tag:theconversation.com,2011:/id/topics/leadership-crisis-2394/articlesLeadership crisis – The Conversation2022-06-07T17:15:10Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1845852022-06-07T17:15:10Z2022-06-07T17:15:10ZI correctly predicted the vote on Boris Johnson’s leadership – here’s how I did it<p>It would be nice to claim that the near complete accuracy of my prediction of the result of the Conservative Party’s <a href="https://theconversation.com/boris-johnson-wins-no-confidence-vote-but-the-margin-will-make-him-nervous-184492">vote of no confidence in Boris Johnson</a> was a glorious triumph of dedicated political science: I predicted that 211 MPs would vote for him to 147 against (the actual number was 148 – I assumed one MP might not vote). </p>
<p>But alas, that would be claiming too much. My forecast involved much guesswork and a fair bit of hunch, combining what the Guardian newspaper has called “<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/jun/07/professor-dubbed-mystic-meg-of-politics-says-boris-johnson-will-be-out-by-autumn">Mystic Meg</a>” crystal ball-gazing with mathematical modelling. </p>
<p>Insofar as serious calculations were involved, they involved adding up the number of pledges from Conservative MPs for or against the prime minister and comparing those tallies to Theresa May’s position when she faced a similar vote in December 2018. Of course, many MPs did not declare their intentions, but the basic picture could be ascertained via those who did. </p>
<p>Assessing the loyal or hostile protestations, it was apparent that Johnson would fare worse than his predecessor May had. May had significantly more public pledges of support from her MPs and fewer declarations of opposition. So, the first assumption was that Johnson would not reach her tally of 63% support. The next question was: how low could he go?</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1534192477183279105"}"></div></p>
<p>It seemed safe to assume that those MPs pledging rebellion would remain true to their word. After all, that is their personal higher risk option. If Johnson did win big they risked permanent banishment on the backbenches, thwarting the vaulting ambition of some. Public affirmations of opposition had to be regarded as the absolute minimum scale of revolt, to which additions would be required. </p>
<p>From early on Monday, it was apparent that the momentum lay with Johnson’s opponents. As increasing numbers declared against him, there was a minor snowballing effect, increasing the confidence of other potential rebels to join in the fun. </p>
<p>By voting time, rebellion seemed a lower-risk move – and possibly even the wiser calculation. If the Johnson premiership was to be damaged beyond recovery, those MPs remaining loyal – or sitting on the fence – could become victims of a purge by a new leader.</p>
<h2>Newbies and the payroll vote</h2>
<p>Nevertheless, amid the tumult, the prime minister could count on significant sources of backing. In the privacy of the polling both there is no guarantee that the entire “<a href="https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/payroll-vote">payroll vote</a>” – containing every government member of the House of Commons, from cabinet minister to parliamentary private secretary, will all remain loyal. There are some whose current level of preferment falls short of their own considerable perceptions of their capabilities. They are happy to turn on their leader. </p>
<p>But there are plenty of payroll devotees of the prime minister, grateful to be paid to be in their post. Ridiculously, the payroll vote, at between <a href="https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/payroll-vote">160-170 MPs</a>, forms nearly <a href="https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/payroll-vote">half of the parliamentary party</a>. That, in itself, was nearly enough to get Johnson over the line.</p>
<p>To the bulk of the payroll vote could be added most MPs from the class of 2019 – those <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2019-50771014">58 Conservatives who captured seats</a> from other parties at the general election, many in the fabled one-time Labour “red wall”. A sizeable number feel indebted to Johnson for what they – and many others – might see as their unlikely victories. </p>
<p>In my own patch of northwest England they form one-third of the entire Conservative representation. Significantly, none came out publicly against their leader. There were exceptions elsewhere – such as the MP for Bishop Auckland, <a href="https://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/20190900.bishop-auckland-mp-reveals-voted-boris-johnson/">Dehenna Davison</a> – but most stayed loyal.</p>
<p>Adding the payroll vote and the “newbie” vote and then making some deductions gives you the very broad contours of the vote prediction. But the silence of some MPs in neither category made precision difficult. And that is where there was much forecasting reliance upon luck and guesstimates to get to a 59% to 41% prediction. </p>
<p>Johnson was always going to have more than a majority, so the predictive range was circa 55% to something only slightly below the Theresa May figure of 63%. A halfway house of 59% based on the analysis of the party seemed reasonable. </p>
<h2>What now for ‘Big Dog’?</h2>
<p>Even harder to predict is what now happens to Johnson’s prime ministership. It is almost inconceivable to think of another Conservative leader soldiering on when more than four in every ten MPs from their own side have called for his head. </p>
<p>But you have to take into account Johnson’s suspension of what many may regard as the normal rules of politics. And at least one of his allies <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/no-confidence-vote-boris-johnson-jacob-reesmogg-b2094765.html">insisted he would</a> defiantly stay on even if he only won by one vote.</p>
<p>So it may be unwise to place too much emphasis on the precedents of Margaret Thatcher, John Major and May departing either immediately or shortly after a bruising from their own side. Each departure was in different circumstances anyway.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/boris-johnson-what-the-result-of-the-confidence-vote-means-for-the-pm-and-the-conservative-party-184500">Boris Johnson: what the result of the confidence vote means for the PM and the Conservative Party</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>At this point, the Conservatives seem certain to lose the two looming by-elections in <a href="https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/politics/labour-on-course-for-landslide-victory-in-wakefield-by-election-new-polling-suggests-3721811">Wakefield in Yorkshire</a> and <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-04/johnson-is-taking-tories-to-heavy-loss-in-special-election-poll">Tiverton and Honiton in Devon</a> on June 23. In both cases the Conservative candidates are trailing their main opponents badly. But Johnson will be hoping to cling on after those big reverses until the summer parliamentary recess, beginning on July 22. </p>
<p>But his summer break will hardly be stress-free. Not long after Johnson cracks some jokes at the Conservatives’ annual conference in Birmingham in October, he will be confronted by a potentially very difficult report of the <a href="https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/privileges-committee-investigation">parliamentary privileges committee</a> on whether he misled parliament over “partygate”. </p>
<p>Only if the prime minister survives that unscathed can he begin to set his own agenda again.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/184585/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jonathan Tonge does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Politics professor Jon Tonge was pretty much spot on with his prediction for the result of the no-confidence vote. Here’s how he calculated the result.Jonathan Tonge, Professor of Politics, University of LiverpoolLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1845002022-06-06T21:27:51Z2022-06-06T21:27:51ZBoris Johnson: what the result of the confidence vote means for the PM and the Conservative Party<p>The verdict is in. Boris Johnson <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2022/jun/06/boris-johnson-confidence-vote-graham-brady-tory-mps-live">retains the confidence</a> of the Conservative Party. For now. Johnson received the votes of 211 out of 359 Tory MPs in support of his leadership, which means that technically he won. But the fact that 148 of his parliamentary colleagues voted against him, more than 41% of the parliamentary party, throws his longevity as party leader – and prime minister – into considerable doubt. </p>
<p>Johnson actually performed worse than <a href="https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/bbm%3A978-1-349-27607-3%2F1.pdf">John Major</a> and <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46547246">Theresa May</a> in their leadership challenges in 1995 and 2019. And he faced as much opposition as Margaret Thatcher did in the first round of her <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/november/20/newsid_4318000/4318718.stm">leadership contest in 1990</a>.</p>
<p>The history of such confidence votes in Conservative leaders tells us that they almost always end up damaging both the leader and the party even when they support the incumbent. We have seen this happening on three successive occasions over the past 32 years.</p>
<h2>Political assassinations</h2>
<p>When senior cabinet minister Michael Heseltine challenged Thatcher’s leadership in the first round of the contest in 1990 he took 40.9% of the vote. This meant that under the rules operating at the time, the contest had to go to a second round because she did not achieve the 55% required for an outright victory. Initially she said she would fight on but subsequently the “men in grey suits” persuaded her to stand down, and the resulting contest was won by John Major.</p>
<p>In retrospect, Conservative MPs were right to replace her, since Major then went on to win a surprise victory in the 1992 general election. But subsequently he too was increasingly dogged by the divisions in the party over UK membership of the European Union. Major was a firm supporter of Britain’s membership of the European Union – but an increasing number of Tory backbenchers, as well as party members in the country, wanted to leave the EU. </p>
<p>Major decided to make his critics “put up or shut up” by calling for a <a href="https://go.gale.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA18308748&sid=googleScholar&v=2.1&it=r&linkaccess=abs&issn=00312290&p=AONE&sw=w&userGroupName=anon%7E3e5c2c9c">confidence vote in himself</a> in 1995. He won that vote by a large margin, supported by 71% of his parliamentary colleagues – but unfortunately for him, this did not settle the issue. If anything, it revealed to the voters that the Conservative Party was bitterly divided. Two years later under the leadership of Tony Blair, Labour won a landslide victory in the election which brought an end to Major’s premiership.</p>
<p>The third occasion was the confidence vote imposed by May in the spring of 2019 following her failure to win a parliamentary majority in the general election of 2017. She did better than expected by winning the backing of 63% of her MPs, but unfortunately for her it did not solve the problem of finding a solution to Brexit acceptable to the House of Commons. Despite the victory, within six months she had to resign and Johnson won the subsequent leadership election.</p>
<h2>Two years of turmoil</h2>
<p>These examples show that a confidence vote itself inevitably weakens rather than strengthens the position of the leader and this erodes support for the party among the voters. Two by-elections are shortly to take place in Wakefield and in Honiton and Tiverton – both seats won by the Conservatives in the last election. <a href="https://www.jlpartners.co.uk/polling-results">Recent polling</a> suggests that Wakefield is almost certain to be captured by Labour and, in light of the Liberal Democrat success in the by-elections in North Shropshire and Chesham and Amersham in 2021, the party has a <a href="https://sotn.newstatesman.com/2022/05/who-predicted-win-lose-tiverton-and-honiton-by-election-conservatives-labour/">very good chance</a> of taking this seat from the Conservatives.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ktLemiX9zUk?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>This does not of course mean that Johnson will resign. Former Brexit Secretary David Davis, himself a former Conservative leadership candidate, said the prime minister will have to be <a href="https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1552806/David-davis-boris-johnson-prime-minister-partygate-commons">“dragged kicking and screaming”</a> from Downing Street. If this is indeed the case, it means that, unless his colleagues can remove him from office, the row over partygate will continue and the ability of the government to persuade people to support it to deal with the cost of living crisis and other major issues will be further eroded.</p>
<p>In dealing with this issue, Conservative MPs might do well to remember the advice given by Machiavelli in <a href="https://www.penguin.co.uk/books/604/60451/the-prince/9780141395876.html">The Prince</a> – his manual for how to govern states: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Whoever is responsible for another’s becoming powerful ruins himself, because this power is brought into being either by ingenuity or by force, and both of these are suspect to the one who has become powerful.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>A significantly weakened prime minister and a rebellious parliamentary party is no great foundation for achieving a fifth election victory in 2024.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/184500/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Paul Whiteley receives funding from the British Academy and the Economic and Social Research Council</span></em></p>With 40% of his MPs voting against his leadership, how realistic are the prime minister’s hopes for survival?Paul Whiteley, Professor, Department of Government, University of EssexLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1844922022-06-06T15:52:15Z2022-06-06T15:52:15ZBoris Johnson wins ‘no-confidence’ vote: but the margin will make him nervous<p>Boris Johnson has <a href="https://theconversation.com/boris-johnson-what-the-result-of-the-confidence-vote-means-for-the-pm-and-the-conservative-party-184500">survived a “no-confidence” vote</a> by 211 votes to 148 votes against his leadership. But Johnson’s margin of victory is smaller (as a percentage of all Conservative MPs) than that achieved by his predecessor Theresa May in 2019, six months before she resigned and he won the support of the majority of the Conservative Party and took office. Now, after weeks of speculation during the “partygate” scandal, 40% of his MPs have attempted to vote him out of power.</p>
<p>The no-confidence vote was triggered after 54 (or possibly more) MPs submitted letters to Sir Graham Brady, the chairman of the influential <a href="https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/vote-of-no-confidence-what-is-the-1922-committee-who-is-sir-graham-brady-and-what-happens-with-a-vote-of-no-confidence-3533239">1922 committee</a>, saying they no longer believed Johnson is the right person to lead the party.</p>
