It is impossible not to feel for Tony Abbott after the events of Monday this week. There is no doubt that he is a well-intentioned man with, what he considered to be, the nation’s best interests at heart.
It must be acknowledged how devastatingly effective he was as an Opposition Leader; albeit using his core strengths (dogged determination, a boxing blue, and, yes, three word slogans) to lower the tone of Parliament, and the approach to national politics in general. In this endeavour he had many willing co-conspirators from both sides of the Chamber and beyond.
During that period one could argue that he effectively took down three Prime Ministers (Julia Gillard and Kevin Rudd – twice), no easy task. What no one recognised during what appeared to be his ‘Howitzer’ phase was that he was also drawing up the plans for his own downfall.
He wasn’t a mere draftsman; he was an architect.
He demonstrated how to exploit a broken promise with a zeal unlikely seen anywhere outside a relationship on the rocks. It would be almost impossible to calculate the number of times a high-vis Abbott reminded us about the carbon tax that should never have been.
He was a pathfinder, illuminating the way for future Oppositions.
That’s what makes the Budget of 2014 so mystifying.
A litany of broken promises that drained the pool of credibility, which had been partially filled during the long years he had led the Opposition (granted, it was not terribly deep).
Compounded by the perception that it was highly inequitable, that Budget triggered a response from our collective reptilian brain that fairness was still an Australian trait. Assault fairness – insult the nation.
The sales job was carried out via the echo chamber. Yell an idea in; hear a slogan echoed back. It worked, but only on those doing the yelling. No one had considered informing the electorate of the need for action, let alone contemplating taking it along for the ride.
The appalling politics and communication of Budget 2014 made our former PM (and his fledgling government) an easy target; transforming him from a man of whom the nation was wary but willing to give a go; to another promise-breaking, untrustworthy, administratively inept leader.
Tony Abbott had morphed into what he had previously destroyed.
It is this aspect that generates an increased level of empathy in me for how Mr Abbott must be feeling today. The galling knowledge that in attempting to emulate one of his political heroes, that he had executed his plan so poorly he found himself at the trailhead of destruction. Ironically, he was the cartographer responsible for the map that identified his position so precisely.
It is impossible to gloss over the fact that every time he managed to give his hunters the slip, he, or one of his coterie would send up a flare alerting them to his whereabouts. From Sir Philip, to Bronwyn, to Peter Dutton’s trés hilarious joke – he was Canberra’s Tantalus, almost reaching his goal but not quite being able to reach it.
I hope that history remembers former Prime Minister Abbott with more than just a PutYourOnionsOut hash tag. He deserves better than that.
I also hope that the team of Malcolm Turnbull and Julie Bishop go forward to deliver on their commitment of communicating with the nation, as opposed to treating us as mere tax-paying minions. After all, their decisions will likely have fairly substantial impacts on the lives of us tax-paying minions.
Finally, there’s a chance that the tenor of our national debate will improve and that we will witness some non-poll/focus group driven leadership and policy development.
Who knows, good government might have even started yesterday.
Sorry, not sorryJune 21, 2023 - 1:27 pm
Data Breaches – It’s not if. It’s when!October 4, 2022 - 11:52 am
You will be accountable, but we won’t.May 19, 2021 - 3:14 pm
An Impossible Standard to Meet – or – Nobody Expects The Spanish InquisitionMay 19, 2021 - 3:11 pm
The rise of the echo chamberDecember 2, 2020 - 10:26 pm
Communication takes centre stage at last!
Australian politics delivered not only a new Prime Minister this week, but also a salient lesson in the value of communication.
The new Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull – Mr. Explainer, as some media commentators call him – has brought the art of leadership communication back to life. Three word slogans are no longer the answer.
He has been able to resonate with the community because of his ability to put forward his perceptions, beliefs and expectations in compelling, engaging and understandable language.
The former Prime Minister Tony Abbott and some of his Ministerial colleagues have struggled with this. It was reflected in the polls constantly and it provided Turnbull with the opportunity to say he was the ‘communicator’ who could turn things around, especially in our poll-driven political world.
