From iron will to image wars: What today’s leaders must relearn from the 1980s titans

What kind of leadership does a fractured, multipolar world demand?

In the 1980s, global leadership meant reshaping systems. Margaret Thatcher, Ronald Reagan, and Mikhail Gorbachev weren’t just political figureheads, they were system architects. Each led bold transformations: Thatcher restructured the British economy, Reagan reframed capitalism as a moral imperative, and Gorbachev gambled on openness and reform. They didn’t just manage, they redefined.

Today, the stage feels more crowded, the signals more confused. Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin, and Xi Jinping dominate headlines, but their leadership often seems more performative than reformative. Applause is pursued more urgently than impact. Power is concentrated, but progress is elusive.

So what’s changed, and what can business and political leaders learn from the contrast?

From Principled Strategy to Performative Control

Back in the Cold War era, the “Big Three” were the United States, the United Kingdom, and the Soviet Union. These leaders—though ideologically opposed—shared a long-term vision and a willingness to engineer change from within. They stood for more than themselves.

Fast forward to the 2020s, and the geopolitical triangle now consists of the United States, China, and Russia. The UK, once a strategic pillar, has been marginalised—its post-Brexit identity still unclear, its global clout reduced, its leadership lacking international weight.

Today’s dominant leaders project power differently. Trump weaponised media to disrupt, not build. Putin asserts dominance through conflict and fear, while Xi centralises control with algorithmic precision. The world feels more uncertain, more reactive, and more fragmented.

But leadership is no longer just concentrated at the top. Countries like India are exercising strategic autonomy. Germany steers Europe economically but avoids taking geopolitical stands. “Swing states” such as Turkey, Brazil, and Indonesia shape multipolar dynamics.

The expansion of the BRICS+ bloc signals a growing appetite for alternative models of governance that diverge from the Western liberal consensus.

In short, global leadership has become more distributed, but also more distracted.

What’s Missing?

The contrast isn’t just generational, it’s structural. Clem Sunter, a founding partner of Mindofafox, has long argued that bold leadership matters most during moments of global transition. What today’s leaders lack, he suggests, is not power, but purpose.

Three gaps stand out:

1. Courage to reform from within: Gorbachev risked everything on glasnost and perestroika: reforms that acknowledged systemic failure and demanded internal reinvention. Today’s strongmen resist any structural change, clinging to institutions even as they decay.

2. Conviction-led strategy: Thatcher and Reagan were polarising, no doubt. But their leadership stemmed from deep convictions. Today’s populists chase popularity, not principle, substituting short-term wins for long-term vision.

3. Global perspective: The Cold War may have been adversarial, but it still allowed for diplomacy, dialogue, and arms control. Today’s geopolitical theatre is locked in zero-sum nationalism, making collective responses to global challenges like climate change, AI governance, and pandemics dangerously inadequate.

   
   

Strategic Lessons for Business Leaders

In this era of spectacle, where power is measured in engagement metrics and trending hashtags, businesses cannot afford to be passive observers. Leadership is increasingly narrative-driven, and the ability to interpret and influence global complexity is becoming a core strategic advantage.

Three insights matter most:

• Narratives shape reality. The ability to communicate clearly and consistently—to shape the story—is no longer a luxury. It’s a business imperative.

• Clarity builds trust. In a polarised world, purpose-driven leadership provides a compass. Coherent internal direction and consistent external messaging cut through noise.

• Agility is essential. With alliances shifting and rules being rewritten, success belongs to those who can adapt swiftly and wisely.

  
  

The Bottom Line

Charisma and control may win headlines. But legacies are built on courage, conviction, and transformation. The leaders of the 1980s dared to reshape their systems. Today’s leaders—and those advising them—should ask a difficult but necessary question:

Do we still dare the same?