Lessons in Leading Through Crisis From Jacinda Ardern
28:30 Share

Want to lead like a superhero? On the Superhero Leadership podcast, Marvel's former CEO and legendary turnaround expert, Peter Cuneo, teams up with top leaders from business, media, and beyond to share the real secrets of powerful leadership. Listen to Superhero Leadership wherever you get your podcasts. Imagine a state where you can get from big cities to big nature in less than half an hour with some of the best quality of life in the nation.

Welcome to Minnesota, America's least stressed state. Learn more at exploreminnesota.com slash live.

Hi, I'm Amy Bernstein, HBR's Editor-in-Chief. And I'm Amy Gallo, a longtime contributing editor to HBR. Along with Amy B., I host our Women at Work podcast, which now releases episodes every other Monday, year-round. That means more practical advice and more insights to make you feel seen and supported in your career. Subscribe to Women at Work wherever you listen to podcasts. I'm Alison Beard. And I'm Adi Ignatius, and this is the HBR IdeaCast.

Adi, imagine that you have just been appointed to a big leadership position and the people and businesses you're responsible for are hit by a series of crises. Disease outbreak, a terrorist attack, several natural disasters, and then COVID-19. Do you think you would be able to navigate through all of that?

Definitely not. But I have to say it reminds me a little bit of the era we're in right now. The details are different, but we're in an era of perpetual crisis. And I think business and political leaders have to just accept that there's no smooth sailing. It really is crisis management all the time.

And that's why we wanted to talk to Jacinda Ardern, the former prime minister of New Zealand, who during her tenure from 2017 to 2023 managed her country through all of those crises, one after another. And we do think she has really important lessons for business leaders today who are having to deal with so much geopolitical and economic uncertainty. You know, that volatile, complex, ambiguous VUCA world that we don't love, but we have to deal with.

Yeah, I want to hear what she has to say. You know, we've just launched a new subscription offer called HBR Executive that really is aimed at exactly everything we're talking about, which is, you know, how to help leaders in this very, very, very difficult, very volatile, very crisis-filled time.

Yes, so she has lots to teach us about crisis management, how to make decisions when you don't have a lot of information or that information is changing, how to gather experts with different views and find consensus, how to communicate those choices when other people might not agree, and how to navigate burnout.

Crisis management may be the most important skill that leaders can have today. So here is my conversation with Jacinda Ardern, former Prime Minister of New Zealand. She also has a new memoir called A Different Kind of Power. Jacinda, thanks so much for being with me today. Thank you very much for having me. You did face many crises during your time as PM. How did the early ones prepare you for the global pandemic?

Probably the one that bore the most relevance was the biosecurity incursion that we experienced. The major take home for me was making a decision in a really uncertain environment where there wasn't a template. So when mycoplasma bovis came into New Zealand, we brought together those who are most affected. And that was our farming community. And we gathered together an expert advisory group to give us advice on how to respond. And at that point, we also panned around other countries and

I particularly wanted to know, you know, who else had ever tried to eradicate this illness from their national herd? And the answer was no one. One of the questions we asked ourselves was, well, if we seek to get rid of this disease and we fail, we'll ultimately end up being no worse off than any other country in the response they then had in the aftermath.

And that path of least regret, probably there was a psychology in that that played out then in the approach that we took during the pandemic. If we choose a path, no one else is traveling and we fail, we simply end up in the place that many others are in. And so when you're in these situations,

very uncertain chaotic environments when there's a dearth of information. How do you approach decision-making? How do you make sure you have the right people in the room to advise you and then how do you work through and finally decide on a course of action? This is where I found that one of the traits that perhaps I carried into leadership that I might have previously seen as a bit of a weakness is

this notion of imposter syndrome or a confidence gap, you know, really actually drove me towards an approach that I think helped me in decision making. It meant that I wanted to fully understand everything I could about a problem. I would read as much as I could and,

I would then bring in people who had expertise in the issue. After reading all of the research, observing all of the data, speaking to all of the experts, then a decision needed to be made. It wasn't the case that after doing all of that, there was one obvious conclusion to reach. And I think the most important approach at that point was sharing openly, not just the decision that we'd made, but the choices that we had. And sharing that openly, people could often see why we landed where we landed and

