Resilient Leadership in the face of Vicissitude is the title of my presentation on September 22, 2010 for the HU Leadership Luncheon.    Vicissitude, of course, simply means change, although I think the word lends a sort of pernicious flavor to an already scary term.

The definition of resiliency I like best is "the ability to recover quickly" another is "buoyancy."  Whenever I think about this I remember comments made by my college instructors about pastors who never read anything to develop themselves professionally beyond sermon preparation.  Unfortunately, once in the ministry I ran into some who fit that description.

I share this with my students and anyone else who will listen.  Always be reading three books beyond those required for work:  A devotional book to help keep you spiritually grounded, a novel to help your brain disengage from stress, and a professional book which may not have immediate application but which someone at the top of your field would probably have read (if you can think of nothing in this category then read leadership books).

If you will follow this practice you will find your brain filling with ideas and your passion renewed.

"

The Longview by Roger Parrott was a surprise for me.   I heard Dr. Parrott speak at a conference and I liked how he contrasted sailing with powerboats as a metaphor for leadership.  So I bought the book.  What I found was a solid, well written book on leadership which touched on several areas I have rarely come across, and yet I personally believe to be crucial.  Dr. Parrott is the President of Bellhaven College, in Jackson Mississippi, yet what he shares about leadership is as much about the local church as it is about leading a college.  Pastor's will get great value out of this book and definitely need to read the chapters:  "Vulnerability May Get You in, but Humility Keeps You there"  and "Shepherding a Vision Without Scaring Away the Flock."  The 250 pages of material is divided into 13 chapters.  The book is easy to read and organized in a way that is interesting and applicable.  While not a comprehensive book on leadership, it covers the basics while discussing some interesting and often overlooked aspects of leadership.   Some significant quotes are included below.  If you are looking for a good book to use in developing your staff or lay leaders, this one would make a good study.  If you are looking for a good book on leadership to develop yourself - I highly recommend it.

"While a show of vulnerability brings with it immediate gratification for a leader seeking support, it also attracts critics in the same way blood in the water attacks sharks ready to attack. One of my looming concerns for leadership in today's environment is the difficulty of remaining at one ministry for a significant length of time. One of the reasons for this is leaders' increasing tendency to resort to these short-sighted quests for camaraderie among those they seek to lead. Leaders who wish to go the distance must learn to reject the empty promise or ‘transparency’ before their critics make it out to be a disqualifying fault." p. 67

"To develop a culture of renewal, you must become comfortable living with the ambiguous balance of growth and pruning in your working relationships." p. 96

Leaders who neglect effective evaluation and measured accountability may avoid short-term hassles and awkward conversations, but they are undermining the long-term future of their organization, their employees, and their own leadership" p. 101

"Good leaders must envision, probe, and then explore new opportunities. But it is equally important they always return to inspire, lead, and equip others who can follow them and fully utilize the leader's advances." p. 171

"We can deploy plans, strategies, and best practices, but at the end of the day we require a determined godly focus to make it far into the future with those we lead." p. 237

I had the opportunity this morning to preach at an evangelical church in Van Wert, Ohio.  It was a great experience and the people were very warm and stayed focused throughout the sermon.  My sermon was "Salt May be Bad for Your Health" drawn from Matthew 5:13.  The focus was on evangelism, specifically Jesus' charge to the church to BE salt.  This is not the first time I have preached this message.  In fact, if my records are correct, this is the third time I have preached the message, although as is typical, I "tweaked" it quite a bit from the last time it was preached.  

As I was praying in preparation to preach the focus on evangelism would not leave me and I am convinced that not only was this message the right one for the day, but that this theme is the right one for this season.  I preach again on August 22 in Huntington at the Nazarene church - I'm anxious to see where God is leading in the days ahead as I prepare for that service.

I say all that to say this:  Leadership, especially spiritual leadership, also means listening and being open to the leadings of the Holy Spirit.  While this comes easier for some than for others (not so much for me), anyone can learn. 

I upload some notes I took with the logipen with no problems, simply connect to the computer with the included USB cable and select "Upload Notes" from the Logi Manage program.  I have to say how pleased I am with the easy transition from the device to the LogiManage program.  Even without checking the directions too much, it is pretty easy to navigate.  However, when trying to open in MS Word, the LogiManage states that no handwriting was detected and further research on the website shows that getting this to work in Windows 7 is complicated.  On the plus side, the company provides on the same installation disk as the LogiManage, a handwriting recognition package named: MyScript.  This did a pretty reasonable job in translating my handwriting (which is not too good) into text with some typical problems with 'o' and '0' and 'i' and 'j'.  I like that the capture actually clearly captures all my notes, drawings, etc. as I am a visual thinker and have left literally hundreds of profound thoughts and drawings on napkins across the country.  No more, this device and pen should be able to capture pretty much anything I create and faithfully bring it back to my computer.  So far I haven't found any easier way to move stuff to MS OneNote, which I think would be a real plus for this company.  What I have had to do is not too complicated (simple cut and paste) but it is an additional step which could be avoided.

So far, I am well pleased with how this test is going.

I just opened the box of LogiPen's LogiNotes Digital Pen Input Device.  I will be testing the device to see how it integrates into an office environment, primarily focusing on integration with Microsoft's One Note.  I'm also concerned about how the device would work in a college setting for students.  Inside the box:

• Pen
• USB cord
• LogiPen capture unit (1 1/2 x 3 3/8 x 3/8 inches) with a clip on back to secure to pages (called Base Unit in the Directions)
• flat package including pen  and stylus refills, 2 batteries and an "extractor" for replacing the pen/stylus
• directions
• CD-ROM of Software for LogiManage

 The Base Unit has to charge for up to 12 hours before the first use - so that won't happen until tomorrow.

Installing the batteries (SR41) was simple and the directions were straightforward.

The directions said to push the pen insert in gently until it is lodged securely - it actually felt more like passing over a bump, but it did insert OK.  The ink quality is only average - but that is to be expected since the focus is not on the writing but the capture.

More tomorrow.

What vs. how

I have heard it said that managers focus first on
doing things rights, while leaders focus first on doing the right things. What I think happens most often is that neither is accomplished. In reality we would be well served to do the ONE thing well(remember the movie City Slickers?). That ONE thing is to do whatever I do as unto the Lord. Yes the "what" is important, but the "how" may be the most important.
Rick Upchurch
Sent from my Windows Mobile® phone.

One of the things which constantly amazes me is when I am confronted with how oblivious I can be in my own leadership practices.  My problem is that I make assumptions that everyone on my team is on the same page when that may not be the case.  Even though I have attempted to cast vision and set goals, I realize now that I need to be more purposeful in aligning my team.  I think where I may have mis-stepped is in not making sure to make to follow through on accountability to best practices, goals, etc.

This kind of thing is a good reminder to pay attention to the basics.  That is the major theme of another Jim Collin's book, "How the Mighty Fall."  Paying attention to the basics may seem too obvious to even mention but my experiences recently have proven to me that the basics ARE important.

Rick, stay focused!!!

I stopped into K-Mart this afternoon (Saturday)  to pick up one small item.  I find the item and make my way to the checkout only to find that there are a LOT of people waiting for 2 checkout lanes.  After a few minutes I hear an announcement about a manager being needed at one of these lanes.  Shortly, over the intercom again, the manager now says "cancel manager" and makes her way from the customer service register where she was talking to another employee to the checkout lane with issues.  LOTS of us are still standing and waiting.  Finally the customer service counter announces "no waiting" if we want to walk half-way across the store to check out - which I quickly did.

Have I become so used to prompt service that these little inconveniences are so annoying I want to scream?  Is this really poor management or simply impatience on my part?  Does the manager need training or do I need counseling?

Here are facts which should not be ignored.

• Who you are (character) is more important than what you do, ultimately
• so live with integrity every day all day
• What you do is the yardstick used to measure your success, immediately
• so do something - execution is the shortfall of many a genius
• What you say has the power to hurt or heal, to edify or destroy
• use a language of respect and remember the first point above
• What you value always comes through in the decisions you make, sooner rather than later.
• even when you don't think you know what you value, your decisions will tell the tale, so spend some time clarifying the important things in your life.
• Who you know and the networks you have are one of God's ways to place you where he wants you
• if you alienate people unnecessarily you may become unable to perform the role God has designed you for - so treat everyone as you would like to be treated - or even better than you would like to be treated, which ever is best.
• What you know can be improved upon, only a moron would assume he/she knows it all
• never, never, never stop learning, nor get sidetracked by busy - if you are not learning, you are becoming obsolete
• Patience and ambition are uncomfortable bedfellows
• God knows your potential, if you find yourself straining against the ropes, focus on the quality of what you do NOW and trust God for the future.   This is harder than it sounds.