<p>The 148 votes against Johnson means that for the first time the public, and the rebels, know the scale of the opposition Johnson now faces. This figure for has this evening virtually trebled from the 54 needed to instigate a leadership contest to 148 who were willing to vote to change leader. Although not yet sufficient to topple Johnson, it is far from the decisive victory Johnson will wish to present this as and could yet galvanise more calls for him to resign.</p>
<p>The contest was a straightforward yes or no vote. To win the vote, Johnson needed a simple majority of the ballots to be returned in his favour. All of the 369 Conservative MPs took part and Johnson has managed to hold on to the majority. Under the party’s current rules, he will not face another such vote for 12 months. </p>
<p>Including Johnson, four of the five previous Conservative prime ministers <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/jun/06/from-may-to-heath-tories-faced-votes-on-leadership">have been publicly challenged</a> over their position as party leader, going back to Edward Heath in 1974. And Iain Duncan Smith lost a no-confidence vote as leader of the opposition in 2003. </p>
<p>Their example tells us that winning the vote may not prove to be enough to secure Johnson’s position. May survived a vote of no confidence in January 2019, and both Thatcher and Major faced leadership challenges (although under different rules and after significantly longer in office than either Johnson or May). Remarkably, all three won their respective ballots but both Thatcher and May resigned shortly afterwards and Major went on to lose the 1997 general election by a landslide. </p>
<p>Johnson’s team will hope to use a victory to “draw a line” under partygate and other scandals but this may be difficult to achieve in a party that is publicly as divided as the Conservatives currently are.</p>
<p>Any victory will inevitably be <a href="https://www.politico.eu/article/theresa-may-wins-confidence-vote-2/">compared to May’s</a> in December 2018. May won her vote by 200 votes (63%) to 117. In order o reach the equivalent level of support, Johnson would have needed to get the support of at least 236 of his fellow Tory MPs. He failed in this.</p>
<p>Had he lost, the Conservative Party would have had to begin the <a href="https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/conservative-party-leadership-contests">process of electing a new leader</a> and, by virtue of losing the vote, Johnson would have been prohibited from standing in the resulting leadership election. </p>
<p>Now Johnson will remain in office, but the speculation will inevitably intensify as to whether – and for how long – he can survive.</p>
<h2>Possible leadership contenders</h2>
<p>Waiting in the wings are an array of Conservative colleagues who are thought to have leadership ambitions. Among them are several of his cabinet colleagues and other senior Tories, who have either chaired parliamentary committees or held senior posts in previous administrations.</p>
<p>They include Rishi Sunak, chancellor of the exchequer, who was previously seen as a forerunner to replace Johnson. But the cost of living crisis, and a fine for attending the same event that brought Johnson his fixed penalty notice, has seen his <a href="https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/trackers/rishi-sunak-approval-rating">personal ratings plummet</a>.</p>
<p>Other prominent cabinet members who are reported to harbour leadership ambitions include the foreign secretary, Liz Truss, who has been loyal to Johnson but is expected to stand should a vacancy arise. Penny Mordaunt, the minister of state at the Department for International Trade is seen as a possible unifying figure, something the party may well come to increasingly value. Other senior figures tipped as possible contenders include the defence secretary Ben Wallace, the education secretary, Nadhim Zahawi, and the health secretary, Sajid Javid.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, there are heavy hitters outside the cabinet whose attraction is that they could help the party to move on with a narrative of change. One prominent Johnson critic is the chair of the foreign affairs committee, Tom Tugendhat, who was the only figure to publicly state he <a href="https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/who-replace-boris-johnson-pm-tory-party-leaders-vote-no-confidence-1670730">would run</a> if a vacancy emerges. Other potential contenders include the former health secretary, <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-61703422">Jeremy Hunt</a>, who came second in the members’ ballot behind Johnson in 2019. </p>
<p>But the prime minister remains in post – for now. The next big indicators of the public mood will the the two by-elections on June 23 in <a href="https://www.wakefield.gov.uk/elections/wakefield-constituency-parliamentary-by-election">Wakefield in Yorkshire</a> and Tiverton and Honiton in Devon. These two very different constituencies, in both of which the Conservatives are <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-04/johnson-is-taking-tories-to-heavy-loss-in-special-election-poll">trailing in the polls</a>, will be watched very carefully by all 369 MPs as they consider their position going forward.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/184492/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Christopher Kirkland does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The prime minister has survived by 211 votes to 148.Christopher Kirkland, Lecturer in Politics, York St John UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1727672021-11-30T02:44:27Z2021-11-30T02:44:27ZLuxon takes the controls – can the former Air NZ CEO make National straighten up and fly right?<p>Hands up if you know anything about Christopher Luxon other than he was once CEO of Air New Zealand, he’s been hailed as the new John Key, and he’s the MP for Botany. Anyone?</p>
<p>Luxon takes on the role of leader of Her Majesty’s Opposition – the sixth since Jacinda Ardern took the reins across the political aisle (or seventh if you count Nikki Kaye’s day-long stint between Todd Muller and Judith Collins) – at a time when the toughest of all political gigs is as hard as it has ever been. </p>
<p>From his new office he will confront a global pandemic that has just taken an unwelcome turn (meaning media attention will quickly shift elsewhere), a battle-hardened prime minister with 13 years’ parliamentary experience (compared with Luxon’s 12 months), a fractured caucus and a floundering party organisation. </p>
<p>You suspect there will be moments in the weeks ahead when he will think back fondly on his days at Air New Zealand.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1465483436408205319"}"></div></p>
<h2>Church and state</h2>
<p>There will be little time for nostalgia. Luxon has work to do and not long to do it. Top of the list will be introducing himself to the country’s voters, to whom he is not well known. </p>
<p>His <a href="https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/hansard-debates/rhr/document/HansS_20210324_053340000/luxon-christopher-mallard-trevor">maiden parliamentary speech</a> provides a few helpful insights. In it he referred to his years with Unilever and Air New Zealand, which will play well to the party faithful. (Although one should be wary of assuming a successful private sector career necessarily translates into a decent political one. Sure, there’s John Key – but there’s also Donald Trump.) </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/as-it-selects-a-new-leader-national-needs-to-remember-one-thing-confidence-doesnt-always-equal-competence-172755">As it selects a new leader, National needs to remember one thing – confidence doesn’t always equal competence</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Some of the other stakes Luxon put in the ground may prove more contentious, not least his religious beliefs. He may profess that his faith is “not itself a political agenda” but there is still the question of how some of Luxon’s views will play with the liberal wing of the party’s base, a number of whom <a href="https://www.newsroom.co.nz/ideasroom/where-did-nationals-votes-go">defected to Labour</a> in 2020. </p>
<p>National needs to bring those people back into the fold, but some will find Luxon’s conservatism – he opposes voluntary euthanasia and abortion law reform – off-putting. The appointment of Nicola Willis as deputy will help, but Luxon is the face of the party and he will need to ensure he doesn’t permanently alienate dove-ish National voters.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/434599/original/file-20211130-17-125iwip.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/434599/original/file-20211130-17-125iwip.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434599/original/file-20211130-17-125iwip.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434599/original/file-20211130-17-125iwip.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434599/original/file-20211130-17-125iwip.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434599/original/file-20211130-17-125iwip.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434599/original/file-20211130-17-125iwip.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">John Key after resigning as prime minister in 2016, setting in train the events leading to Luxon becoming leader.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">GettyImages</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>In the shadow of Key and Ardern</h2>
<p>But Luxon’s leadership faces greater challenges on two other fronts. The first involves the long shadows cast by two very different politicians – Jacinda Ardern and John Key.</p>
<p>National has a Key problem, in that it is still searching for a replacement for the man who led the party through the golden years. Luxon has just secured the top job in no small measure because he is thought to be the closest thing National presently has to the original. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/judith-collins-may-be-gone-but-new-zealands-search-for-a-credible-and-viable-opposition-is-far-from-over-172590">Judith Collins may be gone but New Zealand’s search for a credible and viable opposition is far from over</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>But going Key-lite seems risky when the successor has to go up against a Labour leader who – two years of lockdowns, MIQ and vaccine mandates notwithstanding – remains <a href="https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/452419/judith-collins-sinks-below-david-seymour-as-preferred-pm">streets ahead</a> in the preferred prime minister stakes. National has already tried that tactic with Muller and it <a href="https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/122129365/todd-mullers-national-party-leadership-lasted-only-53-days--heres-how-they-unfolded">didn’t end well</a>.</p>
<p>Reaching back to a playbook from the past for an answer to present and future challenges seems a little unimaginative, especially when the past in question looks increasingly like another country. </p>
<p>We may have avoided the worst excesses of political polarisation and populism in Aotearoa New Zealand (so far, anyway), but we have not been entirely immune from them. In the COVID era those pressures are building. Key was prime minister in the before times, and there is nothing in Luxon’s political CV to suggest he is equipped to deal with contemporary challenges of a kind Key never had to face.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/434601/original/file-20211130-23-1mnkjk7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/434601/original/file-20211130-23-1mnkjk7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434601/original/file-20211130-23-1mnkjk7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434601/original/file-20211130-23-1mnkjk7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434601/original/file-20211130-23-1mnkjk7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434601/original/file-20211130-23-1mnkjk7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434601/original/file-20211130-23-1mnkjk7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Simon Bridges, runner-up and now one of four former leaders surrounding Luxon.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">GettyImages</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>A schism in National’s broad church</h2>
<p>The second big challenge concerns whether National can once again become a broad political church. </p>
<p>In recent years the parliamentary party has become dangerously polarised. The urban liberal wing has been increasingly squeezed out by Christian conservatives – “dubbed ‘the Taliban’ by the party’s remaining centrists”, <a href="https://www.metromag.co.nz/society/society-politics/the-national-party-death-spiral">according to one commentator</a>.</p>
<p>There is a view that the simple act of anointing Luxon will restore the natural order of things. But what if it doesn’t? What if the same commentator is right and National continues to morph into “a Trump-like cult”? </p>
<p>The party bled significant numbers of votes in both directions in 2020. Some within National must lie awake at night wondering if that was less a blip than the start of the party’s own descent into the turmoil currently playing out in Canada, France, Germany, the UK and the US, where established centre-right political parties are being slowly eroded from within by increasingly strident populist elements.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/why-jacinda-arderns-clumsy-leadership-response-to-delta-could-still-be-the-right-approach-169926">Why Jacinda Ardern’s ‘clumsy’ leadership response to Delta could still be the right approach</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>A leader among leaders</h2>
<p>That divide is already apparent in National’s caucus. Luxon’s success (or failure) in dealing with it may have existential consequences for the party stretching well beyond the next election. </p>
<p>If National is to survive, let alone prosper, the new leader will have to show that his predecessor Judith Collins’ taste for <a href="https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300355706/leaked-document-suggests-judith-collins-briefed-don-brash-on-new-campaign-against-he-puapua">culture wars</a> is not now endemic to the party.</p>
<p>Finally, Luxon has the dubious luxury of having four former party leaders to help and guide him. Muller may be <a href="https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/448818/todd-muller-ditches-national-s-caucus-meetings">reviewing his options</a> now that Collins has gone, Shane Reti may be feeling a little jilted, Simon Bridges’ ambitions have just been thwarted (again) and Collins has made it clear she has no intention of leaving parliament altogether. </p>
