The paper examines the link between ‘Hegemonic Presidency’ and ‘economic outcomes’ using comparative case studies from South Korea under Park Chung Hee (1961-1979) and Uganda under Yoweri Museveni (1986-date). The study employed a qualitative comparative research design, which enabled a systematic comparison of the two cases. Critically reviewing relevant scholarships and analysing multiple datasets, the paper found that Park's policies emphasised structural change through industrialisation, export and state-directed investment; Museveni's policies were geared towards growth, stabilisation, and liberalisation. Unlike Uganda’s, South Korea's development experience brought about rapid industrialisation, increased productivity, and overall economic growth. This explains the different economic outcomes of a hegemonic presidential system practised in the two case studies. The study contributes to comparative political economy literature by showing how similar political structures can yield divergent economic outcomes depending on institutional quality and policy decisions.  In sum, a hegemonic presidential system combined with able institutions, a meritocratic bureaucracy, disciplined implementation and a clear developmental agenda is more likely to produce positive economic outcomes.