AWA: Academic Writing at Auckland

Until recently the study of political leadership consisted of an analysis of individual leaders, now the conceptual exploration of the way it works allows for a comparative analysis of different typologies.[1] This essay will examine which of Barber’s leadership styles is the most successful within New Zealand's unique unitary system. Firstly, a literature review will be used in order to highlight the contrasting views and models that have emerged in the study of political leadership. Secondly, this essay will use James Barber’s role demands, Rhetoric, Business and Personal Relations, to categorise three New Zealand Prime Ministers. Starting with David Lange who was Prime minister in a First Past the Post electoral system, thereafter FPP and then Helen Clark and John Key, Prime Ministers under a Mixed Member Proportionate system thereafter MMP. This essay will analyse which of the styles inherited by these Prime Ministers has been the most effective but will also develop a critique of Barber’s model by highlighting some of it’s shortcomings and where it could be improved.

The literature surrounding political leadership is limited and has only recently begun to conceptualise specific theories and create theoretical typologies. By exploring leaderless environments the importance of political leaders becomes apparent. Leaderless environments permit a conference style of decision-making however they also hinder the movement towards a common policy goal and increase the chances of a party failing to coordinate.[2] Despite the importance of political leadership to the success of government, relatively little is known about it in comparison to other fields.[3]  While Raymond Miller offers a helpful leadership typology that compacts three styles into one model it is only touched on in one chapter of his book Party Politics in New Zealand.[4] Whereas other academics generate the focus of an entire book on one individual leader and explore in depth, the successes and failures of that single actor.[5] This makes it difficult to comparatively analyse different political leaders.[6] New Zealand voters are becoming more attracted to a Prime Minister who reflects certain ‘kiwi’ specific values.[7] This was evident in the New Zealand 2008 election where the news was monopolised by political scandals, polling, and the candidates rather than policy discussion.[8] Suggesting that it is becoming progressively more fundamental for politicians and political parties to understand which leadership styles are the most effective for their political system. Furthermore with the introduction of an MMP system in New Zealand the role of the Prime Minister and the formation of parliament has undergone some interesting changes.[9] For this reason, when exploring New Zealand's political leaders, it becomes interesting to analyse the leadership styles pre MMP such as David Lange and the leadership styles that existed in an MMP structure such as John Key and Helen Clark.

When exploring the style or leadership typology of these Prime Ministers the psychoanalytical model introduced by James Barber in his study of American presidents is helpful. Political leadership style originates from the integration of a leaders personality with the requirements of the role.[10] While it is clear that all leaders must to some degree exercise Rhetoric, Business and Personal Relations it is equally clear that each Prime Minister’s devotion and performance within these roles will vary.[11] A large proportion of Barbers psychoanalytic model focuses on the energy and satisfaction of political leaders creating a passive-active notion used to predict political behaviour.[12] However this element of his study is not as applicable when analysing effective leadership in a Prime Minister role and thus this essay will use the section of his argument that looks at the personality style of the leader.  Barber’s analysis of personality and leadership has three components, Worldview, Style and Character.[13] The fact that Barber emphasises styles as one of the most fundamental elements to the study of political behaviour, highlights how influential this can be when investigating effective leadership.[14] When creating a comparative analysis of New Zealand Prime Ministers Barber’s proposals of political styles and how politicians use their style to preform their core role demands is applicable to New Zealand.[15] By interpreting the three core styles, as a political leadership model that investigates the way Prime Ministers focus their attention, this essay is able to analyse which style or role demand has been effective.

The rhetoric role is made up of the leaders need to communicate through direct and indirect means.[16] The next role demand known as business is the ability to undertake the day-to-day requirements of the job for example the paper work.[17] Henderson has also described this style as the management function because it requires the habitual organization of people and paperwork.[18] The third style is personal relations, which focuses on a leaders ability to deal with political colleagues, staff and other people.[19] Political leaders are required to coordinate, debate and bargain with a large number of people who often will have differing views and personalties.[20] Therefore the typology emerges out of a leaders personal ability to use words, work and/or people to adapt to the demands and opportunities they face within the political environment.[21]

