It is always a joy to see mentees walk into their calling and potential.
Spiritual Leadership or Its Absence Affects Your Bottom Line
Spiritual leadership impacts the bottom line
Most leaders understand the necessity of developing skills and leveraging their unique personality. Fewer leaders understand the antecedent of spiritual formation in the development of leaders. Fewer leaders still believe that spiritual formation has any bearing on their bottom line. However, research begs to differ with what leaders believe or don’t believe.
So what difference does spiritual formation and spiritual leadership make according to the research?[i] Every significant metric of employee performance i.e., commitment, productivity, performance, character, and competence are positively affected by spiritual leadership. The reverse is also true; the lack of spiritual leadership exists as a drag on these same metrics. The fact is that spiritual leadership melts the impediments that keep organizations and businesses from hitting sustained bottom line performance. How?
First, spiritual leadership positively predicts calling (i.e., the experience of transcendence that defines how one makes a difference through service to others and thus derives a meaning and purpose in life). How calling is generated in followers is the concern of the spiritual leader. Calling is that sense of meaning or purpose that makes up the triad of intrinsic motivation (competence, mastery, and purpose – see Pink). As Fry et al describe it:
“The term calling has long been used as one of the defining characteristics of a professional. Professionals in general have expertise in a specialized body of knowledge, ethics centered on selfless service to clients/customers, an obligation to maintain quality standards within the profession, calling to their field, dedication to their work, and a strong commitment to their careers.”[ii]
Second, spiritual leadership positively predicts membership (i.e., the fundamental need to be understood and appreciated – this emerges in followers as the leader manifests the characteristics of spiritual leadership and so generates a sense of mutual care and concern so that followers gain a sense of membership). Spiritual leadership contributes to the altruistic love of each team member toward the other as they jointly develop a common vision. Altruistic love and a common vision is a prerequisite to developing hope – a characteristic that expressed in a “do what it takes” pursuit of “a vision of transcendent service to stakeholders.”[iii]
Third, the positive relationship between spiritual leadership and organizational commitment and performance is fully mediated by calling and membership. Leaders who tap into their followers needs of calling and membership find that shared experience helps the emergence of trust, intrinsic motivation, and organizational commitment needed to enhance the team’s performance. Researchers explain the dynamic at play in shared experience as:
“Concerning spiritual leadership, over time these individuals would begin to form shared or compatible mental models of altruistic love, vision, and hope/faith of the group, thereby increasing the group’s sense of calling and membership, and ultimately influence each other toward increasingly greater levels of commitment and performance.”[iv]
Spiritual leadership is a game changer
Clearly the exercise of spiritual leadership is a game changer. So what is spiritual leadership? It is an expression of vision, altruistic love, and faith/hope that characterizes the leader’s approach to exercising influence and power. Spiritual leadership is a composite variable in organizational performance. It cannot be adequately deconstructed to create a reflective construct but does serve as a formative construct i.e., causal action flows from indicators to create a composite variable. The formative indicators of spiritual leadership include:
- Vision – a picture of the future based on implicit or explicit commentary describing why people should work to create that future.
- Altruistic love – “…a sense of wholeness, harmony, and well being produced through care, concern and appreciation for both self and others.” (262)
- Hope/faith – hope is a want with the certainty of fulfillment; faith adds certainty to hope. People with hope and faith have clarity in where they are going and how to get there and are willing to endure hardship or setbacks along the way without losing the conviction behind their goal.
Taking care to help leaders in their spiritual formation is action designed to help them develop a clear vision, love for others, and hope/faith. The methods of spiritual formation vary but always need a mentor who helps the emerging or existing leader frame their insight and communicate their vision and hope clearly. Spirituality is that transcendent aspect of humanness that seeks out a sense of meaning and purpose in life. It may take on a variety of forms or expressions. Spirituality is distinct from religion. Religion is concerned with theological system of beliefs and rituals and related formalized practices and ideas. This distinction is important to keep up not only to avoid the violation of human resource law but to cut misunderstanding that wrongly equates spirituality and religion in a way that then disassociate its importance to the business goal.
In contrast to the idea of spiritual leadership, some leaders assume that the only needed tool of effective leadership is a dispassionate commitment to “the numbers”. The value of analytics is not in dispute. What is in dispute is the assumption that analytics alone are enough to lead the sustained performance of any group. Research simply does not support the belief that a manager can be effective and stay dispassionately disengaged from the people they manage while hiding behind “the numbers.” Nor does research support the idea that the idea of meaning/purpose is secondary to the real business of making money or completing tasks. Meaning/purpose are primary factors to high employee motivation, sense of calling, and feeling of membership with the group.
