I think he is exactly what he appears to be: a middle-managerial placeholder.
There are legions of these people out there, infesting the world. They develop through doing some particular job within particular parameters, ideally an individualist job rather than actual leadership, and they do so competently. So they appear holistically competent. They look like the sort of person who you might be able to leave in charge of things - thanks, biases - and actually it probably is safe to do so, as long as you don't actually need anything and aren't confronted by any difficulty.
A cardboard policeman.
So they are highly palatable, and do well for themselves, because they don't present any liabilities or risk to the status quo. They're benign.
But they have no values and vision, so all they are capable of is administration at best. Ideology & dogma can obviously be a dangerous thing, but you need at least a little of it to have some idea of what good looks like & to drive anything forward, especially when you are it and nobody else is going to do it for you.
And we are in an emergency, where these type of people are the worst people to have in charge, because they have nothing in their DNA to bring to the emergency. The scientifically measured tweaking of a dial, the mildest of reforms. And it probably will kill us.