David Lange’s ability to articulate his views and speak to the nation enabled him to lead one of the most transformational Labour governments in New Zealand history and he successfully exemplifies the rhetorical style. David Lange became the Prime Minister of New Zealand in 1984 for the NZ Labour Party, with his period of governance largely been defined as a period of social and economical change.[22] His personality enabled him to effectively engage with the rhetorical demands of the job and to be highly accomplished in this area.[23] The Shorter Oxford Dictionary defines rhetoric as the art of using language so as to persuade or influence others.[24] Lange was able to preform this ‘rhetorical persuasion’ through his appreciation of the emotional element of politics.[25] This power to persuade through recognising the energy and emotion of a crowd enabled Lange to elevate Anti-Nuclear Policy into the nations conscience.[26] Lange when writing about his experience at the Oxford Union Debate, which was broadcasted back to New Zealand after he had refused the visit of US Ship USS Buchanan, stated he  “wanted to say something about the nuclear-free policy that would make the people at home proud of it”.[27] Demonstrating his rhetorical ability to appeal to the emotional side of an audience, which ensured he was successful in vocalising feelings of national pride centred on New Zealand’s Anti-Nuclear Policy. By doing well at the Oxford Union Debate Lange essentially made New Zealand's nuclear-free policy a reality.[28] The rhetorical element of Barber’s leadership model does not only focus on expressiveness to the voting public but also the need to articulate viewpoints amongst government officials and their companions.[29] In 1985 Lange conducted a tour of Africa in an attempt to highlight New Zealand's position as a strong anti apartheid state.[30] Throughout his journey he asked the leaders in every country “ why people were being imprisoned without trial” a query he himself understood was at times an extremely difficult often encumbered question to ask.[31] His asking of this demonstrates his ability to communicate an issue and initiate discussion about complex problems not just domestically but also to leaders around the world. It demonstrates how Lange was able to use the power of rhetoric and interaction to highlight a pro democracy anti apartheid national agenda. Lange clearly devoted a large proportion of his Prime Ministership to the rhetorical demands of the job and to some degree failed in the other two areas. Lange largely avoided confrontation with his political colleagues and instead of approaching them for a one on one discussion he would choose instead to ignore them.[32] An example of his poor interpersonal skills was his infamous meeting with United States Secretary of Defense, George Shultz, in 1984 where Lange was indecisive and non-committal.[33] Furthermore his poor relationship with Roger Douglas and his cabinet in 1989 lead to him standing down as Prime Minister (Lange, 2005: 271). Therefore while Lange may have competently executed the rhetorical style of leadership by connecting politics and emotions his failure in the other areas may suggest ineffectiveness. Other Prime Ministers have exercised the other functions, personal relations and business, in just as a successful manner.

Helen Clark’s managerial focus and a heavily business driven attitude sees her leadership style gravitate towards the ‘business’ typology.  Clark became the Prime Minister of New Zealand when the Labour party won the election in 1999, only the second election under the new MMP system.[34] She survived as Prime Minster for three consecutive elections to be defeated by John Key in 2008, and proceeded to gracefully end her leadership of the Labour Party.[35] Helen Clark’s commitment to completing the tasks of her job and focusing on the business side of her daily activities is highlighted by her devoted work ethic. Once she knew of Labours 1999 election victory she states that she didn’t feel jubilation but rather she was focused on the next step in a workmanlike fashion.[36] Furthermore Clark’s Labour government in the 1999 election introduced a pledge card with seven explicit policy promises, in order to regain the public’s trust. Clark proceeded in her first years as Prime Minister to work through achieving these election promises and was relatively successful in making these promises a reality.[37] For Clark there was a focus on completing the tasks at hand and doing so in an efficient and united manner.  In Absolute Power an unfavourable biography about Clark, she is portrayed as a ‘control freak’ that will go to any extent to ensure that everyone is in line and doing what they are supposed to be doing.[38] Former WINZ boss Christine Rankin, emphasizes this view as she explains the frank, abrupt advice from Helen Clark about what was expected of executives in order to ensure the state institutions were run according to Clark’s efficient desires.[39] Thus Clark was more orientated towards getting the business end of the job completed at any cost including negative personal relations with staff in Government institutions. Furthermore when talking about the National government Clark was quoted as saying “ they do tend to work pretty short weeks”.[40] When compared with the hours that Clark devotes to the job it could be said that Key and English do work shorter weeks as she has been described as the hardest working Prime Minister that New Zealand will see for a while. This hardworking attitude is testament to the fact that she has committed her life to politics and perusing her career and while she has often faced criticism for not having had children this has allowed her to engage with the business area of the job to it’s fullest extent.[41] Therefore in comparison to other Prime Ministers Clark has exercised the business style to a high degree. Her lifestyle choices and the dedication she had for a life in politics have enabled her to put a substantial amount of effort into the day-to-day business tasks the job requires. Her drive to be successful has seen unfavourable descriptions arise about her by those required to work beneath her outside of Parliament however this demonstrates her desire to ensure every component of her role or ‘business’ is managed efficiently.