Response to Tungle.com com survey.  Tungle is a great scheduling software which makes it easy for people to schedule meetings with you and easy for you to send open times for meetings to individuals or groups to find a common time to meet.  I highly recommend Tungle!

1. What made you decide to start Tungling? I read a review in a blog by ProfHacker and thought I would give Tungle a try - I have not been disappointed.
2. What’s one thing we do better than any other productivity app out there?I like the capability of sending a link (or even posting a link) so that if someone needs to schedule a meeting they can easily do so.  I sent a web-link to some key people in my organization so that if they need to schedule something with me it will be easy for them to see when I am available and easy to propose a time for a meeting.  I also like that I can highlight multiple times on a calendar for a meeting and send that to several people, who can highlight their availability and how tungle merges all of that to find the common times for me to select for the meeting.
3. What’s one thing we could do to create a better experience for you?Right now I can't think of anything.
4. Do you refer Tungle.me to others?  If yes, why?Yes, I do for the reasons stated above.
5. What would you Google to find an app like Tungle.me? scheduling application

Thoughts and quotes from Unleashing the Power of Rubber Bands: lessons in non-linear leadership, by Nancy Ortberg.  I'm not really sure about the "non-linear" aspect of the title, but the topics touched upon by the author were those you would expect in a book devoted to leadership.  I did like the theme which is implied in the title phrase, "rubber bands" of tension.  The kind of tension Ortberg references is the kind which balances the need for execution against the ever-present pull of homeostasis (my word, not hers).  I think if she had emphasized this even more throughout the book it would have taken the book from an OK book on leadership up a level.  As it is, I would have to say that most of the book is a re-work of the principles found in Good to Great, from a Christian perspective. 

Still, I found her writing to be easy to read and she was willing to be personally vulnerable in her journey on the path of leadership.  Some of the quotes I found particularly interesting were:

"Inherent in the leadership relationship is the expectation that over time, the direction you give will result in progress toward maturity, growth in skills and character, and even an increase in your own leadership competencies." p. 2

"To lead well, we must possess the strong belief that our best days are ahead of us, always ahead of us.  Hope and leadership are inexorably linked." p.8  I think this particular quote expresses a perspective which cannot be "drummed" up but arises from belief in one's self and a willingness to see the future instead of constantly reviewing the past.

"Vision is about stirring and provoking, reminding and imagining.  It's (sic) about showing people the wonder of an improved future and infusing them with hope.  Vision is about creating a reason to believe again.  Vision is primarily nurtured through the stories we tell and the heroes we create in our organizations." p. 18

"This intersection of vision and reality may be one of the greatest tests of leadership.  It is having sober eyes and an optimistic spirit, and refusing to choose between the two." p. 35  I think this whole section is a Christianized and simplified version of what Jim Collins in Good to Great calls Brutal Honesty.

How important is the ability to communicate to leadership?  I would have to say it depends.  If you are talking about leading your self, then not too much.  If you are talking about leading your family or a small group then more so, and if you are talking about leading a large group or organization then I would have to say it is crucial.

Starting with this premise, how does the scenario with Moses, Aaron and leading the Israelites out of Egypt work.  Were all the speeches in Exodus attributed to Moses actually made by Aaron?  Did Moses eventually get to the point where he was able to speak himself for God?

One thing is absolutely clear, someone was communicating.  The ability to communicate as a leader is more complicated than simply opening your mouth.  It takes a certain appreciation of multiple factors such as culture, gender, psychology, circumstances, history, nuance, face, etc.  It also takes an appreciation of the power of the spoken language and how a carefully crafted sentence can make all the difference.

Some leaders, especially those who exhibit leadership skills at an early age, seem to be able to intuitively integrate at least some of these factors when speaking.  They may not realize at first just what they are doing but as time goes by, and with some study, they become even more effective.  Someone who I think fits this example is John Maxwell.  He is rightly known as an excellent communicator.  Starting off with natural ability, he applied himself and became a stronger and stronger communicator. 

So, do you have to be a "natural" in order to be a good communicator.  The answer is no, but it will require effort.  Malcolm Gladwell in Outliers describes the process it takes to rise to the top in almost any area, communication included.  In a nutshell, it is simply this, practice, practice, practice.  According to Gladwell there is a direct correlation between the number of hours spent in doing and/or practice and the level of virtuosity achieved.  I think this could easily apply even to John Maxwell, who, even though a naturally gifted speaker, has literally spent thousands of hours in front of an audience of one kind or another.

For those who ever hope to lead larger groups, there needs to be a willingness to take every opportunity, and even make opportunities when possible, to speak in front of an audience.  Couple that with a sincere desire to learn the basics of communication and seek honest critique, and it won't be long before you find yourself improving and leading at a higher level.

A couple of years ago I took the "strengths finder" survey after reading the book by Marcus Buckingham.  It identified the top 5 strengths which, according to the survey, make me, me.  Buckingham's premise is that we should spend more time in the area of our strengths instead of struggling so hard to bring all of our "low" up.  Of course there are certain areas where we all have to be proficient (emotional intelligence comes immediately to mind) but overall I have found this survey and the results to be excellent indicators of how an individual will actually perform in the work environment.

It is useful for me to know my own strengths (strategic, analytical, input, learner, responsibility) so that I can better understand myself and focus on further developing these strengths.  This makes me more self-aware and more able to effectively interact in my world.  It makes me a better husband, father, worker, and leader.  I would even go so far that becoming more self-aware even makes me a better Christian.

It is also useful to know the strengths of those with whom I work.  It allows me to better position them in the "seats on the bus" for a better functioning team.  It helps me understand why some disagreements arise, and suggests ways to manage the differences.

All in all, I would have to say this is definitely a worthwhile experience and highly recommend it.

Selected thought from: IT: How Churches and Leaders can get it and Keep it, written by by Craig Groeschel

“What is it, and how can you and your ministry get—and keep—it? Combining in-your-face honesty and off-the-wall humor, this lively book helps believers understand the elements needed to obtain it.” From the book jacket.

As I read this book I was struck by how accurate this statement applied to the whole book. Craig’s style is personable and easy to read, yet full of a candid vulnerability with a focused message. IT is all about IT. That “something” that defies an explanation, yet is the hallmark of individuals and ministries which seem to be in the center of God’s will. Overall I found the content to be insightful and one of the books I’ll recommend to others – particularly pastors who are serious about revival.

My favorite chapters dealt with vision (chapters 4 and 5), innovation (chapters 7 and 8), and Outward focus (chapters 9 and 10). Honestly, the chapters on vision are as good as anything I’ve read on the subject and infused with a sense of passion and relevance which was compelling.

Here are some selected quotes:

“When a church has it, lives are changing, and everyone around knows it. The only thing constant is change, which it-soaked people seem to thrive on.” P. 29

“It is what God does through a rare combination of these qualities found in his people:

· Passion for his presence

· A deep craving to reach the lost

· Sincere integrity

· Spirit-filled faith

· Down-to-earth humility

· Brokenness? P. 31

“Ministries that have it always have a clear vision. The people know the vision, understand the vision, believe in the vision, and live the vision. The vision guides them, motivates them, and energizes them.” P. 39

“Anthony Robbins once said, ‘One reason so few of us achieve what we truly want is that we never direct our focus; we never concentrate our power. Most people dabble their way through life, never deciding to master anything in particular.’” P. 58

“Without regular reminders of why we do what we do, of how our part contributes to something wonderful, a team will lose it and simply be a bunch of people doing their own gig.” P. 77

“Warren Bennis said, ‘Innovation . . . by definition will not be accepted at first. It takes repeated attempts, endless demonstrations, monotonous rehearsals before innovation can be accepted and internalized by an organization. This requires courageous patience.’ “ p.99

“Across the board, almost every with-it church I’ve observed is virtually obsessed with reaching those who don’t know Christ. A passion to share Christ consumes them in a beautiful way.” P. 128

“ A church that has it recognizes that reaching people is not just the pastor’s job. It is everyone’s job. I can’t do it alone. You can’t do it alone. It takes all of us.” P. 134

I had the privilege of leading a workshop on Teams for the Whitley County Leadership Academy on December 17.  The focus of the workshop was to examine the workings of teams from two different perspectives.  The first perspective was that of a team member.  We began the session with an exercise which involved the whole group in attempting to achieve a goal that required significant teamwork but provided little guidance on how to accomplish the goal and placed serious restrictions on the groups ability to work together.  Sounds a lot like real life, doesn't it.  Anyway through the group experience the the principles of how to work as a team the discussion provided some insight on what the group members were facing in their "real" world and we were able to work through some solutions.  The second perspective was that of the leader of a team.  In this part of the discussion the principles were similar but the focus on the responsibilities of the leader were emphasized.  I really do believe everything rises and falls on leadership and if I am the leader of the group, I carry significant responsibility to enable the group to be come a high performance team.  In the same vein, if I am a team member, I must still take leadership of myself and my part in the team goal to facilitate the possibility of a high functioning team.  When you are on a team, it is not about you - it is about working with the others to accomplish the goal.

