If bacon-sandwich charisma defines political leadership, only Nigel Farage wins
|
Version 0 of 1. Can't a guy have a bacon sandwich in peace? No. Not if the guy in question wants to be prime minister, anyway. The cameras are always on and every mouthful will be judged. The personal is political, even at 6.30 in the morning. The blurring of talent show contests and politics continues, with celebrity status sometimes counting for more than some of the traditional virtues of political leadership. Affability, or the appearance of it, beats seriousness. Jokes beat speeches. Soundbites beat policy. Every Wednesday at noon, when parliament is sitting, prime minister's questions confirms the extent to which political leadership has become a branch of showbusiness. It is like an open mic session at a not very good comedy club, with coachloads of sixth-formers in attendance. It is all very retro. And the script needs some work. Which is odd, really, because out there in the real world the theory and practice of leadership are changing quite fast. There is nothing very retro about it. The interesting discussions about leadership, and the interesting exemplars, have little in common with the strutting and posing that goes on at the House of Commons and in politics generally. Take Zappos, for example, the American online retailer. It has embraced something known as "holacracy", which means abandoning traditional hierarchy and abolishing managers' usual roles and job titles. Instead, employees form themselves into self-governing and interlinking circles based around core tasks. There are still leaders and leadership, of course, but not of a kind that many in London SW1 would recognise. A similar, non-directive approach has existed at WL Gore, the engineering firm (and makers of Gore-Tex), for years. Here no one crudely tells anyone else what to do. "Want to know if you're a leader?" a WL Gore employee explained to the management guru Gary Hamel. "Call a meeting and see if anyone shows up." And at Google, leadership has also displayed some unconventional characteristics. In its early years of rapid growth employees were encouraged to spend up to a fifth of their time working on new ideas that interested them. When Eric Schmidt, executive chairman of the company, first started attending meetings there he said he could not tell the difference between graduate interns and the most senior staff: you led with ideas and argument, not rank. Google has become more conventional as it has grown to its current all-conquering position. But the origins of its success lie in the rejection of many elements of old-school leadership. Jim Collins, author of the best-selling business books Built to Last and Good to Great, argues that some of the most effective leaders eschew "charisma" and instead adopt a quiet, relentless, purposeful approach. "Force of personality is not an argument," he told me once. "It's not facts, it's not evidence, it's not data … Charisma is irrelevant. It's not good or bad, it's irrelevant." Well-founded confidence, required by political or business leaders, is one thing. Braggadocio is another. Collins has a test for anyone who says that he or she is a leader. "I ask them: 'What are you in it for?'" Some people are in it for themselves. Others are trying to build something that will last, for the benefit of others. This is the test to apply to Messrs Cameron, Clegg and Miliband – and Osborne, May and Johnson too. Politics is not supposed to be showbiz. Soundbites, "jokes", bullying and broadbrush statements may get you though PMQs, panel shows or shorter broadcast interviews. But something serious is supposed to be at stake. Fitness for office should really not be determined by how you eat a bacon sandwich at 6.30 in the morning. Of course the personal is political. We prefer interesting people to boring ones. Jokes can help. Public speaking is a skill that has too few capable exponents. But the degeneration of our politics has led to a situation in which Nigel Farage can command the undivided and often unquestioning attention of much of our media and wider public. And this is what passes for leadership. I do not follow. |