When comparing and contrasting the leadership styles of Mitt Romney and Barack Obama, it is important to note the differences in leadership/management and communication styles. Looking to each leader in the context of their organization we know that Mitt Romney was the running Presidential candidate for the Republican Party and Barack Obama was the Presidential candidate for the Democratic Party that went on to win the Presidency for two terms. In this paper I will discuss the differences in each leaders communication style and how it affects their organizations, how it determines the differences between managers and leaders, how they use verbal/nonverbal communication styles to influence their followers and others around them, and what communication styles contribute to them being judged as a “good” or “bad” leader.
Both Mitt Romney and Barack Obama take strategic approaches while attempting to get support from their distinct organizations. An example of this was during their campaign speeches in 2012. In an article by the Huffington Post it describes Romney talking mortality or a conservative style while Obama talks mainly policy. It also describes Romney’s framing as being more moral, simple, and straightforward while Obama’s style is policy-oriented, filled with numbers, details, and proposals. This gives a clear distinction as to which political party each candidate belongs to based on the assumptions that generally, republicans are seen as more conservative (socially and fiscally), while democrats are seen as liberal and prefer a more active hand in government and a focus on social services.
In the textbook, Leadership: A Communication Perspective, The Human Communication Process lists five principals that reflect the basic components of human communication that directly relate to the leadership and communication styles of Romney and Obama. The two components I will focus on, analyze, and question are Communication is Complex and Communication involves the total personality components. The Communication Process of “Communication is Complex” involves shared interpretations and understandings of the sender. An example of this is Romney’s verbal and non-verbal communication style in The Third Presidential Debate. Romney smiled with both rows of teeth, which seemed submissive according to the Huffington Post, whereas Obama smiled with a closed mouth, which built more rapport that made him look more “important” than Romney. This also links to the article “What Makes a Leader” and describes the importance of social skills and building rapport to: “get them to cooperate and to move them in a direction you desire.” (Goleman, p. 2) Building these social skills and rapport like Obama effectively did during the Third Presentational Debate is critical and put him at an advantage, simply based on his nonverbal communication skills. This proves how critical they are if used or not used effectively.
There are two terms that often get used interchangeably, managers and leaders. In the textbook and in the article, What Leaders Really Do, it describes managers as focusing on more of the organizational aspects of the business like planning and budgeting, organizing and staffing, and controlling activities and solving problems and receiving those physical/tangible benefits. This concept relates to the discussion I presented above about the communication styles of Mitt Romney versus Barack Obama. While Romney is explicitly more moral and straightforward Obama discusses more proposals and ideas this is clear to see based on their communication skills how Obama could be seen as more of a leader while Romney perceived as more of a manager. The article went on to discuss that a leader sets direction, aligns people, and is motivating and inspiring which fits Obama’s communication and presentation style well.
Each political figure has a different level of emotional communication competence that they display while campaigning, giving speeches, and in their personal lives. While researching, I discovered each candidate’s personality type indicated by the Myers Briggs Type Indicator- also known as The MBTI. The personality test revels 16 different personality profiles that are rated on four levels. The first level begins with introversion v. extraversion which indicates how you get your energy- either from others and things that surround you on a daily basis or internally and your inner thoughts and feelings. The second level is sensing v. intuitive which is how you process information in terms of how you hear, smell, taste, and see things. A sensing personality is more likely to need concrete data to back what they are sensing where as intuiting focuses more on their gut feeling. They also focus more on the future and tend to be more idealistic and imaginative. The third level is how you make decisions, which is described as feeling v. thinking. A feeling personality is more likely to act on emotion and empathy whereas a thinking personality tends to use more logic based reasoning and is driven by thought. The fourth and final level is the distinction between perceiving v. judging and how one makes decisions in life. Perceiving is described as living more of a flexible and spontaneous lifestyle while a judging personality type prefers to have a plan and be more organized when they carry out tasks or make decisions.
After summarizing this type of personality profiling I thought it would be interesting to analyze Mitt Romney’s and Barack Obama’s Personality Type and how it relates to their level of emotional communication competence. To my surprise, Obama and Romney have similar personality types. But what does this mean and how does it relate to their emotional communication competence? To begin, Obama has the personality type of INTJ which indicates he’s introverted, intuitive, thinking, and judging; this describes Obama as a “mastermind” or someone who’s an analytical problem solver and is always eager to improve systems and processes with their innovative ideas. On the other hand, Romney has the personality type of ISTJ introverted, sensing, thinking, and judging which is described as the “inspector” these personality types are responsible organizers driven to create and enforce order within systems and institutions. We see these distinctions when comparing leaders v. managers but also when analyzing their emotional communication competence. In the article, What Makes a Leader, it describes that emotional intelligence is a predictor of a more distinguished leader and better performer. Again, this is evident when Obama talks more about ideas and policies (indicated by his personality type) and how Romney talks more about facts and details (also indicated by his personality type). In addition, Obama is perceived as having more emotional stability and regulation of emotion like when he complements his opponent Romney and states that he has legitimate points, even though they may differ, while Romney tends to focus more on his way and makes a clear distinction as to why his points are better and his opponents are clearly wrong.
There are several elements that contribute to Obama and Romney being “good leaders” but also elements that contribute to them acting as “bad leaders.” Romney demonstrates the “good leader” element of ethics and serving the common good. This was especially apparent in Michelle Obama’s State of the Union speech when she describes college education and the “American mindset” of parents wanting a better life for their children. This shows ethics because she shows that she understands and demonstrates compassion in hopes for Obama to expand financial aid to students and their families because she describer herself and Obama having this issue and experiencing it first hand. In comparison, Romney acted unethically when he profiteered a ballot initiated by the Obama Administration. It became apparent that under investigation that Romney and his wife, Ann, personally gained $15.3 million dollars from the bailout. This demonstrates unethical behavior and doing everything but serving the common good. According to the textbook and Kellerman, there are two categories of bad leaders, ineffective and unethical. When it comes to categorizing Romney as ineffective or unethical from the example presented above it would be make most sense to group him on the unethical side which is described as unable to distinguish between right and wrong and maximizing their own rewards while harming others rather than ineffective which pertains to poor skills and ineffective strategy or tactical planning.
In conclusion, Barack and Obama have very different management/leadership styles in terms of their communication styles, how they address the difference between leaders and managers, their emotional communication competence, and what elements make them good/bad leaders. Throughout the paper it was evident that the underlying theme was their communication style and how that played into every aspect of the following questions. There is no doubt that from researching, reading, and analyzing the text that there are clear examples as to why Obama and his personality type is more of an effective leader, posses a greater emotional intelligence, and has more elements of “good leader” characteristics than Romney.

