|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Christian Leadership Manuals
|
Schroedinger's cat
Ship's cool cat
# 64
|
Posted
OK, I am watching the series about Longleat, which is worth while, if nothing else because Lord bath is exceptionally mad, and most of the other aristocracy are mildly mad.
Anyhow, this week they introduced a new business manager who is a Christian, and reads all sorts of Christian Leadership Books, which is his methodology for running the place.
The basic principle that seems to be at play here is "servant leadership", meaning, as it is explored in the program, that everyone just gets on and does all of the things that need doing. Resulting on one member of staff going, because he wasn't prepared to do that for no more money (I can see his point).
The problem I have is that this "servant leadership" is appropriate in a church, or similar. I am not sure it really works in business. If I am employed to do a job, it is not reasonable to expect me to contribute my skills in other areas, taking more of my time, without any further remuneration. In the church I probably will, but in work I probably won't*.
But I am still not over the idea of "Christian Leadership Manuals" - aimed at business, rather than the church. I mean, why? Trying to build a management strategy on the Bible seems like as much an abuse of both sides as building "God Hates Fags" on the Bible.
So has anyone read these, used them? Is there a place for "servant leadership" across the board in business (not just for those with business responsibility)? Is there a place for drawing a leadership manual from the Bible? Or is this just putting the "Nice and Christian" label on something to make it seem better?
*I am generally happy to help in other areas of the business, but I will not spend extra time doing this.
--------------------
Blog
Music for your enjoyment
Lord may all my hard times be healing times
take out this broken heart and renew my mind.
Posts: 18859 | From: At the bottom of a deep dark well. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
TurquoiseTastic
Fish of a different color
# 8978
|
Posted
I can see your point about being employed to do a job. But surely the point about servant leadership is that it starts at the top? If you are delegating the servant leadership to someone else, aren't you missing the point?
If it does start at the top though, there's probably something to it. I have often seen something along the lines of:
Q. If there's a broken window catch in the factory / crying pupil at the school / unpaid water bill at the town hall that no-one is doing paying any attention to, whose job is it?
A. The Managing Director / Headmaster / Mayor
Posts: 1092 | From: Hants., UK | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Schroedinger's cat
Ship's cool cat
# 64
|
Posted
TBH, they were seeking to do this by example, but it seemed that this was a "management paradigm" that everyone had to follow. Which is, I think, why I was struggling with the concept of a Christian Business Management Manual.
--------------------
Blog
Music for your enjoyment
Lord may all my hard times be healing times
take out this broken heart and renew my mind.
Posts: 18859 | From: At the bottom of a deep dark well. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
In theory, I believe it. Leadership is all about influence and power, and the NT says quite a lot about power. So, theoretically, you should be able to write a "Christian business manual" based on those principles, that would apply to the running of both businesses and churches in a way that is distinctly Christian.
Problem is-- that's not what most "Christian business manuals" do (possible exception: Nouwen's In the Name of Jesus). Instead, they take the same mad voodoo cocktail of pop psychology and art of war strategizing that's coming out of Harvard Business school (literally, I could name names...) slap a few Bible verses on it to make it sound "Christian" and there you go. The outcome is ugly enough when it comes to business-- but at least there it's blending in with what everyone else is doing so you can just ignore the absolutely meaningless "Christian" label and get on with dealing with your business in the same way everybody else does in a capitalist society. But when it's slapped on churches it gets really really ugly.
If you really wanted to write a "Christian business manual"-- for either church or business-- I imagine it would read something like Walter Wink's The Powers that Be. And you might very well be bankrupt in a week. If that's not a problem for you, then you might be ready to read an actual "Christian business manual". Otherwise, you're just playing house.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jolly Jape
Shipmate
# 3296
|
Posted
I think cliffdweller has this exactly right. Whatever the book in question is about, it certainly isn't servant leadership. It seems, rather, to be about the imposition from above of a distinctly un-christian ethos of manipulative extrinsic motivation in order to prevent people from receiving fair recompense for their labours, something about which the bible pulls no punches. It's actually the antithesis of servant leadership. Biblical servant leadership would mean that the workers serve the customers, the forepersons serve the workers, the managers serve the forepersons, and, presumably, the batty Lord serves the managers.
--------------------
To those who have never seen the flow and ebb of God's grace in their lives, it means nothing. To those who have seen it, even fleetingly, even only once - it is life itself. (Adeodatus)
Posts: 3011 | From: A village of gardens | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
"Servant leadership" has become one of those meaningless buzz words-- like "missional" and "collegial"-- that mean whatever the person using them wants them to mean. Pretty much every lead pastor I've ever met defines his (because most of them are male-- that tells ya something...) leadership style with all three: "servant leadership", "collegial", "missional"-- yet they are all as different as light & day in what they mean by that. Some of the most hierarchical, dictatorial, and controlling pastors I've ever met will use those words to describe themselves. And they probably mean it-- they think what they're doing is what those things look like. But what they really mean is "making sure things turn out my way".