<p>But all that lies in the future. National is looking for a saviour and for now has found its man. Christopher Luxon will just be praying he hasn’t agreed to a Hail Mary pass.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/172767/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Richard Shaw does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Once a broad political church, the National Party has become a house divided against itself. New leader Christopher Luxon faces huge challenges uniting both the party and its wider congregation.Richard Shaw, Professor of Politics, Massey UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1022952018-09-03T14:01:11Z2018-09-03T14:01:11ZSouth Africa is paying a heavy price for dysfunctional local government<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/234431/original/file-20180831-195331-51qw2m.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Violent protests over the poor delivery of basic municipal services occur frequently in South Africa.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Kim Ludbrook</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>South Africa’s Minister of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs, Dr Zweli Mkhize, recently painted a bleak picture about the state of local government. It should worry all South Africans, not only those suffering as a consequence of dysfunctional municipalities.</p>
<p>In his budget speech in Parliament in May Mkhize said that 87 municipalities – about a third of South Africa’s total of 257 – <a href="https://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/mkhize-87-municipalities-dysfunctional-require-urgent-intervention-20180515">“remain dysfunctional or distressed”</a>. He identified two problems. One set is systemic and relates to the size and structure of municipalities. The other is mismanagement due to “political instability or interference, corruption and incompetence”. </p>
<p>Whatever the causes of the <a href="https://theconversation.com/local-government-in-south-africa-is-in-crisis-how-it-can-be-fixed-97331">dire state</a> some municipalities are in, it is evident that this situation has a huge negative impact on society.</p>
<p>South African municipalities form the third sphere of government after the provinces and national government. In accordance with the <a href="http://localgovernmentaction.org.dedi6.cpt3.host-h.net/content/constitution-south-africa">Constitution</a>, they must be democratic, accountable institutions that provide a range of basic services to local communities, such as water and electricity.</p>
<p>They are also key institutions for the promotion of social and economic development, given their direct link to local communities. Successful municipalities are essential for the country’s prosperity.</p>
<h2>What dysfunctional looks like</h2>
<p>A number of characteristics are evident in dysfunctional municipalities. Firstly, there is very poor or no service delivery – in other words rubbish isn’t collected and basic services such as water supplies are patchy or non-existent. Another feature is that they suffer from serious financial problems such as low debt collection and huge overdue creditors’ payments. There is also always evidence of infrastructure, such as roads, deteriorating at a fast pace. </p>
<p>Communities in these areas often experience a range of problems that reflect this state of dysfunctionality. These include potholes; significant water losses due to infrastructure not being maintained; an increasing backlog in new infrastructure; financial mismanagement as well as fraud and corruption. </p>
<p>A second important impact is that service providers are affected. If a municipality doesn’t collect all the revenue due to it, it can’t pay its creditors or takes a very long time to do so.</p>
<p>An example of this is the <a href="https://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/mkhize-87-municipalities-dysfunctional-require-urgent-intervention-20180515">R16 billion</a> owed by municipalities at the end of 2017 to Eskom, the country’s power utility. Smaller service providers, some of which are small and medium enterprises, could face serious liquidity problems if they don’t get paid. At worst they could go under.</p>
<p>The effect of all this is often <a href="https://www.timeslive.co.za/news/south-africa/2018-06-25-service-delivery-protests-turn-violent-at-embattled-eastern-cape-municipality/">civil unrest</a>. In the longer term consequences will be increasing uncertainty or even instability in affected communities and a spiralling financial crisis. And financial problems will have a snowball effect. This is because investors won’t be interested in investing and current businesses might decide to move elsewhere. This will mean that local economic development and much-needed job creation won’t get off the ground.</p>
<h2>What needs to be done</h2>
<p>In addressing systemic issues, there needs to be a thorough investigation into the structure, size and types of municipality and their governance structures. This should ideally be done by independent experts on behalf of the government.</p>
<p>This should be directed to the overall improvement of the design of local government. And it should also take into account the fast-changing, technology-driven environment in which we live. </p>
<p>In reflecting on the current state of affairs two potential scenarios – which I name after Beatles songs – are presented. </p>
<p>The first is a low road scenario. I have called this <a href="https://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/beatles/cryingwaitinghoping.html">“Crying, Waiting, Hoping”</a>. The other is a high road scenario, which I have named “We can work it out”. </p>
<p>In the first scenario, bad governance continues. On the financial side this involves financial mismanagement, tender fraud, corruption, low debt collection and very slow payment of creditors. In this scenario services will deteriorate. Refuse will be collected less frequently and there will be more water losses due to old infrastructure not being maintained. In addition, more potholes will lead to more claims due to accidents. And finally, increasing dissatisfaction among the citizens which lead to more civil unrest.</p>
<p>If this went on for a prolonged period of time it could lead to the total collapse of a municipality. This in turn would require a long time and significant funding to get it into an acceptable functional state again. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.google.co.za/search?q=we+can+work+it+out+lyrics&rlz=1C1NHXL_enZA711ZA711&oq=%E2%80%98We+Can+Work+It+Out%E2%80%99&aqs=chrome.2.69i57j0l5.5054j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8">“We Can Work It Out”</a> scenario envisages the successful prosecution of corrupt officials and councillors, cooperation across the political spectrum to create a stable organisational basis and a serious attempt by communities to help solve municipalities’ problems. They can do this by providing expertise and participating constructively in the rebuilding of their society. </p>
<p>In this scenario all available resources from all three spheres of government, the business community, academia and citizens would be used in a spirit of cooperation to work out solutions that can benefit society.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/102295/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Dirk Brand does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>South Africa’s dysfuctional municipalities are characterised by very poor, or no delivery, of basic services such as refuse collection.Dirk Brand, Extraordinary Senior Lecturer at the School of Public Leadership, Stellenbosch UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/973312018-05-29T13:01:57Z2018-05-29T13:01:57ZLocal government in South Africa is in crisis. How it can be fixed<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/220602/original/file-20180528-80653-hvdjy9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">South Africa's Auditor General Kimi Makwetu says most municipalities in the country are dysfunctional.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Flickr/CGR</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Most of South Africa’s 257 municipalities are in a disastrous financial position. According to the country’s Auditor General, only 33 (13%) are in full compliance with the relevant legal requirements, and produced quality financial statements and performance reports. </p>
<p>The most recent <a href="http://www.agsa.co.za/Reporting/MFMAReports/MFMA2016-2017.aspx">audit report</a> from Auditor General, <a href="https://www.agsa.co.za/MediaRoom/LatestAG%E2%80%99scolumn/tabid/238/Author/8/Default.aspx">Kimi Makwetu</a>, shows that nearly a third (31%) of the municipalities indicated that they are not financially viable. In business terms that means they are not going concerns anymore.</p>
<p>According to Makwetu this dire situation can be ascribed to a range of factors. These include a lack of appropriate financial and management skills, political interference and infighting in councils. The failure to fill key personnel positions is also a problem, as is the fact that there’s clearly a lack of political will to ensure accountability. </p>
<p>There are serious consequences to this unacceptable state of affairs. The most important is that municipalities are unable to deliver services such as clean water, sanitation and electricity. It also means there’s a lack of maintenance of infrastructure in towns and cities all over the country. The <a href="http://www.municipaliq.co.za/">rise in protests</a> by disgruntled citizens is a clear sign of people’s frustration and the failure of local government to provide basic services.</p>
<p>Local governments are also responsible for providing services such as refuse and sewage removal and disposal, storm water drainage systems as well as municipal roads and street lighting in a <a href="https://www.worklaw.co.za/">sustainable way</a>. The Constitution and the laws of the country make it clear that municipal officials and councillors are accountable to ensure good financial governance, and that there could be disciplinary or criminal proceedings if they fail to do so. For their part, citizens are entitled to receive good services from their respective municipalities. </p>
<p>How can the disastrous situation be turned around? There appears to be a complex set of problems which means that there are no quick fixes. What’s required is a comprehensive approach that deals with various elements of the local government system. </p>
<h2>What needs to be done</h2>
<p>Firstly, it’s important to understand the role that the other spheres of government have to play to help cure the problems. </p>
<p>Although municipalities have a specific constitutional role to play, they are not expected to do so on their own. Provincial and national governments must support municipalities to perform their functions. They can do this in various ways, such as providing training, technical support and capacity building workshops. Financial governance capacity in key issues such as debt collection, risk management, internal audit and revenue management needs to be strengthened. </p>
<p>The provincial and national governments must also monitor the performance, including the financial performance of municipalities. If they all do this properly, more financial management problems could be identified and dealt with during the course of a financial year. </p>
<p>The Auditor General is also an important part of the support structure. His office is an important constitutional institution that does more than just audit the accounts of all three spheres of government. It also has an important role to play in the <a href="http://www.agsa.co.za/Reporting/MFMAReports/MFMA2016-2017.aspx">accountability chain</a> by identifying key problems and causes. It goes on to make recommendations to help municipalities solve their problems. </p>
<p>At the moment the Auditor General’s office doesn’t have the power to enforce its recommendations. But that’s about to change. Amendments to the <a href="https://www.parliament.gov.za/storage/app/media/CommitteeNotices/2018/january/draft_Public_Audit_Amendment_Bill/PA_Amendment_Bill_2017_6_Dec_2017-English.pdf">Public Audit Act, 2004</a>, being debated in Parliament will give the office more teeth to strengthen accountability. This is a welcome and necessary legislative improvement.</p>
<p>But a great deal of what needs to be done rests with municipalities themselves. Local government finance specialist Deon Van der Westhuizen, <a href="https://books.google.co.za/books/about/Local_Government_Finance.html?id=R-MiDAAAQBAJ&redir_esc=y">states that</a> </p>
<blockquote>
<p>one of the cornerstones of successful, continued service delivery is systemic discipline.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This implies effective revenue management, which includes timely debt collection, regular payment of suppliers and a well-structured and managed repairs and maintenance plan for the infrastructure of a municipality. </p>
<p>But to do this effectively and efficiently, appropriate financial management capacity is required. Where municipalities lack this, creative use of shared services between municipalities could be used. And private sector expertise to help improve financial management and audit outcomes should also be part of the solution. </p>
<p>In a worse case scenario, a municipality can be put <a href="https://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/dr-nkosazana-dlamini-zuma-municipality-under-administration-kzn-cogta-20180328">under administration</a>. This means that for a limited period of time the particular provincial government takes over the running of the municipality in order to solve the critical problems that prevent it from functioning properly. It’s a very drastic measure and should only be used sparingly since it interferes in the constitutional mandate of an elected municipal council. But in cases of serious systemic failure it might be the most appropriate course of action. It should, however, be only for a limited time and should be aimed at getting the municipal administration in a position where it could function on its own again.</p>
<p>Lastly, South Africans across the board need to work harder at ensuring that officials are held accountable. Accountability is one of the fundamental principles of the country’s constitutional democracy. Any person or government institution that does not give effect to accountability contravenes the Constitution. Good quality financial statements and annual reports are necessary to ensure that accountability and transparency are achieved.</p>
<p>The current situation is a national crisis and requires a joint effort across political, geographical and jurisdictional boundaries to get municipalities working properly.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/97331/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Dirk Brand previously received funding from the Hanns Seidel Foundation for research on local government finance that led to the publication of a book, Local Government Finance - a comparative study.</span></em></p>Nearly a third of South Africa’s municipalities are not financially viable.Dirk Brand, Extraordinary Senior Lecturer at the School of Public Leadership, Stellenbosch UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/791022017-06-20T21:06:20Z2017-06-20T21:06:20ZFixing a toxic culture like Uber’s requires more than just a new CEO<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/174811/original/file-20170620-2627-fpxpjg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">A toxic corporate culture may begin at the top, but it doesn't end there. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AP Photo/Eric Risberg</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>In times of organizational crisis, some companies are able to right the ship, while others sink under the pressure. </p>