And that really helped with then enacting the decision because we needed people to be on board with the approach that we were taking. And so that was really critical. So as a person who was making some of the most important decisions that your country would ever face, how did you get over or get past that notion of imposter syndrome? I'm young. I'm a woman. I'm disabled.

responsible for a population and this is a life or death situation. So how did you have the confidence to make those calls? I think it's really interesting because often I think there's an assumption that if you doubt yourself, that means that you won't be decisive. Actually, I found the reverse to be true. Yes, I carried some self-doubt, you know, with

question myself or from time to time, you know, feel internally that lack of confidence. But because as I say, it drove me towards being very well prepared, you know, I wouldn't walk into an interview without fully trying to understand the problem that I was being called in to address. The same with every policy decision.

All of that led to me being confident in the decisions I was making. Politics is inherently sort of a tough business. You're always going to be criticized in these heightened crisis situations. Yeah, it's a blood sport. Exactly. It gets even worse. Yes. So how did you develop the sort of thick skin that you needed to get through sort of your early career, but then also these really high stakes situations? I'm not sure I did.

Which probably means that at various points, politics for me felt like sometimes quite a difficult experience. But again, the idea of being thin-skinned or maybe if you're being uncharitable, describing it as being emotional, actually isn't that just empathy? And isn't that a character trait that we want more of in leadership? Yeah.

One of the things that surprised me, though, is I knew going into politics I was thin-skinned, and I thought that the way that I needed to deal with that was to toughen up.

Over time, I think I learned that the most important thing was to try and feel the things I needed to feel because we shouldn't isolate ourselves from criticism. Criticism and a feedback loop can drive us to, you know, re-examine decisions we've made, motivate us to work harder on issues. And in politics in particular, we need to hear that, but then filter out the things that might just be political or might just be a personal insult. Those things didn't bother me as much.

And the way I was able to decipher between the two often was just asking the question, what's the motivation of the person pitching that forward right now? And if the motivation was purely political, it was a little easier to compartmentalize that. So you became sort of a symbol of empathetic leadership after the Christchurch shooting. And that was a shooting at a mosque where 51 people were killed. Yes.

After that, you got gun control legislation passed in 27 days. So how did you marshal support and mobilize action so quickly? Here I really have to credit the New Zealand public. People were really seeking a response that was a never again approach. What do we do to prevent this ever happening to us or to anyone else? And that

turned us towards gun control. In our case, it was an Australian who came to New Zealand with the express intent to take the lives of members of our Muslim community, and he legally acquired multiple weapons, including AR-15s. And we are a country with reasonably high gun ownership, but New Zealanders still looked around and said, is this a weapon that we need to have widely available in our country? And the answer was no.

It's worth noting that 119 of the 120 members of parliament voted in favour of that legislation. So yes, we led the charge, but I believe we were simply channeling the sentiment that existed in New Zealand at that time. Yeah. As all of these crises were hitting you, how did you...

make sure to manage and protect your time to ensure that you were also tackling all of the sort of the critical policy issues that you'd campaigned on, not just sort of moving from crisis to crisis? Great question. But actually, you know, even if you don't in politics have a

You know, these singular, significant, large-scale events, there are micro versions of those happening behind the scenes all of the time. And so that time management and making sure that you're continuing on with a policy agenda in spite of what's happening either politically or day-to-day is critical.

One of the things, though, that we tried to deploy, particularly during COVID, was this notion of a crisis is upon us. It requires a response. We have these persistent other issues, be it inequality, child poverty, a housing crisis, climate change. How do we do both in singular policy ideas?

We, amongst many other countries, were told that we would have the potential of an economic slowdown. High levels of unemployment were a particular concern. So we produced a package to try and ensure that we maintained high levels of employment.

And part of that was, for instance, creating schemes around climate adaptation where we were employing people to build flood banks, for instance. We had child poverty issues. We rolled out a food and schools program knowing that the hours would suit those who are often in precarious work who had lost their employment during COVID. So we created thousands of jobs whilst also addressing child poverty. So, yeah.