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
I saw that programme and was sufficiently intrigued that I tried to find out a bit more on the web about the book and its writer. I'd never heard of either and I failed. I found it but none of the reports said very much.
I suspect I might find the book very irritating, but Schroedinger's cat's initial post is airing something important.
I'm not convinced that we are entitled to say that what Jesus says about leadership is important for the church, but we can abandon it when we get into work on Monday morning. I don't even think we're entitled to say he was being hopelessly unrealistic. After all, as Son of God and one of the three persons of the Most Holy and Undivided Trinity, we can assume he knows more about sovereignty and how to run the Universe than we do.
I also don't think the church over the centuries has ever taken seriously what Jesus says about leadership, how countercultural he is and how he models it. I assume the phrase 'servant leadership' comes from Lk 22:24-27. That was in the context of the disciples arguing, yet again, about who should be greatest.
We haven't got a very good record on this.
I'm also fed up with church eminents aspiring to follow the latest - or more usually, the latest but three - ideas on secular leadership and secular organisation culture, when we have treasures of our own to offer if we would but get them out of our storeroom. After all, the average business organisation isn't usually either a nice or a creative place to work. Why should be ape them?
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
The problem I have is that this "servant leadership" is appropriate in a church, or similar. I am not sure it really works in business. If I am employed to do a job, it is not reasonable to expect me to contribute my skills in other areas, taking more of my time, without any further remuneration. In the church I probably will, but in work I probably won't*.
This sounds like a dodge for getting extra work out of you by guilting you into it. Nothing Christian about that (though the name's been abused...)
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jenn.
Shipmate
# 5239
|
Posted
It strikes me that they were trying to change the culture of the workforce from a 'that's my job, that's yours, let's get on with it' to one which says 'our job is to make the park work, what do we need to do'. The second makes more sense to me as a business model in that environment, but if I were employed under the first, and comfortable with it, I may see the second as trying to get more work out f me for no extra pay. In reality its making the team deployable and makes sense. I have no idea what that has to do with servant leadership.
Posts: 2282 | From: England | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jenn.:
It strikes me that they were trying to change the culture of the workforce from a 'that's my job, that's yours, let's get on with it' to one which says 'our job is to make the park work, what do we need to do'. The second makes more sense to me as a business model in that environment, but if I were employed under the first, and comfortable with it, I may see the second as trying to get more work out f me for no extra pay. In reality its making the team deployable and makes sense. I have no idea what that has to do with servant leadership.
That would be more "team leadership" than "servant leadership", and sure, it's a good way to go. But I think it's just as much a subjective one-size-fits-all term as "collegial", "servant", and "missional" leadership-- whether we're talking secular business or church leadership. It's a nice good-sounding modifier to tack onto what default style of leadership you want to demonstrate. I've worked for more than my share of bosses who with an explicit goal of "team building", whose idea of what being a "team player" is meant "doing what I say w/o question".
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Schroedinger's cat
Ship's cool cat
# 64
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
I'm not convinced that we are entitled to say that what Jesus says about leadership is important for the church, but we can abandon it when we get into work on Monday morning.
I completely agree with this. I think if we are a manager, we should manage as a Christian, drawing lessons from the Bible as to how we should manage. The same applies, actually, to any job.
What I had real qualms about is the idea that I can define an approach to running this business that is drawn from the Bible, that we can impose on other people. I don't see how you go from the Bible to a Leadership manual, to the imposition of a different style onto others, seemingly in Gods name.
And that applies in church or non-church life. It is abusive in church life, and it could be abusive in non-church life.
--------------------
Blog
Music for your enjoyment
Lord may all my hard times be healing times
take out this broken heart and renew my mind.
Posts: 18859 | From: At the bottom of a deep dark well. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
I'm not convinced that we are entitled to say that what Jesus says about leadership is important for the church, but we can abandon it when we get into work on Monday morning.
I completely agree with this. I think if we are a manager, we should manage as a Christian, drawing lessons from the Bible as to how we should manage. The same applies, actually, to any job.
What I had real qualms about is the idea that I can define an approach to running this business that is drawn from the Bible, that we can impose on other people. I don't see how you go from the Bible to a Leadership manual, to the imposition of a different style onto others, seemingly in Gods name.
And that applies in church or non-church life. It is abusive in church life, and it could be abusive in non-church life.
Yes.
Greg Boyd talks about how the way of the world is "power over." Good leadership is about building power and influence-- whether that's thru gaining expertise, thru accumulating political influence, thru economic strength, currying favor, building a literal or figurative army, whatever-- in order to achieve your desired result, whether thru coercion, manipulation, or force.