I am reading a new book with the title "It." It is about that "something" you can sense in churches that exude life and how to find "IT." Still too early in the book to be able to say if it lives up to its goals. I am intrigued, however, because I have definitely been in a church with "IT" (Antioch Church in Wheaton, Il.) and some where "IT" was a distant memory. What makes the difference? Music, leadership, preaching, fellowship, facilities, doctrine, agenda, etc?
Rick Upchurch
Sent from my Windows Mobile® phone.

I conducted a weekend leadership development experience for Odon Church of the Nazarene, Odon, Indiana, on November 13,14, 2009. The sessions focused on defining leadership, along with identifying leadership characteristics and basic components, team skills, and the importance of understanding yourself and others using the Kiersey sorter.

This picture is from an exercise in team building using a rope and blind folds.

I have to commend the pastor, Trevor Stanley and the church leadership for opening themselves up to this kind of experience. Whenever we learn more about leadership, it begins to change us and the way we look at our world.

When presenting about change at regional workshops I have emphasized the point that no change occurs without some urgency. That is, without a sense of urgency, there is little motivation to change and rarely any long-term change. Twice I have been asked about the danger of alarming the congregation; of spreading wildfire.

On the one hand this is a valid concern as "wild" fire can have a tendency to burn out of control and destroy - something to definitely avoid.

On the other hand, unless the congregation takes their head out of the sand and realizes that there is a fire which has the potential bring death to the church, through stagnation if nothing else, there is little hope of bringing change.

So, the answer is, take the risk, take off the blinders and reveal the danger and allow/create/nurture a sense of urgency which can be used to motivate change.

I think most people feel they are pretty good communicators. I think most people consider themselves average or better in the leadership area. Let's assume for the sake of argument that both of these assumptions are accurate, that is, most people are pretty good communicators and average or better leaders.

If this is true, what can we deduce from the obvious evidence of our society?

• That there are relatively few divorces
• That most businesses thrive and grow
• That most investments succeed
• That we have efficient governmental structures/policies/procedures
• That integrity (a key part of leadership) is the cornerstone of all relationships - personal and business

What, you say there seems to be a disconnect? That these items in the list above are not true? Could it be that the premise upon which they were built has problems?

Solution: Quit thinking how wonderful you are and start learning how to do the right things - remember all of life can be reduced to relationships.

I have become convinced that leaders should take up the game of golf no matter how frustrating!! There is so much to be learned by chasing that little white ball:

• Pride in a stroke well hit
• Humility in a stroke no so well hit
• Focus - keeping your eye on the ball
• Focus - keeping your head down
• Focus - holding your club just right
• Focus - Holding your body just right
• Focus - swinging the club just right

Are you getting the sense that golf is an exercise in focus? I hope so. Of course, for me, humility is right up there as well. Leader's need ongoing reminders of the basics and focus is a biggie.

I am currently teaching a class on Contemporary Leadership as part of the curriculum for the EXCEL Adult Degree Program at Huntington University. The foundation upon which the course was written was Jim Collins' book Good to Great. I have written about this book in earlier posts so I won't go back into it, except to say this is a must read for anyone serious about leadership education.

I am finding, however, that taken alone, the principles from this book may be a little ahead of those who are being exposed to leadership for the first time. I can see in the students' eyes the interest in the material as well as some confusion as to how to wrap their minds around the material. So, I have had to augment the course with some more basic concepts which provide greater context for understanding the book. For example in the discussion of level 5 leaders, I spent quite some time working with Maxwell's levels of leadership and the section on credibility from The Leadership Challenge.

I don't think this is a comment on the students, but perhaps a thought that, while we all say "Leadership is in short supply," we might not know exactly what leadership really looks like when we see. It is easy to get taken in by those who fit the caricature rather than the individual who simply and quietly influences movement toward a goal.

Some of the KEY words which are associated with leadership include:

• Passion
• Vision
• Character
• Integrity
• Focus
• Risk taker
• Strategic thinker/planner
• Wise
• Communicator
• Executor
  

Have you ever seen pictures of what the walls of you home look like minus the drywall? About every 16" there is a 2"x4" piece of wood going from the floor to the ceiling. These are called studs. They are placed at this 16" interval for two reasons. First it allows for easier fitting of standardized insulation and other building materials, but more importantly it provides strength to support the roof. Spaced too far apart and the weight of the roof, particularly with the addition of snow would be too great and it would fall in.

In the same way, leaders have to be men or women who are multifaceted. A leader is not one thing but many things, and while it may be that one or two are part of the genetic heritage, most of what makes a leader comes through experience and education. Keep working on it - you'll get there.

I've just finished going through the book "Selling the Invisible" twice. Have given copies to key people at my work with instructions to cover the last half and be prepared to discuss sometime this week or next. The book is only partly about selling. It is mostly about leading your organization to be aware of who it is and what it's purpose is.

I have to believe if you are struggling to figure out where you are heading as an organization, or maybe you just need to do some evaluation this would probably be a good book for a leadership retreat.

For me one of the most significant points had to do with the discussion on Position and Position statements. Some of the quotes related to this are:

"Stand for one distinctive thing that will give you a competitive advantage." (p.103)
and
"To broaden your appeal, narrow your position." (p. 105)

I think this is especially hard for churches who want to be all things to all people and wind up doing most things with mediocrity, or worse. The information on focusing on one distinctive thing and how that actually can broaden your appeal is definitely a message the church needs to listen to. For example, Beckwith says "In positioning, don't try to hide your small size. Make it work by stressing its advantages, such as responsiveness and individual attention." (p.120)

If you are a leader in ANY organization this is a book worth having on your shelf.

John Maxwell has been quoted as saying that Attitude (the right ones) can give you Altitude. This parallels what we read in Philippians 4:8, "Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable - if anything is excellent or praiseworthy--think about such things." Now I've said that so I can say this:

Teamwork, real teamwork, the kind which not only accomplishes a goal but also is personally fulfilling at the same time, the kind which values people and still functions at high levels, this kind of teamwork is a matter of personal choice, daily choice, on-purpose choice, life-orienting choice. It's all in your mind!!

YOU choose your attitude and YOU choose to operate from a mind-set which sees the team instead of self, which operates from the perspective of we instead of me, which really lives out God's design found in Philippians 2:3: "Do nothing out of selfish ambition, or vain conceit, but in humility consider others better than yourselves."

Ironically, this is the essence of a mature holiness lifestyle in everyday practice.

Try this sometime, ask someone if they have change for a $5 bill. If they reply they only have $3 or $4 dollars, say that’s OK you can keep the difference. You will be amazed at the response. Most people will either refuse your offer or go out of their way to figure out how to get the rest of the money back to you.

People as a general rule, have a keen sense of what is “fair.” While that definition can be bent in times of crisis, most people try to live by that standard, and expect to be treated the same way. To be fair is to be just and this is where our understanding of Justice comes from.

For a leader, justice has to be more than an automatic response to the day-to-day happenings of life. Real leadership demands a personal lifestyle of justice, and the practice of the principles of justice in every transaction. Any recent headline of a “fallen” leader can be traced back to a perversion of the standard of justice. When a leader bends that sense of “fair” to benefit themselves, scandal is sure to follow.

When I hear someone described as a devoted follower, because of publicized events, my mind immediately brings up pictures of some cult. When I hear someone described as a devoted spouse, I get a different picture, one of love and unity.

It is interesting how the same word brings up two entirely different emotional images, depending upon the context. The definition of devotion includes wording such as “profound dedication.” It is an important topic when discussing leadership because all true leaders are devoted, that is they all exhibit a “profound dedication,” from the very worst to the very best.

Leaders are passionate about their vision and translate that passion into action toward accomplishing that vision. But it begins with that sense of devotion. Two obvious lessons stand out here: Devotion is an important part of leadership, and where that devotion is focused will dictate a leader’s course of action.

