This paper builds on the rich and expanding seam of leadership theory around the need to examine and analyse leadership within particular local contexts (Fairhurst, 2009; Porter & McLaughlin, 2006; Grint, 2005). We apply concepts from generic leadership theory to analyses the leadership challenges of national politicians, for whom these contexts are myriad, dynamic and contested (Hartley and Benington, 2010; Rhodes et al, 2007). Contexts, or arenas, for democratically elected politicians in prominent leadership roles include interactions through formal and informal parliamentary relationships, constituency and political party links and their specialist department connections. The focus in this paper is on how ministers learned to handle the complex challenges of their role.
The paper reports findings from a small-scale interpretive study of the leadership and learning experiences of nine former Ministers from UK national government, with semi-structured interviews undertaken once they had left office. Drawing from a stratified sample across the three ranks of Minister, as well as spanning both the Commons and the Lords, findings are based on a thematic analysis of views on their personal leadership experience in a range of arenas, each presenting its own particular complex challenges.
Key themes emerge from enquiry around learning from formative experiences, perceptions of leadership, formal and informal roles, key achievements and significant challenges while in office, formal and informal learning and reflections about what might have been handled differently.
Demands of the ministerial role allow little opportunity for reflection on leadership learning, particularly on handling simultaneous and conflicting contextual pressures, while in office so retrospective accounts provide the basis for study. Learning experiences are examined through an analytical framework developed for specifically from national politicians’ experience, highlighting comparisons between structured learning, practicing new skills, reflection and daily political life (Hartley, 2011). The paper reflects on the data about learning and leadership to contribute to theories of political leadership in multiple and contested arenas, while also drawing lessons for leadership studies in general.
