Workplace Calisthenics: Methods of business should apply to democracy

I don't know about you, but I'm not impressed.

By the time your eyes slide across the panorama of this column, we will have decided who will be the next boarder in our White House. Honestly, neither Al nor George cut the mustard for me.

Just think about what we have just done! We have thrown the mantel of world-class power, prestige and nuclear codes over the shoulders of someone we only know through make-up laden 30-second television spots. Nestled somewhere between the off-camera sighs, toothy smiles and adoring family embraces, we tried to find the real Al and the real George.

Now we are resigned to it all coming out in the "Wash-ington."

What a risky gamble we have taken. This is a stupid way to run a country. Democracy has always been touted as making sense. This election has been ludicrous.

It seems to me the majority of Americans would be interested in a smart, caring and trustworthy person residing in the White House. Right? Maybe I have missed something, but I don't think we got the cream of the crop in Al and George.

There has to be a better way to dump greatness on someone who, literally, holds our future in his or her hands.

I have a suggestion.

Almost every day of my professional life, I interact with men and women who lead organizations who I think would make great presidents of the United States. They are, for the most part, highly intelligent people who have proven histories of inspiring followers to a common goal. Why not look at the way businesses anoint senior leadership? This has got to be better than the dip-in-the-pork-barrel, do-you-know-who-my-father-is, slobber-on-the-babies, let's-take-another-bus-tour, four-year marathon.

First, I believe each major political party should hire a top-notch headhunter. That's right, let's put some bucks into scouring the nation for the best and the brightest. People like Anita Roddick (The Body Shop), Mike Harper (ConAgra) and Jack Welsh (General Electric) are out there.

Headhunters will quickly redline the imprudent, impatient and immature.

Why not leave the choice to the experts? Our present system of political patronage and sucking up to any interest group that is sitting on soft money is a sham and a shame.

Second, after the decision has been made, I want to be informed, as a tax-paying citizen, of the results of both an IQ test and a psychological profile on the candidates.

It scares me hairless to think about someone lounging in the Oval Office with a national security position paper in one hand and a TV remote control with a bag of fried pork rinds in the other. When the Middle East is convulsing with the vibrations of violence, our children are dining on hate, submachine guns are in the school cafeterias and The Street heads south, I want someone smart sitting in the West Wing.

Third, I am convinced we should allow these candidates to debate, with no moderator and in the middle of a live audience. Do you think the general public could quickly figure out who had genuine leadership ability, ethics and intelligence in this verbal slugfest?

Just think about it there would be no rehearsed, robo-politician answers.

Finally, let's practice the law of business. Instead of a four-year term, let's make it eight years but with the provision that if the president does not produce the right numbers, he or she gets a nice severance package and we call the movers.

I'm sorry, I have to end this column right now because I've got to immediately get to the ER to have my tongue removed from my cheek.

Really, though, I'm not impressed.

(Dr. Cal LeMon solves organizational problems with customized training and consulting. His company, The Executive Edge, can be contacted via the Business Journal at sbj@sbj.net.)