In today’s multi-channel media environment, it is what leaders are saying and doing that connects with the community more than at any other time. The corporate world is no different.
Research shows that consumers regularly talk about the performance of the CEO in relation to his/her reputation and how they communicate.
People judge companies on the information that flows from the top. What is communicated shapes their thinking and influences their decisions; whether it is buying company shares, buying products, or believing in a company’s future direction.
Getting the leading message or narrative into the word-of-mouth conversation is paramount. It is worth more than advertising and networking meetings and discussions.
However, leaders can never just rest on a narrative. It is the messages that build the narrative, which are important. How the narrative is expressed, how pertinent is it to stakeholders and how persuasive is the delivery are also key factors. They make up the ‘communication mix’.
The salient lesson the new Prime Minister has delivered to all leaders is the role of communication in today’s world.
There is no better time for CEOs and other top executives to consider their ability to communicate with their stakeholders and communication plans shape the messages and reputation of an organization.
The new Prime Minister is now in his first 100 days in office. He will be judged not only by his expertise in the management of Australia’s political scene, its economy and social wellbeing, but also his ‘best practice’ in communicating his plans for the nation. We are re-entering the phase of communication in politics.
Tony Abbott: Architect of his own Demise
It is impossible not to feel for Tony Abbott after the events of Monday this week. There is no doubt that he is a well-intentioned man with, what he considered to be, the nation’s best interests at heart.
It must be acknowledged how devastatingly effective he was as an Opposition Leader; albeit using his core strengths (dogged determination, a boxing blue, and, yes, three word slogans) to lower the tone of Parliament, and the approach to national politics in general. In this endeavour he had many willing co-conspirators from both sides of the Chamber and beyond.
During that period one could argue that he effectively took down three Prime Ministers (Julia Gillard and Kevin Rudd – twice), no easy task. What no one recognised during what appeared to be his ‘Howitzer’ phase was that he was also drawing up the plans for his own downfall.
He wasn’t a mere draftsman; he was an architect.
He demonstrated how to exploit a broken promise with a zeal unlikely seen anywhere outside a relationship on the rocks. It would be almost impossible to calculate the number of times a high-vis Abbott reminded us about the carbon tax that should never have been.
He was a pathfinder, illuminating the way for future Oppositions.
That’s what makes the Budget of 2014 so mystifying.
A litany of broken promises that drained the pool of credibility, which had been partially filled during the long years he had led the Opposition (granted, it was not terribly deep).
Compounded by the perception that it was highly inequitable, that Budget triggered a response from our collective reptilian brain that fairness was still an Australian trait. Assault fairness – insult the nation.
The sales job was carried out via the echo chamber. Yell an idea in; hear a slogan echoed back. It worked, but only on those doing the yelling. No one had considered informing the electorate of the need for action, let alone contemplating taking it along for the ride.
The appalling politics and communication of Budget 2014 made our former PM (and his fledgling government) an easy target; transforming him from a man of whom the nation was wary but willing to give a go; to another promise-breaking, untrustworthy, administratively inept leader.
Tony Abbott had morphed into what he had previously destroyed.
It is this aspect that generates an increased level of empathy in me for how Mr Abbott must be feeling today. The galling knowledge that in attempting to emulate one of his political heroes, that he had executed his plan so poorly he found himself at the trailhead of destruction. Ironically, he was the cartographer responsible for the map that identified his position so precisely.
It is impossible to gloss over the fact that every time he managed to give his hunters the slip, he, or one of his coterie would send up a flare alerting them to his whereabouts. From Sir Philip, to Bronwyn, to Peter Dutton’s trés hilarious joke – he was Canberra’s Tantalus, almost reaching his goal but not quite being able to reach it.
I hope that history remembers former Prime Minister Abbott with more than just a PutYourOnionsOut hash tag. He deserves better than that.
