 |
| Image source: Indian Express |
When every seventh person on this planet is an Indian, to be elected as prime minister of India is like getting elected as leader of the combined populations of whole of Europe, the US and Canada. That indicates the size of the republic of India. When Mr. Narendra Modi got elected as Prime Minister of 1.27 billion people of India in May 2014, he took on a responsibility which can fairly be said to be sum of the responsibilities that several global leaders shoulder for their respective countries. Between years 2001 and 2014 Modi was Chief Minister of relatively prosperous state of Gujarat in mid-western India with population size closer to that of the UK. During that period he won three five yearly state elections and ruled the state for 4,610 days before moving to New Delhi to take up the role of the Prime Minister of India. During election campaign for general elections in April/May 2014 Mr. Modi’s party Bharatiya Janta Party (BJP) projected him as an able administrator who would provide good governance and put India back on faster road to economic development. But is leadership only about efficient administration or is it something more. What differentiates a leader from chief executive officer? The question is prompted by distinct difference in the tone, words and style of Mr. Modi during election campaign and after winning the election.
Harvard psychologist Howard Gardener, who propounded theory of multiple intelligences, in his book Leading Minds: An Anatomy of Leadership defines leader as, "an individual (or, rarely, a set of individuals) who significantly affects the thoughts, feelings, and/or behaviours of a significant number of individuals". How do such individuals influence the behaviour of large number of people? Professor Gardner argues that great leaders talk ‘direct’ to people and they have a story to tell.
Abraham Lincoln’s story was about abolition of slavery and keeping the union of United States together as captured in his famous speech House Divided delivered in June 1858 where he said, ”I believe that this government cannot endure, permanently half slave and half free.” Lincoln became the 16th president of the USA in second half of 19th century at a time when the country faced Civil War threatening the integrity of the union. Lincoln’s political challenge was preserving the union but also resolving the historical paradox of Declaration of Independence of the USA which had not removed slavery from that country. Famous American historian of Civil War, Shelby Foote called amazing American history as a combination of “glory and shame”. Slavery could not be reconciled with the independence until every citizen had same rights. Lincoln left mark as great leader by creating solid ground for abolition of slavery and managing to save the union.
In Gardener’s analytical framework Mahatma Gandhi’s leadership story was freedom. In South Africa Gandhi supported struggle against the racial discrimination of Asians and back home in India against the colonial rule by the British. Gandhi was master of mobilising mass support for a cause one’s he took it up. Freedom struggle has always been a powerful storyline in life of many a great leaders. What made Gandhi’s story enduring legacy for mankind is his perfecting the art of using disobedience and non-violence as weapons of resistance.
Nelson Mandela’s story again was about freedom and struggle against racial discrimination which did remain in South Africa well into twentieth century. There are parallels between Mandela’s leadership and Gandhi’s leadership after Mandela gave up armed resistance in favour of non-violent methods and Gandhi’s ways.
Margaret Thatcher in late twentieth century UK came to symbolise a determined, no non-sense leader who would dominate the discourse in economics. By introducing massive public sector reforms, redefining the role of markets and government in the sluggish British economy in late 1970s and through 1980s. Guided by intellectual scaffolding found in works of libertarian philosophers like F W Hayek, Mrs. Thatcher’s leadership story was around reforming economy, restoring markets as central institutions, and individual economic freedom. Like most leaders Thatcher received unflinching support from some and opposition from others.
Now let us go back to Mr. Narendra Modi. What is his story line? In a lighter way one could say he also had ‘freedom’ in one of his many punchy slogans. He used a sentence frequently in election campaign ‘Congress mukt Bharat’, literally meaning, ‘Congress free India’ referring to removal of Indian National Congress as ruling party in government. During and after the elections he claimed in his speeches that people had chosen ‘hope’ for better days over the decade old rule by opposition coalition of parties led by the Congress.
Projected as deliverer of economic prosperity for millions of poor in India Modi sold a dream of economic growth to alleviate poverty and raise standards of living for hundreds of millions of Indian. As a leader he successfully consolidated his image of a popular leader in Gujarat to the leader of a very diverse nation that features dozens of languages, ethnic diversity and all major religions practised by millions. Modi drew his power to persuade from people and performance. In Indian society emotion and reason, drama and documentaries, tradition and modernity, believers and atheists, liberal and orthodox co-exist and many-time under the same roof. One can find paradox at each corner tea shop in India. It was Modi’s political acumen to note these facts and convert them into pieces of information and convert them into political knowledge. Leader takes pieces of information and puts them in front of a mirror of purpose which reflects back not information but knowledge and understanding. It was that knowledge which resulted in a campaign strategy and style that helped Modi to project a vision of development that resonated with voters.
This though was not simple task. So how did Modi do it? He converted ‘development’ into main storyline and spoke directly to people. In a span of eight months from September 2013 to April 2014 he transformed himself from regional to national leader. He chose few one to one interviews to media but addressed 437 big rallies, participated in total 5827 public events, travelled over 300,000 kilometres across 25 states in India according to a report. His choice of Hindi as language to communicate is significant political choice too. In such a cultural and social setting with thousands of years of tradition with almost uninterrupted continuity in daily living direct talking to people in India needs oratory skills that Modi demonstrated ably. There was a clever planning in choosing the audience and the mode of communication. He knew well the spread of mobile phone and social media in cities and towns. In the political landscape of Uttar Pradesh (UP) the male muscular vanity is more prominent where main symbol of celebration of victory is firing gun shots in air. In such landscape where main opponent party had a former wrestler as its president in Mulayam Singh Yadav, Modi chose to boast of his 56 inch chest to imply that developing a state required manly courage. The audiences less likely to turn up in the dusty planes on hot summer days but live their life on screens of tablets, computers and smartphones were directly reached through various digital windows offered by social media. Modi’s acute understanding of the power of media is well known and again showed up recently when he chose to meet Sheryl Sandberg COO of Facebook a privilege not many COOs would get from Prime Minister of India. Neither party could underestimate the public relations value of such a meeting.
It seems however, Mr. Modi has assumed role of a CEO soon after getting elected. One detects moderation in his speeches that are free from lyrical stories criticising Congress government and promises for better India. His tone is more of CEO wanting to making systems changes, introducing efficiency, task focused government ministries and processes. The intention here is not to evaluate the effectiveness or otherwise of these early decisions and announcements because that will be naïve given that Mr. Modi’s government is only few weeks into power. But already there is an interesting coincidental similarity in approach in some areas with the Obama administration in the US.
On 13th June 2011 Barak Obama issued executive order number 13576 titled Delivering An Efficient, Effective and Accountable Government, which stated following as its purpose. To strengthen that trust and deliver a smarter and leaner Government, ...will reinforce the performance and management reform gains, ….identify additional reforms necessary to eliminate wasteful, duplicative, or otherwise inefficient programs; and publicize these reforms so that they may serve as a model across the Federal Government.
Here is what Indian PM Mr. Modi says on his website,” We will work together to re-establish the credibility of the institutions of democracy. My government will function on the mantra of ‘Minimum Government, Maximum Governance’. Now the question is will Mr. Modi succeed in delivering faster economic growth, reduce the corruption and poor governance in coming years? The challenge will require leadership qualities and CEO's energy and implementation abilities. Time will tell and iRA-D-AR will comment on this periodically.
