NEWS ANALYSIS : Low-Key Perry Being Asked to Master High-Flying Job : Pentagon: Nominee for top defense post was considered ideal as No. 2 man. Now he has to show he can shape bold national policy and sell it.

When the Clinton Administration first considered William J. Perry for a top Defense Department job a little more than a year ago, the low-key Stanford University engineering professor seemed the perfect choice--for the Pentagon’s No. 2 slot.

The quiet-spoken mathematician was regarded as a careful manager, capable of running the day-to-day operations of a huge department. He was a recognized authority on crucial issues, such as military technology and arms control. And he was highly respected on Capitol Hill.

Now, nominated by the President to be secretary of defense after the embarrassing withdrawal by Bobby Ray Inman, the 66-year-old Perry still must overcome the perception that he is better suited to be second-in-command than the Pentagon’s chief.

Although the Californian is widely credited with having done a workmanlike job as deputy secretary of defense, even friends conceded that he is largely untested in the realm of shaping policy for the nation’s future security and selling it to Congress and the public.

He also lacks the “star” persona and political stature that some White House officials had said Clinton was seeking to help him regain credibility with the military and to serve as a forceful spokesman for Administration policies.

“It’s clear that he’s going to have to broaden himself,” a onetime colleague said of Perry.

There is considerable skepticism in some quarters about whether Perry will be able to exert the kind of forceful influence within the Administration’s policy-making team that some say is needed. Clinton’s relations with the armed services remain uneasy at best. And, beyond the Pentagon, there is continuing criticism of the Administration’s handling of immediate crises such as Bosnia and its efforts to shape a comprehensive strategy for national security in the post-Cold War era.

Don Snider, a military analyst with the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said that Perry is apt to find it “hard to work in that kind of Cabinet with that kind of entree. It diminishes the stature of defense within the Administration.”

Indeed, it is not even clear what new policies the secretary-designate would be likely to promote. Although Perry’s outlook on technology and defense procurement are well-enough known, virtually no one is familiar with his views on broader defense and foreign policy issues.

Friends said that he has agreed with outgoing Defense Secretary Les Aspin on most of the new policies that he has put into effect. “I don’t think you’re going to see many major changes,” one longtime friend said.

Even so, supporters insisted that Perry may prove to be a sleeper when it comes to strengthening the Administration’s national security team. Although Perry has concentrated mainly on overhauling the Pentagon’s Byzantine procurement system this past year, he also has become more conversant with issues ranging from budget priorities to military preparedness.

John D. Steinbruner, a Brookings Institution defense expert who has known Perry for years, said that behind the new nominee’s friendly demeanor and straightforward style is a man with a clear vision about how to resolve long-term problems and the determination to follow through.

“There is a tendency to believe that nice guys can’t accomplish anything,” Steinbruner conceded. “But he has a lot of competence and sense of purpose and he’s not easily deflected. When he decides to do something, he’s formidable.”

Moreover, defense analysts pointed out that Perry is one of the few Democrats that Clinton could have named who have built reputations in the defense arena. The rest already are in lesser slots in the Defense Department or the Central Intelligence Agency.

And Perry clearly was the favorite of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who had been fearful that Inman--who withdrew his name from nomination last week after complaining of excessive criticism from the press--might concentrate too much on intelligence issues. Inman had a long career as a senior intelligence official.

A brainy yet pragmatic man, Perry was undersecretary of defense for research and engineering during the late 1970s, playing a key role in launching the development of radar-evading Stealth aircraft that performed so well during the Persian Gulf War.

He later served as director of Stanford’s Center for International Security and Arms Control and headed Technology Strategies and Alliances, a Menlo Park consulting firm. In the early 1980s, he managed Hambrecht & Quist, an investment firm specializing in high technology.

During his 10 months as deputy secretary, he has become a leading advocate of defense procurement reform, calling for greatly simplified contract regulations in an effort to make government practices more like those in the commercial market.

Under his proposals, the military services would buy commercial products off the shelf wherever feasible, rather than pay extra for custom designs. And he has promoted efforts to keep critical defense industries alive.

Once confirmed, Perry would face a broad array of challenges: He would have to help hammer out a more coherent, broad-scale foreign policy, manage the continuing reduction in the size of the military without sacrificing readiness and deal with day-to-day problems, such as Bosnia and Somalia.

Perry told the Senate Armed Services Committee during a confirmation hearing last year that the biggest challenge facing the Pentagon is how to sustain military preparedness in the face of the current effort to reduce the size of the armed forces.

But he eschewed any quick-fix solutions, saying only: “We have never successfully managed a drawdown of this size.”

Times staff writer Ralph Vartabedian contributed to this story.

Profile: William J. Perry

* Age: 66

* Hometown: Vandergrift, Pa.

* Education: Bachelor’s and master’s degrees in mathematics from Stanford University, 1949 and 1950; Ph.D. in mathematics from Penn State, 1957.

* Career highlights: Director of electronic defense labs for GTE in 1954; president of ESL Inc., a military electronics company from 1964 to 1977; served as Pentagon’s undersecretary for research and development, 1977 to 1981; chairman of Technology Strategies and Alliances, a California consulting firm from 1985 to 1993; professor and co-director of Stanford University Center for International Security and Arms Control from 1989 to 1993; deputy defense secretary, 1993.

* Personal: Married to Leonilla Mary Green; five children.

Sources: “Who’s Who in America,” Associated Press