Abstract:
This thesis investigates the leadership of six people who were prime ministers of New Zealand from 1984-2000 during unprecedented economic and electoral change. The research, which included interviewing 60 political elite and reviewing relevant literature ranging from journals, biographies, autobiographies, commentaries and articles, revealed some predictable, and some surprising, insights into New Zealand prime ministers' leadership styles and the use of their formal and informal powers.
Each prime minister's leadership has been evaluated against four theoretical approaches: power/influence, transactional, transformational and charismatic. Differences and similarities in leadership styles are revealed by a comparative study of the prime ministers' careers, particularly how they gained leadership and then lost it. A further comparison also investigates, from primary and secondary sources, how prime ministers led within their departments, their caucuses and their cabinets. Finally, a comparison of the way three prime ministers led coalition negotiations under the MMP electoral system introduced in 1996 confirmed major changes in prime ministerial power.
When analysed, the prime ministers' leadership styles are shown to differ in that one was revealed to be both charismatic and laissez faire, while the others were combinations of transactional and power/knowledge, with two being also mildly transformational. In times of unprecedented change it could have been anticipated that some prime ministers would be strongly transformational but, as this study shows, it was two Ministers of Finance who were strongly transformational. Both differed from transformational theory, however, in that neither was in the least charismatic.
Surprising insights were given into differences in the leadership of men and women prime ministers and this is an area ripe for further research, as are the differences in the leaders chosen over the decades by the two major parties and the attributes that selectors require in political leaders. The importance of institutional rules at a time of economic and electoral change could also be the subject of worthwhile research, for it appears from this study that in New Zealand the rules are important, but the direction the prime ministers set, the relationship between what prime ministers say they will do and what they actually do, are even more important.
