The general consensus among historians is that Jimmy Carter's presidency was a failure. Though Carter came to the White House with high ideals that many felt were needed in a country still reeling from the Watergate scandal, he was generally unable to put those ideals into practice or make popular policies out of them.

The main problem with Carter is that he was very much a process politician, someone concerned with how things should be done rather than what should be done. He believed that if a policy could be carried out in a certain way, according to an established procedure, then it would invariably lead to good outcomes. With Carter, unlike his successor Ronald Reagan, more emphasis was always placed on the journey rather than the destination of policy.

As a result of this approach, Carter was chronically incapable of setting consistent, achievable goals for his administration. Without an overarching theme or philosophy, there was a real lack of consistency in the implementation of policy. In some areas, such as energy policy, there was centralization, in other areas, such as education, there was decentralization.

This lack of direction from the presidency made it more difficult for the Carter Administration to achieve its policy goals. It also made it more difficult for the administration to respond more effectively to the numerous international crises with which it was faced, such as the oil price shock and the Iranian hostage crisis.