Conclusion
How do you make room for the development of your own spiritual leadership? How clear are you about your own sense of purpose or the meaning of life and work? Do your vision, love, and hope/faith rise to the level of responsibility you now hold or did your spiritual formation arrest under the press to acquire the skill needed to master the technical aspects of your current role? If spiritual formation has not been a conscious exercise in your professional development you may just have found the reason your team’s performance continues to lag behind the competition and your organization’s expectations. Need help in kick starting your spiritual formation? Then it is time to talk with a coach who gets it.
Afterward: The relationship of spiritual leadership and servant leadership
According to Fry et al, spiritual leadership addresses four key areas that research in servant leadership has not yet examined: (1) the specific cultural values that are necessary for servant leadership; (2) the role of servant leadership in achieving value congruence across organizational levels; (3) the personal outcomes of servant leadership; and (4) the apparent contradiction of placing the needs of people higher than the needs of the organization. It must be noted on this last point that Fry observes a popular perception not a data supported by experience in servant leadership. Servant leadership works at the level of motivation with organizational views in mind and indications are that organizational outcomes are enhanced by this perception as Fry et al also acknowledge in their definition of professionals above. What may be a more accurate statement is that a spiritual leadership perspective is the antecedent of the exercise of servant leadership.
[i] Louis W Fry, Sean T. Hannah, Michael Noel and Fred O. Walumbwa. “Impact of Spiritual Leadership on Unit Performance,” The Leadership Quarterly, Volume 22, Issue 2, April 2011, 259-270. 11 pages.
[ii] Fry et al 263
[iii] Ibid. 263
[iv] Ibid. 261
Leadership Takes Agility, Responsiveness & Commitment to Learning
Mexico’s goalkeeper Guillermo Ochoa illustrates the idea of skill and behavioral repertoire in leadership. Leaders can’t just use the same “play” over and over expecting to generate great results.
In the first half of play against Brazil in the World Cup competition the camera caught the breadth of his ability.
Like Ochoa, leaders must to keep their head and heart in the game – they have to learn new skills and exercise a growing self-discipline. If they learn and exercise self-discipline their ability to respond to a changing situational dynamic, changing team-mate responses, and the competition grows. If your leadership looks something like this photo you will experience more wins than losses. On the other hand if you thought leadership was the attainment of a position, power, or prestige you might find yourself flat-footed when you need to be nimble. How is your leadership development growing?
Leadership Takes Agility, Responsiveness & Commitment to Learning
Mexico’s goalkeeper Guillermo Ochoa illustrates the idea of skill and behavioral repertoire in leadership. Leaders can’t just use the same “play” over and over expecting to generate great results.
In the first half of play against Brazil in the World Cup competition the camera caught the breadth of his ability.
Like Ochoa, leaders must to keep their head and heart in the game – they have to learn new skills and exercise a growing self-discipline. If they learn and exercise self-discipline their ability to respond to a changing situational dynamic, changing team-mate responses, and the competition grows. If your leadership looks something like this photo you will experience more wins than losses. On the other hand if you thought leadership was the attainment of a position, power, or prestige you might find yourself flat-footed when you need to be nimble. How is your leadership development growing?
Putting out Fires – Leadership Lessons from My Son the Submariner
I was talking with a client who recently moved to an international assignment. He is an experienced executive with earlier international experience but the tone in his voice alerted me to the fact he faced an unexpected level of adversity in his new move. He started our conversation by saying, “This has been three weeks of hell. All I have done the last three weeks is put out fires, and it is exhausting.”
What kind of “fires” do leaders face? Common “fires” include:
- Rumors that undermine staff morale and productivity.
- Deliberate reputation hack jobs by competitors designed to undermine customer and stakeholder confidence.
- Revenue crises i.e., sudden drops in sales or donor gifts.
- Political crises that threaten market stability and employee safety (especially threatening and uncertain in countries facing military coups).
- Unexpected loss of key people.
- Surprise audits.
- Innovation breakthroughs by competitors.
In my experience there are three kinds of “fire-fighting” leaders. The first two are damaging to an organization. The third is the ideal because they reduce damage while maintaining productivity.
The first is the frantic leader. This is usually a new and inexperienced leader who expected everything to work without a glitch. This young/inexperienced leader is the most dangerous to an organization because their own panic in the face of crisis leads them to freeze or withdraw at a time that their presence and clear-headed perspective is most needed by employees and stakeholders looking for reassurance that the crisis is not fatal. The frantic leader needs to understand that fires happen – they will occur and because of this reality contingency plans for dealing with fires must be in place.