Making sure that in those moments of crisis, you use that, if you can, as an opportunity to accelerate your other policy agenda. And that was something we focused on. A lot of win-wins. Double duty.

So how did you avoid burnout? I like to think that I did. And some people have, in some cases, misinterpreted my departure when I did as being burnout, when that was never the way I would have characterized my decision to leave. And so maintaining a level of stamina during that five years, it was difficult, particularly with those back-to-back crises that we experienced earlier.

I thankfully had a team that were very careful to try and throughout everything we were going through, try and maintain just small portions of time that I would have with my family, particularly my young daughter. In the evenings, they would try and give me 90 minutes at home to put my child down, read a story, do bath time. And then I would go back to it, whether it was working at my home office or back into the building for meetings.

And that long-term plan, I think, helped act as a layer of extra resilience by just giving me that connection point back to my family as often as I could. That helped build up the stores a little bit. And sleep. We martyr ourselves, I think, in leadership to sleep. People assume that we don't sleep. In fact, if they ask, you feel like...

It's wrong to tell people that you try to get enough sleep. But actually, as decision makers, I think we need to be much more protective of sleep because it is a decision making tool. And without it, I think we're the poorer for it.

I am a big proponent of at least eight hours of sleep a night. I failed miserably most of the time, but I really did try. I'm sure. And are there any sort of overarching leadership lessons that you took away from all of those crisis management experiences? I think probably one of the most significant is this notion in leadership that we have that confidence is built on.

through absolute knowledge and displaying a sense of the fact that we have all of the answers all of the time. We should be trusted because we show no shred of a gap in that knowledge at any point. I think confidence is built through trust. And trust is built by people seeing that in whatever moment of crisis you're in, that there are inevitably going to be gaps in what information is available to you. And COVID was such an obvious example of

The whole world was grappling with this new illness. And if we all knew what to do, we all would have had the same plan, I imagine, possibly at least. And so being open about our knowledge gaps, sharing with people everything that we knew and everything we didn't know, I think became a tool to build trust and confidence. And I think we should be more willing to be open in those moments and transparent as a tool to build trust.

And as someone who had to negotiate with opposition parties, as labor leader, had to negotiate with foreign counterparts, as prime minister, how do you approach high-stakes negotiations when there is big disagreement over what the right thing to do is or sort of differing needs? What comes to mind as an example is some of the times in office where we were trying to work through really difficult policy challenges around climate change.

Often, I think a starting point was just understanding the history of that debate was really important because I often found that the people that you might be engaging with might represent communities that felt a sense of blame for an issue that actually it was in everyone's interest to find solutions to and blame took us nowhere. And so the first thing that we did on some of those tricky things, like for instance, addressing agriculture as a contributor to our emissions profile was

was to get everyone, you know, the leaders of those communities who are affected around the table and just find a point of consensus. And when we did that, it was really clear that actually for almost everyone around the table, the environment didn't matter to them. It did. Our reputation mattered to them.

our profile on the international stage and our value proposition as a clean green nation, as an exporter mattered to them. And when we found that starting point, that really opened up the conversation, well, if we agree that, then what do we do next? And having the ability to work through those challenges together, there were practical questions that without them around the table, we just could not have designed appropriate policy without them.

I found that really key for some of those really tricky issues. And what about when you were discussing issues like climate change, like the COVID crisis with foreign leaders? You know, when you come into those conversations, often you'll be coming from entirely different political perspectives. You'll often have very different value sets that are dictating the way that you're operating in your own home environment.

But actually, when you leave the country and you sit down to a bilateral conversation with someone else, what is sitting in front of you at that point is, how do I advocate best for my country? How do I advocate best right now for New Zealand's needs? And so I always found that in those circumstances, understanding where the person across the table, how they were going to be thinking in that frame, what they needed in that conversation as well, what they were looking for,

That was the best way to prepare walking into those conversations. So a lot of my conversations were about trade. They were about tariffs. They were about New Zealand's interest on the world stage, about the importance of a rules-based order, because that is how I could best represent New Zealand's interest and needs.

