May 31st, 2010
Along with a lot of our colleagues, we’re watching to see how the leadership of the new coalition government approaches the huge job that faces them.
At the same time, we’re keeping an eye on the slowly unfolding leadership contest in the Labour Party.
It appears that Gordon Brown was more comfortable surrounding himself with people significantly younger. He disposed of the serious hard hitters of his generation who were capable of acting as role models to others underneath.
As a result, the young acolytes he picked to serve him had little exposure to role models of strong and authentic leadership, and are now revealing the gap in their ability, their experience, and their credibility.
They were not given the development that they required – and deserved – and as a leadership cadre it is arguably ill-equipped to take over.
Was Gordon Brown unaware of this part of his responsibility? Or was it that at a conscious or less-conscious level he was afraid to develop them, as he felt too vulnerable in his own self, and saw his own team as competition?
If you don’t give your people the encouragement, help and support to develop their talents, you are in dereliction of your duty and responsibilities as a leader.
As we see, he has left the organisation in a vulnerable state. How long will it take them to recover?
March 1st, 2010
General Election season is upon us – and the pace of revelation, attack and counter-attack is warming up (unlike the weather that continues to shroud us in grey gloom).
Once more the shadow side of politics – and personalities – is coming to the fore. While Labour delights in showing up Cameron as full of hidden shallows; so the latest furore over “Brown the Bully” is pointing to our PM’s explosive depths.
What else can we read into this? As so often, Brown demonstrates both the good and the bad news that our psyche brings to our behaviours. The good news is that this is a man of high intellect, single-mindedness, and someone who desperately wants to achieve. But the bad news is that he also demonstrates a breakdown in our expectations of normal functioning in interpersonal relationships. His high intellect and single-minded need to achieve, can lead to a build up of frustration with himself and others, and leads to high anxiety in those around him. This in turn can lead to fear of giving feedback, in an attempt to avoid creating conflict and outbursts of temper.
It is very hard for everyone when working with those who lack the traditional interpersonal skills of leadership. Well-developed personal skills - even showmanship – in the age of constant public interaction and media coverage are vital for political leadership success.
Brown’s weakest link (or missing link?) seems to be within the interpersonal dimension; his inability to observe or understand what other people are feeling. This is not to say that he does not have feelings of his own. He does – and it’s often his own feelings of frustration that lead to his explosive outbursts. We also know that Brown can show his emotions – for example in his recent interview with Andrew Marr. He is not comfortable with it – but that’s not what is at the heart of this issue.
Brown has not one, but two achilles’ heels. He does not appear to tune into the signals coming to him from others. What he has in intellectual power he lacks in emotional connectivity. And, his inner frustrations build up inside him with no outlet (a pressure cooker without an escape valve) until they overflow in an explosive outpouring of frustration and temper.
Because of this, he does not measure up to our idealised view of what leaders need to be able to do. But are we right to condemn Brown for being different?
Or should we be wondering why such a senior leader does not choose to put in place some psychological support – to enable him to harness more effectively his obvious talents by managing his areas of difficulty?
