualified for the job?

Bricking it
*Speaking of pouring money down the drain can anyone tell me how many tens of thousands Leeds City Council has wasted installing and then de-installing block-paved road crossings? Anyone who has taken the slightest notice of a block-paved drive would have seen how these rapidly deform with the passage of vehicles. How were they supposed to survive when hammered by hundreds of vehicles (including buses and trucks) every day (and turning them into deathtraps for those on 2 wheels)?

Just another example of how so-called leaders are pissing our money away. Meanwhile the economy they created destroys our savings.