While John Key does not offer the same quality of articulation to the job that Lange did he has still been able to mobilise, coordinate and inspire people not only in his immediate cabinet or parliament but also individual New Zealander’s. This ability to communicate and deal with the people demand of the role allows Key to fit within a personal relations style of Prime Ministership.  A significant part of elections under MMP is the need to put together a coalition in order to form a government.[42] Key’s creation of a coalition between National, Act and United Future is not surprising as they all share similar ideological views and thus can be easily coordinated and bargained with.[43] However the inclusion of the Maori Party into this coalition is a testament to Key’s personal relations style as he demonstrates his ability to bring together parties on the left and right of the spectrum.[44] The fact that the Maori Party’s confidence-and-supply agreements with National differ from those of the Act and United Future Parties demonstrates the fact that on paper the Maori-National pact is more of an arms-length association.[45] An example of these differences is the Maori parties refusal to support Nationals ‘Post Election Action Plan’ suggesting the relationship is centred around personal relations as opposed to written agreements.[46] This demonstrates Key’s ability to create good personal relations with the Maori Party that does not need to be reinforced by written contracts. Demonstrating his understanding of the importance, in an MMP environment, of investing time into people to people relations with minor parties. The personal relations style is described as the people function and as a result it extents to the general public as well.[47] Therefore Key’s ability to appeal to the ordinary people allowed him to stand out from Helen Clark in the 2008 election.[48] Voters are looking for the existence of a social relationship between themselves and their leaders and the use of mediated communication tools can help a leader achieve this personal relationship with their voters.[49] Key’s strategy is clearly orientated towards him being seen as able to relate to people from all areas of New Zealand and from a range of backgrounds. An example of this was when Key was invited to go fishing on Graeme Sinclair’s show ‘Carters Gone Fishing’ in 2008.[50] When the show aired Key was seen fishing, diving, cooking for the crew and appearing not like a politician but in touch with every typical Kiwi bloke.[51] This example demonstrates how Key is seen as a people person and in touch with the values of the nation. By doing this fishing show he formed a personal relationship with a large proportion of New Zealanders and portrayed himself as someone that understood different elements of Kiwi life. This view is reinforced by the Herald Online polls that questioned readers on the personal attributes of the leaders in the 2008 election campaign.[52] John Key was the clear favourite in these personal characteristic polls apart from the one that asked what politician would most likely stab you in the back?  With Helen Clark winning this poll.[53] While these polls should not be taken too seriously they demonstrate Key’s success as being titled a people person and the fact that New Zealanders are viewing him as in touch with the ordinary elements of life.

There are many contrasting methods of evaluating a leader’s effectiveness and whether their style will be more likely to succeed or fail. Criteria such as the judging of public opinion can be used when assessing the effectiveness of an individual leaders style.[54] However issues with this method arise when attempting to create a comparative analysis of leaders throughout different historical contexts.[55] For example observing the polls about who is the preferred Prime Minister can be unhelpful because in New Zealand a vote is cast for the political party and not for electing a Prime Minister.[56] Using this method is relevant when comparing the style of Key directly against the style of Clark’s because they competed against one another in the 2008 election. For example Key and his personal relations style was seen as preferred throughout the majority of the 2008-election campaign and is was only the degree to which he was favoured that fluctuated.[57] Therefore suggesting Key’s style was more popular and as a result allowed him to be successful in the gaining office and maintain on top of the polls throughout his time as Prime Minister. Concerns with this style arise when looking at whether it is sustainable to be a Prime Minster who is everyone’s friend and evidence of its future effectiveness will arise in his terms to come. In terms of the effectiveness of Lange’s leadership style it is difficult to offer a comparative analysis to the business and personal relations styles by looking at opinion polls because there is very little that directly compares Lange Clark and Key. As a result of this it is important to look at the styles of each leader and analyse their effectiveness in light of the New Zealand electoral system and the political culture. 