<p>Recently, Uber has been under fire for a <a href="https://theconversation.com/ubers-dismissive-treatment-of-employees-sexism-claims-is-all-too-typical-73418?sr=6">bad corporate culture</a>, which promoted, among other things, sexism and other forms of toxic behavior. This led to a <a href="https://www.recode.net/2017/6/13/15793732/uber-ceo-travis-kalanick-leave">four-month investigation</a> and pressure from the board for founder and CEO Travis Kalanick to <a href="http://money.cnn.com/2017/06/13/technology/business/uber-harassment-report/index.html">take an indefinite leave of absence</a>. He <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/21/technology/uber-ceo-travis-kalanick.html">suddenly resigned</a> as CEO on June 20 after several major investors demanded he step down. </p>
<p>Unfortunately, Uber is not the only company to come under public scrutiny in recent months for its toxic culture. <a href="http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/lawyers-allege-toxic-culture-racism-sexism-fox-news-beyond-oreilly-ailes">Fox News</a> and <a href="http://fortune.com/2017/02/28/kay-jewelers-sexual-harassment/">Sterling Jewelers</a> have also been accused of widespread sexual harassment. And other companies, such as <a href="http://www.bbc.com/news/business-34324772">Volkswagen</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-wells-fargo-encouraged-employees-to-commit-fraud-66615">Wells Fargo</a>, have been in the media spotlight for unethical behavior. </p>
<p><a href="http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory/uber-chief-business-officer-leave-company-amid-turmoil-47987925">Many</a> have focused on the role of leaders in allowing toxic cultures to fester, which is what led to the ousting of Fox founder Roger Ailes and Kalanick’s departure. While this is certainly a necessary step, it’s not enough. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Samuel_Hunter4/publication/257467301_The_susceptible_circle_A_taxonomy_of_followers_associated_with_destructive_leadership/links/53f61b4c0cf22be01c406aab.pdf">Our research shows</a> that companies need also to root out a bad leader’s followers among the rank and file and make other important internal changes. Otherwise, a moral meltdown like Uber’s is likely to happen again. </p>
<h2>Harassment in the workplace</h2>
<p>Sexual harassment is a widespread problem in U.S. workplaces, and its effects are pervasive and corrosive.</p>
<p>It is <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Remus_Ilies/publication/227604263_Reported_incidence_rates_of_work-related_sexual_harassment_in_the_United_States_Using_meta-analysis_to_explain_reported_rate_disparities/links/09e41513cb1365a57e000000/Reported-incidence-rates-of-work-related-sexual-harassment-in-the-United-States-Using-meta-analysis-to-explain-reported-rate-disparities.pdf">estimated that 58 percent of women in the U.S.</a> have encountered potentially harassing behaviors at work, while 24 percent have experienced sexual harassment. </p>
<p>Victims <a href="http://www.vodppl.upm.edu.my/uploads/docs/dce5634_1299071187.pdf">tend to suffer</a> in many ways, including through lower job satisfaction, damaged physical and mental health and symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder. Employees who witness sexual harassment at work are <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Fritz_Drasgow/publication/4819556_Ambient_Sexual_%20Harassment_An_Integrated_Model_of_Antecedents_and_Consequences/links/545bb1310cf249070a7a7b30.pdf">likely to experience</a> the same negative outcomes. </p>
<p>Harassment <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Remus_Ilies/publication/227604263_Reported_incidence_rates_of_work-related_sexual_harassment_in_the_United_States_Using_meta-analysis_to_explain_reported_rate_disparities/links/09e41513cb1365a57e000000/Reported-incidence-rates-of-work-related-sexual-harassment-in-the-United-States-Using-meta-analysis-to-explain-reported-rate-disparities.pdf">is more likely to occur</a> in organizations in which managers have a lot of unchecked power over lower-level employees, as seems to be the case at Uber and Fox, with their powerful and charismatic founders.</p>
<p>Importantly, these toxic behaviors do not start and stop with those at the top. They may become embedded in the organization’s underlying culture, which begs the question: Once a toxic culture takes hold, what can a company do to reverse it? </p>
<p><a href="https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Laura_Lunsford/publication/304991962_Destructive_Leadership_A_Critique_of_Leader-Centric_Perspectives_and_Toward_a_More_Holistic_Definition/links/579532d208ae33e89f9e77d8.pdf">Our work on toxic leadership</a> demonstrates how toxic, unethical, flawed or otherwise ineffective leaders can do a lot of damage in organizations.</p>
<p>But the damage can also run both ways. Susceptible followers, a lack of checks and balances and other cultural elements can help create or reinforce bad leadership. </p>
<p>Thus, while it is easy to fire leaders when a culture becomes toxic, there are many other factors that must be addressed for true organizational transformation to occur. Our research suggests some best practices for addressing these factors and reversing a culture gone wrong. </p>
<h2>Conformers and colluders</h2>
<p>With respect to followers, there are certain types of individuals who are likely to remain obedient to toxic leaders, turn a blind eye to their behavior and even participate in the leader’s destructive activities. </p>
<p>Based on established theory and research across a wide range of scientific disciplines, <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Samuel_Hunter4/publication/257467301_The_susceptible_circle_A_taxonomy_of_followers_associated_with_destructive_leadership/links/53f61b4c0cf22be01c406aab.pdf">our recent work</a> proposes five types of followers who are particularly susceptible to the influence of toxic leaders. </p>
<p>We break these groups into two overarching categories: “conformers” (individuals who are prone to obedience) and “colluders” (those who actively align themselves with toxic leaders). </p>
<p>In terms of conformers, “lost souls” are insecure individuals who lack a clear sense of self and who find a sense of identity, purpose and belonging through their affiliation with strong, powerful leaders and their groups. “Authoritarians” are those who rigidly adhere to social hierarchies and tend to simply follow orders, whether ethical or unethical, from senior leaders. </p>
<p>Finally, “bystanders” are fearful individuals who remain silent and turn a blind eye to a leader’s toxic behavior to prevent any negative consequences to themselves. </p>
<p>In terms of colluders, “opportunists” are those who ingratiate themselves with toxic leaders for personal gain, while “acolytes” share the same values, beliefs and goals as the leader. </p>
<h2>What to do with followers</h2>
<p>Importantly, when toxic leaders are replaced, these followers remain. How should organizations deal with each of these follower types? </p>
<p>First, in terms of colluders, it should be obvious that acolytes and opportunists need to be rooted out and let go. Opportunists are sure to put their own self-interests ahead of any ethical concerns and the greater good of the organization, while acolytes are likely to possess the very same values and beliefs that got their leaders into trouble to begin with. </p>
<p>For example, at Uber, those managers who were identified as active promoters of the culture of harassment that was passed down from the top <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/mar/07/uber-work-culture-travis-kalanick-susan-fowler-controversy">should be let go</a>. For the same reason, ex-Fox host Bill O'Reilly had to be fired, given the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/apr/19/bill-oreilly-fox-news-sexual-harassment-board-meeting">many sexual harassment allegations</a> against him. </p>
<p>But companies obviously can’t fire everyone. And so with conformers, employees who are lost souls or authoritarians are at greater risk of blind obedience to those in power – and being co-opted by another bad manager, thereby making it harder to fix the culture. As such, targeted interventions that seek to retrain these individuals must be a primary goal. Because cultures are sticky, these followers will need to be taught to behave in ways consistent with the new culture. </p>
<p>In particular, it is important that they understand the importance of constructively challenging and holding leaders accountable and that these behaviors are rewarded and expected within the new culture. At Uber, employees who were closely aligned with the <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/us-uber-sexual-harassment-idUSKBN18X2GZ">staffers it fired after the investigation</a> will need retraining to learn the company’s new value structure. </p>
<p>Finally, bystanders need to be empowered to act when they observe malfeasance, given their fears and natural tendency to turn a blind eye to toxic behavior. This means creating clear, nonpunitive methods for reporting bad behavior and training individuals on all issues surrounding effective whistle-blowing. Fox News, for example, had an <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/21/business/media/fox-sexual-harassment-hotline-bill-oreilly.html?mcubz=1&_r=0">anonymous hotline for reporting abuse</a>, but few employees felt comfortable using it. The company will need to empower employees like <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/clareoconnor/2017/01/11/fox-news-whistleblower-gretchen-carlson-plans-her-next-move/#1ec4392d27f3">Gretchen Carlson</a> – the first to publicly raise the issue of sexual harassment. </p>
<h2>The road to redemption</h2>
<p>Overall, the road to redemption after a scandal or crisis is long and hard. But this may be because most companies think that simply firing the old leader(s) will address the issue. Dealing with their followers throughout the organization is also essential, as is reasserting checks and balances by strengthening board independence. </p>
<p>Past CEOs, such as <a href="https://qz.com/431078/how-ford-ceo-alan-mullaly-turned-a-broken-company-into-the-industrys-comeback-kid/">Alan Mulally of Ford,</a> have demonstrated that you can fix a broken culture. Essential to his success was that he spent a lot of time aligning employees with the automaker’s new values.</p>
<p>We, as the general public, are also important in holding companies accountable. The actions taken in the aftermath of the Uber allegations, for example, may not have occurred if the public shrugged its proverbial shoulders instead of <a href="http://fortune.com/2017/02/24/uber-users-deleting-app-hurting/">deleting the app</a> from their phones.</p>
<p>So although toxic companies need to do the bulk of the legwork in terms of regulating themselves, we can all play a role in driving more inclusive workplaces worldwide.</p>
<p><em>This article has been updated to reflect the resignation of Uber CEO Travis Kalanick.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/79102/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Katina Sawyer owns and operates K. Sawyer Solutions, LLC, a consulting firm that specializes in selection, assessment, leadership development and diversity in organizations. Katina Sawyer receives funding from National Science Foundation and Society for Human Resource Management. She is affiliated with Dawn's Place, The Philadelphia Society for People and Strategy, Women of Tomorrow, Women's Way, and Women's Resource Center. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Christian Thoroughgood does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Ethical scandals at Uber and Fox have focused attention on the leaders of the organizations, but the problems of a toxic culture often embed deep within an organization.Katina Sawyer, Assistant Professor of Psychology, Villanova UniversityChristian Thoroughgood, Assistant Professor of Psychology and Human Resource Development, Villanova UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/690732016-11-23T21:02:42Z2016-11-23T21:02:42ZBeware of misleaders who thrive on fear and capitalise on crises<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/146581/original/image-20161118-19345-gqv82.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">A billboard of US president-elect Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin in Danilovgrad, Montenegro.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Reuters/Stevo Vasiljevic</span></span></figcaption></figure><blockquote>
<p>We live in a world that romanticises crises. This gives rise to the false prophets, the smooth operators, the gangsters, and the demagogues who would have us believe that we need them to lead us through the crisis, to save us, to show us the way.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>These are the words of <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Leadership-Essential-Writings-Greatest-Anthology/dp/0393239691/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&linkCode=sl1&tag=thepoliinfo-20&linkId=d9012ca8d1100d8ad40c5f5b736baf46">Elizabeth Samet</a>, Professor of English at West Point Military Academy in the United States, who cautions against the pervasive tendency to conflate leadership and crisis. She quotes John Adams (1735 – 1826), an American author, lawyer and the second President of the United States. All that time ago he cautioned against leaders who capitalise on difficult situations to have us believe that our destiny and salvation lies in their hands. </p>
<p>Adams wrote that the United States would not improve until people begin</p>
<blockquote>
<p>to consider themselves as the fountain of power. They must be taught to reverence themselves, instead of adoring their servants, their generals, admirals, bishops, and statesmen.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The absence of self-reverence and self-leadership invites a worshipping of not only religious leaders and wartime or warmongering generals, presidents and electoral candidates, but, in the same vein, of so-called captains of industry and of the world’s wealthiest. </p>
<p>A legacy of authors, poets and playwrights – from Frantz Fanon to Shakespeare to Virginia Woolf – have, like Samet, commented on this through the decades, clearly distinguishing leaders from the misleaders. It is time for us to do the same.</p>
<p>The concept of misleaders is eloquently captured by Andre van Heerden in his <a href="http://www.mcleodsbooks.co.nz/products/438219?barcode=9780986459856&title=LeadersandMisleaders%3ATheArtofLeadingLikeYouMeanIt">book</a> “Leaders or Misleaders, the art of leading like you mean it.” He believes the fault lies in our understanding of what leadership is really about. I think he is spot on.</p>
<p>Misleadership is underpinned by fear, lies, corruption and self-interest. Misleaders capitalise on crises and use this as a platform to get into power by promising all sorts of benefits that are never delivered.</p>
<p>Fewer than 10% of leaders today demonstrate the kind of leadership that we should be calling “good” or “effective”, let alone “true” or “great”, he asserts. </p>
<h2>True leaders versus misleaders</h2>
<p>True or great leadership is underpinned by a heartfelt need, in the first instance, to develop oneself, and in so doing to develop the wisdom, integrity, skills and capacity to help others. As Van Heerden puts it, true or great leadership is about</p>
<blockquote>
