Prime ministerial dominance is facilitated by the predominance of leadership and leadership and prime ministerial dominance seem to be interdependent and mutually facilitatory. Hefferman claims that the dominance of the prime minister arises from the fact that the prime minister has access to many institutional and personal resources and power tools that give him a dominant role within the polity. The resources available to a minister and especially the prime minister define his power thus greater resources signify more power and fewer resources would indicate less power. Thus resources given to the core executive and the prime minister within a polity, for instance in the British polity would grant the prime minister and his cabinet with intra executive authority and influence and also help them with an opportunity to be stringer through exercising greater power.
James (2004) highlights the challenges faced by the members of the core executive for steering and coordinating public activity and in undertaking strategic function of political governance in keeping with social demands. Considering the core executive within the UK government, especially the Treasury, the tools of governance could be delineated. In this case Public Service agreements or PSAs are used as unique tools of governance focused on improvement of public services. Thus core executives use specific tools to provide quality services to the public and these tools of governance are focused on information about performance, improved setting and incentive effects focused on ministers and officials through a system of performance targets in which if targets are achieved, proper performance rewards are given. The core executive thus helps in determining the level of performance as also the quality of services. The powers and priorities are now considerably focused on Prime Minister's office and the cabinet office suggesting some sort of centralization of power within the British polity. Governance monitoring and assessment have improved considerably although there may be misleading reports on progress towards government goals. The relationship between governance, assessment of performance and expenditure concerns have opened up discussion between departments that focus on priorities although ministerial responsibility for performance has been limited. The core executive sets the target yet targets are seen as minimum pledges of performance rather than tools for improving performance. James highlights the importance of core executives suggesting that the PSA system is in danger as there are frequent changes to principles of governance and also inadequate representation of performance in certain areas of governance.
Marsh et al (2003) emphasise further the concept of the core executive using the asymmetric power model to explain the British political system. They point out that the Differentiate Polity Model or DPM by Rhodes has it own flaws as it seems to overstress the diffuse nature of power. Marsh et al contend that the balance of power in the British