Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 18

Lead with your Strengths - Peter Kaldor and John McLean

Part One: Leadership: What we mean and why it matters

The word “leadership” is used in many ways. What might we mean by it? What might leadership that
really makes a positive difference look like? Why does it matter?

What is leadership?
“Leadership is one of the most observed and least understood phenomena on earth.” - James MacGregor Burns1

“Who, me? I could never be a leader. Leadership is for others with special talents or qualifications.”
“What we need around here is strong leadership - someone to make hard decisions and give directions.
Here I am!”
Between these two perspectives lie many understandings of the word “leadership”. There are over 350
academic definitions2. People quickly point to leadership as the real solution to many challenges, without
clarifying which meaning they are subscribing to. Some highlight good preaching or caring for people, a
treasurer may emphasise sound management, and the denomination may think of sound doctrine.

In this part we explore what it may mean to exercise leadership that can make a difference. First, in
Chapter 1, we look at the context in which leaders are seeking to exercise leadership. Beyond the
challenges of changing context there is also resistance to internal change. Leadership by definition invites
people to journey towards a particular future, often different to present realities. Moving into the
unknown may involve stress, uncertainty, anxiety and a desire to hang on to that which is safe, rather than
moving towards that which may be risky but important.

In Chapters 2 and 3 we look at what we mean by leadership itself. For some it is about people with
specific traits, powers, roles or positions of authority. For us it is something quite different, more a verb
than a noun, about exercising gifts to achieve change or make a difference. It starts to look less like a
person and more like a collection of strengths.

How can we best foster and develop these strengths, both in ourselves, in leadership teams, groups,
churches or in the communities we are committed to? Chapter 4 explores the importance of a
positive strengths-based approach, which may not only be the path to more effective leadership, but
also to higher levels of personal well-being. A critical step in developing leadership strengths in ourselves
and in our teams is to start with what we have, and move forward based on our hopes and aspirations.

Through these chapters we can identify some recurring strands that are important to exercising leadership
that can really make a positive difference. These are strands that surface in thinking about leadership
from very different points of view: from thinking in the corporate sector, in churches, in voluntary
community organisations, in community development, when moving for change and in personal
development.

Notes
1 Burns 1978, 2.
2 Stogdill 1974, 7.
2

Chapter 1
Hardly ever easy
Society today is characterised by rapid and continuous change, increasing social diversity and a
strong emphasis on the individual. There is lower confidence in and loyalty to organisations. For
many churches and groups a central question is “What is our vision and purpose at this time, and
how should we live it out?”

Effective leadership involves charting the changes going on around us, as well as overcoming
natural fears about change, hard work and pain.

Let’s get this out there right at the outset, leadership is seldom easy. Sometimes - often - it is very hard.

Our research on church leaders, no doubt mirrored elsewhere, shows that many leaders have high levels
of commitment and really want to make a positive difference through their roles. Our research tells us
effective leadership is vital to a healthy church or organisation, particularly in times of rapid, continuous
change. Yet it also suggests many leaders feel ill-equipped for the challenges they face. Many came to
ministry with a desire for pastoral and teaching roles. Nearly half (47%) find the reality of their role quite
different to what they expected. This tension surfaces in many ways, as can be seen below:1

Leadership is challenging: Nearly half (45%) of The future needs to be different: Attenders are
all church leaders see leadership as more changing generally positive about their churches, experiencing
and uncertain than they expected when they started belonging and growing relationships with God. But
with 77% finding that exercising leadership that really looking to the future many feel their churches need to
makes a difference where they are is really rethink directions, or that the future is unclear or
challenging. doubtful. Only a minority want their churches to keep
going as they are.
Wearing out: Church leaders record high levels of
satisfaction with their roles, but also often Growing new directions: Church leaders do not
dangerously high levels of emotional exhaustion always feel equipped for growing vision and new
.Some 26% feel their workload is simply too high and directions. For only 28% is it one of their main roles,
38% feel they really lack backup support. yet 42% believe that it should be. Only 34% feel it is
one of their strengths. In 2001 nearly half (46%) saw it
Training for ministry: A fifth of leaders feel out of as the area in which they most need to improve. As
their depth in aspects of their roles. Over 40% feel will be seen in Chapter 9, our research suggests
their training equipped them poorly or not at all for certain personality types are better suited to growing
planning and direction-setting, and large numbers felt vision and direction...and church leaders tend to have
quite ill-equipped for understanding a community a personality profile almost the opposite to that profile.
(39%), maintaining boundaries (37%), coping with
stress (42%), and management (38%). Even more feel
ill-equipped for cross-cultural ministry (53%), rural
ministry (52%) or inner-city ministry (49%).

Leadership for what?


There are many different types of problems leaders may be seeking to address. Some can
be solved by applying expertise or making use of information. A better budgeting process may need better
software. Improving a sound system may require technical advice from someone with expertise. These
problems require only technical solutions without any deeper disturbance to anyone.
3

Other issues run much deeper. If a church or group becomes disconnected from the community for which
it is concerned, asking how to reconnect or grow stronger links with people or groups in the wider society
may raise some very difficult “why” and “how” questions. “How have we got to this place?” and “How
might we need to change, and what might we have to lose, in order to move forward?” Maybe people
don’t want to come to participate in churches like ours? Maybe they find our culture and/or ways of doing
things confusing or alienating? Maybe making a reconnection may require us to change things that we
cherish or find valuable? Maybe in our churches we have a range of deep down prejudices about certain
people or groups or activities in the wider society? Maybe we simply expect people to come because fifty
years ago they used to? Maybe we want these connections for our own sakes and our own needs – keeping
the church open, feeling successful, etc – rather than out of concern for the community and those within
it?

Adaptive challenges are commonly about going in new directions, responding to changing circumstances,
engaging new situations, responding to seemingly intractable dynamics. Here are other examples of
potentially stretching adaptive challenges:
• We have some great ideas for the future, but the more they are raised, the more people get
anxious and defensive! We are becoming quite paralysed.
• I want to connect up people from different backgrounds and get them involved, to make the most
of this opportunity. But how to start? How do we make meaningful connections?
• They are proposing a major development which will have devastating environmental
consequences. We need to do something about it. But what?
• Several churches are to come together to create a regional church. How can we do that in a way
that creates something new, not just the culture of any of the existing churches?
• Our community agency has just been shut down by our parent organisation, who do not
understand the importance of what is being done. We must try to keep going some of the
important things we do. But how?
• Our church is in deep trouble. We can no longer afford a minister. Should we just shut down? Or
are there positive ways forward?
• Our group was founded with core beliefs and values that need to be changed. How can we help
this process forward, when feelings will run very deep?
• In our family, group, or team we always get stuck, criticising each other for things we each do
wrong. The consequence is hurt, anger, frustration and feeling like failures. Are we doomed to
always behave this way?
• We seem to just meet and go through the motions, without thinking about what we should really
be about. How can I help change that?
• I’ve some dreams I’d like to explore but don’t know if I have what it takes. I don’t want to make a
fool of myself, so maybe I won’t bother?
• I want to be there for the long term, to make a real difference, and grow myself. But I’ve seen
many leaders crash and burn. I want it to be different for me!

Problems like these require adaptive change, involving deep reflection and reorientation of priorities2.
They are likely to necessitate significant change and adjustment. Currently in our churches, as in many
situations in life, most of the serious issues or possibilities we confront are about adaptive change where
individuals and groups need to explore direction and purpose, and how to live it out. Our research
suggests churches that can move through adaptive change and discover and own a new vision will be
vibrant and healthy churches that people aspire to be part of.

