As I have observe the scene over the decades, I have a few key points I remind my self of regularly:
1. A Political Party is a Machine to Win Elections for a group of members. When people confuse that with ideology, things go awry. Politicians are specialists in winning elections and then operating government. Like Doctors, or Plumbers. To expect more is to live miserably.
Parties become coherent and dynamic when either of two things happen.
1. A Charismatic Leader Emerges who can deliver votes
2. Donors have a unified front to deliver money to achieve focused goals.
It is fortunate that item one and two cannot co-exist in the same time and space.
Successful Parties sacrifice ideology to results when necessary.
After a Charismatic Leader retires, voters usually want a technician politician to maintain the course. This leads to disaster over time as conditions change and technicians rarely adapt.
interesting. In my observation of the IT field, this is also true of technicians. They feel they are cutting edge, but many times, an older technician is an expert in the way it used to be done. Techs who have taken a turn in management, you would think, would catch some of the vision, but then if they do, they can no longer stand being on the production line. Techs make bad leaders, and leaders make bad techs.
All that says is that leaders are frequently poor managers – and vice versa. Being a leader often means allowing the managers free hand, which is usually what managers can’t do well.