Reference Page
1. Lakoff, G. (2012, May 18). Obama vs. Romney: The Framing Matchup, Round One. Retrieved February 24, 2015, from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/george-lakoff/obama-romney-slogan_b_1605212.html

2. Democrat vs Republican. (n.d.). Retrieved February 24, 2015, from http://www.diffen.com/difference/Democrat_vs_Republican

3. What Leaders Really Do by John Kotter Harvard Business Review, December 2001
4. What Makes a Leader by Daniel Goleman Harvard Business Review HBR OnPoint © 2000
5. Obama Romney Personality Types. (2012, October 1). Retrieved March 6, 2015, from http://www.personalitypathways.com/article/presidential-types.html
6. Lydia E. Anderson and Sandra B. Bolt, Leadership and Professionalism. (2013). Boston, MA: Pearson.

7. Mitt Romney Faces Ethics Charges For Profiteering From Auto Bailout. (2012, November 4). Retrieved March 6, 2015, from http://newsone.com/2074449/mitt-romney-ethic-charges

8. Kavoussi, B. (2012, November 5). Mitt Romney Likely To Face Ethics Complaint From UAW For Allegedly Hiding Auto Bailout Profits. Retrieved March 6, 2015, from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/01/mitt-romney-ethics-complaint-uaw-auto-bailout_n_2056941.html