Rene Haas

Rene Haas

Arm CEO

How should the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Education be selected?

This explainer site suggests using a Panel—but not just any Panel.

The power of the Panel: In this explainer site, review the proposed process for selecting the Secretary of Education. Click the U.S. Department of Education and scroll down to the section titled: “In a Congressional remake of the DOE, should the Secretary of Education position be performance-based?” Also note the proposed authority of the Panel to replace the Secretary if performance falls short.

Because the Secretary—especially when supported by Congressional legislation designed for that purpose—could influence nationwide K–12 student performance far beyond historical levels, the method of selection may be just as important as the person selected.

Potential Panel members could come from many backgrounds—and there should be no required discipline, credential, or traditional career path.

As one example, in the 34.04 issue of Wired, the article “ARM’S RACE” by Lauren Goode profiles Rene Haas, CEO of Arm. Arm is a global technology leader whose chip architectures are licensed by companies including Apple, Tesla, NVIDIA, Microsoft, Amazon, Samsung, and Qualcomm.

Not that Mr. Haas would necessarily have any interest in serving on the Panel; rather, the point is that exceptional potential candidates abound. What each might contribute is a unique perspective shaped by experience with innovation, culture, leadership, and performance.

(U.S. K–12 student performance has been a national concern since the early 1960s. As a parallel—but unrelated—example of major institutional change, consider the IBM turnaround under Lou Gerstner. He came from Nabisco—a company known for cookies, crackers, and snacks—not technology. Despite lacking a computer industry background, IBM recruited him from Nabisco. He quickly halted IBM’s planned breakup. He then helped lead one of the most recognized corporate turnarounds in modern business history—suggesting that transformational leadership may emerge from unexpected backgrounds.)

Snippets from the Wired article:

Wired: Since you became the CEO, people say there’s been a big culture change. Do you agree?

Wired: The thing I’ve learned is that the CEO sets the tone for the company. My training, which develops who you are as a leader, was accelerated by moving to Silicon Valley 30 years ago—working with startups and then for NVIDIA. I was working for founders. At the time I couldn’t tell you, “Oh, working for founders, that’s the kind of environment I resonate with.” But looking back, that’s where my DNA was shaped and where I found the environment in which I thrive.

Wired: What kind of environment is that?

Haas: Taking risks, bold growth, fast markets, making mistakes, but being willing to take big bets. So when I took over here, I said, that’s the kind of culture I want.

Haas: There's never a bad time. There's never a good time

Haas is preparing to launch a bold new chip initiative. Major risks lie ahead, and the outcome is unknown—but so is the possibility of industry-changing success. As described in Wired, he works closely with SoftBank CEO Masayoshi Son (SoftBank owns 90% of Arm).

Haas’ point: when pursuing a major initiative, choosing the perfect time is impossible. External conditions continuously change and create new uncertainties. Thinking long term, as Haas puts it: “You’ve just got to do it.”

Haas: “My first job out of college was with Texas Instruments in 1984. It was a boom year for the semiconductor industry. But the early 1980s included one of the worst recessions ever. Then, in 1985, Reagan began his second term and reduced defense spending—which was a major part of TI’s business.

What was the lesson I learned? There’s never a good time to do anything. Seriously. There’s never a bad time. You’ve just got to do it.”

Wired: “You’re a big fan of the famed basketball coach Phil Jackson. Why?”

Haas: “What I love about Phil Jackson is that he took two great teams with a lot of talent and turned them into champions.”

(This explainer site: That observation brings to mind the DOE and nationwide K–12 student performance. The challenge may not be a lack of talent—but identifying leadership capable of helping convert potential into championship-level performance.)

A Panel that included perspectives from someone such as Rene Haas—or from someone with leadership attributes similar to Phil Jackson’s—might approach the selection of the U.S. Secretary of Education differently.

As John F. Kennedy might have supported—based on the importance he placed on nationwide K–12 student performance—Congress could consider re-legislating the DOE and, within that legislation, establishing a process for selecting the U.S. Secretary of Education.

One possible mechanism would be a Panel.

Kennedy did not live to see the DOE launched in 1980, more than two decades after his death. But one could argue that he may have been disappointed that the DOE’s legislated mission did not expressly focus on K–12 student performance, or identify K–12 student performance as a standalone mission.

Moreover, if the DOE mission were redefined to play an unprecedented role in influencing nationwide K–12 student performance—click the U.S. Department of Education—success could depend substantially on selecting the right Secretary of Education. Yet responsibility for selecting the Secretary was left to an incoming U.S. President—who may already face overwhelming responsibilities and whose priorities may vary from one administration to the next. (At stake: nationwide K–12 student performance.)

Today, Congress could revisit the DOE structure and establish a process—such as a Panel—to select the Secretary. Such legislation might attract broad Congressional support and could potentially be viewed favorably by President Trump.

Have an idea for a sponsor? Let’s talk 
 Key code 184