Academics such as Hargrove and Owens have explored the impact the political system has on effective leadership styles.[58] The introduction of MMP into New Zealand has meant the need for a coalition government.[59] This meant leaders, could not take an all-or-nothing approach to policy making and their strategies needed to consider the role other MP’s would play in their ability to legislate.[60] Therefore skilled leadership was fundamental to the construction of government, which was not needed in FPP where one party was the winner.[61] This suggests that Lange’s rhetorical style of government may have struggled under MMP as his poor interpersonal relations may have meant he struggled to coordinate and form a coalition government. While rhetorical styles are important they become less significant when the leader is required to engage with people to people bargaining and negotiation or personal relations, in order to lead and create the government.[62] Thus Key’s ability to create and maintain successful personal relationships within his capacity as Prime Minister means he is effective in creating and maintaining coalitions, which are crucial to New Zealand governance. The job of Prime Minister in Westminster democracies such as New Zealand and Britain is been viewed as increasingly presidential in style.[63] Therefore the media is scrutinizing the leader of any party in regards to their personality and temperament and the leader is given media attention in accordance to their communication techniques as opposed to the policies of their party that they represent.[64] Demonstrating that it is important for the media and the public to want to listen to what the leader is saying and thus some degree of talented articulation is necessary in a political arena where the media and it’s portrayal of the leader is increasingly important. However Key’s people style means audiences want to see him and hear what he has to say regardless of whether he has the same eloquence as Lange because they feel they have a personal connection to him. Furthermore the unitary style of government that New Zealand operates under places decision making power in the hands of the centralised government which means laws are uniform and applicable equally throughout the country. Decisions are made by one parliamentary house consequently increasing the workload of the Prime Minister and their cabinet because they are required to make decisions and regulate issues throughout the whole country as apposed to one state or electorate. The strong work ethic and management approach of Helen Clark is essential to ensure the effective running of the country and contributes to the reason she had electoral success for nine consecutive years as she was seen to be doing her job to a high standard. Therefore this suggests that a balance of the business and personal relations style’s is the most effective as it ensure both electoral success but also the ability to achieve results once in power. However analysis brings to the forefront some of the issues surrounding Barber’s model and demonstrates the difficulties that arise when attempting to explain which is the most effective because in reality the most effective leadership style would be one that incorporates a balance of all three styles.

In an MMP setting it becomes clear that an effective leader is someone that has a range of skills and can incorporate these three ideas into their an individual style.  Issues arise when evaluating the effectiveness of these leadership typologies as the three styles are significantly interrelated and an effective leader would be able to engage with each element when necessary. Burns theory of leadership highlights both transformational and transactional styles of leadership, which bring into two models a range of ideas that are necessary for a New Zealand political setting.[65] The first style incorporates a range of ideas such as inspirational rhetoric, clear vision and ensuring that followers are guided while transactional leadership conceptualise bargaining, reward and punishment and the people element of leadership.[66] By highlighting this theory it becomes clear how simplistic the three role demands that have been explored in this essay are and suggests that there is more to effective leadership then being an excellent example of one element of the job. With the transition to MMP between Lange and Clark style needed to change and be more reflective of the changing nature of the New Zealand system. A Prime Minister with poor interpersonal skills such as Lange would have struggled immensely under MMP as the ability for a party to win an election rests on their ability to bargain with other parties and form a coalition. However all three style’s are fundamental and thus the conceptualisation of them into transformational and transactional highlights a more broad skill set that can be used by Prime Minsters to ensure they are effective leaders in all areas of the job and their efficiency is not solely concentrated in one individual area. Therefore it is important to note that Key a more rounded leader and difficult to categorise into one particular category of Barber’s leadership styles is more effective because he incorporates a range of views and appeals to a variety of groups. This is largely because his style has out polled and been more popular to that of Clark’s and Lange however whether this people style will be sustainable is questionable and will develop as his time of Prime Minister continues.

