Survival of the fittest
When Gordon Brown first became prime minister, Director assessed how he would measure up as chief executive of Great Britain PLC. The omens weren't good. So how has he fared and what about his rivals for the top job? Here's our report card.
by Jo Owen From www.director.co.uk , January 2009
Gordon Brown
The prime minister has improved from a poor start. The global credit crisis has helped him improve his poll ratings; otherwise many of the same questions about his leadership qualities persist.
Vision **
Last time our verdict was: "Drop the clever ideas (endogenous growth theory) and focus on people's needs." The message remains the same. Brown may have a vision, but he has not yet communicated it in a way that mere humans can understand. A test of a clear vision and a good leader is that it takes people where they would not have gone by themselves. It is not evident that he is steering Labour, or the UK, in any fresh direction. Brown needs a vision, not a to-do list and a have-done list.
Ability to motivate **
Our advice last time was: "Put the best talent on to your team, regardless of whether they voted for you. Then trust your team to deliver." He has done this, with mixed success. Sir Digby Jones got his peerage and promptly disappeared, while Peter [now Lord] Mandelson reappeared from the political grave. Both were courageous appointments by Brown. But there are still gaps in his ability to motivate. It is clear that civil servants find him less than civil. And he lacks the popular touch, which Blair had in abundance. He should talk less about himself ("I want to talk with you today about who I am, what I believe, what I am determined to lead..."). He needs to talk more about the people who will vote for the next government.
Crisis management ****
In 2007, we predicted "crises could be the making of Brown, the prime minister". The credit crunch has been the perfect crisis for Brown: intellectually challenging while not requiring much emotional engagement with the population at large. And he followed the advice we gave last time: "Build a team to help you manage the inevitable crises." Like any good leader, he put together the team and took advice rather than trying to do it all heroically himself. The credit crunch may yet save him. He gets four, not five, stars for two reasons. He has over-reached himself by trying to sort out the world economy—when CEOs take their eye off the ball like that, it is always a bad sign. And we need to see if he will be as good with other crises, or whether he reverts to being Macavity: always absent when there is bad news.
Decisiveness **
Our verdict as Brown took the helm was: "Let your vision and values drive tough decisions." The problem is that he does not appear to have a clear vision. The result is death-by-initiative. There is a lot of activity, but no clear direction. There is a subtle difference between a leader who is decisive (gives clear direction on the major issues) and someone who makes many decisions and micro-manages. Brown needs to set a clear vision, be assured on the big issues and then delegate far better to his Cabinet, which can turn the vision into reality. Apart from the credit crunch, it seems that this sort of decisiveness is not in Brown's DNA.
Honesty and integrity **
Brown is saddled with more than 11 years of New Labour history and promises. He clearly hopes that the credit crunch will allow him to wipe the slate clean and start all over again. If he can disassociate himself from the recession and from his, and Labour's, past it will be an act of political genius. Stakeholders do not want to hear excuses, they want to see results. Brown has never admitted an error. Perhaps a braver leader would have the integrity to own up to the odd blunder over 11 years, show that they have learned and then move on. That would be a better way of building trust than taking credit for all the good events and blaming setbacks on everyone else. Honesty and trust go hand in hand, which is perhaps why so few people trust politicians.
Leadership rating **
The credit crunch may yet save Brown, but otherwise many questions remain about his capacity to lead.
David Cameron
The Conservative leader has succeeded in painting a new picture of his party since becoming leader in 2005. But concerns remain over his ability in a crisis.
Vision ****
He has detoxified the brand. The "nasty" party has become the "hug a hoodie" party. Cameron has even painted the Tories green. These are significant achievements. The reason he scores only four, not five, stars for vision is a lingering concern around style versus substance. He needs to show that he will take difficult decisions around tax, spending, and social and environmental policy. Talk needs to become action. There is much work being done in the background. At some point, we need to see it.
Ability to motivate ****
Cameron has led the Conservatives to big leads in the polls. It is not clear if this is a positive Tory vote or a reaction against Labour. The good news is that he has a strong media presence and has built a robust "brand Cameron". The bad news is that he struggles to shrug off his Bullingdon Club heritage. He can appear to be populist rather than heavyweight.
Crisis management **
It is difficult for an opposition to shine during a crisis such as the credit crunch. Oppose the government and you look negative and unhelpful; support it and you appear irrelevant. Even allowing for these excuses, Cameron did not have a good crisis. He lacked the authority and clarity that Vince Cable gave the Lib Dems. There will be other opportunities for Cameron to shine in an emergency, but he needs to prove that he can handle all the unexpected events that happen to any prime minister.
Decisiveness **
A YouGov poll in July last year found that 45 per cent of respondents thought Cameron was decisive. YouGov also said 80 per cent thought that Blair had the same quality in 1997. In other words, the public are not convinced that Cameron has made the switch from PR executive to potential prime minister. While he has been decisive on some issues, such as dropping Derek Conway in the wake of the parliamentary expenses scandal, these have been relatively easy decisions to take. He needs to pick a couple of battles and win them. Playing it safe may be good politics, but ultimately a leader needs to take risks and make tough decisions.
