Key's Management Style
John Key has been Prime Minister of New Zealand now for just on two years. We are endeavouring to write up a report card on his performance. Whilst still incredibly popular, it is early days. So far, he has proved a teflon premier. He is regarded pretty much universally as a nice guy. Our previous posts on his report card have made clear that he is a far, far better leader of the civil government of New Zealand than his Labour predecessor, Helen Clark. But there are also significant weaknesses, which have equally significant ramifications and risks to our country.
Key's management style is far superior to that of Helen Clark. This is to the country's benefit. Clark was the closest thing to a totalitarian control-freak we have seen in the a long time. She and her chief of staff, Heather Simpson ran a suffocating regime. This is probably due in no small measure to her being heavily influenced by the ethos of Marxist class warfare. Clark clearly believed she was in a war. She looked through a polarised filter upon the world. She despised, even hated her political opponents, regarding them as fundamentally nasty people. Their nastiness was proven by the fact they criticised and opposed her. She took political conflict personally. She mistrusted her own colleagues, keeping them under a very tight leash. When problems arose they were always someone else's fault. Helen Clark operated on a strewn carpet of very, very thin eggshells.
Like most warriors faced with the exigencies of a state of war, she was prepared to cut corners and sacrifice casualties to get what she wanted. We believe that she was a really dangerous politician, and that she did much damage to our nation.
Key is at almost every point contra-polar to Clark. He does not take political conflict personally. He reaches out to all sorts of political actors. He clearly sees many issues in non-personal terms, which frees him up to seek common ground. In that sense he is very much a consensus political leader who unites people (however loosely) rather than divides them. He appears as far removed from the ethos and ethics of class warfare as it is possible to be.
In our previous post we pointed out that this approach has significant dangers, and, in our judgment, on constitutional matters, particularly those swirling around Maori, Key has proved incompetent. He has not leveraged his good relationship with the Maori Party into sound and necessary constitutional directions. The tragedy is that he could have done so--and he is ideally placed to do it--more so than any other Premier in living memory. But thus far, he has failed dismally to capitalize. We suspect the reason is that John Key has his own version of Marxism nestled to the breast. He sees the world far too much in materialist terms. Achieving economic prosperity is far more important to him than fundamental constitutional issues. This is a significant weakness in his leadership which we will take up in future posts.
His leadership style of the government, however, has genuine strength, breadth and depth. Firstly, Key believes in delegation and holding people accountable. Thus, his administration reflects more a team of horses in harness, each pulling their weight, each making a contribution. He has given Simon Power, for example, great latitude in Justice; Ryall in health; Brownlee in Canterbury post the earthquake; English at the Treasury; Steven Joyce in diverse (but big spending) portfolios; Collins in Police and Corrections, Bennett in Social Development, etc. He does not second guess his ministers; he does not often override them.
The confidence these ministers display in public implies that they know they have the support and backing of their Prime Minister. The fact that so few have made major gaffes implies that behind the scenes communication around the Cabinet table is effective and that Key is successfully managing the tension between his expectations of each and giving each sufficient latitude so they really can take the reins of their portfolios. Consequently good, sound government is a far more likely outcome.
Finally, and we believe this is a huge positive, John Key is not a career politician. He has made it clear that he regards his premiership as a "tour of duty", not a lifetime perquisite. Therefore he is free to consider succession planning on the basis of merit as his ministers go about their responsibilities. By contrast, when a political leader is a career politician, they are likely to consider every emerging talent as a threat to their career. Consequently, they tend to favour lapdogs and milktoasts as their natural successors. (One Chris Carter springs to mind, as does one David Cunliffe.) Knives, barbeques, back-stabbing and coups eventually become the order of the day. The country suffers under such the wretchedness of vaunting ambition and pride.
We give John Key an A on his leadership and management style. It benefits the country greatly.
No comments:
Post a Comment