Semiatin states that a major disadvantage to this hierarchical structure is that those at the top of the structure have the power to restrict, or shut down ideas before they get to the candidate. I think that within our campaign we have the ability to lessen the detriment of this factor, as we have an open line of communication with the Candidate and our Campaign Manager is willing to listen, and give everyone a chance to explain their ideas. Since we have this openness in the campaign I defiantly feel that we are better off with the hierarchical model than a collegial model because we are able to quickly react to daily events. There are times where it is important to speak with a few members of the campaign staff to come to a consensus as to what to do but most of the time it is more effective to have decisions made by those who it directly effects.
Thusfar, I have not run into any issues with the way the campaign has been run. I am generally able to get all of the information I need on a project from Steve Lapinksi and if there is anything he is unsure of he will get me in touch with the correct person. The one thing that confuses me a little is that after the Finance Director position is filled they will not be put in charge of the Treasurer and Assistant Treasurer, it seems that in most companies this would be the case. The same is true of the Communications Director position, I would think that the webmaster and Literature Coordinator should fall under that umbrella.
Richard J. Semiatin, Campaigns in the 21st Century
ISBN 0072453621
