The Buck Stops wherever those on top want it to stop,
but every four years, it stops with us
By
When things go wrong, we naturally want to apply Harry Truman’s “The buck stops here” maxim. Before we do, however, we need to take a closer look at the idea that the “buck stops” at the top. This is a catchy saying; but, in practice, the opposite is usually true.
Recent headlines of AC-T letters to the editor asked, “The buck stops at the White House, doesn’t it?” (May 16); “If the buck does not stop with Rumsfeld, where does it stop?” (May 22); “Where does the buck stop, if it stops at all?” (May 26).
In organizations based on the “descending theory of authority,” the organizational chart takes the shape of a triangle -- the chief executive officer is at the top, with vice presidents just below, holding subordinates accountable for various parts of the operation. We are familiar with these organizations because they are prevalent in business, politics, education, and religion.
Other types of organizations have different shapes. Communities take the shape of a circle. Examples of communitarian organizations might be companies owned and operated by a small group of people, parochial schools, or Quaker friends groups. Instead of authority descending from the top, it moves out from the center as leadership emerges from different organizational members at different times.
Democratic organizations take the shape of an inverted triangle. The citizens, who are at the top, elect officials to represent and serve them in local, state and federal government. Examples of democratic organizations are elected legislatures and boards in local, state and federal government.
But in our society the upright triangle is the dominant organizational structure. Its very shape suggests that those at the top hold those at the bottom accountable. In this type of organization, the buck does not stop at the top. On the contrary, authority and accountability are passed down from the top, stopping wherever superiors want it to stop.
The triangle structure of “descending authority” organizations is firmly entrenched in our society because of the two rules that govern it. Rule 1 is “Preserve the hierarchy.” In order to function well, an organization must be stable. This rule assures that all organizational members commit themselves to the idea of descending authority.
Rule 2 is "Serve the hierarchy.” Triangle organizations function best when subordinates loyally do what superiors want. This rule says that loyalty goes in one direction – subordinates must be loyal to superiors.
If you doubt these rules, simply
behave in a way that challenges the authority of your business, school
district, political party, or church hierarchy.
These two rules explain that, in actual practice, the “buck” is passed
downward, not upward. It is just the
nature of triangle organizations. The
In the movie, A Few Good Men, the Tom Cruise character made us cheer because he got the colonel to admit he was guilty of ordering a soldier’s murder. We cheered because the colonel would be prosecuted, while those who carried out the orders were acquitted.
But the lesson of that movie is that subordinates are held accountable by superiors. The two men being court-martialed are the lowest ranking soldiers of those involved in the killing. Without the general’s admission, the military buck would not have stopped at the top. It would have stopped at the bottom.
Is this similar to what is happening to the soldiers who are being court-martialed for prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib? We will never know for sure, unless the highest-ranking officers publicly describe the ways in which they are responsible. This is unlikely because the purpose of military court is to decide where the buck stops in actual practice.
The only person who can hold Secretary
Rumsfeld accountable is President Bush, and only
President Bush can hold himself accountable.
David Williams’ letter to the editor (AC-T, June 1) realized this,
suggesting that Bush should follow LBJ’s example and
not seek re-election because of the “boondoggle this misguided adventure in
But the debate about who is
responsible for the problems in
That was the point of Richard Reeves’ May 24 column, headlined, “The world is holding Americans accountable for mindlessly following poor leadership.”
But I do not fault the American
people for following Bush. It is easy to
criticize in hindsight. Leadership,
however, is about foresight. The
pertinent question is, “Does President Bush have the foresight to reduce the
damage being done to the Iraqi people, American soldiers, and
On November 2 we will hold the
executive branch accountable for both the successes and failures of the war in
Although it is clever for a president to have a desk plate that reads, “The buck stops here,” it really does not. When acting as the Commander in Chief of the military, the buck stops wherever he and the generals want it to stop. And every fours years, when voters go to the polls, the buck stops with us.