The second is the distracted leader. This leader puts all their energy into extinguishing the fire and finding its source. The distracted leader is also dangerous to the organization. The distracted leader is aware of the potential for “fire” however, they have not put response mechanism in place. Because they focus their attention on the fire they temporarily suspend leadership activity needed to keep the organization on the right course in the midst of the fire. The organization becomes distracted and may fail to produce or pay attention to its stakeholders.
The third leader is the captain. The captain knows fires happen and that they threaten the mission critical activities of their employees and organization. Because of this the captain puts in place the response mechanisms needed to address the fire while continuing to manage the operational necessities that keep the organization productive and strategic. The captain knows his vessel, he has response mechanisms and people in place and he directs their response. He is confident in their ability because he has trained and drilled his team to refine their skills.
Here is where my son’s stories of being a submariner kick in. As we talked about life aboard a submarine during his Navy days I walked away with two important insights. First, everyone is a fire fighter on board any kind of marine vessel. Even on my visit to his submarine on parent’s day we were given instruction on what to do in case of fire. We were instructed on where to go, what equipment to use, how to use it, and then we practiced using it. Everyone on board is trained to respond to fire. Second, a fighting vessel cannot afford to drop its operational functions to respond to a crisis. It has to be able to maintain a dual focus of mission completion and crisis intervention. If a fire occur those at their duty stations remain attentive to their jobs, those off duty become fire fighters.
The application to leadership is important. On a submarine this dual focus is the subject of repeated drills. I observed the captain run several drills while aboard my son’s submarine. Practice, practice, practice so that when emergency situations arise people respond with discipline and not panic. The captain was attentive to multiple layers of activity.
My friend while an experienced executive is developing new capacity as a leader. He has moved beyond the frantic leader model to the distracted leader model and to his credit he realizes that he cannot afford to be distracted. As we talked his vision of being a captain emerged and I am confident that his current crisis will teach him what his organization needs to manage fire while completing their mission.
What kind of leader are you? The question is really one of capacity i.e., the power to grasp and analyze ideas and cope with problems. Does your organization have the mechanisms in place to respond to different kinds of “fires”? Do your people know how to respond (or defer response) in the face of crises? Do you lead from the front in the face of “fire” or are you frantic or distracted. Think through the “fires” your organization has faced in the past. What needs to be in place to find the nature of the “fire” and what needs to be in place to address it?
For example: in one company I worked with we set up social media monitoring to catch customer disappointment or complaints as soon as they appear. We drew up an action map to guide an immediate response to any complaint or disappointment. We drew up an action map for follow-up and designated specific follow-up by department. In another company I worked with I helped them create a legal response team to work with clients, state and federal compliance, and internal management. This team went into action when any of our employees inadvertently or deliberately violated state or federal law (sounds odd but in that industry the quick pace, high demand and tight regulatory boundaries made such infractions a distinct possibility). In this situation too we define action maps; we drilled people on their roles, responsibilities, and follow-up procedures. We moved from a frantic reaction to a disciplined response that not only reduced the damage but created an organizational culture that was more contentious about compliance and productivity.
How do you deal with “fires” as a leader?
God is Not Silent – Are You Listening?
I had just completed reading the second book of Chronicles in the Jewish scriptures. The conclusion of the author caught my attention. It reads,
The Lord, the God of their ancestors , sent persistently to them by his messengers, because he had compassion on his people and on his dwelling place; but they kept mocking the messengers of God, despising his words, and scoffing at this prophets, until the wrath of Lord against his people became so great that there was no remedy. (2 Chron. 36:16-16, NRSV)
I reflected on the persistent disregard the king’s of Israel had toward God’s personal communication. My response is not uncommon, “How can people who have so many clear interventions from God so completely miss God’s attempt to communicate?”
My ruminations about transition emerge from the context of my own experience. There have recently been times were I felt at the end of my most important contribution. Oddly, opportunities for which I am amply qualified have closed in front of me. Ageism? Perhaps. Diversity goals? Perhaps. Cost reduction? Perhaps. The reasons were insignificant compared to the questions I face at this stage in life. I am part of the Boomer generation and I look forward to the convergence of experience, learning, and opportunity. Yet, I sometimes feel convergence slipping from my grasp. Fear assails my thoughts, resignation like a mental rigor-mortise has tried to rob my creativity and resilience.
In the midst of these fairly common emotions I am reminded to embrace yet another metamorphosis as I learn to apply my knowledge and experience in new ways. Reading the historical lessons of Chronicles has been encouraging – a reminder that God is not silent and that the shaping of destiny and purpose continues through a life time. Decisions made today are as significant as decisions made a decade ago spiritually. Look at faithful men and women in Chronicles who live an entire life of faithful and powerful relationship with God who then fail to finish well in the end through hubris or some other arrogance that leads to a wreckage of faith and not a flourishing of faith.