<p>inspiring people to be the best they can be in mutual pursuit of a better life for all.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>True or great leaders make a positive difference to people’s lives. They are committed to improving the lives of all people and improving the manner in which we care for the natural environment because this is what sustains us. A strong sense of our shared humanity underlies their actions and in the way they engage with people. They inspire people to be the best they can be, in mutual pursuit of a better life for all.</p>
<p>Misleaders are concerned about becoming the president, prime minister or CEO of a country or company, largely for egotistical, power-mongering reasons. They are all about making a financial fortune to elevate themselves and their cronies or shareholders above everyone else. Rather than acting in the best interest of the organisation, they view the entity as an instrument to serve their own self-interest. There is a distinct lack of acknowledgement of our shared humanity in their actions and in the way they engage with people. They spread fear and set different groups of people against each other. </p>
<p>Samet explains that we often confuse the crisis style of leadership with true leadership that promotes development and peace. True leadership is far more enduring than war-style leadership, and yet it doesn’t win medals or votes. </p>
<p>This is explained in an <a href="http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/02/29/our-dangerous-leadership-obsession">excellent piece</a> by Joshua Rothman in The New Yorker on February 29 2016, titled Shut Up And Sit Down. He refers to Donald Trump’s first official campaign TV advertisement:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The ad features a procession of alarming images – the San Bernardino shooters, a crowd at passport control, the flag of Syria’s Al Nusra Front – designed to communicate the idea of a country under siege. But the ad does more than stoke fear; it also excites, because it suggests that we’ve arrived at a moment welcoming to the emergence of a strong and electrifying leader. (Trump, a voice-over explains, will “quickly cut the head off ISIS – and take their oil.”) By making America’s moment of crisis seem as big (or “huge”) as possible, Trump makes himself seem more consequential, too.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>To conclude his piece, Rothman quotes Jacques Lacan, 20th century French psychoanalyst, psychiatrist and author who wrote</p>
<blockquote>
<p>If a man who thinks he is a king is mad, a king who thinks he is a king is no less so. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>Rothman went on to write: “A sense of perspective may be among the most critical leadership qualities. For better or worse, however, it’s the one we ask our leaders to hide.”</p>
<p>And then we wonder why the billions spent on leadership seminars aren’t producing better leaders.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/69073/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Owen Skae does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The world needs great leaders who thrive on making a positive difference to people’s lives and not on festering fear and war mongering.Owen Skae, Associate Professor and Director of Rhodes Business School, Rhodes UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/644952016-08-29T14:39:36Z2016-08-29T14:39:36ZGlobal leadership is in crisis – it’s time to stop the rot<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/135627/original/image-20160826-17876-jb7xyr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C260%2C1000%2C601&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Bad leaders are bad news – for their followers and for the world as a whole.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>People around the world are <a href="http://qz.com/768342/robert-mugabe-will-not-allow-an-arab-spring-in-zimbabwe-as-police-crush-another-anti-government-protest/">angry</a> and frustrated with those who “lead” them. Increasingly, leaders and leadership generate <a href="http://reports.weforum.org/outlook-global-agenda-2015/top-10-trends-of-2015/3-lack-of-leadership/">scepticism</a> and, in some cases, <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/us-burundi-politics-idUSKBN0OI1FK20150602">open revolt</a>. </p>
<p>People’s trust and faith in leadership and the institutions they represent is evaporating at an alarming rate. There’s a deepening, widening crisis in the legitimacy and credibility of leadership. This crisis can be attributed to five primary sources: unable; unintelligent; immature; immoral and/or destructive leaders.</p>
<p>I estimate that at least 30% – and rising – of the world’s current leadership is virally infected by one or more of these sources. It is crucial that this crisis is tackled, and leadership is reimagined to fit the new world order. </p>
<p>Without this process of reimagining, the world’s very future may be at stake. Bad leaders will destroy people, <a href="http://qz.com/576459/jacob-zumas-erratic-leadership-has-done-long-term-harm-to-south-africas-economic-future/">wreck economies</a> and tear societies apart – irreparably.</p>
<h2>Unable leadership</h2>
<p>More and more leaders are emerging without the abilities and qualities needed to lead effectively in a changing world. This is typified by variety, interdependency, complexity, change, ambiguity, seamlessness and sustainability. </p>
<p>Today’s leaders often have obsolete abilities for this new world. They appear unable to reinvent themselves fast enough to adapt to the ongoing shifts. They lack the required levels of, for instance, resilience, responsiveness, agility, risk-taking, creativity and innovation. Simply put, many leaders have reached their “sell-by date”.</p>
<p>There is a rapid increase in leadership <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/287394318_When_leaders_burn_out_The_causes_costs_and_prevention_of_burnout_among_leaders">burnout</a> and leaders being rejected by their organisations. </p>
<p>This is driven by the constant stress they’re under, which mercilessly exposes <a href="http://www.hogandarkside.com/">their hidden weaknesses</a>. And because they are constantly under pressure, leaders are unable – or don’t make – time to build and maintain the essential qualities of hope, passion, confidence, efficacy, courage and perseverance in their followers. They don’t equip their followers with the <a href="http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1010&context=leadershipfacpub">psycho-social capital</a> they need to deal with the world.</p>
<h2>Unintelligent leadership</h2>
<p>Unintelligent leaders either overemphasise one or lack in some of the <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-the-world-needs-intelligent-leaders-and-what-it-takes-to-be-one-59277">five interdependent intelligence modes</a>: intra- and interpersonal; systemic; ideation; action and contextual.</p>
<p>They fall short on the insight and wisdom needed to deal effectively with the new world. Leaders are are dumbing down. </p>
<p>They have poorly crystallised identities. They don’t understand themselves, others and their reciprocal impact. They tend to get trapped and overwhelmed by detail instead of seeing the big picture. </p>
<p>They’re also are unable to be big dreamers who look constantly ahead: they’re stuck in the here-and-now. They do not have the insight to affect lasting, large-scale change and constructively engage with the new world.</p>
<h2>Immature leadership</h2>
<p>Many leaders are stuck at earlier <a href="https://theconversation.com/maturity-makes-great-leaders-the-journey-from-dwarf-to-giant-61417">maturity stages</a> and struggle to migrate to higher levels.</p>
<p>Some seek constant approval from others because their self-worth has not been affirmed. They have no confidence in their own ability. Others strive to satisfy their egocentric interests and needs single-mindedly. </p>
<p>Some proclaim ad nauseam to be the one and only, indispensable saviour of the world. Others push in an uncompromising manner for the realisation of narrow organisation specific goals to the detriment of the common good. </p>
<p>Because such leaders are stuck at earlier maturity stages they are unable to graduate to maturity stage five, the highest level. Those who have reached this stage <a href="https://theconversation.com/maturity-makes-great-leaders-the-journey-from-dwarf-to-giant-61417">have embraced</a> their role as a servant and steward who is in service to humanity, and drive commonly shared pursuits.</p>
<h2>Immoral leadership</h2>
<p>Ethical leaders do the right thing for the right reasons in the right way in the right place and at the right time with the right people.</p>
<p>But a growing number of leaders lack a moral conscience, compass and courage. They are arrogant, cowardly and secretive. They have little or no integrity, and pursue their own personal interests and needs. They shy away from any accountability for their own decisions, actions and the consequences of these.</p>
<p>Immoral leaders’ followers are very rarely <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S104898430600110X">empowered and enabled</a> to do their jobs well. These leaders feel threatened by their followers and tend to actively block their development.</p>
<h2>Destructive leadership</h2>
<p>The previous four sources I’ve described pertain to a “lack of”. </p>
<p>This fifth source relates to the “presence of” something: <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-toxic-leaders-destroy-people-as-well-as-organisations-51951">toxicity</a>. Toxicity manifests in leaders’ ongoing, deliberate actions to undermine their followers’ sense of dignity, self-worth and efficacy. </p>
<p>These destructive actions may be physical, psychosocial, spiritual or all three. </p>
<h2>The imperative of reimagining leadership</h2>
<p>What can be done to deal with these sources of the world’s leadership crisis?</p>
<p>The first, knee-jerk response is to embark on a frantic search for a silver bullet. But such missions often cause more damage than the existing crisis. A supposedly new and “better” form of leadership is posited. This lulls people into a false sense of security. The hard reality? There is no magic wand.</p>
<p>It’s imperative not to start with answers to given questions, but rather up front to identify the right questions about future-fit leadership and then seek answers. It’s time to reimagine leadership anew, both in terms of new questions and answers that will have lasting benefits. Here are six possible questions to help us find useful answers:</p>
<ol>
<li><p><em>Where?</em> It’s important to choose an appropriate leadership vantage point from which to look at leadership. I contend this entails taking a complexity, long term perspective of leadership. This will allow organisations and societies to reimagine leaders as holistic, organic, integrated and dynamic whole persons. </p></li>
<li><p><em>Where to?</em> This involves crafting a leadership excellence model that is matched to the leadership challenges, demands and requirements of the new world.</p></li>
<li><p><em>What?</em> This encompasses systemically reinventing and reprogramming the five leadership facets of ability, intelligence, maturity, morality and authenticity at a much deeper level in order to match leaders closer to the new world.</p></li>
<li><p><em>How?</em> Continuous lifelong, blended leadership development across all leadership facets must occur and form part of leaders’ key performance areas. Leadership capacity, and its development, must be set as a national priority by countries’ governments, and by organisations.</p></li>
<li><p><em>Who?</em> Everyone must be enabled and empowered to be a leader. All leaders must be encouraged to take a leadership oath in which they’d publicly commit to leadership excellence and being held accountable accordingly.</p></li>
<li><p><em>When?</em> The identification, growth and development of leadership must start in early childhood at school level already, and continue throughout a person’s whole life.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>There is much to do if we’re to tackle the world’s deepening, widening leadership crisis. Without better leaders, the future of the world is truly at stake with the growing risk of a world implosion. We need to reimagine and nurture leadership for this new world.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/64495/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Theo Veldsman does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>There’s a widening global crisis in the legitimacy and credibility of leadership. It can be attributed to five sources: unable; unintelligent; immature; immoral and/or destructive leadership.Theo Veldsman, Professor and Head, Department of Industrial Psychology and People Management, University of JohannesburgLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/288282014-07-07T05:00:37Z2014-07-07T05:00:37ZIf Ed Miliband is not the person to lead Labour into an election, is Alan Johnson?<p>The more that Labour insists the support for Ed Miliband is rock solid, the less the public are inclined to believe the party. It’s not just the <a href="https://theconversation.com/labour-should-be-soaring-but-it-is-stuck-with-dead-hand-miliband-28463">open criticism from John Cruddas</a>, there’s all the reading between the lines of what others in the party are saying. A textual analysis expert would have a field day. The solidarity around Ed is a sham and as flimsy as some of the policies he is proposing.</p>
<p>It is clear that Ed Miliband is <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jun/17/ed-miliband-nick-clegg-fall-lowest-popularity-guardian-icm">not the person to lead Labour to victory next year</a>. No matter what he says or does, opinions on Britain’s doorsteps are not favourable. He just can’t seem to get the working class voters to take him or Labour seriously. A poll last week puts Labour at 36%, just 1 point ahead of the Tories.</p>
<p>By rallying round their beleaguered leader, the inexperience of Miliband’s acolytes is being exposed. There is no doubt they are bright, indeed their academic credentials are unquestionable, but that alone doesn’t make them good politicians. Their pursuit of their leader’s favours and benevolence is jeopardising Labour’s chances of getting back into power. When Labour loses the next general election it will be the fault of those who lacked the backbone to do something before it was too late. </p>
<p>Margaret Thatcher once said her greatest achievement was Tony Blair. Well David Cameron’s most powerful weapon is Ed Miliband. What the Labour Party needs is a leader of substance, someone who’s been around the block a bit and can connect with a range of supporters across the social spectrum. </p>
<h2>Leader-in-waiting</h2>
<p>One Labour leader-in-waiting is Alan Johnson – and he couldn’t be more different to Miliband and his inner circle. His background is more traditional, he’s slightly “old Labour”, but someone who recognises the need to look forward rather than back. Whenever he’s interviewed or appears on the Question Time panel, Johnson isn’t afraid to stray from the rehearsed party line – so you get a sense of what he, Alan Johnson, really thinks. He is thoughtful, speaks his mind and talks common sense. His responses are not always as polished as some of the others, but that’s because they are his views and not the creation of some back-room spin doctor. He comes across as a man you can trust - now there’s a novelty. </p>