Honesty and integrity ***
Let no-one claim that Cameron lacks honesty or integrity. As a leader, though, he faces a tougher test. Can he show that he delivers on promises and deals with awkward situations? If he can, he earns that most valuable of political commodities—trust. But until he is in a position of power, we will not know if he can fulfil his pledges. The jury is undecided.
Leadership rating ***
If Cameron can convert his words into action he could prove to be very good. He needs to show he is decisive, prove his worth in a crisis and deliver on promises. Time will make him or break him.
Nick Clegg
The Lib Dems' leader lacks the oxygen of publicity essential for all politicians. Director spent an afternoon with him to find out whether he is made of the right stuff.
Vision ****
Clegg has surprised everyone, including his own party, by setting out a direction which is very much his own. It may be the right course, or it may be wrong. What counts from a leadership perspective is that he has a new vision and he is taking the party with him. Staff within his office were able to predict what his position would be on new issues before they asked him—that's a good sign of a leader.
Ability to motivate ***
In common with most good politicians, Clegg is good at close quarters. He has charm, is considerate, takes time to put colleagues at ease and enjoys what he does. His staff clearly like working for him. He is near to a five-star rating for his one-to-one motivation, but scores closer to one star for his motivation to many. He is rarely seen on television, and when he appears he lacks impact and authority. As the face of the Lib Dem brand, he needs to build his media presence and persona.
Crisis management ***
Clegg has performed well during the credit crunch. For this, he owes a debt to his Treasury spokesman, Vince Cable, who projected authority and credibility. Leadership is a team sport and Clegg had the good sense to let Cable star. Clegg need not be a superhero doing everything himself: he was wise to let the best person step into the limelight at the right time.
Decisiveness **
Clegg suffers from being the leader of a relatively small party with limited funding. He is expected to do everything himself with much smaller resources: media, fund-raising, party management, policy, parliament, the regions and more besides. He needs absolute clarity about where he adds most value and makes the biggest difference. He manages a tight diary, but needs to be more decisive about what he will do himself and the areas where he will delegate.
Honesty and integrity **
Many politicians think they are honest if they have not yet been proven guilty of barefaced lies. Leaders face a tougher test of honesty and integrity: delivering on promises and dealing promptly with awkward situations. In other words, honesty is about how far we are prepared to trust a leader. Until they are tested, it is difficult to gauge how far they can be trusted. On this, the jury is out, so Clegg scores only two stars.
Leadership rating ***
Clegg may be a triumph of substance over style. But if he can build his media presence, focus his time better and build his track record, he could become an outstanding leader.
Boris Johnson
Who: Mayor of London
What: The former MP for Henley-on-Thames was elected mayor in May 2008. Before that he held shadow government posts as party vice chairman, minister for the arts and minister of higher education. He was editor of The Spectator for six years and writes a weekly column for The Telegraph.
Good: His self-deprecating persona and sense of fun means he is one of Britain's most recognised politicians. He's not afraid to speak his mind, is clever and ambitious.
Bad: His detractors think he is an upper-class twit, intent on sabotaging his career with ill-judged, naïve statements. Who else has managed to offend the citizens of a whole city?
Rhodri Morgan
Who: First minister for Wales
What: The Oxford and Harvard graduate and former Labour MP has been first minister since 2000. It is thought he may retire this year, as he approaches his 70th birthday.
Good: An outspoken, independent spirit he is hugely popular in Wales and not afraid to criticise his Labour peers, as well as the opposition. The historian, Jan Morris, describes him as "full of flash and fire".
Bad: His critics think of him as a loose cannon, a talker not a doer. They say policies to improve Wales's economy and prospects are hazy. A Tory dossier in 2008 accused him of squandering public spending.
Alex Salmond
Who: First minister of Scotland
What: The former president of the Scottish Nationalist Students became first minister in 2007. He is also the MSP for Gordon.
Good: He has been described as the SNP's best political operator and the shrewdest non-Labour politician in Scotland. He commands attention when he speaks.
Bad: He has also been described as unpleasant, vindictive and ruthless.
Peter Robinson
Who: First minister of Northern Ireland
What: The leader of the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP), Northern Ireland's biggest party.
Good: Won universal acclaim for his decision to give free bus fares to the elderly and for his role in the 25-year Regional Development Strategy and Transport Strategy. Seen as talented, articulate and a good strategist.
Bad: As with many of his generation, there is a darker history. He led violent protests against the Anglo-Irish Agreement, which saw him earn the nickname "the Punt" for a while.
Vince Cable
Who: Deputy leader, Liberal Democrats
What: The MP for Twickenham was made Shadow Chancellor in 2003. For 64 days in 2007 he was acting Lib Dem leader.
Good: His ready wit, judgement and experience make him a hugely popular figure in politics and on the street. In fact, many seem to prefer Cable to actual leader Clegg.
Bad: Has been suggested he's unlikely to toe the party-line and is too old to be leader.