Hence my rumination, “How can people who have so many clear interventions from God so completely miss God’s attempts at communicating?” And hence, my commitment to remain attentive to that still small voice of God – God’s communication that is clear in the scriptures read and reflected upon or in those intuitive thoughts that emerge from prayer that bear the stamp of God’s own voice.
I went about my day and was preparing to leave my office and run some errands when I heard a knock at the door. A young man in a lime green logo shirt with iPad in hand was conducting an energy survey to find out who in our neighborhood qualifies for alternative energy projects. Janice and I have already explored these alternatives so I was closing the conversation when the young man surprised me with a request, “May I pray for you?” he said.
“Sure, what congregation are you a part of?” I asked.
He told me, we prayed and then he looked at me and said, “A man your age sometimes thinks their time of fruitfulness is over. Your greatest time of fruitfulness is about to begin. God has you in this time of transition not to forsake you but to complete the equipping and preparation you need for what is next. The end of your life will see the greatest of God’s work in scope and in impact. You have been faithful in little, God will make you faithful over much more.”
He said several others things too personal to share in this format that spoke to the deepest parts of my being.
Ok, that was different. Some might even say it was weird.
After he left, I considered my reflection about the kings of Israel and their response to the prophets. I am separated from their experience by thousands of years and yet the God of Abraham still speaks to me like the God I read about in the Bible. I remembered something Dallas Willard once wrote:
In the last analysis nothing is more central to the practical life of the Christian than confidence in God’s individual dealings with each person. The individual care of the shepherd for his sheep, of the parent for the child and of the lover for the beloved are all biblical images that have passed into the fundamental consciousness of Western humanity….The biblical record always presents the relationship between God and the believer as more like a friendship or family tie than like merely one person’s arranging to take care of the needs of another.(1)
I take the young prophet’s words to heart. I listen for the voice of God who is also my friend.
In case some wonder; I am not lost in the pursuit of the next episodic thrill of existential phenomenon. I am attentive to what God says in the scriptures, in prayer, and through the voices of others. I have specific goals and I work toward the convergence I want to see also recognizing that opportunities I have not thought of may well land in my lap as a result of the guidance and grace of God.
Is it a surprise that the prophetic (a gift of the Holy Spirit according to 1 Corinthians 12-14) still finds expression through and in the church? Not at all. This is the promise of God at work to guide, restore, heal, comfort, and develop God’s people. Are you listening for the voice of God? What do you do with what God has said or is saying now? How do you test the validity of what you hear to decide its reliability? If you are a follower of God through faith in Jesus Christ then be ready to see God act today just like you see God acting in history.
If you are not familiar with God acting in this way then contact me, I am happy to talk with you. Or, pray, ask God to show God’s self to you in a way you can’t miss. Walk the journey of faith with expectation, hope, and joy; one greater than you walks with you.
(1) Dallas Willard. Hearing God: Developing a Conversational Relationship with God. (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1999), 22-23.
Chance Meetings, Learning, and Career Advancement
I meandered down to the lounge of our hotel while I waited for Janice to come down for dinner. We were at the tail end of our anniversary celebration and were flying out the next day.
The lounge is always a great place to meet traveling business people and this evening was no different. As I entered a young man at the bar suggested several types of drinks I should try. We started talking. Turns out he is a Vice President of Acquisitions on a five state tour finalizing deals he had put together. Assessing profitability, building company portfolios, and finalizing complex financial deals it is not my forte. So, my curiosity was piqued. He gave me a rundown on what he and his team looked for in potential purchases. His background at Lehman brothers was the perfect foundation for his current role.
I asked him to what extent the corporate cultures of potential acquisitions played into his team’s assessments of potential acquisitions.
“We don’t bother with that,” he replied. “It is strictly a numbers game. We look at profitability, structures, and what duplication we need to remove or what systems will strengthen ours and we absorb what we can and eliminate what we don’t need.”
His background in statistics and finance give him a specific lens from which to view business yet several of his comments indicated that he had a greater than average people-sense behind all the analysis. I wanted to get at that. “You obviously enjoy what you do. What the four most important lessons you have learned in your career so far?” I asked.
“I have thought about that,” he replied. “They include: (1) patience – things don’t always move as fast as I want and being more deliberate helps me read whether I am working with a group that is on the same page or divided in how they approach challenges and whether they are critical thinkers or ‘yes-men;’ (2) numbers – I do the analysis work. People tell good stories but I want the facts. It is the facts that tell whether a company is profitable and sustainable; (3) research – when I speak I have all the data I need. I watch some guys simply throw stuff at the wall. It may work temporarily but when the CEO comes back with questions it doesn’t take long for bull*hit to unravel. If I don’t know the facts I will tell the CEO that I don’t have the facts now but I will within the day; (4) competency – a person has to be able to do the work with excellence.
