Leaders Need Followers

New Zealand's Prime Minister John Key addressed Parliament yesterday. There have been mixed reactions to his speech. The PM had an opportunity to take some bold actions on tax reform that may have helped propel New Zealand forward. Mr Key had at his disposal recommendations from the Tax Working Group and the 2025 Taskforce. The Tax Working Group's recommendations included a rise in GST, a lowering of the top personal tax rate, and the introduction of a Capital Gains and Land Tax. The former were embraced and the latter deferred. Bob Buckle, Chair of the Tax Working Group, interpreted the PM's speech as a broad acceptance of the Groups framework for New Zealand's future tax system (Fallow, 2010). Other commentators, like Bernard Hickey, told Generation X and Y that the Prime Minister was effectivley telling them to leave the country (Hickey, 2010). I could go on about other reactions, but this has been well covered by the NZ Hearld and Stuff websites.  Instead, I want to focus on leaders and followers by comparing Prime Minister John Key's Statement to Parliament and President Barak Obama's State of the Union Address. This will not be a comprehensive review of the speeches themselves, but rather the circumstances that brought each leader to the delivery of these speeches.

President Barak Obama came to power in January 2009 riding a wave of change. His arrival was accompanied with chants of, "Yes we can!" and "Hope!" He entered Washington in the midst of unusual fervor and excitement. During his first year in office he tackled some big issues. He bailed out the banks; continued efforts to revitalize the economy through various stimulus packages; made efforts at reconciliation between America and the rest of the world; and jumped into the massive task of revamping the health care system. It took bold actions to wade into these issues.

In comparison, Prime Minister John Key's National Government focused on the economy, law and order, education, and health. The National Government has made some in-roads in these areas but they have done so carefully, so as not to rock the boat. National has received a fair amount of public support and has gained enough political capital to allow them to act boldly in the area of tax reform. But this opportunity may have been squandered. Resistance to the introduction of National Achievement Standards is rising in the education sector, and the PMs Statement to Parliament has received mixed reviews. The window for bold action is quickly closing. It appears that the PM is going to walk gently around tax reform. Why make waves when you can keep some ideas in your pocket for re-election?

Obama used his political capital and popularity in an effort to make a fundamental change to America's health care system. He did not communicate well the importance of health care change or paint a clear picture of what the future would look like if this change wasn't made. In his State of the Union, the President acknowledged that he understood that his focus on health care had cost him. But he re-stated his convictions and re-emphasized the importance of addressing the tough challenges and not leaving them for someone else. In contrast, Key has worked to maintain his popularity. It is obvious to some that being liked is more important than making the tough calls that are required to make fundamental changes to the way we live. Obama tried to lead boldly but it appears he did so with few followers. Key has stood in front of many potential followers and has lead them nowhere.

In both examples of leadership given here the follower has played a significant role. The American public made clear that they weren't happy about the direction the President was leading them, and in response he changed his behavior and refocused his message to address their concerns. But, just as he did in the campaign, he also reminded his followers that change wouldn't be easy and that he can't make the changes on his own. Followers need to be willing to sacrifice in order to make a difference.

On the other hand, Key brought with him to his speech many followers who were waiting to go boldly where they needed to go. There were those in this country who were ready to follow him and make the required sacrifices so that New Zealand could have a better future. Instead of a courageous leader, some found that they were following someone who would rather be remembered as a nice guy.

There is more history to be written about these two leaders. In the short term, those that follow them need to make some tough choices. We need bold leadership that will help us to re-think how the world is structured. But these leaders can't restructure the world if we aren't willing to follow them. Blind followership is not the answer. But neither is choosing not to follow at all. We need to be prepared to engage our leaders in the pursuit of solutions that address the unique challenges we currently face. America and New Zealand will repeat the same mistakes if we aren't able to tackle the fundamental issues that got us here in the first place. Our leaders are not going to take us where we need to go if we don't follow. As followers, we need to recognize where our leaders are trying to take us and act accordingly.