An old saying goes like this, “earn as much as you can, so you can save as much as you can, so you can give as much as possible.” Probably an easier way for us to understand this is in the phrase “knowing the value of a dollar.” You might think the topic of money is unusual for a discussion on leadership until you consider that Jesus spent more time discussing financial issues than any other, that money problems are the source of most marital fights, and that the way money is handled by an individual can lead to success or poverty.

So . . . what is the value of a dollar? It’s value lies entirely in the understanding that everything costs something. Money is not the end, but the means to an end. It plays an important role in our lives because it is the measure of our priorities, and our discipline. Since most of us have a limited amount of money, what we purchase clearly identifies our priorities. What do you count as a necessity? What is a luxury that may have to wait? The answer will vary but two things should hold constant, first a responsible person will recognize the value of earning a stable income, and, second, evaluate your priorities so you can spend wisely.

Leaders know how to “count the cost.”

You might appreciate it when someone slows down and let’s you turn into traffic. You might appreciate it when the check-out clerk actually smiles and is pleasant when you go through the line. You might appreciate it when you get home and the chore you were dreading the most was done by another family member. In fact, if you think about it there are about a hundred things to appreciate in every single day. I think for most of us it is easier to see those things which frustrate us, and it seems as if that number could climb to a million in the course of a day. Cultivating a sense of appreciation has a remarkable effect upon our ability to successfully navigate the daily hurdles of life. Those who take the time to “smell the roses,” find their lives more enjoyable and their work more productive. Numerous studies have shown that those who focus on appreciation have better health and are more likely to live longer. One step at a time, turn your focus from the frustrations to the opportunities. Start out by taking a few minutes of your day to think about the many things you have to appreciate, before you know it the frustration count will drop and your quality of life will go up.

.

The quote below is from Launching a Leadership Revolution by Chris Brady and Orrin Woodward:

"A critical pre-supposition all leaders must realize is that followers buy into the leader before anything else. The vision may be compelling, but is the leader worth following? The rewards may be inspiring, but can the leader be trusted? The environment may be inviting but does the leader care about his or her people? The resources may be enormous, but does the leader know what he or she is doing? These are the qualifying questions followers ask subconsciously before giving permission to be led. Leadership is not a position or title; it is a condition of permission given by followers once they buy into the leader. (bold and italics are mine) Leadership influence, like trust, must be earned and earned continually." (p. 186,187)

WOW! Do you see the bones underneath this? Unless the follower is convinced that the leader can lead in a way which benefits HIM in some way, there will be problems. This issue is one of the most significant problems with leadership from my perspective. Leaders don't take the time to develop relationships, and, therefore, their credibility is suspect. CREDIBILITY!!! The last two words of that quote are the downfall of many who have talent, charisma, and knowledge; trust must be earned continually!!! It may not seem fair or necessary, but to disregard this is to set the stage for followers to become disenchanted and potentially disruptive.

"What is being done, is what is being rewarded." If this is true, then all of our behaviors have some kind of reward attached. In most cases that reward is the comfort of pattern, i.e. we've always done it that way and see no reason why we should change - it is comfortable - it is a rut. Now being in a rut is not always a bad thing. Have you ever tried to change how you brush your teeth? Try switching to the opposite hand to hold and brush your teeth and you will experience in a small way the challenge of change, and the comfort of a rut.

As a leader, identifying the ruts which are conducive to accomplishing the mission, and those which are not, is part of the job. Someone has said that efficiency is doing things right and effectiveness is doing the right things. In other words, you can be doing things right, but those things may not contribute toward the fulfillment of the mission. The old forest and trees syndrome. Too many times the leader becomes focused on the trees and forgets the bigger picture . . . and then wonders why the mission never seems to get accomplished, even though huge amounts of time and energy are being poured out.

The benefit of understanding the GMP at the level of leadership is to see which behaviors are effective, i.e. "right" in the sense of mission fulfillment. Once behaviors or ministries are identified as being "off-track," the leader can strategize what the correct behavior needs to be AND THEN HOW TO PUT REWARDS INTO PLACE TO MOVE TOWARD THAT NEW BEHAVIOR.

This can and should include the process described in earlier posts regarding change principles - yet those principles, when augmented with this understanding have an even greater chance of success. Leaders have to be big picture people.

Another way to understand the GMP is this: What gets rewarded is what gets done OR what is being done is what is being rewarded. When we think of rewards some will automatically think of monetary rewards. Of course, this is one of the most powerful kind of rewards, but it is often impractical to reward with money. Take for instance the behavior of individuals arriving late for church. You could pay them to arrive on time but there probably isn't enough money available for that to last long.

Rewards don't have to be money. Now that that is settled, begin to think creatively of different kinds of rewards. One of the most powerful in the non-money category is appreciation. Most people crave appreciation, genuine sincere appreciation, desperately. In fact if the appreciation is genuine it can be a powerful force for changing behavior. On the other hand if it is perceived to be insincere and manipulative behaviors will get even worse.

Remember when you identify behavior patterns to connect the dots to the reality that what is being done is what is being rewarded, whether you think so or not. To change the behavior, figure out what behavior you want, and then design a way to reward that behavior. . . and be patient, it will change.

The Greatest Management Principle is simply this - that behavior is directly connected to perceived benefit. How does that fit into the Christian worldview?

The Christian worldview says that we should love others before self and sacrifice so that others might be saved. The standard is Love, but not just Love. Rather a Love which is God designed and God empowered. With this love in our hearts, the reality of the Christian worldview is possible, without it, NOT. Jesus exemplified this Love completely. His entire life was motivated by a Love which sought the Father's will and our salvation. There are notable examples of others who have also met this standard, as well as examples not so notable in every local church in America.

Yet, one would have to admit that even though these examples exist, that there are genuinely holy people among us, most of us, even in the church, fall in the sphere where the GMP applies in our lives. Those who understand this are more likely to be albe to influence and lead than are those who do not. The Holy among us do right for right's sake. Most of us have to be persuaded that the right has a benefit for us or our families before we will expend the energy.

Therefore, we see two different approaches to leadership: One which understands the Christian worldview and those few who live in it (unfortunately mos of preaching assumes, incorrectly, that all Christians live in holiness, or are even seeking it. Again, NOT). Second is an approach which deals with the un-transformed nature. I really believe this may be what Jesus referred to when he talked about being as clever as serpents and as gentle as doves. If we are holy and live by the principles of Love it doesn't preclude us from understanding the world as it is for most - and using the GMP to influence people toward the path that leads to holiness - indeed to do otherwise is a practice in ignorance or pomposity. Understand the GMP. After all, most people live under its influence. Practice the use of the GMP for the end of God's Kingdom. But live in the midst of Love.

I have been thinking of staffing for the local church. I have observed the normal pattern in most churches which focuses upon age group ministries relevant to a church's perceived need. I have read books which suggest that staffing should be more functional focused, specifically related to alleviating the load carried by the senior pastor. In both cases, there is a formulaic method to determine how many people in a congregation it takes to support the addition of a staff member.

I want to suggest another model. In this model Ephesians 4:11,12 is recognized as a guiding principle, especially, "to prepare God's people for works of service so that the body of Christ may be built up."(v.12) The primary focus of this model is to hire a "Volunteer Coordinator" whose role is to facilitate the identification, training and insertion of volunteers into ministry positions within the local congregation. The Volunteer Coordinator seeks to purposefully affect the usually perceived ratio of those who are actively involved in ministry (20% do 80% of the work) by actively getting more people involved in ministry, preferably within their spiritual gifting.

What do you think?

I would define leadership as: " the expressed guidance, decision, or action which is compelled by nature in the face of need, to accomplish a desired end." I know there are those who say that leadership demands followers but I would disagree. I believe that we either choose to lead ourselves, or fail to do so, resulting in an unfulfilled potential. While leadership can be broadly understood to apply to groups of any size, it starts within the individual.

The old saying is that "nature abhors a vacuum," meaning that when there is the absence of air, nature itself will do everything in its power to fill that void. I truly see this in relationship to leadership. In every situation there is a need for leadership . . . and in every situation someone always chooses to express guidance, make a decision or take action, however badly they may do so. It is not always good leadership which steps to the front - but there will always be some kind of leadership. It is a part of how God has designed the world and us.

Further, although it is nature which compels the void to be filled, it is our education and experiences which equip us to effectively provide leadership. We can learn the principles of leading and become adept at exercising those skills for the effective leadership.

It may be that we choose to allow others to lead in group situations but we cannot ignore the need in our own life to take responsibility and initiative (the major components of leadership). Even when we allow others to lead, there comes a time and a place where we have to add our influence to the process and thereby express leadership.