In conclusion Barber’s leadership styles are an interesting way to categorise New Zealand Prime Ministers regardless of the fact, downfalls with the theory are revealed when a comparative analysis of effectiveness is attempted. This essay has explored the ways that Lange, Clark and Key successfully fit within the Barber’s three styles; Rhetoric, Business and Personal Relations, even though it is difficult for one Prime Minister to focus exclusively on one approach. Lange’s successfully exemplified the rhetorical typology but his failure with interpersonal relations poses difficulties in an MMP system. Clark’s success with the business element of the job enabled her to operate an efficient government and leave the leadership role gracefully. Key still involved in New Zealand government has successfully branded himself as the people person of politics and as a result he has favourable relations with voters and members of parliament. Idealistically an effective style would be one that incorporates a balance of all three styles. However when comparing these three leaders the public relations style of Key has so far been the most effective in engaging the public and creating and maintaining government relations. But it leaves to be said whether this style will eventually ruin his entire reputation and allow him to be classified as the less effective most unproductive leader New Zealand has seen. This is why it is also important to engage with the business side of the role in order to ensure that tasks get completed in the correct manner.

 

 

Bibliography

Angus Reid. “Key still edges Clark in New Zealand.” Angus Reid.  http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/34264/key_still_edges_clark_in_new_zealand/. (21 September 2011).

Arseneau, Therese. “2008: National’s Winning Strategy” In Key to Victory: the New Zealand general election of 2008, edited by Stephen Levine and Nigel S. Roberts. Wellington: Victoria University Press, 2010.

Barber, David. Politics by Humans: Research on American Leaders. Durham: Duke University Press, 1988.

Burns, James. Leadership.  New York: Harper & Row, 1978.

Dewan, Torun & David Myatt. “Leading the Party: Coordination, Direction, and Communication,” American Political Science Review 101, no. 4 (2007).

Espinar, Colin. “ Hard hats on as personal attacks continue.” NZ Herald Online. http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/blogs/on-the-house/1879975/Hard-hats-on-as-personal-attacks-continue (accessed 18 September, 2011).

George, Alexander. “Review: Assessing Presidential Character” in World Politics 26, no. 2 (1974).

Hargrove, Erwin & John Owens. “Introduction: Political Leadership in Context” in Leadership in context edited by Erwin Hargrove and John Owens. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, INC., 2003.

Henderson, John. “The Prime Minister,” in New Zealand Politics In Transition, edited by Raymond Miller. Auckland: Oxford University Press, 1997.

Jesson, Bruce. “The Alliance” in New Zealand Politics in Transition edited by Raymond Miller. Auckland: Oxford University Press, 1997.

Johansson, Jan. The Politics of Possibility: Leadership in a Changing. Wellington: Dunmore Publishing, 2009.

Lange, David. My Life. Auckland: Penguin Group, 2005.

Mcleay, Elizabeth. “Leadership in Cabinet under MMP,” In Political Leadership in New Zealand edited by Raymond Miller and Michael Mintrom. Auckland: Auckland University Press, 2006.

Miller, Raymond. Party Politics in New Zealand. Melbourne: Oxford University Press 2005.

Miller, Raymond. “Taming leadership? Adapting to Institutional change in New Zealand politics,” in Public Leadership Perspectives and Practises, edited by Paul T Hart and John Uhr. Canberra: ANU E press, 2008.

Miller, Raymond & Michael Mintrom. “Political Leadership in New Zealand,” in Political Leadership in New Zealand. Auckland: Auckland University Press, 2006.

Rudd, Chris., Janine Hayward and Geoffrey Craig, Informing voters: Politics & the NZ election 2008. North Shore: Pearson, 2009.

Shorter Oxford Dictionary. Rhetoric 5^th Edition. London: Oxford University Press, 2002.

Wilson, Kiri. “David Lange and the ANZUS Crisis: An analysis of leadership personality and foreign policy.” Masters Thesis, University of Canterbury, 2006.

Wishart, Ian. Absolute Power the Helen Clark Years. North Shore: Howling at the Moon, 2008.

 

[1] Raymond Miller & Michael Mintrom, “Political Leadership in New Zealand,” in Political Leadership in New Zealand (Auckland: Auckland University Press, 2006), 7.

[2] Torun Dewan & David Myatt, “Leading the Party: Coordination, Direction, and Communication,” American Political Science Review 101, no. 4 (2007), 828,

[3] Miller & Mintrom, 2.

[4] Raymond Miller, Party Politics in New Zealand (Melbourne: Oxford University Press 2005), 138.

[5] Miller & Mintrom, 3.

