Can the FCC be saved from its chairman?

[Commentary] What kind of leadership does the Federal Communications Commission need?

One kind is adaptive leadership — a concept pioneered by Harvard University’s Ronald Heifetz —that helps organizations recognize and address harsh realities. Sen John Thune (R-SD) is providing adaptive leadership by pointing to failings, identifying disconnects, and showing the dangers of a continued downward slide. The other kind of leadership is that which fulfills the authority vested in the chairman. The head of any organization is expected to provide direction (which is about clarifying the organization’s purpose and role), order (which is about aligning the organization to fulfill its purpose), and protection (which is about protecting the organization from the forces that could hinder its work).

FCC Chairman Wheeler has clearly failed in providing direction because he has abdicated the agency’s regulatory role to the White House and to Democratic congresspersons. His failure to provide proper order is evidenced by the agency’s diminishing transparency. And Chairman Wheeler has also failed in providing protection. For example, at a recent commission vote on Lifeline, a telecommunications price discount plan for low-income households, Chairman Wheeler delayed the vote so that congressional Democrats could pressure Commissioner Mignon Clyburn to vote along party lines rather than align with her Republican colleagues at the commission. Enabling Democratic politicians to interfere with his fellow commissioner is a betrayal of the chairman’s leadership duties.

[Jamison is the director and Gunter Professor of the Public Utility Research Center at the University of Florida and serves as its director of telecommunications studies.]