How does one go about communicating leadership principles in practical ways with those who follow? Obviously the visible living out of those principles can be observed and perhaps emulated by followers. Over a long enough period of time such example could result in transformed behavior in the life of an observant follower. But observing can only teach so much, particularly if the observation is clouded by personality which is flawed by ego, as is so often the case.

Leadership is more than simply knowing principles, however, it is also about people and trust. It is about focus, but not JUST focus. Focus without trust and a concern for people (more than simply mouthed platitudes) comes out feeling and looking a lot like tyranny.

In addition to demonstrating leadership principles in real-time situations, allowing those who follow the opportunity to fail as they learn to lead, while expressing support and confidence, may be an example of true transformative leadership.

What is unfortunate is when a leader's perception is that he/she is a transformative leader when in actuality a tyrant is closer to the truth. In this situation those who follow must either endure, weighing their commitment to the organization and it's values against the climate produced by such leadership, or disengage at whatever level necessary to find balance.

On November 14, 2005 I wrote: "Let's think about leadership in terms of an accumulation of skill sets. The acquisition of those skill sets will enhance the ability of the leader to move the organization toward the goal. Instead, then, of concentrating on moving to a different level of leadership, a better path to effective leadership might be to identify the skill sets needed to be effective, and to acquire those skill sets (which might also include bringing individuals around you who can supplement your weaknesses if the skill set is beyond your ability or would require excessive time to acquire)."

Let's suppose this is true. Then one of the key characteristics of a leader would have to be the ability to be able to "see the big picture." To see situations and problems in a larger context AND to then to know which skill sets apply (intuitively), and either pull those out of their accumulated kit (acquired through knowledge and experience) or pull in those who have the necessary skill set. Leadership then would have less to do with influence and more to do with a kind of disassociation. By that I mean the ability to disassociate oneself from the immediate and step back to see the greater good, keeping in mind the mission and strategic planning. Now let's add another big word - integration. The best leaders are those who can disassociate WHILE remaining integrated with the human side of the context.

As we develop this thought it is interesting that we are actually constructing a new leadership model which truly allows the possibility of becoming a leader in actuality rather than just theory. Learning to see things globally, while difficult, can be learned. Acquiring the various leadership skill sets can be difficult, but can be accomplished by most. Like learning a new language, learning the pieces (nouns, verbs, conjugations, etc.) comes before fluency and fluency in enhanced by the ability to actually think in the new language. Leadership is like that, what seems mechanical and awkward at first with practice becomes intuitive and reflexive. Let me tell you a secret which is the starting point - stop talking and listen.

I want to return to the levels of leadership discussed earlier. John Maxwell's book on Developing the Leader Within You describes various levels of leadership and Collins talks about level 5 leaders. The categorization of leadership into levels seems to be, at least in part, an artificial structure which, while allowing comprehension of some aspects of leadership, may actually limit our understanding by limiting our concepts to the defined structures/levels and causing would be leaders to focus on climbing a stair case ???. What I'm saying is, maybe there aren't different levels of leadership, at least not as has been suggested.

Oh, sure using the level description it is much easier to describe someone by saying "She has only reached level 3 in Leadership." Or, "Now he is a level 5 leader." All of which ignores much of what is . . . and is not happening in the leadership process.

As I have suggested before, Leadership includes initiative and a willingness to take responsibility for decisions. An almost compelling need to exercise initiative. Think about that. It might be said that Leaders who do not exercise initiative are not at a sub-level of leadership but are not leaders at all.

Now obviously, there are individuals who are in positions which are recognized by the world as leadership positions, but that doesn't make the people in those positions leaders, at any level. And what kind of initiative does a leader exhibit? It is initiative toward a goal. The goal may be misguided or well counseled. The goal may be specific or nebulous. However, leaders always take initiative toward a goal. They may have a misunderstanding of the culture, or the factors which may help them achieve this goal, but this is not a matter of a "level" of leadership as much as as maturation and wisdom.

Let's think about leadership in terms of an accumulation of skill sets. The acquisition of those skill sets will enhance the ability of the leader to move the organization toward the goal. Instead, then, of concentrating on moving to a different level of leadership, a better path to effective leadership might be to identify the skill sets needed to be effective, and to acquire those skill sets (which might also include bringing individuals around you who can supplement your weaknesses if the skill set is beyond your ability or would require excessive time to acquire).

What are some of those skill sets? Some of them might be:

• Interpersonal Communications (i.e. people skills)
• Ability to communicate clearly
• Ability to think critically
• Willingness to take risks
• Willingness to make a decision
• Ability to stay focused

You add some more to this list, it's not complete.

In summary, Leadership might be diagrammed better as a center hub with spokes leading to skill sets, instead of a staircase.

Just a thought.

The last chapters of Good to Great focus on the importance of developing a culture of discipline wherein those who comprise the enterprise are disciplined enough to stay focused (i.e. hedgehog concept) and work within that focus for excellence. Couple this with an understanding of the "flywheel concept" indicating that change toward great occurs as momentum is achieved through perseverant effort. The principles from this book have important consequences for those who are wise enough to see their application.

Of course, as has been noted along the way, all of these principles correlate with other leadership principles drawn from other sources. Perhaps the most interesting thing about these principles is the data which supports them. The vast accumulation of this information and the analysis which produced these principles validate many of those principles taught by others.

An interesting deviation might be seen in the leadership principle which comes from those who teach "transformational" leadership. That is, leadership which focuses upon fulfilling the potential of those who are part of the institution, believing thereby that the goals of the organiation will be achieved as well. Although the principles of Good to Great encourage mutual respect and integrity, the emphasis is placed more squarely upon the "right people" who will focus with disciplined energy to achieve that for which they are passionate about.

Do you see the difference? It is in the goal. In transformational leadership, the development and fulfillent of the follower is the goal which ultimately affects the organization. In Good to Great, the focus is on being part of a great vision. For the church, particularly in America, we are easily convinced that the emphasis should be on the person. That the church's role is to fulfill the person, who will then participate in the mission. This practice has led the church into an increasingly self-focused spirial of stagnation. The goal of most churches is not the fulfillment of the Mission of Christ and the effort at Passionately becoming the best in ministry, but upon fulfilling individuals.

This seemingly circular arguent is, I think, at the root of a stagnant church. The focus is upon "me" and "my comfort," instead of Him and His mission. The New Testament church was one of great sacrifice and radical living. Ours is one of "comfortable" existence fiting into a culture which ignores Christian principles and even attacks Christian standards.

What do you think?

Chapter 5 from Good to Great by Jim Collins. In this chapter Collins talks about the "hedgehog concept." He states: "Hedgehogs, on the other hand simplify a complex world into a single organizing idea, a basic principle or concept that unifies and guides everything." (91) Although he avoids using the word Mission or Vision like the plague, the essential concept is the same. What is unique, however, is the three circles, "...a Hedgehog Concept is a simple, crystalline concept that flows from deep understanding about the intersection of the following three circles: 1. What you can be the best in the world at.... 2. What drives your economic engine.... 3. What are you deeply passionate about." (95,96)

According to Collins the overlap of these three circles is the "Hedgehog Concept." Whether these should be seen as circles that overlap or not, the important thing is that these three questions provide a sound starting point for discussion between those "on the bus."

Regarding "What can you be the best at in the world?" Collins writes, "Just because something is your core business--just because you've ebeen doing it for years or perhaps even decadees--does not necessarily mean that you can be the best in the world at it. And if you cannot be the best in the world at your core business, then your core busniess cannot form the basis of yourHedgehog Concept." (99) When applied to churches the guiding mission is often formed without regard to the make-up of the congregation or even the culture and demographics of the the community surrounding the church. Certainly the mission of the church has to be influenced by Matt. 28:19, but just as certainly the individuality of the church itself is important in how Matt. 28:19 is applied.

Regarding "What drives your economic engine?" "...every good-go-great company attained the notion of a single 'economic denominator.'" (104) This one is harder for the church world but boils down to this. What single thing within the organization determines success, and if improved, would show even more success. Of course in the business world, this is an economic factor, however, in the Church world, this question might be better understood as "What produces the greatest number of the deepest disciples?" Each church has to answer this question for itself.

Finally, regarding "What are you deeply passionate about?" "You can't manufacture passion or 'motivate' people to feel passionate. You can only discover what ignites your passion and the passion of those around you." (109) Obviously, for the Church this could be ministry to a specific age group, or other kid of group, or a focus on any aspect of ministry. Often churches are encouraged to look at all the things they do and find something they don't do well and work on bringing that area up to speed, however, Collins' opinion is that a better use of energy is to focus on what you are passionate about - because that is where you will generate the most energy and interest, and do the best job.

