As a self-proclaimed “rebel with a cause”, Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner will be unafraid to keep Prime Minister Keir Starmer in check. But what does this mean? Should every CEO/PM have someone like this by their side? And what qualities should such a person demonstrate to do the role effectively?

The perfect leadership team

The perfect leadership team is diverse. It brings different lenses together. People’s perspectives are informed by their upbringing, their technical expertise, their culture, the specific experiences which built their adult personalities. 

The richness of discussions and, therefore, the robustness of decisions made at the senior level is enhanced by this variety of perspectives. 

A cabinet, like any senior leadership team, is a place for debate, conflict, challenge and – like any healthy team – diversity of perspectives should be welcome. 

Starmer vs Rayner

Starmer and Rayner are very different in many ways. 

Starmer has a more conventional political upbringing – selective state school, university and a career as a barrister before joining the world of politics. 

Rayner was raised in a low-income household, became a mum at the age of 16, and returned to education later in life before entering politics. 

Starmer is a lawyer by nature. He is articulate and collected under pressure. He chooses his words with care. 

He is political in that sense – measured and deliberate rather than speaking off the cuff. This can mean you don’t know if you’re getting his real opinion, but it does mean he doesn’t put his foot in it too often. 

Her role as DPM will likely at times be to keep Starmer in check. 

Rayner is blunt – she speaks as she finds. She tends not to moderate herself, which means she sometimes has to apologise later. As Deputy PM, Rayner can largely define the role herself. This is not an official government title and past DPMs have interpreted the role in different ways. 

Her other role as minister in the department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, is more defined. But as a self-proclaimed “rebel with a cause” her role as DPM will likely at times be to keep Starmer in check. 

The value of your team

Having a second in command who does this can really be valuable in a senior team. Power can go to anyone’s head. Having someone by your side who is willing to challenge you, to put forward uncomfortable perspectives or to call you out keeps a CEO, or a PM, grounded. 

It sets the tone for the team, showing that this is a place for robust conflict or ideas and opinions regardless of the fact that the person being called out in the Prime Minister of the country. 

But for this role to be effective, some basic ground rules have to be in place. 

1. Trust and mutual respect

Ideally critique will come without personal agenda. The person doing the challenging needs to be trusted and there must be mutual respect between the two. 

Are they speaking up because they want to enhance the quality of the debate, to ensure different perspectives are on the table and hold colleagues to a higher standard? Or are they trying to score points, divide and conquer?

The latter could actually undermine the quality of the debate and the ability of the ‘captain’ to lead. 

2. Being willing to change your mind

There is no point having a debate, even a high quality one, if people are intractable in their positions. Everyone around the table must be willing to change their mind in the light of the debate. 

That doesn’t mean they WILL change their mind, but they are open to it.

they value and encourage this kind of discussion and cannot be set against each other. 

3. Being willing to hold lightly to your opinion

Not only must people be willing to change their minds, they must also be willing to hold lightly to their opinions.This means recognising that, having presented their case, they may not get the outcome they want. 

Who is the decision-maker? If it is not you, at some point you have to gracefully back down. You did your job. 

4. Choosing your moment

The problem with the ‘speak as I find’ approach is that it takes no responsibility for how comments land, how they affect others in the room or even how, in the heat of the moment, you say something you later regret… but the damage is done. Keeping someone in check is a fine ambition but it requires some subtlety to have the desired outcome. 

That might mean choosing your moment. Are you going to call out behaviour in front of everyone, or take it outside the meeting? Do you want the outcome, or do you just want to be seen as standing up to power? 

5. Having each other’s back

This kind of dynamic only works when it is valued by both or all parties concerned. When the person being challenged welcomes the challenge and takes it with grace, humility and maybe even a sense of humour, it can be deeply refreshing. 

Equally, when the person challenging does so with respect, a willingness to receive challenge as well as give it, and the nous to know when enough is enough, the team is strengthened. 

It is also vital that, should anyone try to use a moment of tension between these two colleagues as an opportunity to create a rift, gossip or go to the press for their own political gain, the two individuals concerned leave no room for doubt – they value and encourage this kind of discussion and cannot be set against each other. 

The future holds promise

Whether or not Starmer and Rayner are able to navigate this dynamic effectively only time will tell. 

Even if it proves too challenging for this particular team, there is no reason to reject it in your own organisation. It takes practice, a willingness to get it wrong and a good amount of emotional intelligence to strike the right balance between ‘holding each other to account’ and continual, increasingly disrespectful, conflict.

But the benefits, if you get it right, for the quality of discussion and decision-making, are worth the attempt.