GhoseSpot | What Uddhav Thackeray can learn from Naveen Patnaik and Devendra Fadnavis

Having spent the better part of my life in the corporate world, now as an observer of Indian politics, I often tend to view political leaders through the lens of organisational leadership. To be clear, the principles of leadership run through all walks of life — business, sports, politics. It is only the context that varies calling for varying skill sets in different situations. Many former sports personalities like Mike Brearley and Paddy Upton are sought after corporate coaches. Sir Lawrence Olivier’s son — Richard Olivier — has built a successful practice out of using Shakespearean plays for leadership development. With the presidential system taking roots across the world, political leaders in India too are behaving increasingly like corporate CEOs. Therefore, a comparison of the leadership style of different leaders may be instructive and interesting. And what can be a better place to begin than the recent drama in Maharashtra. Though it is still work in progress, one can still draw lessons from the conduct of the lead actors. These may be useful in our personal lives as well. Uddhav Thackeray has always given the impression of a Shakespearean “tragic hero”. People have called him a reluctant politician and even less of a “fundamentalist”. A common refrain has been that he is a misfit in today’s ruthless and toxic corporate environment. The same is at times also said of Rahul Gandhi. A more relevant comparison may have been Naveen Patnaik. Before his legendary father died, Naveen Babu used to live in a different universe several light-years away from the grimy world of politics. He was parachuted to Bhubaneshwar and turned out to be one of the most admired and longest serving chief ministers of the state. In his fifth consecutive term, Naveen Patnaik has cemented Biju-babu’s legacy but in his own style without trying to imitate the charismatic personality father. [caption id=“attachment_8970281” align=“alignnone” width=“640”]  File photo of BJD (Biju Janata Dal) supremo
and Odisha chief minister Naveen Patnaik. PTI [/caption] What one saw in the case of Naveen Patnaik happens often in business too. A classic example is Azim Premji — who had to return halfway through his graduate studies at Stanford University to take charge of the family enterprise after the untimely death of his father. There are many other instances too where an incumbent has grown in his role after an abrupt transition often decided by fate. [caption id=“attachment_10856781” align=“alignnone” width=“640”]  Wipro chairman Azim Premji at the Annual Meeting 2009 of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland on 31 January 2009. Image courtesy Monikia Flueckiger/WEF via Wikimedia Commons[/caption] A common trait of these personalities — is they all found their own voice through a deep sense of self-awareness about their strengths and weaknesses. While these people know that in an age of disruptions maintaining status-quo is not an option, they also understand the importance of “change with continuity” in heritage institutions. Above all, they gather the right talent around them. Kumarmangalam Birla managed this transition brilliantly after the premature demise of his father, Aditya Birla to take the group to great heights. Sometimes growing under the shadow of a matriarch or patriarch can also be limiting, especially if the latter has a larger-than-life persona. This may have been a handicap for Uddhav. But where he perhaps erred most is in outsourcing the strategy to a few around him and his immediate family, who were also lacking hands-on experience in running an iconic party with a culture rooted in regional and religious identity. His choice of aides was, perhaps, based more on considerations of loyalty than political acumen. As a result, he may have cut himself off from the grassroots and thus choked channels of communication.

***

Also Read **Uddhav Thackeray: A look at the big wins and the biggest lost** **Lotus to bloom? The next step in Maharashtra politics after Uddhav Thackeray quits as chief minister** **Could Uddhav Thackeray have prevented the Maharashtra political crisis? Here's what we know so far**

***

It is said in Uddhav Thackeray’s defence that his personality and impaired health did not allow him to physically reach out to constituents. Hence, this task was largely delegated to his son and increased his dependence on satraps, who were the old guard fiercely loyal to his late father and his ideology. Sometimes one thought, he saw himself more as a caretaker or custodian of the throne for his son, waiting for him to come of age. It is interesting though that Balasaheb himself seldom stepped out of his residence — Matoshree. Yet, his grip on the party and information network ensured that nothing moved within the Shiv Sena without his knowledge or approval. The litmus test of a leader comes in the form of managing crises. Here too a comparison with Naveen Patnaik may not be out of place. Naveen Babu too is known to be predominantly housebound and inaccessible. He operates through a few loyal and exceptionally competent bureaucrats. The secret of his power are his extraordinary political instincts. This has not only helped him maintain a dynamic equilibrium with the government in Delhi — with healthy trade-off between the interests of the state and the Centre without making it an adversarial relationship. He is remarkably clear about his priorities and realistic in his ambition. So, he does not have to expend energy in unproductive confrontations. When some party members tried to stage a coup while he was on a rare overseas trip, he was able to quash it in no time. In contrast, Uddhav Thackeray appeared to be at sea during the current denouement. First, there was a huge intelligence failure, which has been widely commented upon. But through the entire episode there was apparent confusion in his camp with people shooting in different directions. People spoke in different voices ranging from wild bravado to maudlin sentiments. It was not clear as to who was in charge. There was a distinct impression of his being advised by outsiders, who may not have been in sync with his and the Shiv Sena’s interest. So, his moves did not inspire confidence either in the ranks or external stakeholders. As the leader he seemed beleaguered and pushed against the wall. [caption id=“attachment_10842231” align=“alignnone” width=“640”]  Maharashtra chief minister Eknath Shinde. PTI[/caption] In comparison the Eknath Shinde camp and his sponsors working behind the scenes, no prize for guessing it was the BJP led by Devendra Fadnavis, worked with clockwork precision on a masterfully crafted strategy. Having learnt from their previous mistake of 2019 — no doubt guided by the central leadership of the party — nothing was left to chance, and all gaps were plugged, and contingency plans kept on stand-by anticipating every move of the adversary. Ultimately, it was a victory of flawless execution over scattered and incoherent responses. [caption id=“attachment_8856951” align=“alignnone” width=“640”]  File image of Maharashtra deputy chief minister Devendra Fadnavis. PTI[/caption] Similarly, there is a lot to learn from Devendra Fadnavis. But let us keep that for another article. For now, the key lesson is how he recovered from the setback of 2019. When acceding defeat then, he had said: I shall return. Come back he did and how. As Uddhav Thackeray embarks upon rebuilding his party, he can take a few leaves out of Fadnavis’ book — as indeed learn from other leaders in the world of business and politics who have risen from the ashes as it were, like the proverbial phoenix. The author is a current affairs commentator, marketer, blogger and leadership coach, who tweets at @SandipGhose. Views expressed are personal. Read all the Latest News , Trending News ,  Cricket News , Bollywood News , India News and Entertainment News here. Follow us on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram.