In the derby for success in business and politics, contestants square off not only against each other but a plethora of obstacles, variables, decisions and responses, deal-killers, all that can originate from that darkest and most dreaded netherworld called the self. In other words, many careers are arrested or even derailed because someone inadvertently shoots themselves in the proverbial foot, or they simply disappear into a crowd of more likeable people. Conversely, some soar to unlikely heights because they understand how to steer the voting constituency – and make no mistake, there is a voting constituency in business; they’re called customers, co-workers and management – towards other aspects of their game. They’re just so darn likeable, even when they are something less than perfect, so they get the promotion, they win the deal and in spite of thin platforms and lack of experience, even in spite of all that is logical and good, they get elected.

The Pulpit of Likeability
The political stage is perhaps the most transparent laboratory to witness the power of personality in full glory. Gordon Brown emerges from the shadow of Tony Blair to embody all that is competent and assured in a bureaucrat, only to see his lead in the polls over the conservative opposition of David Cameron, which had been as high as 56 to 32 per cent, dwindle and then disappear in only six months. Most of this decline occurred in the final two months of that timeframe, when the public saw more of Brown than ever before. The question, then, becomes this: did Cameron gain the lead through the power of his combined offering of politics and his sparkling personality, or did Brown lose it through a public perception that the guy had all the charisma and likeability of a day-old piece of cod? No one questions Brown’s experience but would you really invite the guy over for a barbeque? Pollsters think not and the outcome could swing on that very issue.

Hop across the pond and you’ll observe the cult of personality dictating poll results with perhaps even more power. Notice that John Kerry, the former contender for the job of President of the United States, is nowhere on the landscape of this election, even though his credentials and insider equity are of the highest caliber. But no one questions that he is unelectable due to one simple truth and it’s not his Bassett-hound mug: it’s the likeability factor. In his case, the perceived lack thereof. The guy has all the allure and charisma of a tax audit, and when you look more closely at his background (let’s just say he’s married to one of the richest women on the planet), he becomes the very antithesis of ‘the common man.’

Legend has it that when a reporter suggested to Kerry that he didn’t speak the language of the average American voter, the Senator responded, “Au contraire mon frere.” Odds are, he hasn’t been invited to a barbeque in decades. Meanwhile, the active candidates have staffed the likeability factor of their campaigns with highly paid consultants, whose job it is to blur the line between policy and personality to the extent that one begets the other. Barack Obama has less than a full term in Congressional office and yet he is neck and neck with more established opposition by virtue of representing the face of change, not the least of which is a killer smile and a way with words. Hilary Clinton, on the other hand, perhaps over-compensated for the perception that she needed to be tough and authoritative – she succeeded wildly, no one questions this, and the word ‘cold’ often enters her biographical vocabulary – and only when she shed what some thought were a few carefully calculated on-camera tears (a return on her investment in consulting, some surmise) did her fortunes turn, to land her a victory in the second state primary and a return to front-runner status with more smiles and hugs than we’ve ever seen from her.