I think his work style is great! I think it will create a better atmosphere to get things done, as well as be a bit happier. Also, since starting at 9am, that gives all other employees a chance to start their days with breakfast and a workout!

sounds like a boss i would love and the surprise visits are good, you can't be slacking off cos you never know when he will pop in.

To each their own, Usually the office changes with a new supervisor, Bush got his job done the way he wanted to and now Obama.

Now onto other things, thats really actually news please.

I guess they can get rid of that free gym for employees since they no longer have to be "jacked" in the office.

I second what CG said, to each their own. But it does sound to me like lower standards in the white house isn't a good thing. And meetings running long?!?! UGH! There's too many meeting and not enough action in this world as it is.

I personally don't see a lack of jackets as a "lower standard", since I've worked in places such as formal offices and labs, each with vastly different dress codes but still large amounts of work and output on both ends, but yes, to each his/her own.

I do kind of like the surprise visit thing. Kinda keeps you alert, like that prof who has a class list on his podium at all times and will just randomly shout out names after he asks questions.

I had a prof who would throw a tennis ball at whoever he wanted to answer the question... that would keep you alert!

Maybe the press secretary should implement that technique!

I'm with CG. To each their own.

Tennis ball--that's pretty interesting. I like that idea!

I also had a teacher in high school who went around with a spray bottle every time we had to memorize something. If you didn't get the quadratic equation right, she'd squirt you in the ear.

I think people generally perform better when they're comfortable. And if you factor the office standards of the recent past with the actions taken and the results, change seems a real good idea.

"with the actions taken and the results" what does that mean?

I agree stephley. Not wearing a jacket is not exactly jeans and tennis shoes. They are still wearing ties and slacks. I think business casual on the weekends is totally appropriate. Just because Bush did a good job at showing off doesn't mean that he was working hard.

SL, how was he showing off?

For the media.

I think what is being said is that every rule that Bush had for the WH was wrong becuase everything Bush did was wrong so therefore change for the sake of change is a solution.

A lot of what Bush did was a publicity stunt. Clearing brush on his ranch for example before the election. Did you ever see him clearing brush again after he won?

Change for a more productive environment is what I was thinking haus.

Yes, there were pictures of him clearing brush after he won actually.

And how do we know its more productive? We don't. Its just the way he wants to run things and that doesn't mean its right or wrong, its just personal preference. I'm more old school, I value things like men wearing suits in the most powerful office in the world. But thats just me and I'm not the President. And judging by the other threads, I'm not entitled to my opinion.

clearing brush...is that all you got on the publicity stunt front? I would have thought you had more imagination than that. also I had no idea that there were so many Sugar peeps privy to what actually goes on behind closed doors to be able to say if any administration was productive or not.

Oh they are in the KNOW CG.

And you know, I don't consider myself to be a particularly "green" person, I mean I do my best, but isn't the very first and most basic thing to do to conserve energy to turn the thermostat down?

I think that it sounds like they are being productive. I especially like the long meetings thing, and I disagree with Haus that it would lead to things not being done. I mean, can you imagine in a Bush meeting where they ran out of time to talk about something like Iran, and no, sorry, it is 6:00 time to run out the door? I would rather they stay late and finish up what needs to be done for that day.

Critiquing him for his temperature preference now? Ha! Love it. That is pretty funny.

I don't know why assuming that running long = better. To me running long is a sign of inefficiency. I'd rather have people be concise and efficient so more gets done during the day.

No, not temperatue preference, just general hypocrisy.

You can tell a lot about a person by their management style. I mean theres entire books written on the subject so lets not pretend like you can't.

But I'm sorry, I learned on the other thread that we're not allowed to question our Dear Leader so I sit corrected. He's wonderful. He's amazing. Everything he does is fantastic. He words are like breath of angels.

You are free to discuss Obama...but other people are free to disagree with you and shoot holes in your theories, just as you do to theirs. Why are you so sensitive about people disagreeing with your opinion?

I'm not. I completely agree with you. Its just that I've been shown on other threads that if you say anything bad about Obama its taken very personally and personal attacks then come in full force. I don't agree with that.

I don't know what went down on the other thread, but in this one no one is making personal attacks. Everyone is just disagreeing with each other.

So I'm just trying to understand what the waters are like now. If you say anything negative you're therefore opening yourself up to personal attacks? So the best thing to do is just assimilate or keep any dissenting opinion to yourself?

