Suchergebnisse

Compares the methods utilized and the degree to which each head of state achieved their policy goals for social welfare.

THIS ARTICLE COMPARES THE DEGREE TO WHICH REAGAN AND THATCHER, AS CHIEF EXECUTIVES, HAVE BEEN ABLE TO ACHIEVE THEIR POLICY GOALS FOR SOCIAL WELFARE. THE SOCIAL WELFARE POLICY AREA MAKES A GOOD COMPARATIVE CASE STUDY, BECAUSE THE DEGREE OF SUCCESS THESE TWO LEADERS HAVE ACHIEVED IN FULFILLING THEIR INTENTIONS IS CONTRARY TO THAT WHICH THE RESEARCH LITERATURE ON PRESIDENTIAL AND PRIME MINISTERIAL SYSTEMS LEADS ONE TO EXPECT. CONTRARY TO EXPECTATION, PRESIDENT REAGAN HAS BEEN ABLE TO ACHIEVE MORE OF HIS GOALS IN SOCIAL WELFARE POLICY THAN HAS PRIME MINISTER THATCHER. THE PURPOSE OF THIS ARTICLE IS, THEREFORE, TO EXPLORE THIS PARADOX BETWEEN THEORY AND RECENT PRACTICE. IN THE PROCESS, THE AUTHORS REVIEW THE STRATEGIES UTILIZED BY BOTH LEADERS AND ASSESS THE ASSUMPTION THAT PRIME MINISTER THATCHER SHOULD BE MORE SUCCESSFUL THAN PRESIDENT REAGAN. THE BASIS FOR THIS REVIEW IS THE EXPECTED OR TYPICAL BEHAVIOR FOR A CHIEF EXECUTIVE IN EACH COUNTRY. PRESIDENT REAGAN'S SUCCESS IS RELATED TO NONTYPICAL PRESIDENTIAL BEHAVIOR ON HIS PART. IN CONTRAST, PRIME MINISTER THATCHER'S RHETORIC AND STYLE HAVE BEEN MORE ATYPICAL OF PRIME MINISTERS, BUT HER BEHAVIOR AS CHIEF EXECUTIVE HAS NOT.