Change is not easy for many reasons. It is not easy because the nature of the problem being faced
can be complex and outcomes uncertain. Secondly, it is not easy because it involves people
journeying into unknown territory. People will generally be reluctant to give up the safety of the
known for the uncertainty of the potentially possible. The challenge of leadership is to help a group of
people engage the issues that demand new directions and to foster a willingness to journey together
towards new possibilities. Thirdly, there is our own reluctance to count the costs of moving in new
directions, the challenges it may present to us, and the imperatives for growth and development that it
may entail.

In this chapter we look at each of these in turn.

Navigating permanent white water


"We assume we paddle our organisational canoes on calm lakes, and periodically have to go through
some temporary white water. But we never get out of the white water. We think things will settle down
after whatever is now upsetting things is over, but things never settle down because some other upset
always comes along to keep things churned up." - A perspective cited by Peter Vaill3

Peter Vaill describes the present context for life and leadership as being one of navigating “permanent
white water”, a condition of fast flow and rapid change4, where it is always hard to know what is around
the corner; little can be taken for granted and careful scouting needs to accompany an adventuring and
adaptable spirit.
4

Navigating permanent white water requires flexibility and an ability to make good judgments when
needed. Some people find it difficult to make decisions, ending up smashed on the rocks of indecision
rather than choosing one path or another down the rapids. Others make decisions too hastily with little
information or experience and find themselves caught in dangerous rocky rapids without the skills to
navigate.

There are many “isms” used to describe the cross-currents running through contemporary society:
multiculturalism, economic rationalism, individualism, relativism. The list could go on.
Beyond these “isms”, our lives have been reshaped by increasing mobility and massive technological
change. Shifts in values in areas such as sexuality and marriage simply add to the uncertainty of life.
And everything is measured by its economic value. Even traditional community events like football
matches are talked about by organisers as products they sell to potential markets.

We are a society with a wide range of diverse sub-groups: ethnic sub-groups, urban and rural sub-groups,
occupational, age and interest sub-groups. Any community is made up of many sub-groups, often with
different values and ways of living.

Is it any wonder many struggle with issues of change, uncertainty and turbulence, defining traits of
modern times? Many get lost in the complex competing pressures of contemporary life, confused and
paralysed by the range of choices we face. No wonder so many hark back to “the good old days”.
Approaching the realities of taking forward or revitalising churches or other organisations in the current
environment may often feel like negotiating permanent white water and is unlikely to be straightforward!

Often we rely on past ways of leading, as if that is safer. But, in times of rapid change, to quote Vaill again:
“In the midst of an earthquake, the last thing I want is an overly detailed map”5. At such times need to
look beyond past practices to engage present realities. If we are playing a game that no one really knows
how to play, we must be prepared to look in some strange places for ideas. Some of our most cherished
ways of doing things may not be appropriate6.

Challenges for community organisations and institutions


One reality of contemporary life is the increasing distrust of social institutions.
Over the last few decades we have become less likely to trust our governments, media,
police or legal systems. The percentage of people with quite a lot of confidence in the
legal system has dropped from around 60% in 1983 to 34% in 2002, and in the
federal government from 56% to 37%. Confidence in the media dropped from around
Since 1983 wider community 28% to 15%, and most dramatically, in banks from 87% to 22%7.
confidence in churches has
fallen from 56% to 35%, Churches have not been immune to this trend, with confidence falling from 56% to
declines mirrored in many 35%, further undermined by child abuse scandals and changing sexual practices.
other organisations in There has also been a decline in organisational loyalty. Church leaders often assume
they work with a stable loyal band of supporters in their denomination. Our
society.
research suggests otherwise: only around a quarter of Anglican and Protestant
attenders see lifelong loyalty to a denomination as important8. These trends are
reflected in high levels of actual denomination switching - for every two Anglican
and Protestant attenders who change churches, one also changes denominations
in the process9. More Catholics see lifelong loyalty as important, though this
percentage is declining.

Well-respected organisations often believe they exist by right - IBM in the


computer workplace, and Holden and Ford in the car market. Over time they
When changing churches, have had to learn to compete in the marketplace they thought they owned. This
for every two Anglican and is also true for churches. Mainstream denominations once thought they each
Protestant church had a guaranteed market share. The growth of the Pentecostal churches is part
attenders who change of a story not just of new attenders who previously didn’t attend anywhere, but
churches, one changes also of existing attenders moving somewhere else that they find more helpful
and meaningful. Other denominations have needed to think again about their
denomination in the place, re-examining who they are and how to journey there. Exercising
process. leadership in institutions at times of declining confidence and loyalty requires
care and thought about how to build commitment and trust.10

From cradle to grave


Community organisations often move through various stages. Someone with vision, insights and dreams
creates a movement which is flexible and held together by the common vision. It puts its ideas into
practice, often with rough edges glossed over in the enthusiasm to get on with it. As a movement develops
it tends to become a machine - well oiled, functioning smoothly with room for people to contribute and
belong, but no longer as adaptable as it was. In times of change there is a danger that it will become
obsolete, a monument. Monuments have their place, in the realm of the past, and in maintaining
possibly important traditions, but their time has passed.
5

Churches are not immune to this process. Many face the challenge of retaining the flexibility enjoyed by a
movement. Others, having become monuments, seek to once again become something that is alive and
connecting with people. Both these steps often mean change and discomfort for those involved, as people
are asked to swap the comfort of a known present for an unknown future. As we shall see, such transitions
are very difficult - institutions have a tendency towards pattern maintenance and preservation of
traditions and identity.

As local organisations, churches are very vulnerable to social change. Many older communities have
changed greatly in demographic and are now very different. Churches often struggle in the new social
realities, sometimes becoming refuges for a remnant segment of the community. In more severe cases, the
financial viability of a church comes into question and it faces closure.

So often in contemporary Australia, models of church life are quite inappropriate, leaving churches and
their leaders struggling to define their roles. Many people see the church as an irrelevant or alien place
looked after by clergy whose role they do not understand or respect. Churches and leaders are often
struggling to regain a vision of their role and purpose in this time of transition.

The spiritual contours of Australian life 11


“To understand the spiritual threads of contemporary society we need to consider not just the temples but
also the market place”. - NJ Demerath 12

The spiritual landscape in Australia has changed dramatically. Multiculturalism


“To understand the has brought a diverse range of philosophies and approaches to life. Television and
spiritual threads of the emerging youth culture of the 1960s impressed on all the diversity of religions
and spiritualities that exist across the globe, discovered by many people first-hand
contemporary
Our wider community research as overseas travel became more commonplace.
society we need to
suggests that 65% of Australians
consider not just the Individualism has encouraged the idea of personal choice in the area of spiritual
believe that different religions
temples but also the meaning. For many, truth is no longer dependent on revelation, authority or
may be equally right. Only 13%
market place”. tradition, but discovered through individual perception. Many find the idea of
disagree with 23% uncertain. 11
NJ Demerath there being one “true” understanding of the universe difficult to accept13. Notions
Nearly a third of Australians take of spirituality separate from religious institutions have flourished14. Questions
what is helpful from different about spirituality and meaning have moved from something we inherit from our
religions or philosophies. family and ethnic background to something about which we make individual
choices15. Australians are increasingly being invited to shop in the spiritual
Around 60% make sense of life supermarket with an increasing array of religious and other spiritual options
purely in terms of the here and marketed in every aisle.
now.
The choice of the term “marketed” is deliberate: the broader spiritual
supermarket is for many a consumer enterprise. Serious seekers stand
alongside shysters in an industry that, on the one hand, many feel requires
regulation for truth-telling yet, on the other, by its very nature is almost
impossible to regulate.

