A Quote by Francis Maude

I feel fantastically excited that we have a leader who fought for the leadership without compromising his quite challenging view that the party has to change. — © Francis Maude
I feel fantastically excited that we have a leader who fought for the leadership without compromising his quite challenging view that the party has to change.
A revolutionary party is, in its essence, the party of its leader that carries out his ideology and cause, and the main thing in its building is to ensure the unitary character and inheritance of his ideology and leadership.
It is simply the view, and a view I think shared by most members of the party, that it is very difficult to have a leader that does not command the support of the parliamentary party.
Part of the task of the leader is to make others participate in his leadership. The best leader knows how to make his followers actually feel power themselves, not merely acknowledge his power.
I don't subscribe to, 'Here are the top ten tips to successful leadership,' or, 'How to learn leadership in ten minutes.' A leader is someone who gives positive energy to others which then results in a better change than would have happened. I think everyone is a leader.
The trouble with the Labour Party leadership and the trade union leadership, they're quite willing to applaud millions on the streets of the Philippines or in Eastern Europe, without understanding the need to also produce millions of people on the streets of Britain.
Everyone believed the Senate could not really be led. It used to take so long to rise up through seniority. In two years Lyndon Johnson is assistant leader of his party. In four years he is the leader of his party.
My view is that Trump will not change the Republican Party, America's right-of-center party. If he brings in new followers, that's great, and well worth the effort, but he will not change the Republican Party.
The core in the Juche outlook on the revolution is loyalty to the party and the leader. The cause of socialism and communism is started by the leader and is carried out under the guidance of the party and the leader.
The manager administers; the leader innovates. The manager has a short-range view; the leader has a long-range perspective. The manager asks how and when; the leader asks what and why. The manager has his eye on the bottom line; the leader has his eye on the horizon. The manager accepts the status quo; the leader challenges it.
I want you to notice nature, how geese are in flight and they form a V in a leadership role…The lead goose, when he gets tired of flapping his wings, he drops to the back and the next goose comes up front. Without stopping, without fussing, without whining. He becomes that next leader, he or she, that’s what we have to do.
Jeremy Corbyn couldn't have won without Labour changing its leadership election rules in 2014, but which more importantly got rid of the electoral college that had given MPs a third of the say over who leads the party. That's why Diane Abbott came last when she ran for leader in 2010, even though in the absolute number of votes she came third out of five. It's one of those wonderful historical ironies that the change to the rules was a victory for the Labour right, the result of a push back against the unions who had been asserting themselves more forcefully within the party.
No great leader in history fought to prevent change.
No leader can possibly have all the answers . . . .The actual solutions about how best to meet the challenges of the moment have to be made by the people closest to the action. . . .The leader has to find the way to empower those frontline people, to challenge them, to provide them with the resources they need, and then to hold them accountable. As they struggle with . . . this challenge, the leader becomes their coach, teacher, and facilitator. Change how you define leadership, and you change how you run a company.
Often, in a given project team or network, one sees leadership roles shifting among various members at various times. Attempts to fit these into traditional views of "leader" and "follower" don't quite work. It's more like Twitter: the "leader" has "followers" - but the "followers" are empowered to alter the relationship unilaterally, and the "leader" must continually earn the consent of the "followers."
I've fought the guys that didn't do anything for me, didn't move the needle a bit, people weren't excited for it, I was having trouble getting excited for it. I've fought those guys because that's what was given to me.
The Congress leadership always denied responsibilities to me both within the government and within the party organisation... They would always tell me my image as a Hindu leader was a constraint on my capacity as a political leader.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!