Let us analyze this event purely
from management and leadership perspectives:
(1) First thing which struck
me was that the meeting was happening at a private 'Resort' where entry was
restricted to a few while 'aam aadmi' did not know what was happening inside.
Bhushan's demand to video-tape the proceedings was met with great scorn and
heart-burns. Then some of Yadav's supporters were denied entry. When Kejriwal
had said that he would take oath as Delhi CM in a stadium, it meant something.
A stadium symbolized "openness" and "equality" while a
"closed door resort" symbolized "non-transparency" and
"inequality".
(2) A leader is built by
taking leadership during crisis. This is why Rahul Gandhi never got respect as
he went absconding during every crisis. Kejriwal was the same leader who used
to challenge his opponents into "open debate" in front of live
cameras. He was always ready to clarify his positions. Portions of Kejriwal's
speech or conversations which we have listened to recently sound like a fuming
Sonia Gandhi. Kejriwal's group have hardly displayed any inspiring leadership during
this crisis.
(3) A good leader has to
remain 'accessible'. This is why managers who advertise "open door
policy" appear so happy about it. During yesterday's meeting, we never saw
Kejriwal or his select group outside the venue interacting with the party's
"volunteers". We never saw Kejriwal even talking to the media,
clearing his position on the scandals or about yesterday's ruckus. When leaders
are inaccessible, they run the risk of adversaries taking their pole positions.
We saw this happening yesterday when anti-Kejriwal Yogendra Yadav sat on Dharna
in front of the "volunteers" - dharna being the most branded IP of
Kejriwal. Party members may fall in love with other leaders for doing what they
were earlier used to seeing Kejriwal doing.
(4) When AAP had established
an 'internal Lokpal', it had sent a strong message to all. That the party was
ready to walk the talk; the party stood for all the values it wanted other
parties and govts to possess. But when Kejiwal's team asked their internal
Lokpal Admiral Ramdas not to come to the meeting, it was as if they wanted
"righteousness" and "truth" to turn a "blind
eye". This decision made Kejiwal and his party appear like
"hypocrites".
(5) People expect
"continuity" as much from a leader as they expect "vision".
This crisis and the manner in which it was handled gave a clear message how
much the party had changed after gaining absolute power in a state (of Delhi).
That was people's worst fear - that this party and its leaders were appearing
honest until they were out of power and would also change after gaining power.
The party has been successful in letting its members' worst fears come true. It
has been a PR disaster. It has been a crisis mismanaged. It has been an
anti-climax.
- Rahul
No comments:
Post a Comment