I was impressed with the clarity and the speed with which he listed these off – clearly he has been thinking about this. I still wanted to know more. “So what have you learned about people?” I asked.
Again he didn’t even pause, “My career started as a cop. I worked in undercover narcotics and one thing was true about every person I arrested – they were great story tellers. They could have made millions as authors of fiction. Most people tell great stories – I don’t pay attention to the story, I look for the facts (the behaviors). It is just as true in business. That is why I am patient. I hear the stories but I look for the track record. This is why I will get to CEO role – I can separate the stories from the facts.” He paused for a moment and continued, “I recognized early on that technology was changing the way we did everything. I asked for an assignment in our IT department then I learned everything I could about technology and systems. I completed a degree in statistics and finance and I leveraged these at Lehman Brothers. I understand how to package business and to create systems to maximize it.”
I was enjoying the pace of the conversation, but I still saw that there was more to pull out of him – more about leadership. “You are clearly driven, so when you finally arrive at the top position how will you define success?” I asked.
He paused on this question. “You are really perceptive,” he said. He thought for a moment. Then he continued, “I will be different than the c-suite leaders I have seen so far. In my view the three most important things a C-suite leader has to pay attention to are: (1) numbers – always know what makes the business successful; (2) technology – most leaders lose touch with technology and when they do in this day in age they loose touch with their business; (3) people – they are the ones who make success happen. A leader can’t ignore the people who make it happen. Too many C-suite leaders I have seen treat people as though they are mere automatons. Without people things don’t happen – a leader has to appreciate and recognize the efforts of those around them.”
As he finished his thought his associate entered the bar. We made introductions and they congratulated me on our fortieth wedding anniversary and they left for dinner – I went to find Janice.
I did observe that his last statement gave him an “aha” moment and gave me the information I was looking for. His initial description of his work in acquisitions seemed devoid of the human side. This struck me as odd because his demeanor and the way he greeted me when I entered the lounge was much more engaging. What I saw in his response was a growing integration between the demeanor he demonstrated and his approach to analysis. His demeanor inferred an intuitive grasp on people dynamics. He elaborated on this a little more when he talked about patience. The more he moves his intuition toward an explicit understanding and integration the stronger the leader he will become. In fact his aversion to the impersonal CEO model indicated that he had started down this very road.
So, what did I learn? I will spend more time in the numbers. I don’t have a finance background but I have collected some business acumen along the way and I am committed to adding to it. I also learned that leaders who exercise awareness of their own emotion learn more about the people they manage. My friend at the bar inferred his own frustration at being depersonalized when he described the short-comings of the CEOs he has worked with. Because he is willing to learn from his experience by openly contemplating his own emotion and experience he has arrived at a clear differentiation between highly effective and moderately functional CEOs.
What have you learned along the way in your career? Are you as articulate as this young man in outlining what you have learned? This young man took our conversation as a learning time just as much as I did. He gained insight into himself by the questions I asked. My questions led him to consider his experience from new perspectives. I noticed that he was ready to engage conversations as learning tools but he also was ready to engage the conversation as an interview. I have noticed over the years that true leaders have this dual approach to conversation. Because they are learning every conversation potentially expands their knowledge. Because they are interviewing they find opportunities others never see.
How do you approach conversations with total strangers? The next time you meet a stranger – ask some key questions. Pay attention to the insights you pick up along the way and watch for opportunities. Most of all, have some fun – we did.
5 Principles that Make or Break Leadership
It takes just a few minutes to discover whether I am working with a tyrant, a Pollyanna, or a true leader. All I need to do is listen to how they describe their employees.
A tyrant makes statements like, “These people are: entitled, lazy, ignorant, and clueless about how to manage gross profit. I need you to define what we need in the next manager and to show us how to turn this team around.” The owner had is game face on as he told me this. I suppose it was to impress on me the weight of the job he was asking me to do – it wasn’t working. He wanted to hire our company to define what he needed to do to turn around his struggling sales team. I wasn’t impressed nor was I sure I wanted the contract.
A Pollyanna makes statements like, “I have the greatest team in the world – they are awesome world champions.” However, when I asked why the owner needed us to do employee assessments he simply stated that he needed help. I learned that their profits were non-existent and their cash flow was inverted. I did not learn this from the owner – I stumbled on it when interviewing the office manager. A Pollyanna boss can’t see problems nor do they see reality. They simply wring their hands and hope that everything will be ok.
