A633.6.5.RB_RuggerioSteven

Crutch or Coach: The Leaders Follower Dilemma

            Being confident of this, that he who began a good work in you will 

            carry it on to completion until the day of Christ Jesus (Philippians 1:6, NIV).

We are failing.  Failing as leaders and failing as followers of Christ.  Dr. Richard Krejcir (2005) said, “Growing in Christ is the key to growing a church; following up, teaching, and mentoring new and seasoned Christians are the keys to spiritual growth” (p. 1).  The process of discipleship, aka mentoring, training, coaching, and developing individuals into mature Christians, has taken a backseat to the visually stunning and exciting moments of “altar-call” conversions.  As a result, the difficult, yet irreplaceable, task of leading and developing people has been lost.  

The art of discipleship swings back-and-forth like a pendulum from being an absentee leader to one creating complete dependence.  Obolensky’s “vicious circle for leaders” highlights a systemic problem leader’s face when discipling men and women in the church in the area of dependence.  Rather than empowering and facilitating independence, interdependence, and self-confidence, leaders have made themselves indispensable and, in the process, have become more of a crutch than a coach.  

Obolensky’s (2010) “vicious circle for leaders” describes the process in which follower’s continually check with leaders for approval.  The leader’s response either encourages or dissuades follower behavior.  The model demonstrates over time, that the follower’s confidence and development become dependent on the leader’s instruction thereby inhibiting self-confidence and courage.  This vicious circle consists of five steps set in a continual loop. 

Step one begins when the follower “asks for advice and demonstrates a low skill to the leader.”  Step two happens when the leader “gets concerned” and step three when the leader “takes a more hands-on approach.”  After that, step four occurs when “the follower’s confidence grows in connection to the leader” and finally, as a result, step five solidifies the dependence when “followers thinks they must defer more.”

Does this happen in your organization? 

Church culture speaks, encourages, and promotes discipleship.  Jesus said, “Therefore, go and make disciples of all nations” (Matthew 28:19, NIV).  In the process of making disciples, ministry leaders are often caught up into an endless and “vicious circle” of care.  The circle in ministry looks similar to Obolensky in that a church member expresses a need; the ministry leader is pulled into the individual’s struggle; the leader offers encouragement and advice; and the individual then applies it and things begin to look up.  Experiencing a breakthrough, the individual then leans heavily on the leader for additional struggles and help. 

As stated earlier, church leaders are in the “people-business” and their hearts genuinely want to help.  This is encouraged.  However, this compassion and empathy must be tempered with boundaries and wisdom.  Church leaders and pastors are not to step-in and stand-in for every problem a member may face.  Rather, they should help them understand it is their “personal relationship” with God and the strength of their faith that should help them mature and make right decisions. 

 What are the effects on the organization?

The Bible regularly refers to people being like sheep.  The Apostle Peter said, “For you were like sheep going astray, but now you have returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls” (1 Peter 2:25, NIV).  In his article In Praise of Followers, Robert E. Kelley (2001) said, “Sheep are passive and uncritical, lacking in initiative and sense of responsibility.  They perform the tasks given them and stop.  Yes, people are a livelier but equally unenterprising group.  Dependent on a leader for inspiration, they can be aggressively deferential, even servile” (p. 143).

Too often, church leaders create people dependent on pastors and leaders.  Rather than being conduits for people to find their individual strength and purpose, pastors and leaders answer every call, provide every answer, and rescue members from every trouble.  To be sure, leaders often assist out of a pure motives.  They desire to help and to care for one another.  And, they should!  However, it is incumbent for leaders to know when to lean in and when to pull back.  

This vicious circle of dependency creates a church of immature Christians.  Lacking spiritual self-confidence and an ability to seek answers and solutions for themselves, men and women flounder in the face of difficulties and their faith weakens in the process.  

Create a new circle that would promote strong followership and even leadership at the lower levels of the organization.

A leader never stops learning.  In a healthy environment, both leader and follower are learning together; absent power, intimidation, and insecurity.  One of the most successful models and circles of discipleship that I have used extensively is Rick Warren’s model from Saddleback Church. 

