6.3.4.2  Personality Politics                                        

(This is an archived extract from the book Patterns of Power: Edition 2)

Strong personalities can provide moral leadership and drive through radical programmes, overcoming people's resistance to change, but there can be drawbacks to their strength:

·      Charismatic leaders can exert enormous influence over the behaviour of their followers, as described earlier (4.3.2.2), irrespective of whether they are advocating wise policies.  Charisma appeals directly to people’s emotions, and conveys a leader’s sense of certainty.  People suspend their own rational analysis in deference to the more strongly-expressed views of the leader.

·      Leaders can develop what has been described as ‘hubris syndrome’,[1] becoming so impatient of opposition that they refuse to listen to anyone who suggests that they may be making a mistake.  Margaret Thatcher was reported as exhibiting this form of hubris towards the end of her time in office, for example on the issue of ‘poll tax’.[2]  She increasingly ignored both public feeling and the advice of her colleagues, leading Sir Geoffrey Howe to note, in his resignation speech, the frustration felt by those working for her:

“It is rather like sending your opening batsmen to the crease only for them to find, the moment the first balls are bowled, that their bats have been broken before the game by the team captain.” [3]

·      Hubris not only affects a leader's relationship with colleagues; it can include the delusion of infallibility – where having a clear 'big picture' makes the leader feel that detailed analysis and planning would merely give rise to confusion and delay.  There is evidence that this was the case when Tony Blair overrode the advice he received about the risks of invading Iraq, as described later (8.5.5).

·      A leader who is both strong and corrupt, or is strong and misguided, is hard to remove but can damage the country; Robert Mugabe’s grip on Zimbabwe for more than 30 years was an example, as illustrated by comparing reports on elections 25 years apart:

“In 1980 elections, Mugabe won 57 seats of 80 reserved for blacks, becoming Zimbabwe’s PM and Africa’s most feted leader, presiding over continent’s second largest manufacturing base.

… Seriously flawed elections held March 2002 (presidential) and 2005 (parliamentary): Mugabe resorted to using state machinery, war veterans and youth militias to intimidate, suppress dissent, gag media, manipulate food aid and violate human rights.”[4]

All three of these leaders were charismatic agents of change.  They were initially popular.  History would have judged all three more highly, though, if they had gracefully yielded power earlier; they exemplified what is referred to in this book as ‘personality politics’.  Personality politics is dangerous, except for short periods in exceptional circumstances.  A team-based approach is less likely to run astray and is more able to exploit the different strengths of its members. 

© PatternsofPower.org, 2014