A leader makes statements like, “We have had a successful track record. Our team is mostly working well and they are engaged, disciplined, and learning. However, I need you to coach Sue (not her real name); she is struggling in her performance. She has the skill sets, I was sure we made the right hire but for some reason she has withdrawn and become unresponsive. I will have to let her go if she doesn’t change but I need another perspective to let me know if I missed something.”
Listening to managers, owners, and C-suite positions talk about their employees tells a lot about an organization. Why bad bosses who describe employees as incompetent ignoramuses don’t correlate the fact their description of employees is a direct reflection of their lack of skill as a leader is always amusing to me. On the other hand, watching great leaders set high expectations and live those expectations out in front of their team is always inspiring to me.
Over the years I have observed five principles that make or break the success of a company in the short-term and the long-term that are directly related to the behavior of a leader. Look at the principles below and then think about your own behavior as a leader or manager. What does it take to change these insights from a negative to a positive outcome?
Principle 1 – how you talk about your employees is a direct reflection of your skill as a leader. If they are bad employees you are a bad boss. The fact is that great leaders hire great people. They inspire them to carry out outcomes they could not do alone by giving them a sense of purpose higher than the job itself and authenticating their contribution and their skills. I found that companies who think highly of their employees not only develop them consistently but also show sustained success over time. Conversely companies that have a low opinion of their employees typically make bad hires and struggle from financial crisis to financial crisis with poor performance over time.
Principle 2 – employees behave in direct correlation to what you believe about them. If you believe they are successful they will act that way. If you believe they are losers they will act that way. This insight was first found in education then also seen in business. It is called the Pygmalion effect and is used by great leaders to improve overall performance.
Principle 3 – employees know no more about the business than you are willing to teach them. Complaining about ignorance when you do not train and develop your employees is ridiculous. In one company we asked cost accounting to give us an itemized cost of each product. We put together an excel sheet for their sales team from which they could calculate the impact of discounts on their gross profit while paying attention to the product mix and overall revenue targets. We trained the sales team in how to use this sheet and trained the sales manager to reject discounts that did not show the impact on gross profit based on the excel sheet. Not surprisingly the team loved this. It helped them feel they had more control over their own sales tactics. The managers were shocked at this new-found enthusiasm and business acumen. However, the wish to know how to exercise business acumen existed all along. No one ever trained the team or gave them the data they needed to make smarter decisions.
Principle 4 – the harder you work to control your employees’ behaviors the greater the cost of labor you will generate. Extrinsic motivations generally work to cut employee motivation, remove employee engagement, and drop employee commitment – yet it is the first tool every bad manager uses to assert their superiority. Recognize the difference between algorithmic tasks (established instructions down a single path) and heuristic tasks (tasks requiring experimentation to find a novel solution). The point is that reward/punishment motivations work ok with algorithmic tasks but they are devastating in heuristic tasks because they often yield unexpected reactions and impaired performance. Great leaders understand this difference and use it to leverage the intrinsic motivations of their people. The point is that people are intrinsically motivated purpose maximizers not extrinsically motivated profit maximizers in their performance and decision-making. In contrast I worked with one client that defined every job as an algorithmic task. He could not (or would not) see that the tighter he pulled the noose around his people the more inefficient they became. This showed up in increasing sick days, constant internal complaints, losses due to flagging quality, higher rates of turnover, and increasing number of legal actions against the company by the EEOC. His response to these negative results was to lower the boom and get people in line. How do you think this is working?
Principle 5 – the cost of a bad hire is about 5 times their annual salary over the first year of their employment. Bad hires ruin great teams. It is especially devastating to performance when a manager protects a bad hire or truly incompetent employee or even promotes them to avoid unpleasant conflict. In one company I watched an incompetent and poor performing employee run the company with the threat of law suits and complaints to the EEOC. There was ample evidence to terminate the employment and to discipline the manager of that department for failure to discuss flagging performance issues. Instead company penalized top performers for questioning why this incompetence was allowed to remain. In another company we tracked the lack of discipline of poor performance to an affair the owner had with one female employee. She had effectively been paid to remain silent, she did not have to show up to work, and she hated everything about the company. (The company went under about six months after this all came to light.)
What needs to change in your leadership behavior? What kind of boss are you? Change is possible though not necessarily painless. Do you see the need to change? Then act quickly and decisively. Hire a coach (and in some cases legal counsel) to avoid impulsiveness and violation of labor laws. Be honest with yourself, are you a tyrant, Pollyanna, or leader? What kind of leader do you want to be?
All Congregations Face Problems – Leaders Differentiate the Healthy From the Pathological
There are two kinds of problems in a congregation – healthy problems and unhealthy problems. Understanding the difference is the responsibility of leadership.
