The Wolfowitz Bush managerial style

The pressure is growing on Paul Wolfowitz to leave the World Bank. The Financial Times' Krishna Guha and Eoin Callan -- rapidly becoming the World Bank's internal newsletter -- lays out the situation: Paul Wolfowitz?s handling of a secondment deal for his girlfriend Shaha Riza broke the World Bank?s code of conduct, three staff rules and the terms of his contract as bank president, the final report by a panel investigating his role has concluded. The report asks the bank?s board to consider, in the light of its findings, ?whether Mr Wolfowitz will be able to provide the leadership needed to ensure that the bank continues to operate to the fullest extent possible in achieving its mandate?. It suggests that the board should take into account in making this judgment the ?damage done to the reputation of the World Bank group and its president, the lack of confidence expressed by internal and external stakeholders in the present leadership, the erosion of operational effectiveness...and the important strategy and governance challenges the World Bank group is facing?. also asks the board to undertake a review of the bank?s governance structures ?with the aim of ensuring that it is capable of effectively dealing with the challenges raised for the institution?. The report?s findings ? released by near unanimous demand of the board ? will lend enormous momentum to the European-led push for Mr Wolfowitz to resign or be forced out. The US is expected to try to schedule a conference call of deputy finance ministers from the Group of Seven industrialised nations to address the crisis at the bank on Tuesday, after failing to set up such a call on Monday.... Robert Bennett, a lawyer for Mr Wolfowitz, declined comment on the specific findings of the report, but said that overall it was ?clear that the ad hoc committee has simply ignored the overpowering case we presented that he was acting in good faith?.Tyler Cowen sums up the problem with Wolfowitz: As an outsider it is hard to judge many aspects of Wolfowitz's tenure. I take his continuing unwillingness to resign to be the biggest argument against his managerial abilities. He has lost the public relations battle and can no longer be effective. Why should he want the job any more? The obvious hypothesis is that he is emotionally committed to a losing battle, and is not placing much weight on the long-term interests of the institution he is running.Cowen's argument could be extrapolate to apply to the Bush administration as well. Consider the Justice Department. At this juncture, it appears that the White House's revealed preference is to have a loyal but incapacitated and incompetent leader of that department over making any kind of concession to Congress. What's so amazingly boneheaded about this "double-down" strategy is that, inevitably, the White House will lose on both issues. Which means they will not only lose on these personnel questions, they will lose in a way that further exposes their unique mixture of incompetence and political weakness. Oh, and lest one think that Wolfowitz's insistence o keeping his job is not hurting the Bank's mission, click here. UPDATE: The Economist's Free Exchange blog provides another knock against Wolfowitz.