<p>Last week, his performance on Question Time galvanised social media, trending on Twitter with a majority of people’s messages wondering why this assured performer was not the leader of the Labour Party and preparing to lead a confident opposition into a crucial election in 10 months’ time.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/53093/original/jxp6nsxh-1404653890.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/53093/original/jxp6nsxh-1404653890.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/53093/original/jxp6nsxh-1404653890.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=222&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/53093/original/jxp6nsxh-1404653890.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=222&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/53093/original/jxp6nsxh-1404653890.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=222&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/53093/original/jxp6nsxh-1404653890.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=278&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/53093/original/jxp6nsxh-1404653890.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=278&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/53093/original/jxp6nsxh-1404653890.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=278&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Twitter-storm of approval.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Twitter</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Johnson’s credentials to lead Labour are unquestionable. He is unapologetically a working-class boy made good through his own determination and hard work. There was no public school, no Oxford PPE, and no political heritage to piggyback on. It was grammar school, followed by stacking shelves in Tesco. He then became a postman and trade union activist, ending up as general secretary of the Communication Workers Union, before entering politics. As a privy counsellor, and having held several senior ministerial posts, Johnson has the experience needed to lead the party. </p>
<p>Brought up in Notting Hill in West London, before it was smart, Johnson experienced life in Southam Street. A street of properties that were condemned, yet inhabited by families in deprivation for decades. His father came and went, and provided little financial support. His mother endured ill health but worked incessantly to keep food on the table; keeping the electricity connected was altogether a different matter. He’s not only seen poverty but experienced it first hand. He clearly hasn’t forgotten those days and can show compassion for those living on the breadline now. Johnson will have no truck with the noxious idea that people visit food banks and resort to soup kitchens as a lifestyle choice. </p>
<p>At a recent event billed as “An Evening With Alan Johnson” in Worthing, he was subtly critical of the way that politics and those involved in them has changed over the years. In responding to questions with comments such as: “Ed has decided the best way is…” he laced his clear sense of loyalty, with a healthy hint of scepticism. </p>
<p>Johnson obviously regrets the decline of the traditional Labour politician’s career path: often a career in politics was developed through trade union activism and in pursuance of deep-rooted ideological values. A political apprenticeship. In its place we have a generation of career politicians – with their Oxbridge PPEs – and, while Johnson didn’t say this – probably little concern for which party they represent, as long as the get a seat. </p>
<p>There are a number of questions surrounding Johnson’s ability to lead Labour in the future. First, does he want to? He’s certainly never put himself up as a challenger to Miliband, in fact he supported Ed’s brother David in the leadership contest. Second, his age. At 64 many might think he is too old – but with age comes much experience. Will Labour have the courage to go for someone on the left of the political spectrum. Someone as different from the incumbent and his predecessor Tony Blair as you could possibly get? I think not – and that is a tragedy. </p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/28828/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Alf Crossman does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The more that Labour insists the support for Ed Miliband is rock solid, the less the public are inclined to believe the party. It’s not just the open criticism from John Cruddas, there’s all the reading…Alf Crossman, Senior Lecturer in Industrial Relations and HRM, University of SurreyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/155722013-06-27T04:44:17Z2013-06-27T04:44:17ZRudd’s return marks the victory of opportunist politics<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/26286/original/3zjsz6vm-1372302625.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Ultimately, it was Julia Gillard's failure to find a 'narrative' to weave her policies together that cost her the Labor leadership to a more opportunistic Kevin Rudd.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Alan Porritt</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The morning Julia Gillard was deposed as Australia’s prime minister many of the British newspapers carried a picture of her <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2348746/Julia-Gillard-LOSES-leadership-contest-challenging-old-rival-Kevin-Rudd.html">knitting a present</a> for the future heir to the British (and presumably) Australian throne. </p>
<p>There was something very sad in this image. How had Gillard, once attacked for living in a house with an <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/news/Spike/Gillard-bares-all/2005/01/23/1106415457103.html">empty fruit bowl</a>, come to this?</p>
<p>Watching a coup via distant internet is bizarre. The ABC news site carried a series of mindless tweets, presumably because the blogosphere can tolerate anything but silence. My Facebook messages breathed indignation, with most of my friends convinced Gillard was the victim of misogynist bullying.</p>
<p>I would be more convinced of this had Gillard herself not come to power by a similar, if less anticipated, coup. It is hard to accept the thesis that her fall was due to the machinations of nasty male machine politicians when she was made prime minister by similar means. She has also endorsed one of the less impressive party apparatchiks for the <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2013/s3785427.htm">seat of Batman</a> despite Labor’s commitment to finding more safe seats for women.</p>
<p>It is certainly true, as Anne Summers has <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/comment/abbott-needs-more-women-at-the-top-20130612-2o48q.html">elegantly demonstrated</a>, that Gillard was constantly assailed by a viciousness that was clearly infused by deep-seated - indeed, pathological - sexism. It is also true that the concerted campaign of the Murdoch press and some of our shock jocks to deny her legitimacy has few parallels in recent history: although Whitlam faced a similar campaign of vituperation.</p>
<p>But when you remember that Gillard was elected leader because a majority of the Labor caucus believed she had a better chance of winning in 2010 than Rudd did, it is difficult to blame those caucus members who applied a similar logic three years later in deposing her. Remember, too, that she and Rudd combined their support to overthrow Kim Beazley as Labor leader. It was also her performance as deputy prime minister that convinced her colleagues she was a better bet than Rudd.</p>
<p>The real cause for regret is that just as she found it difficult to give a convincing explanation of how her policies would differ from Rudd’s, his return is equally without any commitment to a significant shift in vision for Australia. Should he bring forward the election date to August he can only run on the record of the current government, while simultaneously explaining why its leader needed to be replaced. This is the same dilemma Gillard faced last time.</p>
<p>The polls that caucus read three years ago let them down, leading to a hung parliament (which Gillard managed with remarkable political skill). My hunch is that caucus has similarly misread current polls. Many people will have a vague sense of satisfaction that what was portrayed as a stab in the back has now been avenged, but will still vote to change the government.</p>
<p>In the end Rudd may save a few seats in Queensland and NSW, but he cannot save the government. The most interesting question about Rudd is whether he will stay on as Leader of the Opposition, and indeed whether his remaining colleagues would want him. One wonders what deals may have been done to win over Bill Shorten, whose role as <a href="http://www.news.com.au/national-news/federal-election/bill-shorten-the-man-who-knifed-two-prime-ministers/story-fnho52ip-1226670420184">Labor kingmaker</a> has now been further cemented.</p>
<p>One larger political question revolves around whether Rudd can lift the Labor vote sufficiently to deny Abbott control of the Senate. Whether a post-election ALP will have the emotional and intellectual resources to re-imagine themselves as a convincing party of government is also up for debate.</p>
<p>Unfortunately Gillard and Rudd shared an unwillingness to maintain a convincing progressive position when put under pressure. Rudd gave way on climate change after <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/greatest-moral-challenge-turns-out-to-be-rudds-dearest-folly-20100428-tscw.html">declaring</a> it the “greatest moral challenge of our time”, and Gillard has steadily shifted her <a href="http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/gillard-survives-caucus-backlash-over-asylum-seeker-crisis/story-e6frfkp9-1226669428926">stance on asylum seekers</a> without at any time showing genuine empathy for people willing to risk their lives to seek refuge.</p>
<p>Rudd’s <a href="http://www.news.com.au/national-news/kevin-rudd-declares-his-support-for-same-sex-marriage/story-fncynjr2-1226647193111">belated support</a> for same-sex marriage reeks of the same opportunism as Gillard’s opposition to it does. In contemporary Australia no Labor leader can survive by sounding as if they belong to the Greens, who have been consistent on all of these issues. But one wonders what a leader with the reckless courage of a Gough Whitlam would identify with the ALP’s politics in 2013.</p>
<p>The final undoing of Gillard was not, I believe, due to misogyny, but rather to her inability to articulate a clear vision of where she wanted to lead Australia. Her tragedy was that many of the pieces were there in the actual policies she pursued, but she never found a narrative that weaved them together.</p>
<p>Gillard has much of which to be proud, but she never communicated the personal warmth and commitment that one sees in her face-to-face. Yes, this is a greater challenge for a woman, particularly perhaps for a woman on the political left who faces the implacable belief of conservatives that they have the right to govern. </p>
<p>Rudd now inherits the great dilemma of all current “left” leaders. Despite the global financial crisis it is the parties of the right who seem to have most profited from the downturn brought on by the excesses of capitalism. When he penned long articles for The Monthly, Rudd seemed prepared to grapple with this question, even perhaps to move away from the faith in market solutions which is the legacy of the Hawke/Keating years. That he reached out to business in his initial speech suggests he is not inclined to pursue the logic of his own analysis.</p>
<p>Gillard did not fall because she was a woman, but undoubtedly she encountered increased hostility because of her gender. One is reminded of the comment about actress Ginger Rogers, namely that she did everything Fred Astaire did, but backwards and in high heels.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/15572/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Dennis Altman does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The morning Julia Gillard was deposed as Australia’s prime minister many of the British newspapers carried a picture of her knitting a present for the future heir to the British (and presumably) Australian…Dennis Altman, Professorial Fellow in Human Security, La Trobe UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/155702013-06-26T21:05:12Z2013-06-26T21:05:12ZTwice bitten, business is likely to approach Rudd with caution<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/26245/original/hhp72rsv-1372246873.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Labor's economic record has had hits, but also misses.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>You have to wonder how many times the Labor party will make the same mistake. Immediately prior to the 2010 election the party dumped Kevin Rudd and replaced him with Julia Gillard. The net effect of this was to ensure that the government could not run for re-election on its record. Now immediately before the 2013 election the party dumped Julia Gillard and replaced her with Kevin Rudd. The net effect of this will be to ensure the government will not be able to run on its record.</p>
<p>Now this observation is true, irrespective of what you think of either record.</p>
<p>To be blunt, the record isn’t good. The Rudd government was marred by excessive spending on the stimulus packages of 2008 and 2009. The bungled implementation of the stimulus spending that led to house fires and deaths and knocking down perfectly good school halls only rebuild them was not a record anyone would want to run on. Then there was the mining tax. </p>
<p>The Gillard government has similar problems – the broken promise of “no carbon tax under a government I lead” has been fatal to her re-election prospects and the continual promises to re-balance the budget has seen her economic credentials shredded. The revised mining tax raised very little revenue.</p>
<p>To be generous – bad luck and poor circumstance have contributed to the problems the government faces. But there has been a fundamental problem of competence. Rather incompetence. Former finance minister Lindsay Tanner famously remarked that the Rudd government didn’t dot the i’s or cross the t’s. The Gillard government was no improvement.</p>
<p>So here is the rub: what difference will a change in prime minister have on business confidence at this stage of the electoral cycle? In my view, none.</p>
<p>Kevin Rudd has been able to convince his colleagues that he is a reformed man. He has learned from his mistakes. This must be a good thing – yet, the challenge for any prime minister isn’t that they learn from their mistakes but that they have a vision for the nation and policy ideas to implement that vision.</p>
<p>Yet we know that Rudd had no policy ideas in 2008. After ratifying the Kyoto Protocol, apologising to the Stolen Generation, and dismantling the Howard government’s border protection regime, Rudd had no ideas. He summoned 1000 of the best and brightest of Canberra for a summit to brainstorm ideas. The only idea to come out of that was the mining tax – we all know how that turned out.</p>
<p>Rudd now has to articulate what ideas he has. Bear in mind that the parliament rises this week and won’t sit again before the election. So there is little opportunity to implement any new ideas. At the same time several ministers have resigned their positions, so who will do the work? He must take any new ideas to an election. Also he must win that election.</p>
