Paul Bridle looks at the fine mess that Gordon Brown has got himself into, which he attributes to Brown's lack of leadership 'style'.

One of the measures of good leadership is the leader’s ability to ensure succession. This means that should something unfortunate happen, the organisation has the necessary leadership to take it forward. We now understand why Tony Blair was so slow in handing over the reins of power to Gordon Brown and on occasions looked like he was trying to set up the situation where there was someone else he could hand over to.

What Tony Blair knew, and most people were aware of deep down, was that Gordon Brown was not the right leader to continue driving the country forward. Sure enough, for two years Gordon Brown has systematically shown that he can’t lead a country, much less a party and his own Cabinet.

So what is wrong? Some say that he lacks the flourish and panache of Tony Blair and others say he is too ‘clunky’ and shows no passion. Whilst these comments are true and have a level of merit in a world where people are looking for inspiration and vision, Gordon Brown lacks a more important skill - he lacks the ability to control and discipline his party. Interestingly, as Chancellor he ran his team in a very autocratic manner and a very hands on approach. He was well known for his anger and abrasive style, which he got away with as he was largely guaranteed to hold his position as Chancellor while Tony Blair was the leader. Let us be honest, he probably would not have lasted as Chancellor if Blair and him did not have 'the pact' they made years before.

"We now understand why Tony Blair was so slow in handing over the reins of power to Gordon Brown... What Tony Blair knew, and most people were aware of deep down, was that Gordon Brown was not the right leader to continue driving the country forward."

As Prime Minister, reality faces Gordon Brown. First, he hasn’t got a guaranteed position with a boss that will shield him. He is now directly answerable to the British public. Second, he knows that an autocratic style will no longer work but has no idea how else to lead. He can't take the same hands on approach because the role is too big, but he has no idea how to win loyalty that would enable him to empower people to do what is right.

Tony Blair was excellent at being able to control whilst empowering people. He knew how to manage the perceptions of the public and be seen to deal with issues decisively. Blair was a master of PR and had the ability to find the right words to respond to situations. As much as he would like to, Brown is unable to control everything and every time an issue arises he is trying to figure out how to deal with it without appearing dictatorial or authoritarian. The result is appearing weak or like a volcano waiting to erupt.

His style of leadership in a safe position as Chancellor never prepared him for the leadership needed to govern the country. Worse still, those that had grown weary of his style of leadership as Chancellor see the opportunity to bring the authoritarian down.

The whipping Labour received in the recent elections is a sign that the British public have lost faith. They have found out what they always thought was the case, the MP’s are skimming off the system for their own benefit. Although this is a significant issue, the truth is, the public finally found something to really have a go at the Government about. It was the tipping point that they were looking for. It finally gave them something to justify the nagging feeling they had about this Government and Gordon Brown in particular.

What next for Labour?

One of the key strengths of a good leader is the ability to work their way out of their job. In other words, they don’t make the organisation dependant on them but rather ensure that the organisation can continue to grow beyond them. The problem now is the lack of an obvious successor to Gordon Brown. The pact between Blair and Brown has created a situation where there is no obvious successor. No one has been allowed to create a public profile that would rival Brown and those that may have aspirations to challenge for his position are not likely to do so knowing they will lead their Party into defeat at a general election that has to take place within a year.

So we have a situation where the Prime Minister will not hold an election because he knows he can’t win, and nobody wants to take the role as Prime Minister when there is not enough time to gain enough credibility to lead the Party into a victory.

For a man that has gone to great lengths to make a point that he wants to do what is right for the country, he is now in the position where he has allowed the BNP to gain a seat in the European Parliament, revived the almost dead UKIP and pushed his party to the worst results in decades. Worst of all, he has not positioned the party where a viable leader is waiting in the wings to take control.

Cameron, a leader in waiting?

There is no doubt that at this moment David Cameron would probably be the winner if a general election was run tomorrow. However, he is the best of a mediocre choice of leaders. He was more decisive than Gordon Brown over the MP’s expenses, but he lacks position power.

All the main parties are fighting over the middle ground in politics and the truth is, nobody knows what they stand for. Cameron’s election win will be possible based on the poor leadership of Brown rather than the inspirational leadership of Cameron. He will need to be seen as standing for something meaningful at a time when the options available to him are largely not palatable to many people.

Obama won because he reached out to a generation who had not voted before, had become weary of old style politics and were looking for something new. Blair won because he ditched the old Labour and offered a new Labour with new approaches. Cameron will need to show he has something new to offer and excite the public to follow him for who he is and what his Party stands for now. Failure to do this will mean we have a weak conservative government for five years and then another change.

Paul Bridle is a leadership methodologist, international researcher, author, professional speaker, consultant & facilitator