People embrace spirituality in different ways. For some, beliefs are all-important. For others, devotional
practices are integral to expressing their spirituality. Still others connect through the lens of spiritual
experiences - the mystical, the psychic, healing and miracles, personal encounters with God. Some seek an
integrated careful journey, developing clear frameworks for living. Others take a more eclectic approach,
drawn to the transcendent by a sense of adventure or curiosity.

Spirituality is, for some, a bridge with the ultimate. For others it is more a moat for protection. They may
look for a spiritual home that is safe and clear-cut, to which they can retreat and from which they can live
out their lives protected from the uncertainties and relativisms of the wider world. They may be dogmatic
or unquestioning about their beliefs, because they provide them with significant security.

And in looking at the spiritual landscape it is important not to overlook the sizable group of Australians
who deal with life in the here and now with little interest in the transcendent, or their place in the grand
scheme of things.

To understand the spiritual threads of contemporary society we need to consider not just the temples but
also the market place16. This is not to say the temples are irrelevant or of no consequence - Christianity
remains a significant part of how a large number of Australians make sense of life. But the rapids, white
water and currents that make up contemporary life mean that churches are needing to rediscover how to
find their place and express themselves.

They don’t want to go


Sometimes it is hard to invite a group of people to engage the hazards and uncertainties of permanent
white water, leaving behind the safety and security of the riverbank. In the words of Machiavelli, there is
“nothing more difficult than to lead in the introduction of a new order of things, because the
6

innovator has for enemies all those who have done well under the old conditions, and lukewarm
defenders in those who may do well under the new”17.

In churches cut off from the communities they seek to serve, that are slowly ageing towards closure, many
members nevertheless feel a high level of belonging and really value how it is. It is easy to see why they
would want to resist thinking about change. The present, though unsustainable, is nevertheless
comfortable. Any alternative requires very serious adaptive change. Complacent churches can be a huge
danger to themselves. Forces for equilibrium can pose great challenges to those seeking new directions or
possibilities.

The many faces of work avoidance18


It can be part of human nature to engage in “work avoidance” - a process of not facing up to real and
serious issues that may affect our lives, deflecting us from truly living out our sense of purpose. Put the
proverbial frog in boiling water and it will immediately jump out because it is hot. But put it in cold water
and slowly heat it up and it will likely sit there and boil to death. While it could have jumped out at any
time, the changes were so gradual it hardly realised it was in danger. Do we ever behave in a similar way,
wishing to avoid things we feel are just too difficult?

People often choose to engage in personal work avoidance, not facing important questions of personal
growth because they seem too hard or scary, and because we may need to own up (to ourselves or others)
that we are not the person we aspire to be. It is easy to put things off, take an easier road, retreat in the
face of opposition, get diverted from hard issues by seductively “easy” solutions, or be paralysed by
choices. We say growth is important, but then retreat to safe places so as not to deal with it.

Groups may also engage in corporate work avoidance, together not facing up to hard questions of
change and the discomfort that may be required if we are to fully live out who we hope to be as a group. A
church may not want to face up to changing ways of doing things that are deeply meaningful to them but
which may be confusing for others. As a society we may want to put off difficult changes - facing up to
using less water or energy resources - that may be critical for the long-term well-being of our children and
the generations that follow, because it is just too hard to consider the much smaller costs to us now.

How often in decision-making do we engage together in various forms of corporate work avoidance?
Think about conversations that revolve around the idea of “not in my backyard”. Sure, that prison or
halfway house is important - but not in my neighbourhood. We generally don’t hear many costly solutions
from politicians who would rather offer us answers that involve a minimum of pain as the easiest path to
re-election. But we elect them and then become disgusted when problems don’t go away. We are all
complicit in this piece of work avoidance.

Strategies to ensure “work avoidance”


So you want to engage in work avoidance? The following may be a few helpful tips:
1. Find a scapegoat or a common enemy, someone we can all hate. Often useful in government when things get
difficult - if we can blame a person or group for everything it shifts the spotlight from us. Groups are particularly
easy to loathe, and fear of them can generate for us short term support, deflecting everybody from deeper
questions. Good targets are indigenous people, new migrants, the unemployed or young people. In our churches we
can blame those who think differently, don’t respect our positions or history, or even the hardheartedness of the
communities we are part of. Really easy, and a great tactic for work avoidance.
2. Point quickly to the potential stress that facing these deeper issues might cause: An excellent strategy
for work avoidance - pull away from issues because of the pain they may create. In politics don’t put issues on the
table that might lose votes. In church meetings jump quickly to take difficult issues off the table because of the
dissension it might cause. At home don’t deal with difficult issues in case others get unhappy.
3. There is too much invested in how we do things to consider changing it: Organisations invest a lot in
how they operate, and there are costs in investing in new possibilities. A good reason for not moving forward…and
a good work avoidance strategy.
4. Look for a strong leader who offers pain-free solutions: We have a problem. Let’s find someone who can
solve it for us, without much personal cost. Maybe there is an expert out there…
5. Avoid difficult conversations: Don’t engage in conversations that may bring up difficult questions, pain,
anxiety or conflict. Make your first and overriding priority harmony rather than authenticity.
6. Put it in the “Too Hard” basket: When things are difficult form a committee, ask for an external report or
create one that says little; set up a lengthy consultation process that won’t ever reach a conclusion; list the problems
without responding to them. Always works to buy time…
7. Find excuses to put it off: There is a never-ending list of possible reasons for not dealing with issues - to buy
time, place the problem in the hands of a successor, your children or their children’s children. Try the unthinking
use of sentences like: “It isn’t the right time”, “We don’t have the resources”, “Things might be better next year”,
“We need more data”, and “We need a committee to look into it further”.
7

Happily going to Abilene?


Management writer Jerry Harvey tells the story of an extended family group who come to a decision to
travel a few hours each way to go to the town of Abilene to share a meal. Neither the food nor journey is a
positive experience. Towards the end, one by one, they each own up to the fact that they never really
wanted to do the trip, but thought they were doing it for the others. The result of a range of attempts at
caring was that they went somewhere nobody wanted to go19.

How often do organisations, groups or even societies “go to Abilene”? In the face of difficult issues we can
set up a committee, discuss meeting procedures, deal with technical matters and carry out research or
feasibility studies. In our families we discuss trivial issues rather than dealing with more serious matters.
Such corporate work avoidance does not lead to forward progress: real discussion becomes less as the
issue gets put on the back burner, and we hear comments like:

• Let’s not rush to hasty decisions • We’ve failed before, we don’t want to again
• We need to be really sure before we do this • It’s always going to be like that
• Let’s form a subcommittee to talk more about this • If it ain’t broke don’t fix it
• Let’s find a technical solution to feel we’ve done something • We’re too tired to do that
• We’ve never done it that way before • Let’s get everything completely stable first
Sometimes it is important to slow down processes of change, listen to a wide variety of people, set up
committees to deal with issues…if the purpose is truly to help a group or community towards facing
difficult possibly life-threatening issues. The trouble is work avoidance can parade itself in many guises.
At every step we need to ask ourselves: “What are the real purposes of a committee, report or decision? Is
it taking us towards or away from addressing important though difficult questions?”

