ChiefExecutive and Policy Decisions
Oneof the benefits is that he ensures that adequate strategies are laiddown to achieve the goals of his political system. He employs thecorrect methods to communicate to the people and other partiesconcerning the objectives they have and the need to support themfully. The CEO also takes the initiative in policy formulation whichcan be influential during the crisis periods as it brings the desiredlevel of coherence (Danziger, 2015). He ensures that after thedecisions are made, they implement a plan of action faster and in anefficient manner. He has the authority to veto the bills that areinitiated by the legislature either directly or indirectly. Togetherwith other executives, they dominate the drafting of the legislationas he gives direction to the outstanding bills that are passed. Forinstance, he has the authority to sensitize the drafts be made in amanner that gives the public priority. The disadvantage with this isthat there is a possibility of the CEO being biased and making thedecisions that favor his interests at the expense of the majoritypeople who depend on his judgments.
Onthe other hand, the weak CEO will give the other executives enoughtime to make resolutions in delicate issues instead of handling theissue on a personal capacity. He will share ideas which can bestructured in an efficient manner to serve the interests of people.However, this is also disadvantageous. The process of decision makingwill be very slow because there is more than one party to beconsulted. Likewise, the system will lack an active leader who willguide their operations and give them the most appropriate directionin attaining its goals.
Normally,in the election of legislatures, there are two parties involved. Theyinvolve those who supports and others that opposing his ideas.However, when it comes to issues of decision making as a legislature,he must stand on behalf of all the citizens of his geographical arearegardless of their political affiliations. In reality, the views tobe represented by him are numerous and if he draws his attention toany one of them there is a possibility to be biased because theirinterests vary. To avoid such scenarios, he should work towardspresenting his people equally (Krieger, Kesselman, and Joseph, 2013).
Itis advisable that he represents those who voted for him because thatis the only way to get support from them during the elections tofollow. Otherwise, there are chances of losing to other politicalcompetitors (Roskin, Cord, Medeiros and Jones, 2016). The needs ofthe constituency are better if the specific actions are for the goodof his people as a whole even though they do not serve the interestsof the nation as a whole. Serving the political party could benefitthe legislator if that is the only way to survive and avoiddisciplines that are set for those who work against their movement.For example, this is what happens when one is a member of the BritishHouse of Commons. The party leader has an influence in the winning orlosing of a legislature, and the two should never develop contraryopinions as it will affect their relationship within the group andthe public as a whole. Some decisions can only be relevant if thebenefits they bring to the country outnumber those of a singleconstituency and this compels the legislatures to give them apriority.
Danziger,J. N. (2015).Understanding the Political World: A Comparative Introduction toPolitical Science(12th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson
Krieger,J., Kesselman, M., & Joseph, W. A. (2013). Introductionto Comparative Politics: Political Challenges and Changing Agendas.Boston, MA: Wadsworth.
Roskin,M., Cord, R., Medeiros, J & Jones, W. (2016). PoliticalScience: An Introduction.Pearson Education.