Following what was, by any standards, a disastrous General Election campaign for Theresa May, the first people to take the heat for her dramatic loss of the Conservatives’ Parliamentary majority were Nick Timothy and Fiona Hill – her advisers.

Timothy was responsible for drafting a manifesto that had not only failed to strike a chord with the public, but became the subject of a U-turn that eventually hovered over the entire Conservative campaign. Hill, meanwhile, garnered unfavourable commentary for her brusque and belligerent treatment of May’s aides and ministerial colleagues – with former No 10 director of communications Katie Perrior describing the atmosphere that Hill and Timothy conjured as “pretty toxic”.

Perrior noted: “For two people who have never achieved elected office, I was staggered at the disrespect they showed on a daily basis.” Tellingly, she added, “Great leaders lead by bringing people with them – not alienating them before having even digested breakfast.”

In the US, meanwhile, President Trump is working with a team of 16 C-suite business honchos who advise him purely about job growth. Numerous figures on several other teams are on hand to clue Trump up about a host of other matters.

With so much emphasis placed on leaders’ ability to act decisively, advisers often get lost in the debate. So, how should a leader work with advisers to ensure that they don’t muddy the waters or become too dominant, but continue to provide sage counsel?

“When you’re seeking advice, the real question is: whose advice?” says The Institute of Leadership and Management's head of research, policy and standards Kate Cooper. “In a speech at the Institute of Education last year, former Labour MP John Denham – who once served as secretary for innovation, universities and skills – was quite incredulous at how little academic evidence, particularly in the education field, is heeded in the wider world. So that’s clearly one area to which leaders may not be paying enough attention.

“But there’s a rule of thumb here: if an adviser’s job depends upon the type of advice they give – which is to say, if that person has a vested stake of any sort in the potential effects of their advice – then they are probably not the best person to be put in a position of undue influence. That would amount to a conflict of interest.”

By the same token, Cooper adds, “respect diversity. Be prepared to accept that there’s wisdom in difference. It’s not about right or wrong. It’s about the value of contrasting perspectives. However, there are plenty of times in a leader’s life where they will have to take responsibility for the decision that’s made. Sure, it can be a collective decision, and one would expect one’s team to respect that – ‘We’ve arrived at this together’ – and nobody pulling out later as if they never supported that consensus. Getting that kind of buy-in is an important skill.

“But similarly, at some point you have to weigh up the various feeds of information and opinion you’re receiving and say: ‘I’ve listened to the advice, and I’m taking this decision on the basis of the best information available.’ And you must be totally transparent about why and how that decision was made, and ensure that your people understand that it hasn’t been motivated by a conflict of interest.”

For an overview of decision making, check out this learning item from the Institute

Image of Evening Standard’s coverage of 2017 general election courtesy of Claudio Divizia, via Shutterstock