Healthy problems propel congregations into recognizing a changing need or environment so that they pay attention to structural changes and development of their people. Healthy problems include: over confidence by the founding pastor who sees herself as indispensable; eagerness – high energy; evangelism orientation without a corresponding discipleship process; seeking new ways to serve the community; growth beyond the ability to deliver; insufficient cost controls; insufficiently disciplined staff meetings; and inconsistent salary administration. If you work in or attend a fast growing congregation, you probably have experienced all of these normal problems.
Unhealthy problems indicate that leaders have ignored needed change. Unhealthy problems include: arrogance; lack of focus – energy too thinly spread; no boundaries on what to do; pressing for more growth despite inability to deliver quality care; no cost controls; no staff meetings – no communication; and grossly under paid or over paid employees. These problems show that the congregation has lost its bearing and is adrift.
Even dynamic congregations can lose the drive of their mission when mission looses focus and clarity. The shift of focus is subtle because management strategies included in budgeting, cost reduction, rightsizing, or structural realignment can undermine and distract leaders from the true driver of their success – their mission.
Dynamism in a congregation is situational, it is not guaranteed. It is possible for a congregation to become malformed and enter a period of decline and thus act like an aging organization shortly after it is started. When early aging occurs, simplicity (the earmark of a vibrant congregation) gets lost in complexity as the people in the congregation struggle to explain the gap between their actions and their ideals or to explain how their actions fulfill the mission.
Dynamism induces simplicity as the earmark of a highly reproducible structure. This kind of simplicity was described by Rainer and Geiger as, “…a straight forward and strategic process that moves people through the stages of spiritual growth.”[1] This definition is important to think about. Simplicity is not the absence of complex situations – this misnomer only causes frustration. Complexity and growth go together. Simplicity is the ability of the congregation or Christian organization to support a direct line of action between its mission and its target in the midst of an ever-growing complexity of networks and stakeholders. When this kind of simplicity is lost activity around the mission becomes as congested as a Los Angeles freeway at rush hour.
So how is a simple and dynamic structure developed? Start with a blueprint i.e., define how the congregation will bring people to spiritual maturity i.e., start with your mission. Then remove congestion to build movement. Design what you do in alignment with a spiritual maturation process and your core values. Then recruit people to the process to help others grow in Christ. Use the same process in every aspect of how you minister to the community. Then practice your focus, say “no” to almost everything. People are drawn to momentum, but not every opportunity that emerges is something to be pursued as an institutional response. Recall Jesus’ response to the disciples request that he expand his work in Capernaum. The crowds sought after more but Jesus stayed focused. At the disciple’s request to engage Jesus’ new found recognition Jesus said, “Let us go somewhere else to the towns nearby, in order that I may preach there also; for that is what I came out for.”[2]
When you align your congregation around the purpose it is supposed to be about, you not only keep it simple you also end up launching new ministry because of your focus. Again, look at who Jesus said “no” to. What were the results? How many others besides the twelve did Jesus commission to ministry in the New Testament? Look at Matthew 8:19-22; Mark 5:18-20; John 5:10-17; and John 9:1-41 where Jesus did not inhibit the man from following in the crowd or restrict him from talking. The fact that each of these people immediately engaged in ministry points to the discipleship emphasis of Jesus i.e., act on what you know. It is as people acted on what they knew that Jesus then followed up to help develop their content. Notice that Jesus did not recruit any of these emerging ministers to the twelve.
We often get it backwards, wanting people to have all right content but who often have no idea how to put it to work and then insisting that all ministry happen through the programs authorized by the staff. It is important to see that any time we organize, no matter what spiritual label we put on it, we pull people together toward a common goal and create tension. Tension develops between the organization we create and the mission we seek to engage. The reason tension emerges is that organizations work with four primary drives: self-preservation, growth, effectiveness, and efficiency. A leader’s tension between how they define the work of the gospel and what consumes their time emerges when the organization asserts its drives and imposes its needs on the mission of the congregation. Instead, organization must subsume its drives to the mission it was designed to facilitate as a means of moving people together toward that mission.
Organizations are not people so how does this inversion occur?[3] Organizations become inverted when the people running the organization use its structures and processes to amplify their own drives for power, prestige, and pleasure not serving others.
Organizations invert when its leaders hide in structures and processes to avoid having to take responsibility to serve. This happens when lead pastors or executive pastors or CEOs hide in their offices each day, running new efficiency studies to wring more money out of the operation and not asking what people experience when they meet the congregation. It happens in congregations when the pastor gets lost in the internal aspects of the congregation and tries to make things more effective (read relevant) or more efficient (read removing objections to the latest trend he/she wants to try) and not taking the time to know the questions people are asking about God.