Tariffs are obviously a hot button issue right now. What's your view on whether adversarial trade policies are good or bad for business? New Zealand has long been a proponent of free trade. And not only have we advocated, I'd like to think that we have been key in trying to establish agreements

that acknowledge the role that trade can play in development, but also in acknowledging some of the really significant issues of our time, incorporating environmental issues

issues into trade agreements, acknowledging labour issues in agreements. So we see them as tools that can achieve a great deal and sometimes address some of the domestic harms that people worry about. New Zealand's really prospered as a result of the significant agreements that we have.

Thank you.

That's netsuite.com slash ideacast. In business, they say you can have better, cheaper, or faster, but you only get to pick two. Well, what if you could have all three? You can with Oracle Cloud Infrastructure.

OCI is the blazing fast hyperscaler for your infrastructure, database, application development, and AI needs, where you can run any workload for less. Compared with other clouds, OCI costs up to 50% less for compute, 70% less for storage, and 80% less for networking. Try OCI for free at oracle.com slash ideacastai. oracle.com slash ideacastai. What is your advice to business leaders?

about how they handle their positions on political issues like tariffs and climate change, but then also how they can work with governments to help solve these sort of big existential challenges. One of the things I heard the most from business leaders during my time in office was how much they valued certainty. Often that conversation would be focused on climate policy. How can you give us the most certainty where we can around climate policy, environmental regulation, and so on?

And my message always back to them was that if you're seeking certainty in an environment where from time to time you'll see political parties taking different positions, if you operate at the highest bar that you can anticipate being set, then actually you're creating a level of certainty for yourself. Because if the expectation drops lower...

then you're already operating at a place where you're insulated against that. If someone raises the bar, then they'll simply meet you at the point that you're already operating. And some might say, well, there's an economic cost to that, but policies that are highly variable or creating uncertainty in the way that you're operating comes at a cost as well.

And alongside that, I would also argue that there's a moral case to be made for operating at a bar that demonstrates you're taking climate action within your own organisation. So that was often my message. You know, they equally saw where we would be operating as a progressive party. And, you know, one example that might illustrate the point is that when we came into office, we placed an end to the offering of offshore oil and gas products.

exploration permits in New Zealand. Now, those were future permits. We honoured all those that were already in place, but we said we would not continue to offer the chance to keep exploring for fossil fuels offshore. And some might say, well, the next government will come in and put them back on the table, but they knew where we stood.

And the now Labour opposition has continued to say, and we will honour that. You might call that uncertainty. Actually, we would call that certainty. You know that if there's a change in government, exactly what's going to happen. And it should indicate at what level you would choose to then operate at. Yeah. So let's talk a little bit about how you got in a position to manage all these crises as the leader of New Zealand. Yeah.

You say that growing up in a struggling forestry community was what initially politicized you. So why? To be really clear, and I was small. I was young. These were the observations, you know, observations through the eyes of a child. But I think there's, you know, anyone who's ever heard a child, you know, observe a rough sleeper and ask questions. Why doesn't that person have a home?

And then they dig deeper and deeper and you really find yourself acknowledging that there is something very broken. And so there's something about the simplicity of the way that a child is

views the world. And I was living in a place in the 1980s that had really felt the brunt of New Zealand's significant economic reforms during that period. I didn't know about that. All I knew is that I saw kids that, you know, didn't have food to eat at school or didn't have shoes in the winter.

And that didn't feel right to me. And so with hindsight, I'm sure that that contributed to the way I see the world and my motivation to go into politics. And when you first went into politics, New Zealand already had its first female prime minister, Jenny Shipley, and she was succeeded by the second, Helen Clark. What did that mean to you as a young woman at the start of her career? I mean, how lucky was I? You know, how lucky was I? For all the

young women and girls in New Zealand who as a result of those two women grew up thinking and believing that political leadership was in reach. And when I think about some of that period in our history, at one time we had a female Speaker of the Parliament, we had a female Governor General, we had a female Chief Justice. I did not grow up thinking that my gender would get in the way of

of me doing what I might have aspired to do. Instead, as I talk a lot about, I thought my character would. Because although I saw female leadership, I didn't always see, you know, I didn't see imposter syndrome because people don't often talk about that for really obvious reasons. I didn't see always what I would, you know, label as imposter.