The way of Jesus, otoh, is "power under"-- coming under others in love to serve them and their goals, not ours. This would be what servant ministry is. But that version of servant ministry is something I've rarely seen-- in the church or in business. More often "servant ministry" becomes some version of benevolent (at least in our view) "power over". We exert power over others and impose on them our version of what things should be like. Even when that's a benevolent vision, it's still "power over" which is not what servant ministry looks like in the NT.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Humble Servant
Shipmate
# 18391
|
Posted
But this is nonsense. The servant leader doesn't serve by mucking in. They serve by leading. Leadership is about looking after the team you are leading. It's about ensuring the enterprise meets their needs as individuals, rather than meeting your needs to prove yourself as a great leader. That is your service to the team - to lead them. Not to do their jobs for them, or insist on them doing jobs their not interested in.
Posts: 241 | Registered: Apr 2015
| IP: Logged
|
|
goperryrevs
Shipmtae
# 13504
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
I'm not convinced that we are entitled to say that what Jesus says about leadership is important for the church, but we can abandon it when we get into work on Monday morning.
This is true in terms of principles of character, attitude and so on, but ISTM that the spheres of church and business are not equivalent. Too many times, it seems that people think that everything is transferable (especially, as Cliffdweller said, lifting pop-leadership principles from business and imposing them on the church).
The big difference between Church and Business is that Church is specifically supposed to be under the direct guidance of the Holy Spirit. So a minister in the church is not supposed to be rationally deciding on the best course of action in certain situations (as a manager in a business would), but enabling the body of Christ to discern the will of the Holy Spirit. This is a totally different role than managing a business. Another difference is pastoral support - something that is a means to an end (efficient employees) should be a goal in itself within the church. A minister should also be enabling the church members to have full holistic lives - in and out of church life. A manager doesn't care about what you do outside of working hours.
So, yeah, there are crossover skills, attitudes and abilities, but there's a lot that is just not transferable, because church and business are very different beasts. I think it can be a very unhelpful thing when a minister tries to run a church like a business - for these reasons.
I say this as a Christian who works in and runs a business with other Christians. We're lucky in that there is more stuff that is transferable (we do feel like we can discern corporate direction, and we get to pray together at work). But I'd be kidding myself if I think that because I've run a Christian business I'd suddenly be able to minister a church without a lot of new learning, and having a call to that ministry.
One more thing, the New Testament doesn't teach Servant Leadership. It's something that we've back-interpreted onto it. The New Testament teaches servanthood, among a whole bunch of other virtues - humility, discernment, self-sacrifice, devotion, love, patience, trust, tolerance etc. etc. etc.
These are the virtues that are transferable in the way that Enoch says. Shoehorning one of them into something called 'servant leadership' is not doing the teaching of the New Testament justice.
When we think of the word leader (which even in our English translation New Testaments, barely appears in the NT), there are two concurrent meanings:
- One who guides
- One who rules
Most words that the New Testament writers chose to describe ministries in the church have a lot to do with the former (apostle, pastor, teacher, evangelist, deacon, prophet, elder) - they're about enabling others - they're not about ruling over them. Even with episkopos (bishop/overseer), the focus was on the responsibility of caring for others - not managing or ruling over them.
That's not to say that there's not a place for authority and accountability in the church. Just that we're guilty of imposing a paradigm onto the New Testament that is very different to the one that they operated under. If anything, we would do a lot better to lift contemporary thinking around family & parenthood (since they are metaphors that are used plentifully in the NT) into church structures than we do lifting business management structures.
--------------------
"Keep your eye on the donut, not on the hole." - David Lynch
Posts: 2098 | From: Midlands | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jolly Jape
Shipmate
# 3296
|
Posted
That's very true, and I agree with most of what you are saying, goperryrevs, but there is an interesting phenomenon recently of secular businesses adopting servanthood concepts into their workplaces and their ways of operating. There is, as far as I know, no direct relationship between this and NT leadership concepts (I don't think that many of those involved are self-identifying Christians, for example) but the parallels are truly striking. This book outlines some organisations where the "leader as enabler" model is dominant. From memory, Timpson (the UK shoe repairing business) seeks to operate like this, with all business decisions devolved to the staff on the ground, and central control replaced by support functions. Interestingly, many of the staff are ex-offenders.
--------------------
To those who have never seen the flow and ebb of God's grace in their lives, it means nothing. To those who have seen it, even fleetingly, even only once - it is life itself. (Adeodatus)
Posts: 3011 | From: A village of gardens | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
The problem I have is that this "servant leadership" is appropriate in a church, or similar. I am not sure it really works in business. If I am employed to do a job, it is not reasonable to expect me to contribute my skills in other areas, taking more of my time, without any further remuneration. In the church I probably will, but in work I probably won't*.
