Where is Boris Johnson? When and why it matters that leaders show up in a crisis

Abstract

Now, more than at any time in our recent history, we will be judged by our capacity for compassion. (Rishi Sunak, UK Chancellor of the Exchequer, 20 March 2020). 1 In this piece, I draw on an ethics of care and compassion to address a question that has been asked almost daily in UK politics over the past weeks and months, namely: Where is Boris Johnson? Johnson is a leader with a long-standing reputation for being selective about whether and when he shows up. On 16 March 2020, as the severity of the coronavirus finally seemed to register, Johnson agreed to start holding daily press briefings, bringing his previous track-record and apparent instinct for no-shows into sharp relief. Criticism was understandably stilled during his hospitalisation for the virus, but it was not long after his discharge from hospital before the question of his absences came back into focus, with renewed concern about his non-attendance at key COBRA meetings and his decision to go on holiday in mid-February as the virus had been taking hold. 2 Through the prism of the psychoanalytic caring leader, I reflect on some of the explanations for, and implications of, his absences, arguing that they do not always have the same function or effect. Some absences may be politically astute, as a way of promoting an anti-establishment message and/or reassuring his constituents of their own competence and efficacy. Other absences are decidedly risky, because they send a message that he does not care. In times of crisis, the scales of separation versus proximity – absence versus presence – tip differently to normal, and leaders who appear not to care risk triggering especially powerful anxieties about betrayal and abandonment. When it is impossible for us to be care free, leaders must avoid being perceived or experienced as care less.

What lies beneath resilience: Analyzing the affective-relational basis of shared leadership in the Chilean miners’ catastrophe

“…The spirit of collaboration and fraternity present in the miners’ self-organized system provides us with important lessons. In times of severe global crises, charismatic and populist leaders have displayed strategies based mainly on top-down decision-making, which have proven, in part, effective, but also insufficient as a whole (Tomkins, 2020; Tourish, 2020). A more fruitful and integral approach should stem from the “judicious combination” of command capacities with the ability to “get on board” the rich diversity of knowledge that resides in the community (Grint, 2020; Usdin, 2014).…”

“…Leadership plays a central role in facilitating the creation of a “holding environment” capable of developing reflective processes that empathetically validate each other’s experience (Barton and Kahn, 2019). This “caring leadership” entails a reliable and accessible attitude, which becomes particularly relevant during periods of crisis and high stress (Ciulla, 2009; Tomkins, 2020). Caring is a practice based on an intimate engagement that evokes both positive and negative emotions as a result of taking responsibilities and risks for others (Gabriel, 2015).…”

“…When uncertainty and the margin of error are high, mainstream leadership theories seem useless to deal with adversity because of their reliance on centralized management of information and authority. Consequently, different approaches have to be implemented to mobilize collective knowledge and competences available in the system (Grint, 2020; Tomkins, 2020; Tourish, 2020). Leaders’ capacity to get the involvement of communities in finding realistic responses can enhance not only the latter’s sense of responsibility but also build resilient organizing in the face of catastrophe (Grint, 2020; Usdin, 2014).…”

Highlighting the Plural: Leading Amidst Romance(s)

“…For example, Andrew Cuomo, the Governor of New York State is described as a 'Steady hand in a crisis,' in Forbes Magazine , as offering 'a daily dose of leadership training' in Inc Magazine , and he is compared favourably with Donald Trump by the head of a consulting firm for crisis leadership : 'In the COVID-19 crisis we see a contrast of leaders so stark that it can serve as a leadership laboratory for future generations to study.' The figurehead role seems to carry such significance in contexts of crisis that even many academic writers cannot resist drawing leadership lessons from individual leaders' public performances (Ladkin, 2020;Tomkins, 2020;Wilson, 2020). And yet, academic commentators, at least, certainly know that the public figurehead roles we see on the public stage may be orchestrated performances that are inevitably framed by popular assumptions on what leadership should look like (Alvehus, 2019;Peck et al, 2009), rather than by what we might suspect is actually going on behind the scenes.…”

Teaching leadership the “Day After”, with care

“…In a recently published article, Tomkins (2020) has also drawn on an ethics of care and compassion to address questions asked daily in UK politics over Boris Johnson's apparent absence from the handling of the pandemic. She argues that Johnson's absence has been risky, sending a message that he "does not care," triggering "especially powerful anxieties about betrayal and abandonment" (p. 1) and a perception that he is not carefree but rather careless (Lowrie, 2020).…”