Political Leadership vs Corporate Leadership

Both of these skills require a person to have many of the same attributes such as the ability to communicate ideas clearly, the ability to sell these same ideas to other people and the ability to shepherd these ideas into actionable tasks. However there are many areas where the roles differ and sometimes people get confused as to why political leaders don't always follow the actions of Corporate leaders when confronting issues or implementing policies. You see Corporate leaders have one large advantage over political leaders and that is the fact that they have the power to terminate a person's employment whereas a politician cannot. At the most they can influence your job positively or negatively but rarely can they apply capital punishment to those that don't fall in line. Therefore a political leader has to be able to influence the emotions of his audience and to garner their trust if he/ she is to be successful with their agenda. To get your attention and your vote they must stimulate your passion by raising issues nearest and dearest to your heart. For instance to most people the issue of security for them and their families is always uppermost in their minds so attacking crime and punishment or the lack thereof is always a winner in politics. Taxation in all its forms has always been a negative aspect in our society regardless of your political persuasion so this subject can always raise the hair on someone's neck. Once the politician has tapped the emotions they must now garner trust. A past history with examples of "doing what you say you will do" is a powerful tool that will help convince people to get on your side. If you don't have that then kissing babies, trotting out your family for photo ops and general schmoozing will help get people comfortable with you and your political ideology. Back to the Corporate leader who will find it helpful to garner trust but not a necessary thing required to push through his/her agenda. Both of them can mislead people with vague statements, exaggerations and downright lies to facilitate their agenda so they are Bobbsey twins in this area for sure. So let's look at the results side of the board whereby both leaders have successfully pushed their agendas into actions using their own techniques and now must view the fruit of their labors. The Corporate Leader must be successful or he will face a boot out of his job for failing to satisfy his shareholders. So even though he started with more power and an easier route to implementing his policies and programs he faces capital punishment if he fails. The politician on the other hand finds herself in a very different position if she fails. She may have lied or mislead people to get herself elected and her programs implemented but what is to be done? The job is secure until the next election and by then most will have forgotten the untruths and the failure. In fact with good political spin doctors today they can turn failure into victory through the media (particularly if you are Liberal) and voila' you are ready for another run for the golden ring. So if you are searching for truth and integrity in leadership let me tell you it is very very rare. The last leader in my opinion that held these values was Ronald Reagan. He was truly a unique man and a honest politician ( which is almost an oxymoron) that has not been matched for the years before or since. Sarah Palin has the base talent to be another Reagan but the question remains, does she have the strength and confidence that are required to withstand the pressures that come with "principled" political leadership? It would definitely be something to see.