<p>This is what business will be considering – can Rudd win an election? The answer must be “no”. In video games you can always hit the re-set button. In real life – that option is simply not available. To win an election Rudd must invite the electorate to imagine the last five years hasn’t happened. That next time will be different. I doubt he will succeed.</p>
<p>Rudd will be a lame duck, caretaker prime minister. His job will be to save as many Labor seats as he can. In the meantime consumers will continue to be cautious, business will continue to be cautious, and voters will get to clean up the mess.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/15570/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Sinclair Davidson is an Senior Fellow with the IPA.</span></em></p>You have to wonder how many times the Labor party will make the same mistake. Immediately prior to the 2010 election the party dumped Kevin Rudd and replaced him with Julia Gillard. The net effect of this…Sinclair Davidson, Professor of Institutional Economics, RMIT UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/129822013-03-21T07:53:59Z2013-03-21T07:53:59ZExplainer: how does a leadership spill work?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/21559/original/nqdh37mz-1363845226.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=2%2C2%2C997%2C664&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">No blood was spilt today in parliament, but we still had a leadership spill.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Spill image from www.shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>After a <a href="https://theconversation.com/live-blog-michelle-grattan-12976">harrowing day in parliament</a>, the Labor party saw a leadership spill and Prime Minister Gillard was returned as leader.</p>
<p>The only thing was… no one contested the top spot and Julia Gillard’s name the only one on the ballot. Kevin Rudd declared at the 11th hour that <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/in-depth/i-wont-challenge-for-pm-rudd/story-fnhqeu0x-1226602686327">he would not stand as a candidate</a>.</p>
<p>A “spill” for most people would be something to clear up, but what was happening this afternoon behind closed doors was something quite different. </p>
<p>So how does the process of a leadership challenge work? Monash’s Zareh Ghazarian takes a look at the process behind the leadership crisis. </p>
<p><strong>What is a leadership spill and how does it work?</strong></p>
<p>A leadership spill is brought about in cases where there is disquiet and discontent about current leadership. This is something that prime minister Gillard has been dealing with for quite some time. </p>
<p>There’s been constant speculation about her leadership and of course, there’s been Rudd in the background reminding voters that he was Prime Minister, before Gillard rolled him last time. </p>
<p>So that’s what brought it on today. </p>
<p>But as for the technicalities of the spill, the prime minister convenes a meeting. The meeting is attended by all Labor members of parliament, that includes senators. All positions are then declared vacant and then they will call for nominations for leader and deputy leader of the party. </p>
<p>If they were in opposition, it would just be the opposition leader. But of course, the extra significance here is the person that becomes the leader of the governing party becomes Prime Minister.</p>
<p><strong>So how do they cast their vote? Is it a secret ballot?</strong></p>
<p>If there is more than one candidate, it is a secret ballot. There will be people appointed to be tellers, they will count the votes, it will all be done in secret and no one will know who they voted for. </p>
<p>In some famous cases of past spills, some people have said that they will vote for one person and have written that name on the ballot paper. But as they are about the throw their ballot paper in the ballot box, they cross it out and put someone else’s name on it.</p>
<p>So it’s done by secret ballot and then it’s counted, and who ever has the 50% plus one majority becomes the leader. In the 102 member Labor caucus that means at least 52 votes .</p>
<p><strong>When the vote is cast, is the leader bound to stick the result?</strong></p>
<p>If a candidate doesn’t win the majority, they will no longer be the leader and no longer prime minister. The person who does win a majority will be and they would need to be sworn in by the governor general.</p>
<p>But it’s an easy thing for parties to get around, it’s not a change in terms of numbers in the parliament, it’s just a change of personnel. So it’s not such a major problem for them.</p>
<p><strong>Does a hung parliament affect a spill?</strong></p>
<p>Well, the parliament tests that support and this will mean the incoming prime minister will need to get the assurance of all the crossbenchers that they will continue to support the party in forming government.</p>
<p>And they only have to promise the incoming leader and their party two things. First that they will vote with them on the budget and they will vote with them on motions of no confidence.</p>
<p>So as long as the incoming prime minister can guarantee their budgets will pass and they can survive no confidence motions, they can govern. And technically they don’t even have to pass any other pieces of legislation ever as long as they can get those two things done.</p>
<p><strong>So what would you see if you were a fly on the wall in caucus today?</strong></p>
<p>Well, it’s fairly unceremonious. As observers, we think there’s some great magic going on but there really isn’t.</p>
<p>Generally it’s just a very prosaic paper ballot. Each candidate is asked to make a short speech about why they should be elected. </p>
<p>And then MPs are asked to write down the name of the candidate that they want to win and put it in a box. </p>
<p>It’s very, very back to basic democracy and it certainly doesn’t have the pomp and ceremony of other sorts of electoral contests. </p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/12982/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Zareh Ghazarian does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>After a harrowing day in parliament, the Labor party saw a leadership spill and Prime Minister Gillard was returned as leader. The only thing was… no one contested the top spot and Julia Gillard’s name…Zareh Ghazarian, Lecturer, School of Political and Social Inquiry, Monash UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/127452013-03-13T19:38:29Z2013-03-13T19:38:29ZIn order to win the war, Labor must be prepared to lose the battle<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/21186/original/n6xrvnsd-1363142407.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The ongoing leadership tensions inside the Labor government are only damaging the party’s long term health.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Julian Smith</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>There’s something a little thrilling about a bit of leadership biffo. However, when such talk shows little sign of abatement, as it has in respect to Gillard’s leadership of the ALP, then the thrill factor can plummet very quickly.</p>
<p>Labor’s heavy defeat at the <a href="http://elections.uwa.edu.au/elecdetail.lasso?keyvalue=1859">Western Australian state election</a> last week has continued to fuel speculation about the federal leadership. The resumption of discussion should come as no surprise, just as Labor’s loss in Western Australia was hardly a shock. Labor’s drubbing was widely predicted by <a href="http://www.crikey.com.au/2013/03/08/wa-election-barnett-will-win-and-by-more-than-a-sniff/?wpmp_switcher=mobile">psephologists</a> and by the <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/state-politics/colin-barnett-stretches-pre-poll-margin-newspoll/story-e6frgczx-1226553167130">polls</a>.</p>
<p>What is astonishing, however, is that some Labor politicians, including a former senior <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-03-10/gillard-factor-blamed-for-labors-election-loss/4564024">WA state Labor minister</a>, persist with promoting the view that the only way that Labor will be able to avoid an electoral routing on 14 September is for Gillard to fall on her sword and quit the leadership.</p>
<p>If there is one lesson that ALP should have learnt from Rudd’s axing in 2010 is that terminating a leadership, whether by force or by agreement of the outgoing leader, can have lasting unintended consequences.</p>
<p>Voters believed that it was their right to cast final judgement on Rudd’s leadership. But the decision by caucus to oust Rudd denied the electorate this opportunity, even if it is the privilege of the party room in practice.</p>
<p>This fateful action by Labor’s caucus has created more problems for the party than it assuaged. The speed and clinical nature of the coup, not to mention the image of a teary Rudd announcing his exile to the backbench, shocked and offended many.</p>
<p>The circumstances of events ultimately served to portray Rudd as a victim of a gang “faceless men” and one ambitious redhead. In one foul swoop, the ALP rehabilitated Rudd in the eyes of an electorate who, up until this point, were fast losing patience with him.</p>
<p>More importantly, it set Gillard’s leadership off to a less than inglorious start. It tarnished her credibility deeply and has since served as the lens through which all subsequent judgements about her actions have been assessed.</p>
<p>While the most recent <a href="http://resources.news.com.au/files/2013/03/12/1226595/186037-newspoll-130312.pdf">Newspoll</a> once again shows that Rudd is more popular than Gillard among voters (particularly Coalition supporters), Rudd’s personal popularity is unlikely to offer a quick fix to Labor’s malaise. A change in the leadership is not the solution to a problem that has much deeper roots.</p>
<p>Nor can Labor’s problems be sheeted home to a failure to make plain to the electorate about what it stands for and who it represents. Like it or loathe it, believe it or not, Labor’s central message is unrelentingly clear; it supports “working Australians”.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/opinion/alp-must-look-to-primary-system/story-e6frgd0x-1226075231061http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/opinion/alp-must-look-to-primary-system/story-e6frgd0x-1226075231061">Organisational reform</a>, while a meritorious objective, is also unlikely to offer any real solution to the party’s present woes. If we accept that power tends to centralise, then efforts to temper the influence of existing factions within the organisation are only likely to impede or inconvenience them momentarily or displace them in favour of some new power clique.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/21189/original/34gbktvr-1363143388.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/21189/original/34gbktvr-1363143388.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=387&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/21189/original/34gbktvr-1363143388.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=387&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/21189/original/34gbktvr-1363143388.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=387&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/21189/original/34gbktvr-1363143388.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=487&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/21189/original/34gbktvr-1363143388.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=487&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/21189/original/34gbktvr-1363143388.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=487&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A tearful Kevin Rudd addresses the media in June 2010 after being losing the prime ministership to Julia Gillard.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Alan Porrit</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>While the circumstances of Rudd’s garroting sowed the seeds of ill-will, the problem has been compounded by Labor’s incredibly ambitious policy agenda. Gillard and her cabinet are, if nothing else, potentially guilty of policy over reach. In trying to do too much too quickly, Labor has struggled to retain control over its own agenda. Labor may have fared better if its approach to policy was a little less blitzkrieg and a little more ninja stealth.</p>
<p>One of the consequences of its frenetic policy making is that it has reinforced the perception of a big spending Labor government.</p>
<p>The only real solution available to Labor is to let the next election run its natural course with Gillard at the helm.</p>
<p>For ALP members sitting in marginal seats, this advice is easier to give than it is to receive.</p>
<p>This is not to suggest that Labor should be defeatist and assume the race is necessarily lost. Nor is it to suggest that Labor cannot turn things around. But what Labor does need to do is to show the electorate that it is willing to act with integrity; that it is prepared to take its lumps. Fundamentally, Labor must show that the means of government are just as important as the ends.</p>
<p>Caucus should allow Gillard to ride it out. If the brand is as damaged as everyone is inclined to think, then it is important to allow the electorate to cast its verdict on Gillard and the whole sordid Rudd affair so that both voters and Labor can move on. </p>
<p>Opposition, while never desirable for the main parties, can also provide opportunities to rebuild. Sometimes, in order to win the war, you must be prepared to lose the battle.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/12745/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Narelle Miragliotta does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>There’s something a little thrilling about a bit of leadership biffo. However, when such talk shows little sign of abatement, as it has in respect to Gillard’s leadership of the ALP, then the thrill factor…Narelle Miragliotta, Senior Lecturer in Australian Politics, Monash UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/56002012-02-28T02:24:14Z2012-02-28T02:24:14ZHow Gillard should think the unthinkable and look like a leader<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/8129/original/qtthvxkp-1330387610.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=25%2C9%2C974%2C592&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">"Business as usual" isn't an option for Prime Minister Julia Gillard if she wants to look like a leader.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP </span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Now that the party’s votes are in, Prime Minister Julia Gillard has to make up ground with the voters. The polls are indicating the Labor Government is in deep trouble. Kevin Rudd was nothing if not analytical and blunt about their prospects at the next election. And everyone knows it.</p>
<p>As leader, what does Gillard do now? Perhaps the leadership drama is a gift in disguise. Some leaders would love a crisis to give them an excuse to instigate change and rally the troops around a cause. </p>
<p>In this case, Gillard has been handed a real crisis where there is nothing to lose and everything to gain. It’s clear that business as usual is not an option. </p>
<p>In her speech after winning the leadership battle she said as much. She admitted things have to change otherwise defeat is a sure thing.