I mean, if thats how the majority of people here want it to be, thats cool. I just think that would be really boring and no one would learn anything from each other.

I don't know what went down on the other thread either, but eh, I've had people tell me certain things when we disagree--still definitely free to express my opinion, and haus you should feel free do the same.

Well I'll let it go since its so off topic here, but there are certain people who are rude just for the sake of it and have others that help them gang up on single users. And I think thats BS.

Rant over.

."If you say anything negative you're therefore opening yourself up to personal attacks? "

I don't know where you would get this idea. If you comment, you open yourself up to people disagreeing with you. If they chose to make it a personal attack, that is their choice. But disagreeing does not equal a personal attack.

I don't understand why certain people are so bent out of shape. It wasn't an article about how OMG THIS WAI IS BETTER! It was just a 'Hey, look at their different styles and approaches to business'.

liz, its not the article we are "bent out of shape" about its the comments.

CG, what to mean by "I would have thought you had more imagination than that"?

CG what do you mean by "to each his own"?

CG what do you mean by "bent out of shape" by the comments?

Once again I completely agree. But comments like "That was a half-cracked attempt at a sane explanation. It fell flat...failed miserably. I expected better, to be honest. Actually, no, I didn't. "

or other snarky remarks like "uh huh right" or "Now let's wait for the backpedal... " are not against the terms of service, but they're still personal attacks. And for no other reason that showing a different opinion.
I just think the militancy could stand to come down a notch.

I'm not bent out of shape about how Obama runs his office. I don't think CG is either (not that i can speak for her) so I don't know who is bent out of shape.

What bends me out of shape is the militancy of some posters who behave as if every criticism of Obama is a personal attack on them.

well haus, this article didn't have it, but apparently another article says that Obama may start wearing his hat to the back on weekends...now are you "bent out of shape"?

ok, now I'm having a "to each his own" moment. No need to answer that question CG.

Because Haus, you may also know that there are people who also interpret criticism of President Bush as direct criticism of them and the ENTIRE Republican Party.

The actual article explains it better than the summary above. The meetings run long because he wants details.

"When the president invited Congressional leaders to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue last week to talk about his economic stimulus package, the session ran so long that Mr. Obama wound up apologizing to the lawmakers — even as he kept them talking, engaging them in the details of the legislation far more than was customary for Mr. Bush."

I do wish he wouldn't keep the thermostat so high. Wasn't he lecturing us about that? I'm at 68°, Mr. President. For the good of the planet!

Thank you TS for at least seeing some of my point!

tiabia

I know people will tell me I'm wrong but I would argue with this statement - "engaging them in the details of the legislation far more than was customary for Mr. Bush"

I think that comes down to management style too. I think one of, if not the biggest, downfall Bush had was that he put too much faith in his advisors and didn't nitpick details himself. It seemed like he was afraid of being micromanaging so he took a lot at face value and that ended up not being the right course of action.

It seems Obama is not doing the same (not suggesting he's a micromanager though) so thats probably a good way to start.

I agree haus- lead by example. He should inflate his tires properly and have his thermostat at least at 68. I actually have been setting mine at 65... darn gas bill too high

Haus I agree that the dress code for the White House should include a jacket in most cases. I was under the understanding that the article says that they are not required to wear their coats in the Oval Office. I also agree that the article is just stating the difference between the two presidents and their management style.

I think if Bush had doffed his jacket and Obama insisted on wearing it, I'd be thinking, "Oh, Obama has so much more respect for the office."

But honestly, I feel more professional in professional clothing. I think as long as staffers aren't coming to work in jeans with wet hair, it's not a big deal.

Haus, I didn't even see your comment about the thermostat (I skimmed) but I read this article yesterday and that was my first thought. But I also think maybe David Axelrod (who made the comment about the thermostat) was half-joking.

I am also with you guys on the thermostat issue as well.

"What bends me out of shape is the militancy of some posters who behave as if every criticism of Obama is a personal attack on them."

To be fair, I have seen some posters on this site act the same way about Bush. Heck, I saw some posters on this site act the same way about Palin. During the election, people were so touchy about Plain that you would think some of these posters were her sister or daughter or something.

Everything goes both ways and there is no one side that is more guilty than the other.

And, honestly, and this goes for both sides again, most people here are so stubborn in their own views, that I really don't think many are learning anything by arguing with the opposition.