Exercising leadership will commonly involve working with people who are uncertain or fearful and
therefore resistant, where reality factors are driving the need for change rather than aspirations and
hopes. Leadership is placed in the difficult position of having to help people recognise and engage
unpleasant realities and face difficult choices.

Helping a group engage the challenges of moving in new directions is one of the most significant
challenges for those seeking to exercise leadership. As we shall see in Chapter 6, developing shared
directions involves working with both the head and the heart, and helping people see their place in what is
being developed.

Then there is us!


What we expect of others we need to be willing to engage ourselves. We must not engage in personal work
avoidance any more than anyone else in the group of which we are part.

Sometimes as leaders we have ideas but lack the will, or our intentions get lost in the mounting pressures
of life and other people. Or we are not even sure what is right or what to do, let alone how to do it.
Sometimes we feel unclear about priorities and are being tossed around by demands from loud voices and
competing agendas. Confused or paralysed by the range of choices we face, we see so many possibilities
we don’t know where to start. Some of us know what is important and are putting huge effort into making
a difference, but feel that we lack traction, that our wheels are spinning and we are getting nowhere.

On the journey it is easy to get lost. Sometimes we discover opposition we never knew existed. In the face
of serious adaptive challenges, rather than engaging the real issues, we are tempted to seek quick technical
solutions - what buttons should we push that will instantly change everything.

Effective leadership will seldom be quick or easy. Something far deeper is needed.

Charting a course through the rapids


There is no doubt that leadership in challenging adaptive situations is unlikely to be straightforward.
Calling it what it is, it can be damn hard! While it may generate high levels of satisfaction when outcomes
are positive and good results are achieved, it is certainly not a process that generates instant gratification.

It is a little like journeying to a mountain peak. It takes a lot of hard work for momentary pleasure.

A group with which Peter was involved spent four days walking through mist, rain and snow towards a
mountain peak. On the way they saw nothing and navigation was tricky. Only minutes below the summit
they moved through the cloud cover and came out of the all-engulfing greyness to greet a perfectly blue
sky and a range of snow-covered mountain peaks poking out to greet them. It was a magical experience.
The half-hour on the summit would never be forgotten.

Helping groups move towards new possibilities is like that. It involves huge amounts of hard work, often
seeing only a short way ahead and finding the navigation tricky. Moments of satisfaction can be few and
8

far between, but when a group achieves an outcome there can be little to surpass the immense sense of
satisfaction at having made a difference.

Leadership that makes a difference will minimise work avoidance. A counsellor will help
individuals move beyond work avoidance by asking deep questions that provoke them to think about why
things are happening the way they are, what their contribution may be, and the resources they possess to
move forward. Group leadership will invite people to identify their central purposes, reflecting on how
they may need to grow in order to live them out, and the strengths they bring to the journey. Leadership
in the wider community may mean holding up important questions and inviting constructive
conversation.

A critical leadership role is to articulate the common values that bind people together and develop
commitment to those values and directions, rather than commitment to the organisation for its own sake.
Leadership will involve putting a priority on developing vision and shared directions based on clear
understandings of purpose.

Our research over the last fifteen years in Australia, New Zealand, England and the
United States reinforces this. In every survey, the most significant indicator of
overall vitality has been the existence of a shared vision that is owned by all. When
present, attenders are likely to have higher levels of growth in faith and belonging,
are more likely to invite others to church or share their faith, and be more
concerned for the wider community20.

In every survey the most Developing direction in times of change and uncertainty is clearly critical. But,
significant indicator of equally clearly, it is easier said than done. No-one welcomes a rough ride, one that
church vitality has been may be potentially painful.
the existence of a shared
But the good news is that such leadership is possible, and it can make a
vision owned by all. difference. It can generate satisfaction for those involved, a greater willingness to
take next steps, and inspiration for many more who are watching hopefully on
the sidelines.

But what might such leadership look like? In the next three chapters we will seek
to explore some key elements. It clearly requires unique and especially talented
people…or does it?

Things to consider
1. What are the issues you feel you are focusing on in your church, group or community? Or in another aspect of
your life?
2. To what extent are people in your group or situation avoiding difficult issues, or the need to change or grow new
directions?
3. To what extent are you ready to face up to challenging issues yourself? How might you need to grow or change to
make a difference where you are?

Notes:
1 Further research details are available on our website at www.ncls.org.au/leaders.
2 Heifetz 1994, 70.
3 Vaill 1998, 165.
4 Vaill 1989, 86.
5 Vaill 1989, 4.
6 Vaill 1989, 4.
7 Hughes, Black, Kaldor, Bellamy and Castle 2007, 88.
8 Kaldor et al 1999, 42. 2006 results confirm such trends.
9 Data taken from NCLS Research 2007, 22.
10 Bennis 1989, 84.
11 Demerath 2000, 1.
12 Demerath 2000, 1.
13 Tacey 2003, 45.
14 Hill and Hood 1999, 359.
15 Bouma 1999, 9.
16 Demerath 2000, 1.
17 Sydney Leadership Opening Retreat, Leura, February 14 to 17, 2003.
18 Heifetz 1994, 37. We also wish to acknowledge the contributions of Paul Porteous and Robbie

MacPherson to the development of this section.


19 Harvey 1996, 13.
20 Kaldor et al 2002, 72.
9

Chapter 2
“Solo Man” is not what it takes
What might it mean to exercise “leadership”? Are leaders heroic figures come to rescue us, like on
TV?

Leadership involves us all. It is an action, a process made up of different facets that need to be
present in any healthy group, society or system of people. We all have leadership gifts to contribute
as we seek to live out the purposes of our lives.

While a striking metaphor, it is important not to push the continuous white water image from the
previous chapter too far, for it quickly conjures up images of a rugged individualistic adventurer who
knows no fear and who can conquer everything. And this is precisely not the image of leadership that this
book is seeking to describe. Consider the following example:

Steve, a highly resourceful leader, came close to the image of a rugged individualistic adventurer. He
could be relied upon for creative solutions in difficult circumstances. Yet too often his processes would let
him down. He did not always take the time to communicate what he was doing or why. On one occasion
- a canoe trip down a flooded river - his skill took him past serious rapids and submerged trees. But not
so lucky was the rest of the group. Without adequately explaining to them the risks that existed and how
to deal with them, the result was a series of capsizes, lost gear and team members spread hundreds of
metres down the ravine out of communication with each other. Steve got down the river on his
resourcefulness and skill. But for everyone else it was a disaster resulting in a loss of trust. Such
experiences are seldom forgotten!

Solo adventurers, when translated into the real world, can in fact be a danger to themselves and to others.
They often seek to do things themselves, or control others, taking the unquestioning (or blindly loyal) on a
precarious journey with them. There’s a high chance that they themselves will crash and burn.

Beyond the heroic leader


Many advertising campaigns have run around the theme of the rugged individualist who shoots the
rapids, kills the crocodiles or climbs the mountains all on their own steam. “Solo Man” is totally self-
reliant, totally indestructible and brings everything that is needed to every situation.

Movies and television are also filled with images of special people whose heroic deeds rescue us from our
fate. Without them civilisation as we know it would be destroyed. The “heroic leader” sees something
about to collapse and decisively comes to the rescue before riding off into the sunset1. We can admire but
not emulate such people. Is leadership a heroic trait only a few possess?