Someone who wears their heart on their sleeve. You saw a bit of it, but not too much. And so that was what I questioned. So you saw diverse female role models, not just sort of one type. How did you develop your own leadership style? You know, there was a series of experiences that particularly, I think, made me feel more resolute in the way that I wanted to do politics in.

I wouldn't call it a leadership style because I didn't necessarily see myself as a leader or on a trajectory towards leadership.

But I was a politician. I'd come into an existing culture that I found pretty hard. We have a Westminster style in New Zealand, which, you know, crudely, I would describe as a bit of a bear pit. You know, so when you're in the debating chamber, there's heckling and yelling. And whilst you're meant to stay focused on delivering an answer across all of the noise and ruckus.

And often it can be personal. And when you're in opposition, success is often measured by how many other politicians' careers you end. That never sat that comfortably with me. So I do remember through a couple of experiences that I talk about in the book just determining, well, okay, if that's not the kind of politics that I'm going to engage in, I'm probably not going to be seen as that successful. And that's okay.

So making peace with that was a way of deciding I was going to do things on my own terms and I would just see where that led. You're going to stay human. I was going to stay human. Yeah. So when Andrew Little, who was prime minister before you, said that he was standing down as Labour Party leader and asked you to step up.

Your initial reaction was hesitant. Oh, I just said no. So very clear hesitancy, I would say. Okay. So why did you ultimately realize you were up to the job and say yes? You know, I think anyone who reads A Different Kind of Power will see this lifelong battle between questioning whether or not I'm the person that needs to do something versus being

this overwhelming sense of responsibility that for whatever reason I have always had. And that was just a really clear example with our party, you know, roughly seven weeks out from the election, our internal polling telling us that we are sliding badly and the leader of our party deciding openly to talk to me about whether he should stand down and I should take over. And my immediate reaction was,

was that it would be bad for the team, that it would be perceived by voters very poorly, that we needed stability and that a campaign would help us revive our chances. That was my instinct. Underneath that was also a concern that I would not be able to carry the party to where it needed to be.

Ultimately, not to create a spoiler because it's fairly obvious what happened, the leader of the party really forced things by coming to work a week later and resigning and then nominating me. And at that point...

Whatever questions I had immediately flipped into this is now my responsibility and I am not going to let people down. So I do think it's possible to have those two conflicting emotions and still stand up with confidence and say, here I am and I'm here to do a job. Yeah. And you won. So you said that burnout was not why you ultimately gave up the job. Why did you? And then how did you think about your second act?

Coming into year six, we were approaching an election. We were a year out. And so that was the point where I really needed to decide, am I renewing this potential contract for another term after this? If I was going to stay that year, I needed to stay, commit to a term. And having gone through close, going on six years where we'd had significant crisis and

I knew what you needed to have in reserve should another one arise. And my view was I could have kept going, but I didn't believe that I would be operating at the capacity and the level I needed to do the job well. And all of the traits that I valued so much in leadership, you know, curiosity, you know, keeping a handle on a sense of defensiveness, being open-minded, high levels of energy, you know,

the reserves, I could feel them waning. And so again, I pulled on that sense of responsibility. Initially, I thought considering the idea of leaving felt selfish to me. But when I reversed it and thought about the responsibility I had

to make sure I was operating at full capacity. And if I wasn't, then the duty I had was to go. And so that was how I made that decision. Well, thank you for being a wonderful leader. And I hope that everyone learns from you. Thank you for your time. That's Jacinda Ardern, former Prime Minister of New Zealand and author of the book, A Different Kind of Power. Next week, we'll explore the question of whether hybrid work is working well.

And we now have more than a thousand IdeaCast episodes, plus many more HBR podcasts to help you manage your team, your organization, and your career. Find them at hbr.org slash podcasts or search HBR on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you listen.

Thanks to our team, Senior Producer Mary Du, Associate Producer Hannah Bates, Audio Product Manager Ian Fox, and Senior Production Specialist Rob Eckhart. And thanks to you for listening to the HBR IdeaCast. We'll be back with a new episode on Tuesday. I'm Alison Beard.

Thank you.

That's netsuite.com slash ideacast.