CFK's policies certainly led to high inflation, but the high inflation was mainly due to excessive demand, which her government created through wealth transfers (high taxes and BCRA loans when tax revenues weren't enough). Her government's belief was that you created growth by ensuring that there was demand. There are certainly good arguments as to why this was irresponsible/unethical, but economically-speaking, it kept the wheels turning. If you were to start a business, you'd logically want to start it in an economy where people are spending money; CFK's economy had that.
As far as Macri, I think there is a lot of disagreement about the way forward economically. This was pretty much confirmed by Prat Gay's exit as finance minister. Prat Gay wanted to reactivate the economy (decrease interest rates), which runs contrary to Sturzenegger's goals. Sturzenegger's mandate to lower inflation is much different than Prat Gay's, which is essentially to increase inflation. Sturzenegger, being a long-time PRO adherent (unlike Prat Gay), won that fight.
Macri's strength, in my opinion, is listening to a plurality of voices. The whole reason he's president in the first place is because he was able to forge an unlikely coalition with two other political parties. At the same time, I think his style to listen and not micromanage/oversee has led to a lot of mistakes that could have been avoided, e.g. no public hearings on the increases of utility rates. At times, his administration's policies seem disjointed.
As far as what needs to be done economically now, I think they should target inflation less aggressively and increase domestic demand. Specifically, I would (continue to) decrease government spending (it's too high), lower interest rates, and push for legislation that makes starting a business as easy as opening a Gmail account.
I would not be counting on significant export-led growth or foreign investment.