As I stated at the first, I think these three questions, if honestly discussed and the brutal facts of the current reality are kept in mind, should provide a solid foundation for a mission statement and focus, which if followed will produce significant results.

The third principle from the book Good to Great, by Jim Collins is that companies/organizations which move from good to great, and stay there, are willing to confront the brutal facts of their environment/cultural/abilities, yet not lose faith. "The good-to-great companies displayed two distinctive forms of disciplined thought. The first, ... is that they infused the entire process with the brutal facts of reality. The second, . . . is that they developed a simple, yet deeply insightful, fame of reference for all decisions. . . . You absolutely cannot make a series of good decisions without first confronting the brutal facts." (69,70) The focus of this principle is to not allow or accept a tepid evaluation which denies reality. By that I mean to continue to say how wonderful we are or how well things are going, when in reality there are indications that things are not going so well. Most would call this "rocking the boat." This type of willingness to confront the brutal truths of the organization and it's environment/culture/abilities and not loose faith is a rare commodity. The ability to stick one's head into the sand and ignore the obvious negatives has allowed many churches to quitely drift into a stagnant, placid pond. Collins writes: " In confronting the brutal facts, the good-to-great companies left themselves stronger and more resilient, not weaker and more dispirited. There is a sense of exhilaration that comes in facing head-on the hard truths and saying. 'We will never give up. We will never capitulate. It might take a long time, but we will find a way to prevail.'" (81) For the church some of those hard truths might include the realiation that their are no families with young children, that senior adults are leaving the church, that the facilities are in such disrepair that visitors won't stay, that the neighborhood has changed and no one from the neighborhood now attends the church, etc. The only way to begin to address the future is to confront the realities of the present.

The third principle from the book Good to Great, by Jim Collins is that companies/organizations which move from good to great, and stay there, are willing to confront the brutal facts of their environment/cultural/abilities, yet not lose faith. "The good-to-great companies displayed two distinctive forms of disciplined thought. The first, ... is that they infused the entire process with the brutal facts of reality. The second, . . . is that they developed a simple, yet deeply insightful, fame of reference for all decisions. . . . You absolutely cannot make a series of good decisions without first confronting the brutal facts." (69,70)

The focus of this principle is to not allow or accept a tepid evaluation which denies reality. By that I mean to continue to say how wonderful we are or how well things are going, when in reality there are indications that things are not going so well. Most would call this "rocking the boat." This type of willingness to confront the brutal truths of the organization and it's environment/culture/abilities and not loose faith is a rare commodity. The ability to stick one's head into the sand and ignore the obvious negatives has allowed many churches to quitely drift into a stagnant, placid pond.

Collins writes: " In confronting the brutal facts, the good-to-great companies left themselves stronger and more resilient, not weaker and more dispirited. There is a sense of exhilaration that comes in facing head-on the hard truths and saying. 'We will never give up. We will never capitulate. It might take a long time, but we will find a way to prevail.'" (81)

For the church some of those hard truths might include the realiation that their are no families with young children, that senior adults are leaving the church, that the facilities are in such disrepair that visitors won't stay, that the neighborhood has changed and no one from the neighborhood now attends the church, etc. The only way to begin to address the future is to confront the realities of the present.

The second principle from the book Good to Great by Jim Collins is: First Who . . . Then What. The premise of this chapter is that it is less important to set a direction than it is to get the right people "on the bus." The "on the bus" concept is used to denote those who are aligned with the nebulous thought of being involved in something great, and who have faith (although I'm not sure Collins would use that word) in the leader.

He states: "The good-to-great leaders understood three simple truths. First, if you begin, with 'who,' rather than 'what,' you can more easily adapt to a changing world. . . . Second, if you have the right people on the bus, the problem of how to motivate and manage people largely goes away. . . . Third, if you have the wrong people, it doesn't matter whether you discover the right direction; you still won't have a great company. Great vision without great people is irrelevant." (42)

Collins' emphasis upon the right people is accurate. It doesn't take much thought to come up with enterprises/ministries which we would consider effective, without also recognizing the importance of the individuals who are part of the team producing that effectiveness. Look at your own life. Consider how much personality plays into effectiveness. Collins states: "If you have the right executives on the bus, they will do everything within their power to build a great company, but not bacause of what they will 'get' for it, but because they simply cannot imagine settling for anything less." (50) Those who invest the most have the greatest likelihood of seeing the best effect, i.e. you get out of anything about the same as you put into it.

Collins' work when applied to the Christian is missing two crucial aspects. The first is calling. God calls into the church a unique blend of individuals which by the world's standards might never be called the "right" people. Herein is the great mystery of God at work in people - His strength is made perfect in weakness. The church has been compared by the Apostle Paul to a body, with the right parts ready to function in coordination and with purpose. That takes us to the second crucial point: spiritual gifts. The gifting of God of divine gifts for the edification of the body (church) is without comparison in the world. The model of these good to great companies who strive so hard to get the right people on the bus is NOT the model of the church. God places the ones HE wants on the bus. Now, as Collins points out sometimes the people on the bus are in the wrong seats and I think this is a definite match to what we see in most churches.

The focus on "who" then "what" is interesting in theory but in actuality, I think it ignores the reality that a certain amount of direction (mission, vision, etc.) has to be in place to attract the right people. Jesus approached some of his disciples and said follow me and I will make you fishers of men. Human nature is drawn to the desire to leave something behind that is greater than themselves. For the Christian and the church the focus of this chapter has to be a realization that God calls the right people - we may not like who he has called and wish for different people, and of course some staff will be hired, but the work of the church is not done by the staff but by the believers who combine their gifts to bring about the mission. The concern then should be focused on an understanding of spiritual gifts and getting the right people in the right seat on this bus going to Great.

Again from the book Good to Great by Jim Collins, one of the principles for those companies which went from Good to Great was the factor of leadership, Level 5 leadership to be exact. The question is, what is Level 5 leadership?

According to Collins one of the key traits of Level 5 leadership is: "ambition first and foremost for the company and concern for its success rather than for one's own riches and personal renown. Level 5 leaders want to see the company even more successful in the next generation, comfortable with the idea that most people won't even know that the roots of that success trace back to their efforts." (25, 26) This placing of the interests of the company above self evidently is an unusual trait. It seems that many of those who are willing to step into leadership do so because they are interested in leaving a legacy which can be directly traced back to their wise leadership. When discussing this with my daughter, she thought the Level 5 leader might be characterized by an individual whose concern for those who work for them, those they lead, is genuine and interested in their best as well as the company. She also postulated that the Level 5 leader might also be one who does not see themselves as the lynchpin of leadership, and often are unaware of their own ability. These facts about Level 5 leaders is born out in the book.

Collings also states that: "...Level 5 leadership is not just about humility and modesty. It is equally about ferocious resolve, an almost stoic determination to do whatever needs to be done to make the company great. ... Level 5 leaders are fanatically driven, infected with an incurable need to produce results."(30) The ability to make decisions, often hard and unopular decisions, is not as prevalent as one might assume. Even harder is to stay a course which for the short-run seems as if it will have a irrecoverable effect. Level 5 leaders are able to analyse the data and trends, face the hard truths of the reality and make decisions which keep the company focused and successful.

Finally, "Level 5 leaders look out the window to apportion credit to factors outside themselves when things go well (and if they cannot find a specific person or event to give credit to, they credit good luck.) At the same time, they look in the mirror to apportion responsibility, never blaming bad luck when things go poorly." (35) This is entirely opposite of most leaders who look to blame something or anything for their failure. Now we come full circle back to a concept which Collins refutes, but his research supports (in my opinion): i.e. everything rises and falls on leadership. You probably thought I would come back to this and you were right. The Level 5 leader is aware that what happens can be reacted to, either to blame (wallowing in a victim mentality) or to see the opportunities (moving forward).

See, my take on this Level 5 leaderhip thing can be summed up on these points:

1. Everything rises and falls on leadership - leaders take responsibility.
2. Leaders care about those they work with, wanting them to realize their potential
3. Leaders want results, NEED results, and don't care who gets the credit. (this last part is definitely descriptive of a different kind of leader)
4. Leaders want the best for the company and for things to be better AFTER they leave than even it was when they were there.

