The Choice of Political Advisors

We study the choice of multiple advisors, balancing political alignment, competence, and diverse perspectives. An imperfectly informed leader can consult one or two advisors. One has views closely aligned with the leader’s, but his information is imprecise or correlated with the leaders own. The other is more biased but has independent or more precise information. We identify a trade-off between consulting the more aligned or the better informed expert, even when this entails small costs. Subtle comparative statics emerge : When the leader consults both advisors, increasing the bias of the more biased expert may result in the dismissal of the other advisor. The leader may opt to delegate consulting and decision-making, but only to the advisor who collects superior information in equilibrium. We then study the uncertain trade-off case where the most informed advisor is not necessarily also more biased. We find that reducing the probability that the better-informed expert is more biased may lead to hiring also the other advisor. The leader may delegate to the advisor with uncertain bias, although he is more biased in expectation, because he more easily aggregates information in equilibrium.