A danger to our churches, groups and communities


Often in times of change or uncertainty we look to such “superheroes” for the answers to challenging
problems. The truth is, however, that the situation will probably not be helped by a “Solo Man”. It is not
the kind of leadership needed in challenging and difficult circumstances to achieve lasting change. Not
only is it not what it takes, but it can also cause great danger to churches, groups and communities,
leaving them more paralysed than before. “Solo Man” comes in and leaves, and the group is left floating
and powerless to deal with the next issue. Or, when things go badly, we then blame them for their
incompetence, thereby avoiding personal responsibility. It is an inadequate response all round. What is
needed is something far more remarkable, and far more communal.

In the real world effective leadership will look very different to “Solo Man”. It is a trap to think of
leadership as a quality that exists only in certain people, and to search for special individuals with
leadership potential rather than developing the potential of everyone. The reality is that none of us will
bring all the strengths that are needed to bring about significant change in potentially complex situations.
We all have a different blend of strengths, and we need to support each other and work together.

More than a trait


Until the Second World War leadership was largely seen as something to do with formal position and
linked to social class2. After the war leadership emerged as a research area, exploring the characteristics of
the various heroes of the conflict. A range of research explored the personal qualities of leaders: physical
issues such as height; personality characteristics; and specific abilities such as oratorical skills3.

Often we hear it said that someone is a “born leader”. Such an approach suggests certain people have
special qualities that set them apart to be leaders. Many question such an approach, seeing leadership as
always context-specific. Leaders may be great in one context but poor in another: Winston Churchill, a
great war leader, was thrown out in peace time. And are not all of us leaders in certain situations? Over
10

time such notions of leadership have given way to a more broader concept of it as a process rather than a
person, something related to the interaction between leaders and their groups, communities or contexts.

And not just a question of authority


“The key to successful leadership is influence not authority”. - Kenneth Blanchard4

Often history is written about people in positions of formal authority. Yet is leadership only about such
people? Some of us have power through positional authority and have the privilege (or otherwise) of
sitting at the head of the table. Many of us have the opportunity to make a difference, to contribute
leadership without a formal role, from the foot of the table. Even if we have a formal role we often find
ourselves in situations where that authority carries little influence.

Was Jesus a leader? Did he hold positions of formal responsibility or worldly authority?

Leadership in churches and community groups can be very different to leadership in a corporate setting
where leaders have coercive powers to insist that employees do what is required. In a typical organisation
there is a line of accountability: employees are directed by their superiors. In churches and voluntary
organisations, where leaders have few coercive powers, people choose to participate, move elsewhere or
drop out. Leaders need a different type of authority that will make or break their leadership. They need to
gain earned authority (something also being increasingly recognised as critical even where people do
have coercive powers)5.

Often we think we will achieve change when we have enough formal authority. Yet many organisational or
government heads lament that they couldn’t achieve change because the people were not with them.

People with formal authority need to beware of a subtle but devastating trap. As we noted
in the last chapter, in uncertain times we often seek “leaders” who appear to have strength
and provide simplistic cost-free solutions that make us feel better - without any pain or
risk for us. So we elect or choose leaders who offer to do the impossible at no cost. And
when they fail impossible expectations we make them scapegoats, assassinating them with
our words, at the ballot box or, occasionally, with a gun!6 We blame them rather than
recognising that change requires us all to be participants. Those taking on roles who play
Laissez-faire leadership is not this game with us can actually be followers rather than leaders!
a recipe for growth or vitality in
churches. Where leaders do Formal authority is only one place where leadership can be exercised. Many people who
have formal leadership roles do not actually exercise leadership. And many without
not get too involved unless it
formal authority exercise very effective leadership. Ask people which leaders most
is absolutely necessary, inspire them and names like Gandhi, Nelson Mandela and Martin Luther King Jnr come
congregations record lower up as frequently as John F Kennedy and Winston Churchill. Many have changed
levels of overall vitality. societies without or before holding high office, by exercising leadership within their own
constituencies and then slowly increasing their influence by reaching across boundaries
to wider constituencies7.

A lack of formal authority should not stop us seeking to make a difference and exercise
effective leadership in situations that require it, or where we feel inspired to contribute.
And in challenging situations those with formal responsibilities need to recognise they need everybody to
exercise their gifts and skills to the extent that they can. Far from being threatened, we need to help them
find their place in the overall picture and make their contribution. “Leadership” may come from a wide
range of sources! By empowering others we are generating greater potency within our organisations and
greater possibility for all to move forward towards their common hopes and aspirations.

This does not mean authority is not important


So exercising leadership is not simply about formal authority. But, by separating leadership from formal
authority, we are not suggesting formal authority is irrelevant or unimportant. Our research with churches
makes it clear that a lack of leadership is not a path to creating healthy churches. Whether it is formalised
or not, clear patterns of leadership and decision-making are critical to the health of any group or
organisation.

A group without leadership is quickly uncomfortable. Even in situations where little leadership is
required, after a little while people will search for those who will bring various leadership gifts to keep the
group functioning.

Consider an emergency situation like a car accident or natural disaster. Immediately after it happens,
people mill around nervously wondering what to do but not sure how to start. Then suddenly someone
arrives or starts to give directions to others about making phone calls, looking after particular people,
getting a first aid kit from the car. Suddenly a process emerges out of the inertia or chaos, people start to
take on roles and things start to move forward8.

Critical decisions sometimes need to be made quickly on the football field. A mountaineering or walking
team will need ways to make hard decisions very efficiently in a dangerous situation. Signs of hypothermia
11

in a blizzard are no place for unending committee style discussions! In the heat of a political battle over
whether a development should go ahead, strategic decisions require good but swift process. So too in any
group. Clear process and authority will matter, whether formalised or earned.

People with formal roles and responsibilities have critical functions that can make or break new directions
or initiatives, adding legitimacy or creating serious obstacles. They can create a climate within an
organisation that promotes dependency, or enables others to contribute, together creating something
bigger than any individual within the group.

Not just about who is up the front


We often think of leadership as the upfront person in an organisation or group. While this may sometimes
or often be the case, it need not be. Often the goal or try scorer simply adds the icing to the cake of a
disciplined mid-field, strong defence or commanding forward pack. It is their feats that are replayed over
and over again on the evening sports show, but they are by no means the sole actors.

We remember Sir Edmund Hillary and Tenzing Norgay for first climbing Mount Everest, but the
expedition leader making it all possible from lower down the mountain was Sir John Hunt. Though not
the person heading for the summit, Hunt exercised critical leadership in logistical and strategic planning
to make it all possible, through all the dynamics of personalities and cultural differences (between
Englishmen, New Zealanders and Sherpas). Hunt had to make the hard calls: not everybody could reach
the summit. He had to develop strong commitment to team goals, ensuring all climbers knew that to get
anyone to the summit, they needed to be working on the team goal, not for personal aspirations to be the
ones to get there.

In a group we may (or may not) be the people to bring all the ideas, be the voice, have all the skills and so
on. What is important is that they are there, nurtured, contributed and marshalled in appropriate ways.

Jesus was not always up front. He put a priority on building the disciples as the cornerstone for the
church. For those of us with formal authority the challenge is to liberate and harness the many gifts and
skills of those participating in our organisation, group or church, helping them contribute to building
common purposes and directions.

Our motivations matter


Our motivations will be important. Some people who achieve higher office or responsibility are driven by
the desire or need to lead, to marshal and to experience power and authority. Others end up in positions
of leadership out of a desire to serve, to make things better. The motivations can make all the difference.
Dietrich Bonhoeffer warned about how heroic leadership can quickly poison a spiritual community. He
warned that a desire to lead among “authoritative personalities” springs from the need for the admiration
of men and the establishment of visible human authority. By contrast, the genuine authority of service
seems to be so unimpressive. Yet “pastoral authority can only be attained by the servant of Jesus who
seeks no power of his own, who himself is a brother among brothers, submitted to the authority of the
Word”9.