There are several paths by which this idea arrives.
Obviously there is the general background of American boosterism and the ideas of New Thought filtered through several layers that then get presented via business books.
Which at some point were influenced by Norman Vincent Peales attempted 'Christian' appropriation of New Thought.
The more recent incarnation of this idea stems from Jim Collin's book 'Good to great', where he hypothesised that one reason that differentiated 'good' companies from 'great' ones was that they had 'humble' leaders who were low key and generally put the needs of the company ahead of their own (the canonical example here being John Chambers of Cisco).
Jim Collins' ideas were picked up on by Bill Hybels - who then invited him to speak a few times at his Willow Creek leadership conference - and not a few 'Christian' management books were then written on the back of these ideas - though also munging in general trends in books on time management, and the positive thought tendency related in the above.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
goperryrevs
Shipmtae
# 13504
|
Posted
Thanks Jolly, that's really good to hear. It sounds like they're taking the good principles / virtues I mentioned, and are using them well. I don't have a problem with that - in fact, I think it's great ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
It's just the assumption that many seem to have that management in business is pretty much the same thing in principle to ministry in the church. It gets (as you can probably tell) my goat a bit. Like I said, ministry in the church is a lot closer to parenthood than it is business leadership, and people are much better off thinking about what it's like to be a parent and taking those principles into a church ministry context than they are trying to do the same with business leadership. But even then, it's, of course, an imperfect metaphor.
For example, when you read Galatians, you get the impression that Paul is telling off a naughty child. When you read Philippians, you get the impression he's a parent sharing his heart with his now-grown-up children. The two types of relationships here (parent > infant and parent <> mature offspring) are very different, and worth reflecting on deeply in a church ministry context.
I'm glad that the world can learn good principles and virtues from the church, but I think that we have to be very careful that we don't lose the revelation of what the Church should be as we try to copy secular models. That's what happened all those centuries ago, when we adopted secular monarchist hierarchical models over the picture Paul gives (a body, with many different but equal parts, and with one head, Christ). So, IMV, a hierarchical church structure is at odds with the images the NT gives us of what Church should be. And most business rely on hierarchical structures, which makes me sceptical of trying to make churches fit into business models.
--------------------
"Keep your eye on the donut, not on the hole." - David Lynch
Posts: 2098 | From: Midlands | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Humble Servant:
But this is nonsense. The servant leader doesn't serve by mucking in. They serve by leading. Leadership is about looking after the team you are leading. It's about ensuring the enterprise meets their needs as individuals, rather than meeting your needs to prove yourself as a great leader. That is your service to the team - to lead them. Not to do their jobs for them, or insist on them doing jobs their not interested in.
Actually, no. That's conventional leadership-- at least conventional leadership at it's best. "Servant leadership" comes from Jesus' example at the last supper when he washed the disciples' feet-- very much "mucking in".
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
quote:
Originally posted by Humble Servant:
But this is nonsense. The servant leader doesn't serve by mucking in. They serve by leading. Leadership is about looking after the team you are leading. It's about ensuring the enterprise meets their needs as individuals, rather than meeting your needs to prove yourself as a great leader. That is your service to the team - to lead them. Not to do their jobs for them, or insist on them doing jobs their not interested in.
Actually, no. That's conventional leadership-- at least conventional leadership at it's best. "Servant leadership" comes from Jesus' example at the last supper when he washed the disciples' feet-- very much "mucking in".
I'm with Cliffdweller on this. "The servant leader doesn't serve by mucking in" sounds a bit like 'I don't wash feet. I'm the leader'.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
TurquoiseTastic
Fish of a different color
# 8978
|
Posted
Of course that in turn sounds very like the appointment of deacons in Acts: "It would not be fitting for us to neglect the word of God in order to wait on tables!"
Posts: 1092 | From: Hants., UK | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Schroedinger's cat
Ship's cool cat
# 64
|
Posted
I have worked with people who do show some aspects of servant leadership (not in church - I have found very few in the church who demonstrate this).
For me, this is about always mucking in where they can. It means they will do the testing work, or the dull work if needed. Their role is to enable others to work productively and successfully, and to handle anything they can to make this happen.
Of course, it often means saying "No I won't do this testing, I will source someone else who can do it better". It might actually be both - a Longleat-type example might be "OK, I will muck out the lions this morning, and this afternoon I will use my management skills to find an extra lion-keeper". It is not always about just getting on and doing the work, it is about enabling people to do their work, whatever that takes.
TBH, I am very cynical towards any Management Process Theories. Management is much harder than that to do well. I also think that when you take something as ropey as this and Christianise it, you end up with something far worse.
--------------------
Blog
Music for your enjoyment
Lord may all my hard times be healing times
take out this broken heart and renew my mind.
Posts: 18859 | From: At the bottom of a deep dark well. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