Hodgkinson adds another perspective to creating a dynamic organization that is particularly helpful to those leaders who inherit organizations or congregations that they must rejuvenate. To help sift through the haze of complexity, Hodgkinson offers a series of insightful questions that pastors should ask about their congregations.[4]
- Is the organization unjustified in its basic purpose? Can it describe its basic purpose?
- Is the organization unjustified in its complexity of ancillary purposes?
- Should the organization grow? Consolidate? Reduce? Is the growth pattern valid and defensible?
- What are the latent functions of the organizational effort and are they valid and defensible?
- What, so far as reasonable analysis can reveal, is the shape of the non-quantitative cost benefit account? Is the quality of organizational life adequate under its constraints?
- What consistency exists between the answers to these value questions and the core commitments/assumptions of the leader asking them?
These questions can be a source of hope and vision or a source of intimidation and threat. The emotion experienced when these questions are reviewed is itself a reason to stop and reflect. Ask yourself what emotion you experience and why? This practice of self-awareness may lead you back to the question Jesus asked James and John – are you willing to drink the same cup Jesus drank?
So, what problems is your congregation facing? Are they healthy or unhealthy? Will you exercise the courage and faith to discuss these problems or hide and hope they will go away or that someone else will deal with them?
References:
[1] Thom S. Rainer and Eric Geiger. Simple Church: Returning to God’s Process for Making Disciples (Nashville, TN: B&H Publishing, 2006), 60.
[2] Mark1:38 (NASB)
[3] Christian A. Schwarz. Natural Church Development: A Guide to Eight Essential Qualities of Healthy Churches (Carol Stream, IL: Church Smart Resources, 1996), 62-65. Schwarz’s discussion of a technocratic versus biotic approach to congregational life is another similar way to assess the tension that occurs in the organization of the church.
[4] Christopher Hodgkinson. Educational Leadership: The Moral Art (Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1991), 109-110.
Four Questions to Ask in the Middle of Conflict
Leaders face conflict. Conflict simply is a matter of fact. The presence or absence of conflict has very little to do with whether a leader is successful or not. Instead successful leaders know how to transform conflict into opportunity. So, the question is not how to avoid conflict but how to engage it and how to find the opportunity for break through thinking and development that conflict represents. Don’t rob your organization of powerful and transforming potential by either power over or ignoring conflict.
Mark Gerzon, in his book Leading Through Conflict: How Successful Leaders Transform Differences into Opportunities, outlines four essential questions for approaching conflict. Make a habit starting your approach by asking yourself:
- “What else can I learn about this situation?”
- “Is there some useful, perhaps vital, information that I lack?”
- “Do I truly understand the way others see the situation?”
- “Should I consult with others before I intervene?”
Leaders who make a habit of asking themselves these questions avoid the impulsive decisions that generate years of regret later. I am not exaggerating when I say, “years later.” I have worked with leaders who described significant turning points that cost time, money, and tons of emotional energy in colossal set backs. Rather than ask themselves these questions they responded to in hast and anger. We can and should learn from similar examples.
Ask yourself these questions then you are more ready to engage conversation with the source of the conflict. The goal in engaging any conflict is to listen generatively and not reflectively. Generative listening listens from the context of the whole system while reflective listening only hears from inside one’s self. The pitfall of reflective listening is that subjectivity pushes leaders down the rabbit hole of Wonderland and end up with a distorted view of reality. Generative listening on the other hand provides the leader an opportunity to move from simply managing conflict to engaging transformation. Generative listening uses several important skills. Invite someone with whom you have strongly disagreed to talk with you while you listen – take the following steps.
- Find a good space. Choose a place to talk without distractions.
- Take the time. Let the other person tell their story.
- Respond (versus react). Choose your body language, tone and intention.
- Show interest. Make eye contact; focus on the person speaking; don’t answer your phone or look at your BlackBerry.
- Be patient. It’s not easy for people to talk about important things.
- Listen for content and emotion. Both carry the meaning at hand. It’s OK sometimes to ask, “How are you doing with all this?”
- Learn. Listen for their perspective, their view. Listen for their experience. Discover or learn a new way of seeing something.
- Follow their lead. See where they want to go. Ask what is important to them (rather than deciding where their story must go or how it must end).
- Be kind. Listen with heart as well as with mind.
After doing this notice the difference this makes in how you feel about your relationship with the other person. The act of listening not only brings clarity for both people in the conversation it often brings items to light that have never been considered before. One conversation does not have to resolve all issues however; a good act of listening goes a long way in bridging seemingly unbridgeable differences.
Leadership i.e., the ability to create a new vision for group action amid competing perspectives, values, and allegiances; is all about getting through conflict.