Just as we belong to Christ by grace, so the church exists by grace. And leadership in the church is entirely
by grace, not by right. There is always a danger of seeing leadership in the church as a human
achievement, while perhaps notionally acknowledging God in the process. In the mutually interdependent
life of the church, all leadership responsibilities are shared responsibilities, sustained and guided by God’s
gracious provision.

Jesus was quite explicit about the values and approaches he desired to see in his followers. He said, “I
have not come to be served, but to serve, and to give my life as a ransom for many” (Mark 10:45).
Observing that common patterns of leadership behaviour involved “exercising authority” over people, he
said his followers were not to “lord it over” others, but to lead through humility and service, just as he had
done (Luke 22; Matthew 20).

Thus Jesus radically redefined greatness and accepted norms of leadership. Richard Foster writes, “He
was not just reversing the ‘pecking order’…he was abolishing it. The authority of which he spoke was not
an authority to manipulate and control. It was an authority of function, not status”10. Following Jesus
goes beyond the doing of acts of service. It means genuine inner transformation of heart, attitude and
motive. It involves not just serving, but becoming a servant.

Robert Greenleaf’s work on “Servant-leadership” puts an operational face to this philosophy. He writes,
“Servant-leadership is a practical philosophy which supports people who choose to serve first, and then
lead as a way of expanding service to individuals and institutions. Servant-leaders may or may not hold
formal leadership positions. Servant-leadership encourages collaboration, trust, foresight, listening and
the ethical use of power and empowerment”11. All these themes are explored further in this book.
12

Not just about management


“Management is efficiency in climbing the ladder of success; leadership determines whether the ladder is
leaning against the right wall.” - Stephen R. Covey12

There is an important distinction between the exercising of leadership and the art of management, a
tension that is often identified in literature. There are similarities: both involve seeking to exercise
influence, both are about working with people and are concerned about achieving specific goals. Yet there
are important differences. The word “leadership” comes from the notions of “go, travel, guide”; the word
“manage” from the word for “hand”. Management is concerned with “handling things”, and the
implication is for a more “hands-on”, directive approach.

Management is about producing order and consistency within an organisation, establishing detailed steps
and timetables for achieving results, allocating resources and responsibilities, generating policies and
procedures, monitoring progress and resolving problems to ensure reliable output, efficiency and good
systems.

Leadership, on the other hand, is more about what could be, but isn’t. It is about producing constructive
change and movement, developing and communicating goals, directions and strategies to achieve a vision
for the future and creating teams and coalitions of motivated people committed to those directions. John
Kotter sees several important dimensions to leadership, including:

• Managing change by direction setting. Developing a vision of the future (often the distant
future) is important, as are the strategies needed to achieve that vision;
• Aligning people with the vision by communicating the new directions to those who can create
coalitions that understand the vision and are committed to its achievement;
• Motivating and inspiring people, keeping up the momentum of the new directions by
appealing to the needs, values and emotions of participants13.

Healthy organisations and communities need both effective leadership and effective management in
place. One without the other often proves unsustainable. Without strong management, moving in new
directions is unlikely to succeed because of a lack of solid foundations. But without effective leadership,
organisations can quickly stagnate and get disconnected from their purposes. The dark side of leadership
generates flighty visionaries who never get anything done; and of management orders everything for its
own sake in a way that becomes debilitating.

Often one person cannot deliver both14. If you can’t provide the necessary day-to-day management find
someone who can, and let them do it. And vice versa. This highlights the importance of a team approach.
(Of course problems can arise in small churches or groups without enough people to take on necessary
roles!)

MANAGEMENT LEADERSHIP
Planning and budgeting Establishing direction
Establishing detailed steps and timetables for Developing a vision of the future, often the distant
achieving results, and allocating the resources future, and strategies for producing the changes
necessary to make things happen. needed.
Organising and staffing Aligning people
Establishing structures for accomplishing Communicating direction by words and deeds to all
plans, delegating responsibilities for carrying those whose co-operation may be needed. Creating
out the plans, providing policies and teams and coalitions that understand the vision and
procedures to help guide people, and creating strategies, and accept their validity.
monitoring systems.
Controlling and problem-solving Motivating and inspiring
Monitoring results in some detail, identifying Energising people to overcome major political,
deviations, and then planning and organising bureaucratic and resource barriers to change by
to solve these problems. satisfying basic but often unfulfilled human needs.
Produces a degree of predictability and Produces change, often to a dramatic degree, and
order, and has the potential to consistently can produce extremely useful change (e.g., new
produce key results expected by various products that customers want; new approaches to
stakeholders (e.g., for customers, being on labour relations that help make a firm more
time; for stockholders, being within budget). competitive).
13

Leadership as a verb
If leadership is more than a trait or person, more than management and not just a question of authority,
something involving us all, how might we best understand it? In this chapter we have spoken of exercising
leadership rather than of being a leader. We are talking about seeing leadership more as an action; about
leadership as a verb. This applies to leaders as individuals and also, when considering a church or group,
it translates into leadership being a process underneath its life, contributed by many.

Leadership is the concern of everyone. To lead is to go ahead, enabling a group to find its way, modelling
that way, encouraging and inspiring others to follow. To lead is to bring out the best in others, helping
ordinary people do extraordinary things together in community. To lead is not to foster dependence in
others, but to encourage and equip others to become leaders themselves. It is a process of helping a group
of people discover who they are called to be and where they wish to go. It is a journey with others to
identify priorities and purpose and to actually start to live them out.

At its heart, leadership is about influence. As a verb, it can be defined as “seeking to make an intentional
positive difference”. We all have leadership gifts to contribute as we seek to live out the purposes of our
lives. Where are we exercising such leadership? At work or in other roles we have? In our communities,
with wider social issues or global responsibilities? In our churches or local groups? At home? These are
challenging questions…at least we find them so.

Leadership is a process not a person


If at an individual level leadership is about seeking to make a positive difference, how should we
understand it from the perspective of a group or organisation? What does it mean to exercise leadership
from within a team, through service to the team?

In a committed and effective mountaineering, canoeing or sporting team, the group grows together to the
point where what matters is not so much individual accomplishment as the team achieving an outcome,
and returning safely at the end. It is important to measure success in terms of the entire group, seeing
beyond individual accomplishments. This is as true in a workplace as in a wilderness, or in our
communities or families. James Kouzes and Barry Posner provide a more sophisticated but similar
definition of leadership as “the art of mobilising others to want to struggle for shared aspirations”15.

We can suggest, then, that leadership is the underlying processes of helping a group discover, live out and
journey towards common purposes, outcomes or directions. It is about helping a group of people identify
a common purpose and what needs to be done to achieve it, encouraging ownership and commitment to
the journey. It requires organisation, preparing well and, during the journey, ensuring progress is made,
with safe arrival at the other end.

Leadership can be seen as a critical element of healthy group functioning, rather than something residing
in particular people. Those of us with roles in groups or organisations need to think about ways of
developing “leadership” rather than particular leaders. We need to be about developing a “leadership
culture”, where leaders flourish and develop, as opposed to a culture dependent on a few louder, more
confident or charismatic people. Just as important as thinking about how to take forward our own
leadership, is the need to grow leadership across the whole group or church.