Let's think about this

I have just finished what I think may be one of the best books I have ever read. I know, I know, you've heard that before. I am starting through this book again and have already applied some of the principles in my life and in my conversations and consulting work. The book is Good to Great by Jim Collins. One of the remarkable things to come out of the book is the concept that GOOD is the enemy of GREAT. The book looks at various companies which have made the transition from good to great based on clearly defined statistics. Those companies are then examined in the light of other companies equally as good which did not go to great and then principles are pulled from the data. I won't go into the specifics in this post except to say that the concept of GOOD being the enemy of GREAT is almost enough to prompt a reading of the book itself.

Let's face it, "good enough" is as American as apple pie. We are good people who live good lives, work at good jobs and go to good churches. The problem with most of our lives is that they are GOOD. What a statement! Sounds a little like Queen Esther (from the book in the Bible by the name Esther). Our good enough lives and good enough churches/worship have made complacency a religion all of its own - because the anthesis is the one who rocks the boat, invites in chaotic risk and dreams the ridiculous. That sounds almost scary enough to quit rocking and risking and just go with the flow - back to good enough.

Functional Structures

Functional Structures: What are they?
Every organism has some kind of structure which defines it and makes its existence possible. Structure groups cells of various kinds together and not others, making a unique entity. Structure combines elements in ways that produce various compounds, but eliminates others. In some cases, the structures dominate, in others, the structures are all but invisible. In almost every case there are structures within structures, just as within the shape or structure of a leaf, there are structures which dictate photosynthesis, structures which boundary cells, structures which allow nutrients to come in to the leaf, etc. Thus, while we see only a leaf, were it not for the structures which allow it to function, there would be nothing. Every organism, then, not only has some kind of structure which defines it, but that structure itself is composed of other structures, giving it the possibility of functionality.

Systems Background
Probably one of the most freeing concepts to come from Natural Church Development is the truth that we are not responsible for producing fruit. This freedom allows the focus to be placed on areas which are within our ability to affect. By interacting with the eight characteristics of a healthy church we effectively, care for and intentionally enhance the environment so that, as God allows, fruit will come.

What I find interesting is the beauty of the connections. We see it everywhere in nature. The flowers are dependant upon the soil, the water, the air, the sunlight, and even the insects for pollination. Anyone of these factors can drastically affect the flower, and yet in harmony they produce great beauty. Scripture repeatedly uses the body as analogy for the church. I think that’s a wonderful picture into the intricacies of how even a small congregation is connected.
Our bodies truly are carefully and wonderfully made. Composed of cells and linked through a complex system of veins, arteries and nerves, over a structure of bone and cartilage, moved by muscles and independent thought, the body is marvelous. What is amazing is that even with all the complexity, it works wonderfully well. Yet, there are times when the body’s ability to function is impaired through accident, disease, age, etc. Its ability to function in a broader context is hampered by the impairment of function in a smaller context, e.g. sore throat, broken leg, toothache, etc. When this happens, even though only a small part of the body is primarily affected, the entire body’s ability to function is hampered or even destroyed (e.g. the world class skier who suffers an injury which makes it impossible to ever ski again).

In systems theory, all parts of an organism are perceived as connected and have the ability to affect the other parts. From the smallest cell to the defining boundaries, each part affects the whole. Interestingly, according to systems theory, although the strongest part gets recognized and valued, it is the weakest part which has the greatest power within the system. Natural Church Development recognized this truth with its focus upon the “minimum factor.” Regardless of the high levels of performance realized by any of the eight characteristics of a healthy church, the church’s true health depends upon the characteristic with the lowest level. Thus, while a church might have truly inspiring worship and appear healthy to the casual observer, it is the level of the lowest characteristic that dictates whether or not there is real health.

Structures which are Functional
Although “functional structures” is listed as one of the eight characteristics of a healthy church in its own right, it should also be observed that each of the other characteristics either has, or does not have, structures which are functional. Actually, it is the functionality of the structures within each characteristic which determine the health of that characteristic. Let’s look at some examples:

Empowering leadership is leadership which consciously seeks to empower others to their fullest potential. By giving away leadership to individuals equipped to accept responsibility and accountability, God’s work is multiplied. However, for this to happen there must exist structures which identify potential leaders as well as effective training method.

Gift oriented ministry is the heart of lay involvement and true edification of believers. For gift oriented ministry to become a reality there must exist structures which not only help identify gifts, but equip individuals to use their gifts and provide avenues for the use of those gifts.

“Holistic small groups” is considered one of the most important characteristics, yet the existence of these groups, and especially their health, depends totally upon structures which provide the right material, meeting parameters, and equipped leaders.

Inspiring worship seems to flow in the Spirit and brings the congregation into contact with God. What is not seen is the structures which include practice, music selection, and preparation, without which the flow becomes disjointed and distracting.

Loving relationships even require some structure. At the personal level relationships can become so static that without structures which motivate individuals to reach out to others, newcomers will feel excluded and unwanted. At the larger level, structure enables the church to effectively show the compassion which is part of its heart.

Need oriented evangelism is totally dependent upon structures which not only define the needs to be address but the methods of addressing those needs.

We would like to believe that at least passionate spirituality would be exempt from the need for structures. But here as well the need exists. The constant reminders of the prophets to the nation of Israel emphasize the fact that without structure people have a tendency to slip into spiritual apathy. In fact, it might be argued that one of the primary functions of the church itself is to provide the structure which motivates passionate spirituality. Yet, even within the church it doesn’t happen unless there are structures which point to the importance of consistent spiritual formation.

The characteristic of functional structures as used in NCD refers more specifically to the operational structures of organization and leadership, of resources and assets. In this are, at least, it is obvious that structure is imperative.

Identification Process
Since structures underlie each of the characteristics, how do we identify those structures, and whether or not they are truly functional?
After determining the characteristic with the “minimum factor” it is time to begin analyzing its underlying structures. In its most simplistic form, the steps to this analysis are:
1. Pray for guidance is selecting an analysis team
2. Call the team together and:
a. Pray together more than a simple prayer for God’s direction and guidance.
b. Appoint a recorder to record the information. This might seem obvious but this is VERY important.
c. Brainstorm together ONLY focusing upon those structures which currently exist to support that characteristic.
d. Work down the resultant list one by one discussing each point’s functionality. This is not the time to resource change, so stay focused. Place a triangle next to items which are not considered functional and a star next to items which are considered functional.
e. Send the team home with instructions to pray and meditate upon structures which will make this characteristic more functional.
f. At the next meeting begin again with prayer.
g. It is probable that this step may consume more than one meeting. Depending upon the size of the team it might speed things up to divide the team and assign each one certain points to discuss and come back with recommendations, which will also have to be discussed and modified before a consensus is reached.
3. Implementation of any recommendations MUST occur within the functional structures of the church as a whole and with the full knowledge and support of leadership.

Cautions
There are no formulistic solutions to church health. Two things which all solutions will have in common is prayer and a willingness to look objectively at what is and what might be.
Change, although inevitable, is studiously avoided by the church in general and can be threatening. The mere identification of a “minimum factor” will seem like heresy to some and a personal attack to others. Leaders would do well to understand the dynamics of influence and their own personal investment in relationships before challenging the security of entrenched pockets of power.

On May 11, 2004 I wrote that Leadership could be defined by two characteristics: Leaders participate and Leaders take responsibility. These two characteristics, are foundational to the nature of a leader . . . and both can be learned. Participation is the will to become involved. The will to choose to enter into the task at hand. Leaders will participate. They choose to contribute their skills and abilities to the mission, even to the defining of that mission and the strategic planning AND EXECUTION of those plans. Leaders Participate by choice. For some that choice may seem to be a natural expression of their personality, however, anyone can choose to participate and discipline themselves to enter into the fray. Whether it is the discussion in a classroom, participation in a local church project, or heading up a major project at work - those who participate are more likely to become involved in the leadership of that activity than those who sit back and wait.

Along the same lines is taking responsibility. Let's face it - most of the world is looking for someone else to take responsibility. Not the leader. She is willing to accept the responsibility for the success or failure of a project because she knows the gifts and abilities she brings to the table and is confident in her ability to succeed. The willingness to take responsibility characterizes those who are unwilling to simply allow and accept mediocrity. When her world slows to a stagnant point this leader will take responsibility for her own actions and move forward to a better place and a better solution.

Of course this conversation leads us to observe that there ARE gifts and abilities which are also part of the Leaders quiver. This will be the subject of another post.

So, I'm talking with a friend today who was basically lied to by his boss about why a certain component of his salary package could not be offered, only to find out it had been offered to the previous person to hold the same position. He was understandably upset and thwarted in his desire to confront the "boss" because the boss was out of town for a couple of days.

