How important is the personality and personal characteristics of a prime minister or president in determining his/her effectiveness as a political leader? Discuss using contemporary examples

Authors Avatar

POL 120 PRESIDENTS, PRIME MINISTERS AND PARLIAMENTS

Agnieszka Bielawska-Lovell

How important is the personality and personal characteristics of a prime minister or president in determining his/her effectiveness as a political leader? Discuss using contemporary examples

In this essay, one must discuss the various issues which determine the effectiveness of a prime minister or president. These are not only the suggested personality and personal characteristics but also policies, be it foreign or home, economic or social, views, and opinions. In addition, the leader's ministers, party, and advisors can alter the effectiveness of a leader. Personality and personal character is a wide topic and can mean anything from appearance, public speaking, drive, energy, social background, intelligence, enthusiasm and so on. Often personal characteristics of a political leader can to one person appear to be important in determining the effectiveness of the leader, and to someone else it can be seen as being non-effective. Blondel (1995, p.287) claims that "leadership seems associated with many, if not all, the aspects of human personality".

By considering all the issues that make a political leader effective, one must assess the contribution of personality and personal characteristics in determining the effectiveness of a leader. In order to do this a definition needs to be presented describing a political leader. Leadership is an abstraction, or a social science concept which concentrates on power which is seen as a "desirable property" (Robertson, 1993, p258). Leadership is a theory which indicates the ability "to persuade others to act by inspiring them and making them believe that a proposed course of action is correct" (Robertson, 1993, p257).

The effectiveness of a political leader in the British Political system must be examined differently to that of an American system. In America, the political system is a separate one, although this can be debated. When the constitution was written in 1787, the executive was intended to ‘share’ power with the legislature and the judiciary. This was done in order to avoid single leadership and monarchical-like rule, as in Britain at the time. This sharing of power makes it very difficult for the executive, or president to display political leadership, as he is not the single leader. Therefore, in theory political leadership solely by the president is impossible, as Congress and the Senate are also involved in leading the country. But since the 1930’s when F D Roosevelt was president the executive branch of government has got a lot more powerful and has expressed strong leadership on several occasions.                                                                                                                                

In the British system, the electorate votes for a party, rather than an individual like in the US. Therefore it can be said about being more about policy, rather than personality, which is more important in US elections where citizens vote for a candidate, therefore his personal characteristics and personality must be important. However the Prime Minister is the head of the elected government, so technically he or she can and has more opportunity to express political leadership, then a US president who is often constrained by the legislature and judiciary who 'share' power. That is not to say that in the British system the Prime Minister has no constraints, he does, but that is another issue.

Join now!

Blondel’s (1995, ch.17) summery of Max Webber (1968, vol.1) claims that there are three types of leadership: charismatic, traditional, and rational. The rational leader obeys the laws closely, is sensible and reasonable, such as Wilson in America, or Chamberlain in Britain. The traditional follows the established and common leadership set out by his/her party or predecessors, such as Hoover in the US and Major in Britain. Charismatic leaders are more concerned with putting across their personal characteristics and opinions, such as the most recent Clinton in the US and current British Prime Minister Blair. Both of which relied, and ...

This is a preview of the whole essay