In Christian perspective
For church leaders such ideas start to take very seriously the biblical notion of the priesthood of all
believers, of us together being more than the sum of our parts. In challenging situations we need to
recognise that we need everybody to be exercising their gifts to the fullest. Far from being threatened, we
need to help people find their place in the big picture and make their contribution. By empowering others
we are generating greater potency within our organisations and greater possibility for all to move forward
towards our common hopes and aspirations. Sometimes we need to put boundaries around impossible or
implausible suggestions but, before we do, we should check our reasons for doing so.

Jesus came, not in splendour, worldly power and prestige, concerned with position and possessions, but
as a baby. In Jesus, we see the best revelation of the awesome, self-emptying love of God. Jesus came in
love, service, humility and sacrifice, revealing the life and love of God. He demonstrates the love of one
who did not grasp on to all he had, but who shared real human life, with all its heartache and pain, loss
and grief, suffering and betrayal, difficulty and death. He came to transform the normality of everyday life
into something special.

Exercising leadership in the church is not about protecting turf, or wielding authority. It is about service,
and nurturing leadership and contribution, about glorifying God. Jesus put a priority on nurturing the
disciples and their gifts. He sent them out two by two. The disciples became the core of a committed team
that provided the foundations for the Christian church, drawn up of very ordinary people from very
ordinary walks of life, bringing together a range of different strengths.

Exercising leadership is, ultimately, an expression of being Christ to one another, and to the world we are
sent to serve.
14

* * *
Leadership is, from an individual’s perspective, an action and a contribution to the life of a group of
people. From the perspective of a church or group, it is a vital underlying process for group life in times of
change, a critical ingredient for going in new directions. And, foundationally, it is communal; something
that exists within a community and for a community of people, something to which we shall turn in the
following chapter.

Things to consider
1. How would you describe or define “leadership”?
2. How would you distinguish “leadership” from “authority” or “management”?
3. To what extent are people in your situation looking for a “heroic leader”? Do you see this as dangerous to them?
Or to you?
4. Having considered this chapter, who are some people you feel have exercised excellent leadership where they are?
5. In what ways do YOU exercise “leadership”?

Notes
1 Tichy & Devanna 1986, 90.
2 Hooper & Potter 2000, 53.
3 Bryman 1992, as quoted in Northouse 1997, 4.
4 Quoted in Thomas 2006, 163.
5 Northouse 1997, 7.
6 Heifetz 1994, 236.
7 Heifetz 1994, 183.
8 Chatfield et al 2007, 36.
9 Bonhoeffer 1978, 84.
10 Foster 1988, 127.
11 Greenleaf 1970, also drawn from Spears 1998, 1.
12 Quoted in Thomas 2006, 163.
13 Kotter 1996, 82.
14 Zaleznik 1990, 64.
15 Kouzes and Posner 2002, 21.
15

Chapter 3
What we need is a committed
team
Leadership is more than a role or position of authority: it is something we can all exercise at
different places in our lives. In a group or organisation, leadership is a critical set of processes that
help people discover purpose and direction.

“Grand dreams don’t become significant realities through the actions of a single person. Leadership is a
team effort.” - Kouzes and Posner1

In the previous chapter we noted the radically different values underlying Jesus’ approach to leadership
and identified the communal nature of leadership as something exercised in a context, with other people.
Leadership implies there are people who choose to be led and, in most contexts, other people with whom
one is journeying. Leadership becomes communal as people contribute different strengths or gifts towards
a common end. By leadership we are therefore not just talking about a person, but a process…

In the last chapter we met Steve, a leader of a canoe journey, who travelled a difficult section of river in
flood safely but, because of inadequate instruction, left the rest of his group washed up on rocks and rapids
along the way. How much better would his leadership have been had he taken time to explain to those
involved what they were likely to experience, and provided them with some skills and ways of dealing with
what they would find? The result would have been a more successful journey, and more empowered
individuals able and enthusiastic to take on another trip and other challenges in their lives.

Regardless of the skills and gifts of any individual, effective leadership is about empowering others. When
people are empowered, they can respond to what lies ahead far more effectively than even the most
ruggedly individualistic “Solo Man”.

Though made up of individual contributors, leadership is communal


So many books and “experts” write about leadership as if the individual is the focus. They entice readers
with simple step by step programs that result in becoming a “better” leader. It is as if people can become
successful leaders by taking on some kind of body-building program.

It is critical that we seek to better understand and develop the strengths we bring to leadership as
individuals. But it is equally important that we understand that the communal nature of leadership can
bind people ever closer as they seek to achieve shared aspirations.

An initiative may start with an individual action. A housing project in an undeveloped country may have
started through the vision, energy and commitment of a single person who was moved to the point of
wanting to make a difference. Bob Brown rafted down the Franklin River in Tasmania in the 1970s and was
moved to stand up and commit his life to protecting it, and other wilderness areas across Australia. The
Apostle Paul had a similar transformational experience on the Damascus Road, and he felt called to a
whole new life.

Every day as we negotiate the shifting landscape of our lives, we encounter opportunities to exercise
leadership in our actions, priorities and interactions. We may be a mother or father who wants to improve
childcare options or safety in our community, a teacher who wants to make a difference in the classroom,
or a young adult longing to contribute to creating a better world. We all have opportunities to make a
difference. In the words of Gandhi, “You must become the change that you want to see in the world”2.

Choosing to stand up for, or against, something can be a significant step in a journey towards change or
new possibilities. Each of us can think about what we feel called to do, something that could make a
difference. New movements, for instance, may start from a dramatic contribution from an individual. At
this level exercising leadership may be a single person’s choice or action.

From another viewpoint, however, leadership is fundamentally communal. When we focus on movements
and history in more detail, we start to see the interplay of a wide range of people who all contribute
different things. Many contribute leadership. In some ways, the famous names we associate with
significant moments in history act as symbols and figureheads for the aspirations and actions of a wider
group.

Take a look at that housing project and you will find a range of people providing other forms of leadership
alongside the pioneer, helping make it happen as part of a committed team. Take a look at the
16

environmental movement behind the Franklin River campaign and you will have found a wide range of
people all contributing different leadership strengths and skills to create a movement that could make a
difference. Take a look beyond Paul and you will find Barnabas providing encouragement, support and
complementary leadership.

In any group, effective leadership will broaden its base by involving a range of people and strengths. As we
move forward towards a goal, different people will contribute different leadership strengths. Sometimes
one person will be leading and contributing, and other times they will step back to benefit from the
leadership of others.

In this way, leadership is fundamentally communal. Contributions are made, evaluated and developed in
the context of others. When facing the long-term white water that is often encountered when trying to
instigate change, it is fundamental to be bringing together teams of people who together can navigate the
challenges ahead, support each other and develop the gifts that are needed to meet the situation.

A committed team that brings out the best in its members is critical. Within that team we are more than
the sum of our parts. Building this kind of community involves listening, networking and the development
of strong, solid relationships that act as foundations for what we are seeking to do. This is something we
will turn in more detail in Chapter 5.

Committed to the journey


During most challenging journeys in the wilderness, a team of people work together, moving through
complex situations and making the most of the resources that each of them brings. They journey into
unknown, unpredictable, often inhospitable settings where they might feel small, uncertain or sometimes
lost. Before starting off on such a journey a team needs a clear and agreed sense of purpose and direction.
Everyone needs a strong sense of trust and safety in the group in order to step out together, not fully
knowing what they may find…

Some members may have a gift for navigating, others for carrying heavy loads, still others wisdom and
experience. Some are talented at creating secure campsites or building team spirit, communication and a
sense of cautious optimism. Others still contribute an ability to listen to how others are faring. On such
journeys, leadership is about harnessing individual strengths towards team goals, inviting everyone to
contribute leadership strengths together to achieve an outcome that may well stretch everyone beyond
their comfort zones.