It is formed like a baseball diamond with four stages.  

They are:

1. Committed to Membership – Knowing Christ.  At this stage, new believers and members attend a course that helps them understand their recent conversion and the structure of the church.

2. Committed to Maturity – Growing in Christ.  At this stage, members begin to pursue and develop in spiritual maturity.  They study the Bible, attend community groups, and meet regularly with a spiritual mentor and coach.

3. Committed to Ministry – Serving Christ.  At stage three, members have made their commitment a steady and disciplined part of their life.  They begin to step into leadership positions, delve deeper into their faith, and most importantly, they start focusing on intentionally serving others.

4. Committed to Missions – Sharing Christ.  The final stage is a place where mature Christian begin to actively disciple and lead others.  This is where their life purpose and activities begin to flourish and take form. 

The title “final stage” is somewhat of a misnomer because a disciple never completes the growth process.  However, they are less and less dependent on others for their spiritual growth and have matured to a place of self-sufficiency, i.e., they no longer depend on pastors and leaders for their spiritual “nourishment” but have taken responsibility for their own progress.

Steve

References:

Kelley, R.E. (1998). In Praise of Followers. Harvard Business Review, 66(6), 142-148.

Krejcir, R.J. (2005). The Importance of Discipleship and Growth. Retrieved from

http://www.churchleadership.org/apps/articles/default.asp?articleid=42814&columnid=4543

Warren, R. (1995). Purpose driven church. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

A521.9.4.RB_RuggerioSteven

                                                   A New Type of Leader

My home library is full of leadership books.  Maxwell, Collins, Godin, Yukl, and Wooden to name a few.  At the end of this week another author will be added: Stephen Denning.  Reading his (2011) book The Leader’s Guide to Storytelling in my recent graduate class was a privilege.  I just finished the last chapter aptly titled, A Different Kind of Leader and it ranks as one of the best chapters I’ve ever read pertaining to character, integrity, courage…leadership.  It would serve me well to read it once a month.

At the beginning of the chapter Denning identified six specific dimensions of his “new leader.”

First, the interactive leader works with the world rather than against it.  This can be difficult for the type-A leader who wants to control and direct with incentives and mandates.  However, when leaders look at the situation from all perspectives, they can gain a greater clarity to the possibilities often overlooked.  Denning (2011) said, “Independent of hierarchical position and power can be exercised from wherever you are in the organization” (p. 270).

I ran into a similar situation as a lay leader at my last church. While I was not on staff and held no formal title, my leadership was apparent.  Every Saturday morning I held a men’s group open to men at our church and other churches in the area.  It started with eight men but grew to 50.  Rather than offer support, the pastoral staff felt threatened because a large group of men were meeting with someone who was not being paid (and therefore, could not be controlled).  This eventually led to the group’s demise since the group met at the church.  Looking back, if the leadership at the church had realized “leadership is not in title only,” they could have provided needed resources and benefited from the growth of all the men.

Secondly, interactive leadership both adds and subtracts elements from the leadership palette.  In leadership, there is no “one size fits all” method.  As a result, interactive leaders supplement the traditional management functions of command and control with delegation and authenticity. Interactive leadership also subtracts; removing manipulative and intimidation behaviors. Leadership cannot be practices in a vacuum.  It is the “whole-person” concept.  As Denning (2011) stated, “It’s not possible for leaders to exercise manipulative and spinning behavior in one part of their conduct and expects to be accepted as open, truthful, and trustworthy on other domains” (p. 270)

The third dimension of an interactive leader is interactive leadership builds on personal integrity and authenticity.  This is my favorite dimension.  All leadership rests in this characteristic.  Denning (2011) said, “Because you can communicate who you are and what you stand for, others come to know you and respect you for that.  Because you speak the truth, you are believed.  And, because you make your values explicit and act in accordance with those values, your values become contagious and others start to share them” (p. 270).

