How to evaluate a candidate

How to evaluate a candidate:

My conservative brethren do miss the point! A Republican MUST be elected president of the United States in 2016. Our Republic is in serious trouble. We do not have the luxury of procrastinating until "next time." There may NOT BE a "next time." Please stop counting the – Ahem “flatulence” -- that this potential candidate or the other emits and focus on the fact that none smell so bad as the very BREATH of those who would be the Democrats' likely candidates! May I offer you as a "homework" assignment a means of learning how to numerically evaluate a candidate?  In this case, a presidential candidate.

As with any job, the president has tasks to complete.  There will be constraints on how well s/he can perform those tasks and resources to be drawn upon to accomplish the tasks.  The president will bring to the job specific attributes or abilities that will be counterbalanced by various deficiencies.  

To start this evaluation, consider the table, below.  The five items identified above form broad categories.  They are labeled A - E and are listed in the second column.  In the third column, write the percentage of the president’s job that you think each category is worth.  The total must be 100%.  For example, you might think that showing a task is contemplated or in progress is more important than how well the task is actually performed. In such case, you might say that 25% of the president’s effort should be devoted to showing attention to the task, but that the ability to satisfactorily complete it is only worth 10%. In this example, you might also then consider the deficiencies to counter-weigh the attributes also at 10%.  If the resources to accomplish the tasks of the office are significant, they may be valued at perhaps 35% leaving the constraints at 20%.  The fourth column contains seven rows per category.  (Make more, if you wish but seven is probably enough for your evaluation.) You then identify seven tasks, functions or other criteria that you believe are needed to “make” a president.  For example, under tasks, you might list “develop foreign policy.”  Under constraints, it may be “work with hostile congress” and under attributes, it may be “prior experience,” and so on.  Observe that each entry is a verb and noun.  Use the fifth column to rank the tasks, function or criteria in order of importance, “1” being most important.

KEY	CATEGORIES	%	FUNCTIONS	RANK
A	TASKS	25	Develop foreign policy
			Unify people of U.S.	1
			Promote scientific achievement
			Fight terrorism
			Maintain military readiness
			Develop balanced budget
B	CONSTRAINTS	20	Work with hostile congress
			Partner with foreign competitors
			Anticipate terrorist threats
			Handle natural disasters
			Recognize finite monetary resources	1
C	RESOURCES	35	Use military against threats
			Communicate goals to people	1
			Apply demonstrated skills
			Delegate to cabinet officers
D	ATTRIBUTES	10	Understands separation of powers
			Willing to delegate authority
			Has significant leadership experience
			Possesses common sense	1
			Is patriotic
			Is self-made
E	DEFFICIENCIES	10	Flip-flops on issues	1
			Ponders too long before acting
			Misapplies executive authority
			Used drugs or alcohol
			Lacks good communication skills
		100%

Compare the function identified as most important to you in one category to each of the most important functions in the other categories.  Use the Evaluation Weight Factors to show the magnitude of importance.  Thus, comparing the most important function in category A to the most important in category B shows that A has a major difference in importance compared to B, and so forth.  Then, sum the results for A, B and the others.

B	C	D	E		Function		Sum	Evaluation Weight Factors
A-3	A-3	A-2	E-2	A	A	3+3+2	8
	C-3	D-1	E-3	B	B	0	0
		D-1	E-1	C	C	3	3	1	Minor
			E-3	D	D	1+1	2	2	Medium
				E	E	2+3+1+3	9	3	Major

              

In this model, only the result for the first function is shown.  It shows that “E,” flip-flopping on issues is most important (to me) in selecting a president out of the other functions I identified as first in their categories; I want a president who does NOT flip-flop! 

Apply the same procedure for the remaining six functions in each category.  When you have completed all of the functions, total them in each category.  For example, let us say you get the results shown in the table for categories “A” and “E.”  You can work on B, C and D yourself.

Category A	Sum
A (function 1)	8
A (function 2)	2
A (function 3)	0
A (function 4)	7
A (function 5)	6
A (function 6)	1
A (function 7)	4
Total	28

Category E	Sum
E (function 1)	9
E(function 2)	4
E(function 3)	10
E(function 4)	2
E(function 5)	0
E(function 6)	1
E(function 7)	5
Total	31

Then apply the worth percentage that you value the functions in the “A” category – 25% and the value in the “E” category --10%.  This gives you a final score of 31 x 0.1 = 3.1 for “Deficiencies” and 28 x 0.25 = 7 for “Tasks.”   If the other functions, after applying the worth percentage, are greater than 3.1 – which is the case for Tasks, then it means that although you don’t care for deficiencies in a candidate, it is more important to you that they focus on something else – such as “Tasks.”

This gives you an objective tool;  a “yard-stick” by which to measure a real candidate. If you apply the procedure to leaders known as “great presidents” you will see how they stack up compared to your ideals.  Then scour the field of candidates in whom you MIGHT be interested.  Use the same functions you developed to evaluate them as shown in the model. This procedure is likely going to take you a while.  It might be best to work with others in a group.  In any event, it is exacting and – unlike campaign rhetoric laced with emotion – it permits you to view candidates based upon a fixed criteria that YOU developed.   

If you get stuck anywhere along the way, send me email at abinc@aol.com.  I’ll do my best to help you.

Jay L. Stern