It is in the complexity of the contribution of these many gifts that a strong team is forged, that leadership is
exercised across the group and that safe and potentially successful journeys are undertaken - not with
mindless bravado but with cautious optimism based on firm foundations of the team.

There are also many parallels here with church organisations or groups seeking to discover purpose and
direction together. Many inspiring groups have focused on stretching beyond their comfort zones, aspiring
to common vision or goals that they hold together. People are discovering the need to work together and
develop corporate vision as the best way to achieve individual aspirations. They are realising that together
they can be more than the sum of their parts.

Consider a sporting team. There are many players with gifts and skills who have been deliberately chosen
to complement others in the team. At different moments in the game each person comes to the fore, taking
their team forward. Some may be higher profile than others, for example, the person shooting the goals.
But all are equally critical to the outcome that all are passionately working towards.

Leadership within a community, or as part of social advocacy, is similarly communal. An


individual may bring hopes or ideas, but very quickly will need to create (or be part of) a
process that draws people together, builds common purpose and invites as many as possible
to contribute in an environment of growing trust. Reaching for goals that do not naturally
flow from life as it is, people believe things could be different and want to stretch together to
get there.

There is much to be gained from exploring leadership as a journey, where


Churches are more likely to be leadership is about developing strong team dynamics and drawing out the
vital and growing where key strengths of all involved. Leaders need to bring together teams of committed
leaders have strong co-journeyers who contribute to each other, developing trust, shared purpose,
relationships with those in the effective ways of operating together, and a safe community base of trust from
congregation and where which to step forward.
people feel they know a
significant amount about Christian leadership as communal
leaders’ personal spiritual The New Testament discussion of “gifts” provides a context for Christian leadership. It
suggests that God has distributed different and complementary gifts that are given for the
journeys. Leaders themselves
good of the whole – not just for separate individuals. They are given to glorify the giver,
are also more likely to be vital God, not the recipient.
and growing.
17

Paul emphasises using one’s gifts to serve others. In the one place where the gift of leadership is mentioned
(Romans 12:8: mainly to do with administration), he implores its use “diligently”. As Klyne Snodgrass
suggests, perhaps we should first be concerned about being a gift to the church, rather than claiming our
giftedness3.

Leadership, from a Christian perspective, is about helping all members discover and use the gifts they have
in service to the church and world. It is a functional expression of the priesthood, or ministry, of all
believers. The church is not a place with only “professional” ministers while the rest are passively
ministered to. Rather it is a community in which all participate by ministering to one another, and to
broader society. All Christians have gifts and all have the ability to make a difference, by using them not for
ourselves, but to serve others.

There is so much emphasis in our society on individualism, on individual action and on individual leaders
and their accomplishments. Yet Christian traditions place great emphasis on the gathered community of
believers, on corporate understandings of life and facts. The individualism of our society flies in the face of
biblical models of community as reflected in the Trinity and the early church. Spiritual formation has both
individual and corporate dimensions. Any discussion of leadership needs to get beyond religious
individualism and recognise the role of the gathered community as a space to develop and authenticate
leadership strengths and contributions.

Paul’s most commonly used and perhaps favourite metaphor for the church is that of a “body”,
emphasising the dynamic interdependence of all the parts. No one has everything and no one has nothing.
Everyone has something, everyone is important and everyone has a contribution to make.

While valuing each individual, the church is a living testimony to the value of, and need for, community.
God brings individuals out of isolation into the shared life of spiritual community, characterised by the
author of Hebrews (12:22-24) as being a place of inclusion, joy, festivity, forgiveness and fellowship.
Leadership involves facilitating the interdependent contributions of everyone.

Ultimately, leadership is a part of every Christian’s journey of faith, based in the prayerful seeking of what
God chooses and wants for us individually and collectively. The leadership strengths we contribute come
from beyond ourselves: from God and from nurturing by others. These strengths are contributed to, and
refined by, those around us.

Going to our edges to discover our centre


There is always unutilised capacity in each individual. The challenge of leadership is to help bring that out.

Many training initiatives have been developed around the principle of taking participants into an
unfamiliar environment, and engaging them in a stretching but manageable challenge to grow personal
resilience and leadership skills. Participants usually discover their strengths and their ability to stretch. By
taking on challenges, both individuals and the group develop competence and confidence, extending their
capacity, their character and gaining group leadership skills that can be used again in many other settings.

Usually such stretching experiences are best achieved in relationship with others in a safe community.
People discover the importance of working together, of corporate goals and of how to achieve them. In this
process they are learning critical elements for exercising leadership and making a difference in their lives
wherever they are4.

Leadership is about pacing the journey


In most occasions, achievement and progress require some degree of risk and anxiety. Whenever we work
in areas in which we don’t feel fully safe, the risks involved leave us anxious about the journey we are
considering. Leadership that stretches others, taking them out of their comfort zones, will need to carefully
pace the journey.

Pacing the journey will involve the careful balancing of safety and risk and the creation of safe spaces from
which people can tentatively step out, knowing they have support and encouragement behind them as well
as enough skills to have a reasonable chance of getting through. This requires a good sense of timing and
knowing when to turn up the heat in a situation, and when to take the heat off and allow people to regroup
and re-energise.

It will also involve knowing when to step forward and act - and when to stop and reflect on how things are
going. In the words of leadership writer Ronald Heifetz, it involves knowing when to be on the “dance
floor” and when to be on the “balcony”5.

Holding these balances appropriately will always be best done in the context of a community of people
exercising leadership together, providing feedback and perspective from which wise decisions can be made.

We will look in more detail at these balances in Chapters 7 and 8.


18

Leadership as a collection of priceless strengths and gifts


During the last two chapters we have considered what it means to exercise effective leadership. We have
moved from a focus on individuals and authority to considering leadership as an underlying process that
involves many contributions.

Leadership includes a range of elements that together add up to something important, a collection of
strengths and gifts that any group or organisation need to bring together if they are to move
forward effectively. These “leadership strengths” are brought to the table by a range of people who
possess them in different quantities. These strengths need to be present for there to be effective leadership
in a group.

Whoever you are, whatever position you hold, whatever tough questions you are facing, we believe that
what you offer depends less on your position of formal authority and more on the gifts and strengths you
bring. Gifts that you have understood, nurtured and developed. It is a journey of discovering what we have
to offer, identifying and developing the strengths we have and working out how to best use them in
different situations. It is also a journey of finding others whose strengths complement our own.

The challenge for any group or organisation (or for people with formal responsibilities within them) is to
bring these leadership strengths together, ensuring that in the mix they have present all the strengths that
are needed. The challenge then is to help individuals identify and utilise those strengths and to harness
them, working towards a positive future.

What are key leadership strengths? How can we develop them and use them well? NCLS research has
identified a range of leadership strengths to which we shall turn in Part Two after considering one other
critical principle to exercising effective leadership.

Things to consider
1. Think about a group you are part of. In what ways do different people in the group exercise leadership?
2. To what extent is it important for different people in your group to exercise different types of leadership?
3. What types of leadership do YOU exercise? What could you offer? What might it take to do so?

Notes
1 Kouzes and Posner 2003, 18.
2 As quoted in Chatfield et al 2007, 12.
3 Snodgrass 1996, 213.
4 Chatfield et al 2007, 25.
5 Heifetz 1994, 252.

Вам также может понравиться