[6] Ibid.

[7] Raymond Miller, “Taming leadership? Adapting to Institutional change in New Zealand politics,” in Public Leadership Perspectives and Practises, edited by Paul T Hart and John Uhr (Canberra: ANU E press, 2008), 255.

[8] Chris Rudd, Janine Hayward and Geoffrey Craig, Informing voters: Politics & the NZ election 2008 (North Shore: Pearson, 2009), 44.

[9] John Henderson, “The Prime Minister,” in New Zealand Politics In Transition, edited by Raymond Miller (Auckland: Oxford University Press, 1997), 75.

[10] David Barber, Politics by Humans: Research on American Leaders (Durham: Duke University Press, 1988) 57.

[11] Ibid, 57

[12] Henderson, 78.

[13] Alexander George, “Review: Assessing Presidential Character” in World Politics 26, no. 2 (1974), 241

[14] Ibid, 241

[15]  Henderson, 77.

[16]  Henderson, 77

[17]  Barber, 57.

[18] Henderson, 77.

[19] Ibid.

[20] Barber, 57.

[21] George, 243.

[22] Jan Johansson, The Politics of Possibility: Leadership in a Changing  (Wellington: Dunmore Publishing, 2009), 66.

[23]  Henderson, 78.

[24] Shorter Oxford Dictionary, Rhetoric, 5^th Edition (London: Oxford University Press, 2002).

[25] Johansson, 77.

[26] Ibid

[27] David Lange, My Life, (Auckland: Penguin Group, 2005), 207.

[28] Ibid, 208.

[29] Barber, 56.

[30] Lange, 210.

[31] Lange, 211.

[32] Kiri Wilson, “David Lange and the ANZUS Crisis: An analysis of leadership personality and foreign policy” (Masters Thesis, University of Canterbury, 2006), 98.

[33] Ibid, 102.

[34] Johansson, 102.

[35] Ibid, 105.

[36] Johansson, 105.

[37] Ibid, 105.

[38] Ian Wishart, Absolute Power the Helen Clark Years (North Shore: Howling at the Moon, 2008), 3.

[39] Ibid, 197.

[40] Colin Espinar, “ Hard hats on as personal attacks continue,” NZ Herald Online http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/blogs/on-the-house/1879975/Hard-hats-on-as-personal-attacks-continue (accessed 18 September, 2011).

[41] Wishart, 247.

[42] Miller, 2005, 211-213.

[43]Therese Arseneau, “2008: National’s Winning Strategy” In Key to Victory: the New Zealand general election of 2008, edited by Stephen Levine and Nigel S. Roberts (Wellington: Victoria University Press, 2010), 287.

[44] Ibid, 289.

[45] Arseneau, 291.

[46] Ibid, 291

[47] George, 243.

[48] Claire Robinson, “2008: Images of Political Leadership in the Campaign” In Key to Victory: the New Zealand general election of 2008, edited by Stephen Levine and Nigel S. Roberts, (Wellington: Victoria University Press, 2010), 143

[49] Ibid, 144.

[50] Robinson, 147.

[51] Ibid, 147.

[52] Jeremy Rees, “Which politicians get top marks in the Heralds Online’s character polls?” NZ Herald Online http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10536862. (20 September 2011).

[53] Ibid

[54] Miller, 2005, 143.

[55] Miller, 2005: 143.

[56] Ibid, 142.

[57]Angus Reid. “Key still edges Clark in New Zealand,” Angus Reid,  http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/34264/key_still_edges_clark_in_new_zealand/. (21 September 2011).

[58] Erwin Hargrove and John Owens, “Introduction: Political Leadership in Context” in Leadership in context edited by Erwin Hargrove and John Owens (Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, INC., 2003) 1-17.

[59] Bruce Jesson, “The Alliance” in New Zealand Politics in Transition edited by Raymond Miller (Auckland: Oxford University Press, 1997), 161.

[60] Ibid.

[61] Elizabeth Mcleay, “Leadership in Cabinet under MMP,” In Political Leadership in New Zealand edited by Raymond Miller and Michael Mintrom (Auckland: Auckland University Press, 2006), 96.

[62] Mcleay, 94.

[63] Wishart, 305.

[64] Ibid. 

[65] James Burns, Leadership,  (New York: Harper & Row, 1978), 19-20.

[66] Burns, 19-20