I also hope that the team of Malcolm Turnbull and Julie Bishop go forward to deliver on their commitment of communicating with the nation, as opposed to treating us as mere tax-paying minions. After all, their decisions will likely have fairly substantial impacts on the lives of us tax-paying minions.
Finally, there’s a chance that the tenor of our national debate will improve and that we will witness some non-poll/focus group driven leadership and policy development.
Who knows, good government might have even started yesterday.
Circling the wagons…
Circling the wagons is fast becoming the common idiom for governments and corporations today.
It means that you stop communicating with people who don’t think the same way as you. You want to avoid their ideas.
In business, it is often an indication that you are losing your competitive edge and need to re-think your engagement strategies. This thinking shares the common theme of providing a defense from circumstances that can seem overwhelming when, in reality, it is not the case.
Adopting this head-in-the-sand approach sees governments and companies becoming paralysed in engaging with stakeholders and in taking a leadership role in a debate.
Communities throughout the world are now seeking leadership and forward thinking on issues and want to be engaged in the debate. However, governments, in particular, are steeped in the ‘old thinking’ of ‘testing the water’ with small sections of the community before putting leadership ideas to the broader community.
The Australian newspaper recently highlighted the issue when business, unions and community groups called on the federal government to give the nation ‘real reform’, rather than engage in a ‘race to the bottom’ of not doing anything. Former Treasurer Peer Costello also highlighted the issue in the Herald Sun (Read here).
The federal government should have a stakeholder engagement strategy in place to engage and lead the community on the reform agenda and highlight how it will be achieved.
Political strategists will ague that it is not prudent to telegraph desired outcomes too far in advance. This thinking highlights the weakness in the communication strategy and understanding of the stakeholders.
Strong stakeholder engagement strategies allow you to adopt sound ideas, promote them and use them to strengthen the foundations of your agenda.
The frustrations of the current ‘circling the wagons’ approach defy its origins. In reality, the idiom was not about protection against attacks (by local Native Americans or outlaw gangs), but protection of livestock from wandering off.
If your stakeholder engagement strategy allows your ideas or agenda to ‘wander off’, those protecting it need to demonstrate there is no substitute for leadership. The adoption of sound stakeholder engagement strategies not only protects proposals (i.e. the livestock), but also adds to their value and appeal.
The power of speech
Whatever one may think of USA President Barak Obama’s policies and performance few doubt his ability to deliver a stirring speech. In fact many would argue that his oratorical skills were an obvious driving force in his rise to power. Of course it would not be the fist time that the ability to orate has helped achieve such high station.
Leadership is much more than a good speech but a good speech certainly helps underpin leadership.
A few months ago a crazy white guy walked into a black church in South Carolina and killed nine people including the pastor. This against a background of racial tension at its highest in the USA for decades.
President Obama chose not only to attend the funeral of Reverend Climenta Pickney but also to deliver the eulogy. Obviously it presented an opportunity to try to heal but, rather more delicately, it also offered a chance to shine a light on the unfinished work of USA race relations.
It’s 37 minutes long, so most won’t get to the end. However, for students of oratory, it is well worth it. The pacing the structure, the emotion, the pathos the empathy, it’s all there. It’s not cynical to call it text-book oratory. It is obviously heartfelt. Such oratory has the power to move, emotionally, just like other art forms.
People look to their leaders to express what they are feeling, to inspire and to reassure. That is just as true in business as in politics or religion. Yet in the digitally interconnected world we increasingly lament the lack personal connection that an engaging and arousing speech can deliver.
Few, thankfully very few, circumstances will require the oratory skills of Churchill, Roosevelt or Obama but the ability to deliver a good speech can help drive business objectives or calm a situation in manner that even the most artfully constructed communiqué cannot. For any leader it is a skill worth developing.
That skill can be trained and can be supported by seasoned speech-writers. ICG has decades of experience in presentation training and speech writing for CEOs, senior managers and public figures. We can help develop and support the ability to use the spoken word as a powerful business tool.