I asked him what he wanted as a result of the confrontation. He said that he wanted the boss to promise to be truthful in the future. I shared with him the story of the scorpion and the frog and suggested that a promise from a scorpion is worth exactly nothing if it runs contrary to the nature of the scorpion. So, now what do you want from the confrontation; an apology? an increase in your salary package? what.

The bottom line is that confrontation without a clear purpose is usually a matter of salving the ego as much as it is about justice. And if it is about ego, then one has to examine one's motive for the work. If your motive is because this is your calling - then confrontation only has value as it secures justice, not just to make you feel like you stood up for yourself. This is not a philosophy for the individual with insecurity issues. Can you rise above your own ego to pursue the best path for the organization? Yet, even in calling there is a line where one cannot turn away from situations which require a stand to be made. How one makes that stand, however, IS within your power and many do not take into account the power of their words, nor the long term effect of a hastily spoken word. Judgement as to another's motives is always risky at best and often puts you in the position of the pot calling the kettle black. Thank you very much Mr. Pot. You are welcome, Mr. Kettle.

However, if your motive for being at the organization is NOT a calling but merely a step toward a personal goal, confrontation may be of greater necessity, yet again, the choice of the wording is crucial to a satisfactory resolution. It seems that some people have an uncanny knack of selecting words which cause others to respond with anger and a desire to hurt back.

Coming back to the issue cited at the beginning of this post. Integrity in leadership cannot be overstated. Say what you mean, mean what you say, and let what you say be the truth.

Christmas 2004 is almost over, I guess, technically, it is over as it is 12:20 AM on the 26th. The issues of leadership have continued to press themselves upon my awareness over the last few months. Leadership and management, while having some functions in common are not the same thing. What I see more often than not is individuals with some skill at management, to varying degrees, proving to be somewhat competent, and therefore, being perceived as being a leader. Leadership is one of the functions of management, however, it is leadership within the confines of the organizational blueprint - the smooth functioning of and incremental improvement of the organization along the path designated. This pseudoleadership is important to the organization, but must not be confused with true leadership. True leaders may have some competency in management, if the organization is lucky, but their primary function IS the future and the strategic plan. The plain truth is that anyone who can exhibit any aspect of leadership and the willingness to take on responsibility will eventually move up in thier company, or move to another where they can move up. This is because leadership is in short supply - everywhere.

Lately I have been thinking about how personality contributes to leadership. I'm not speaking of personality types such as sanguine, melancholoy, etc. Instead, I'm wondering if there might not be a specific personality type for leaders (and, therefore, one for followers, and one more for those who are basically clueless).

If there is a personality type: "Leader" then, is it the type which simply is (e.g. sanguine, melancholoy, etc) or is it one which can be acquired. How does one acquire it. Obviously training in leadership principles can make one more aware of what the personality type looks like, however, I am coming to the conclusion that actually acquiring the personality of Leader hinges on two factors:

1. Choose to participate. Leaders participate in every process of which they are a part. You could sooner keep a duck from quacking than to keep a leader from participating. It is part of who they are. I remember when I choose to start participating. I was in a college class and I knew if I didn't participate, I would fall asleep. I became active not only in that class but in every class and that choice has become my nature.

2. Choose to take responsibility. Leaders initiate taking responsibility. They take responsibility for group functions. They take responsibility and process it in a way which benefits the group as a whole.

I haven't refined these concepts yet but I believe that all the other data about leadership may hinge more on these two factors than be the answers themselves.

John Kotter in Leading Change cites eight reasons why transitions (planned change) in firms fail: 1) They allow too much complacency, 2) They fail to create a sufficiently powerful guiding coalition, 3) They underestimate the power of VISION, 4) They undercommunicate the VISION by a facgtor of 10 (or 100 or even 1,000), 5) They permit pbstacles to block the new vision, 6) They fail to create short-term wins, 7) They declare victory too soon (and quit trying), and, finally, 8) They neglect to anchor changes in the corporate culture.

I wonder which of these points you could point to as the main reason the last change plan you were involved with failed. Obviously planned change may require more from leadership than a simple mandate if it is to become a long-term reality. It is interesting that VISION is mentioned in two of the point cited by Kotter: underestimating the power of VISION and undercommunicating the VISION. I suppose this makes sense when one considers that it was VISION which decided the course of the change to begin with.

It amazes me what passes for leadership . . . and the significant lack thereof. Probably the best book I have read recently discussing one aspect of leadership has been Leading Change by Kotter. The concepts presented in this book are universal and if considered will assist any leader in facilitating change within the organization. Key, of course to change is the create the sense of urgency that change, although possibly not desirable, is certainly unavoidable - what can be avoided, with some effort, is negative change. For example, the economic situation may mean that a business will definitely suffer financial reversals UNLESS some change occurs. With the inevitability of change coming, all that remains is to determine which changes can bring forth positive returns instead of negative, for the largest number of stakeholders. This, of course, recognizes that not all stakeholders will benefit or even survive the change, at least in their current incarnation.

Does leadership require a team? Does the team paradigm enhance the function of leadership? I believe so. All the current leadership agrees, yet . . . what do you do when you find yourself in a context which gives verbal assent to the concept while practicing a practical autocracy? Depending upon your position within the organization . . . and the approachableness of the autocrat, the answer may be "live with it." This is hardly an answer, however, for the individual who seeks the fulfillment which could be part of such a team. In this case, it will be up to the individual to evaluate his own calling, position of service and prayerfully consider what God wants, both for the organization (which may mean sticking with the program) and the individual.

Issues on Strategic Planning. It is amazing to me that this concept is so misunderstood. Planning which is strategic is simply planning which is designed to accomplish a set of goals. Thus, Strategic Planning is completely mis-named if one does not have a set of goals or outcomes. If one has a goal, in the church world for instance, of developing a better, more informed, awareness of the Word of God among the congregation, then the strategic plan would lead to that reality. Obviously, time-lines and resources are important considerations, as is the very real consideration of just how many goals an institution can pursue at any one time (and which of these have the highest priority). These factors make strategic planning complex, but even more complex than the plan, in my opinion is the process used to define the goals, thier priority, and the time line for accomplishing those goals. And this hinges upon the mission of the institution. Another factor is the "brand" image of the institution both internally and externally. OK, I guess I can see how strategic planning can be mis-understood. After all if you undertake to do "strategic planning" when you have not addressed the mission, the brand and the goals, what can you expect, except confusion.

Life abhors a vacumn. A vacancy demands that something fill that space. This is especially true in Leadership. When there is no leadership in an organization, or the leadership is inadequate, one of two things will happen. Those who recognize the need will either move toward filling need, or, if that is not possible or the structure cannot be solved without the additional clout of position, these people will leave the situation/organization.

Leaders are influencers. In the best sense they use their influence to empower those around them in the fulfillment of the goals. In the worse sense, they manipulate those around them to make themselves look good regardless of anyone else.

7/11/03 One of the best books I have recently read on the subject of leadership is The Next Generation Leader by Andy Stanley. Although the book is not very long, it is well written and challenges past the basics. I recommend this book and will be posting reflections from my reading in upcoming blogs.

7/11/03 I don't know why but I couldn't sleep this morning and it seemed like a good idea just to go ahead and get up and make an entry here. I have been thinking a lot about the mechanics of leadership and realize that, even though those mechanics can be learned, the heart of a leader is developed much earlier, while growing up. There are certain principles of life which I believe to be foundational enough that I have attempted to teach them to my children from their earliest days. They are: 1. All of life can be reduced to relationships, 2. Everything rises and falls on leadership, 3. Excellence in all things, 4. It is not what happens to you but how you respond, and 5. Perseverance - don't quit. These principles are then build on the Shema which says: The Lord God is ONE, love the Lord with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your strength. I can't overemphasize the importance of these principles when practiced in conjunction with the guiding force of the Shema. Teach them to your children, talk about them at the table over a meal, meditate upon them in the situations of your life.

7/9/03 Communication is a key component to effective leadership. In fact, you could say that without strong communication skills leadership, at least over the long haul, is impossible. What are the basic pieces of the skill set needed for effective communication? Just remember your PEAS. P=precision. A leader's communicatin must be clear, without ambiguity. E=enunciate, as in pronounce the words correctly. It is VERY annoying to hear people in leadership mispronounce words. A=articulate, as in make sure you speak distinctly enough to be clearly heard by everyone in the audience (whether that audience is one person or a hundred). Mumbled, indistinct speech is a big off-putter. S=simple. Keep your focus on the subject at hand.