Perhaps what is needed is a genuine paradigm shift across a number of policy fronts.</p>
<p>The Business Council of Australia (BCA) among others are calling for the government to look away from in-party fighting and focus on the big issues the country faces with renewed vigour. </p>
<p>BCA President, Tony Shepherd, said the leadership ballot should be a catalyst for “more focused government and a renewed commitment to make Australia more competitive and productive”, reiterating its stance on a need for a more competitive tax system, a more flexible, mobile and skilled workforce to improve competitiveness, and a regulatory environment that encouraged business to invest.</p>
<p>The question for Gillard now is how she goes about instigating this change. The government could do worse than start with a clean piece of paper and devising some paradigm shifting approaches. Some would say this is a risky strategy, but perhaps it is not. </p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/8128/original/4f25wtbf-1330387373.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/8128/original/4f25wtbf-1330387373.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=859&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/8128/original/4f25wtbf-1330387373.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=859&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/8128/original/4f25wtbf-1330387373.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=859&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/8128/original/4f25wtbf-1330387373.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1080&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/8128/original/4f25wtbf-1330387373.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1080&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/8128/original/4f25wtbf-1330387373.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1080&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Jason Alexander’s alter ego George Costanza has some leadership advice.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The most daring approach for any organisation on the decline – such as this government – is continuing on as they have been. We often see this in business when organisations take a safety first approach and employ what see “sensible” (conventional) strategies to the detriment of innovation. Strategic convergence may feel good at the time but it can’t win in the long run.</p>
<p>Let’s consider the wise words of a great philosopher: “My life is the opposite of everything I want it to be. Every instinct I have, in every part of life, be it something to wear, something to eat … It’s all been wrong.” The great philosopher was George Costanza and advice came from his good friend Jerry Seinfeld. “If every instinct you have is wrong, then the opposite would have to be right.”</p>
<p>The weekend papers highlighted perceived flaws in the instincts of the Prime Minister – such as agreeing to appear on the ABC’s recent <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/stories/2012/02/10/3427070.htm">Four Corners</a> program, leaving out references to the achievements of Kevin Rudd during last year’s Annual Conference, and so on. It has been suggested that she would be in a better place if she had done the opposite.</p>
<p>This isn’t a bad starting point for any leader facing dire straits. What are the sacred cows? What do we consider conventional wisdom? Is it right? Was it ever? Perhaps it once was but now is no longer? </p>
<p>The role of a leader is to ask the big questions and encourage those working with them to be brutally honest and rigorous in their answers. Being brave enough to suggest “the opposite” is more likely to illicit innovative and creative ideas than the same old, same old. That’s leadership.</p>
<p>One of the criticisms of the Prime Minister’s leadership style is that she is very managerial. This is great for “getting things done”, but perhaps not great for generating “big ideas”.</p>
<p>There is no doubt she has ground to make up with her party and Australian voters; but if she truly wants to win over the business community, then she needs to be open to more radical ideas. Perhaps she should think beyond the “business as usual” approach, particularly given she has nothing to lose by approaching her Prime ministership with an entirely new perspective. Being brave enough to consider the opposite view of everything she’s done before maybe a good start and signal to the electorate. </p>
<p>After all, it worked for George. He ended up getting the girl and job of his dreams with the New York Yankees. </p>
<p>If the Prime Minister adopts this approach perhaps she has some chance of turning a positive into a negative and salvaging something from this crisis. </p>
<p>There is a lot to be said for rigorous thinking and daring to think the unthinkable. It’s what we expect of our leaders.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/5600/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Chris Styles does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Now that the party’s votes are in, Prime Minister Julia Gillard has to make up ground with the voters. The polls are indicating the Labor Government is in deep trouble. Kevin Rudd was nothing if not analytical…Chris Styles, Professor and Deputy Dean, Director Australian Graduate School of Management, UNSW SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/55912012-02-27T04:05:07Z2012-02-27T04:05:07ZGillard vs Rudd: the best of The Conversation’s coverage<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/8106/original/m28vd3cv-1330312943.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=25%2C9%2C962%2C646&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Julia Gillard claimed a definitive victory this morning: now the hard work begins.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>From Kevin Rudd’s surprise resignation last week to this morning’s galvanising ballot, The Conversation has kept you up-to-date with analysis from Australia’s foremost academic political analysts. </p>
<p>Just in case you missed any must-read pieces, here is some of our best. </p>
<hr>
<p><strong>Anika Gauja, Lecturer, University of Sydney</strong></p>
<p>While the contest between Gillard and Rudd has been played out over the last few days in an overwhelmingly public fashion, the actual mechanics of the leadership selection are by contrast, very private.</p>
<p>The procedures for the election of the party leader are contained in the Federal Parliamentary Labor Party Rules – a document that is not publicly available.</p>
<p>However, from the information that has made it to the public arena we are able to piece together an accurate picture of how the process works.</p>
<p><a href="https://theconversation.com/labor-leadership-spill-the-rules-of-the-game-5575">Read more</a></p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/8105/original/kt927frw-1330312097.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/8105/original/kt927frw-1330312097.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/8105/original/kt927frw-1330312097.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/8105/original/kt927frw-1330312097.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/8105/original/kt927frw-1330312097.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/8105/original/kt927frw-1330312097.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/8105/original/kt927frw-1330312097.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A media throng gathers at Parliament House.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><strong>Glen Fuller, Assistant Professor of Communication and Journalism, University of Canberra</strong></p>
<p>However important Kevin Rudd was to the 2007 election result, these conditions will not be repeated in any future election. Dissatisfaction is currently with the ALP government and direct action groups have mobilised against, not for, ALP policy in the form of opposition to the mining tax, pokie reform and the price on carbon. </p>
<p>Labor will have a serious problem regardless of the result of this morning’s leadership spill. </p>
<p>This much is obvious to most political commentators. Indeed, the Labor leadership stoush was a classic example of a political party acting in such a way as to lose enthusiasm, rather than the opposition political party working to produce it. </p>
<p><a href="https://theconversation.com/forget-kevin-07-rudd-wont-close-labors-enthusiasm-gap-in-12-or-13-5579">Read more</a></p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/8104/original/gscc6j8m-1330311873.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/8104/original/gscc6j8m-1330311873.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=379&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/8104/original/gscc6j8m-1330311873.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=379&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/8104/original/gscc6j8m-1330311873.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=379&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/8104/original/gscc6j8m-1330311873.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=476&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/8104/original/gscc6j8m-1330311873.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=476&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/8104/original/gscc6j8m-1330311873.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=476&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A defeated Kevin Rudd leaves his press conference.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><strong>Robin Tennant-Wood, Assistant Professor in the Discipline of Government at the University of Canberra</strong></p>
<p>To understand the significance of Rudd’s tactics, we need to look at Queensland politics generally. More than any other state, Queensland produces and celebrates populist politicians: tub-thumping Queenslanders who decry the treachery of the southern states and appeal directly to a long-held parochialism. Joh Bjelke-Petersen, Wayne Goss, Pauline Hanson, Peter Beattie, Bob Katter, Barnaby Joyce, and, yes, Anna Bligh and Kevin Rudd – the list goes on.</p>
<p><a href="https://theconversation.com/kevin-rudds-queensland-pitch-could-sway-the-sunshine-state-but-leave-the-rest-of-australia-cold-5577">Read more</a></p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/8114/original/hw6d9j94-1330315030.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/8114/original/hw6d9j94-1330315030.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/8114/original/hw6d9j94-1330315030.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/8114/original/hw6d9j94-1330315030.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/8114/original/hw6d9j94-1330315030.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/8114/original/hw6d9j94-1330315030.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/8114/original/hw6d9j94-1330315030.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Rudd and his supporters advance on the ballott room.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Alan Porritt</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><strong>Chris Styles, Professor and Deputy Dean, Director Australian Graduate School of Management at University of New South Wales</strong></p>
<p>What is interesting about the current situation in the Labor party is that unlike a commercial operation, the managers (caucus) are voting for their boss. The opinion polls tell us that the majority of “customers” (in this case the voters) rate him better than the alternatives. But the management team is not so keen on him, and they ultimately are the ones who decide.</p>
<p>In business it is often said that the customer is always right, but in this case their vote doesn’t count. This week’s soap opera has therefore become more about organisational leadership style than the ability to lead the country.</p>
<p><a href="https://theconversation.com/sure-we-can-change-leaders-but-can-a-leader-change-5554">Read more</a></p>
<p><strong>James Mahoney, Senior Lecturer in Public Relations, University of Canberra</strong></p>
<p>The greatest curiosity of the Labor leadership brawl is Kevin Rudd’s “faceless men” line, which seems to refer to prominent parliamentary colleagues with very recognisable faces. But there is method in the way he is using it.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/8108/original/nz7vgzbg-1330314308.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/8108/original/nz7vgzbg-1330314308.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/8108/original/nz7vgzbg-1330314308.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/8108/original/nz7vgzbg-1330314308.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/8108/original/nz7vgzbg-1330314308.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/8108/original/nz7vgzbg-1330314308.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/8108/original/nz7vgzbg-1330314308.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Rudd called out the “faceless men”, but who was he talking about?</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">coleydude</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In a strategic communication sense, Kevin Rudd’s use of “faceless men” in recent days is a tactical message designed to support his long-standing argument against the faction leaders who now run the party. He is suggesting that faction leaders do their work well out of public view, including organising numbers for pre-selections, and leadership challenges. From that base his message is designed to trip the “faceless men” wire to detonate fear in Labor members, especially those who face a wipeout at the next election.</p>
<p><a href="https://theconversation.com/kevin-rudds-faceless-men-line-isnt-accurate-but-it-is-effective-5565">Read more</a></p>
<p><strong>Geoffrey Robinson and David Lowe, Alfred Deakin Research Institute, Deakin University</strong></p>
<p>Labor faces a dilemma because both the Rudd and Gillard models have proved wanting. Labor MPs are still aware of how quickly the euphoria of Kevin07 ebbed.</p>
<p>At one level, Rudd can be likened to Bob Hawke. Both leaders overwhelmed sceptical caucus colleagues by the force of their appeal to voters, but neither was a great parliamentarian. Both of their rivals, Paul Keating and Julia Gillard, were masters of the parliamentary game. In the 1980s, however, Hawke’s appeal was corporatist as well as populist. His government championed a partnership with social movements, in particular the trade unions.</p>
<p>Rudd definitely lacked Hawke’s interpersonal skills, but Australian society has radically changed from the 1980s. In an individualised society in which the base for collective social action has declined, Rudd’s populism was detached from a social base. Once Kevin07 became a memory, Rudd’s appeal to a fickle electorate evaporated.</p>
<p><a href="https://theconversation.com/rudds-presidential-politics-vs-gillards-westminster-wisdom-who-will-win-out-in-the-style-battle-5550">Read more</a></p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/8109/original/yqp4qs93-1330314306.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/8109/original/yqp4qs93-1330314306.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/8109/original/yqp4qs93-1330314306.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/8109/original/yqp4qs93-1330314306.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/8109/original/yqp4qs93-1330314306.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/8109/original/yqp4qs93-1330314306.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/8109/original/yqp4qs93-1330314306.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Different parliamentary styles – one job at stake.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Alan Porritt</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><strong>Norman Abjorensen, Visiting Fellow, Crawford School of Economics and Government at Australian National University</strong></p>
<p>The fact the party kept Rudd within the tent was a major mistake. Those who had worked closely with him and who had deserted him well knew that he was incapable of working as part of a team, which was precisely why he had been deposed.</p>
<p>One has only to go back to the widely disseminated image of an ashen-faced Rudd, wallowing in visual self pity as he sat on the backbench after being deposed, to see that this was trouble in the making.</p>
<p><a href="https://theconversation.com/rudd-should-not-have-been-allowed-to-stay-now-the-alp-is-paying-for-its-mistake-5520">Read more</a></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/5591/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>David Lowe receives funding from the Australian Research Council.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Glen Fuller does not work for, consult to, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has no relevant affiliations.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>James Mahoney has received research funding from the ACT Department of Health and is National Secretary of the Public Relations Institute of Australia.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Anika Gauja, Chris Styles, Geoffrey Robinson, Norman Abjorensen, and Robin Tennant-Wood do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>From Kevin Rudd’s surprise resignation last week to this morning’s galvanising ballot, The Conversation has kept you up-to-date with analysis from Australia’s foremost academic political analysts. Just…Anika Gauja, Lecturer, University of SydneyChris Styles, Professor and Deputy Dean, Director Australian Graduate School of Management, UNSW SydneyDavid Lowe, Director of the Alfred Deakin Research Institute, Deakin UniversityGeoffrey Robinson, Senior Lecturer, School of Humanities and Social Sciences, Deakin UniversityGlen Fuller, Assistant Professor of Communication and Journalism, University of CanberraJames Mahoney, Senior Lecturer in Public Relations, University of CanberraNorman Abjorensen, Visiting Fellow, Crawford School of Economics and Government , Australian National UniversityRobin Tennant-Wood, Assistant Professor, Faculty of Business and Government, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.