As a minister and marriage counselor, my life is always on display.  How can I tell men to unconditionally love their wives if I am not?  How can I speak of the value of integrity and honesty if I am lying and manipulative?  In short, I can’t. No one can – at least not for very long. For example, last year my wife and I spent time with my family in New York.  During our visit, we knew they watched how my wife and I related to one another.  By the end of our three-day visit, my parents and my brother and his wife were treating each other better.  They were holding hands, helping each other, and speaking like they had recently fallen in love.  On the way home, my wife and I discussed the power of authentic love and leadership. Our demonstrative care and respect for one another was contagious. 

The fourth dimension of the new leader is interactive leadership doesn’t depend on the possession of hierarchical authority.  As stated earlier, “anyone and everyone who can help clarify the direction or improve the structure, or secure support for it, or offer coaching that improves performance is providing leadership” (Denning, 2011). 

Fifth, interactive leadership benefits from an understanding of the different narrative patterns that can be used to get things done in the world.  The ability to use narrative depends on emotional intelligence.  Daniel Goleman’s book, Emotional Intelligence should be mandatory reading for leaders and managers.  Too often, people in authority look “outwardly” and never take the time to examine the motives and thoughts of their own thinking.  The strength of the interactive leader lies in their knowledge and application of emotional intelligence.

Lastly, interactive leadership entails active participation in the world rather than detached observation. Leaders cannot be completely detached from their followers.  The “ivory tower,” us versus them mindset dividing managers from workers must be eliminated.  In the military, many people follow orders merely because of rank.  In fact, many senior non-commissioned officers (NCO) used to tell younger airmen to do something and then tell them it was based on Air Force regulation 6-2.  When the airman would ask, “What is reg 6-2?” the NCO would respond, “I have six striped and you have two. Do it.”

I often thought, if I have to tell you to do something and demand it based on my rank or a regulation, then either you are acting utterly rebellious and disrespectful or I haven’t led correctly.  By integrating into the lives and decisions of employees, leaders can connect on an authentic level.  When I’ve taken action to minimize the gap between myself and my followers, we completed the task successfully AND developed strong levels of trust and cooperation.  Denning (2011) is absolutely correct when he said, “In most leadership situations, trust, respect, and collaboration are simply more effective than preemptive domination” (p. 271).

Legacy leads.

Steve

References:

Denning, S. (2011). The Leader’s Guide to Storytelling. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional Intelligence. New York, NY: Random House.

                          

A521.4.3.RB_RuggerioSteven

                                              Hope Springs and Hidden Agendas

Two nights ago, my wife and I watched the movie Hope Springs with Tommy Lee Jones and Meryl Streep.  The film is based around a middle-aged couple, Arnold (played by Jones) and Kay (played by Streep), recently celebrating thirty-one years of marriage.  Stuck in routine and resignation, they undergo five days of intensive marriage counseling in Hope Springs, Maine.  Sitting before their marriage counselor (brilliantly played by Steve Carell), Arnold and Kay unpack fears and unmet expectations.  Advertised as a comedy, this movie delivers an insightful look at the consequences of poor marital communication. 

McKay, Davis, & Fanning (2009), in their book Messages, stated, “You can’t ‘not communicate’ with others. Without saying a word, you reveal your feelings and attitudes” (p. 59).  Watching this movie and reading chapters 4-6 of Messages, I felt as if I were a counselor in the office with Arnold and Kay.  The combination of the movie and the book has opened my eyes and motivated me to enrich the communication with my wife, friends, and coworkers.

McKay, Davis, & Fanning (2009) said, “The key to nonverbal communication is congruence.  Awareness of incongruence in your own nonverbal message can make you a much more effective communicator” (p. 60).  When my wife and I used to argue, the conversations normally consisted of me badgering her with “What’s wrong” and her replying with “Nothing.”  The metamessage tug-of-war could last for hours.  When my wife clearly and purposefully articulates a word ensuring every consonant and vowel is pronounced, it means things are not well.  The obvious incongruence between my wife’s body language and her verbal “nothing is wrong” would send me spiraling into an abyss of frustration.  As a result, my incongruent apology wasn’t much better.  My “I’m sorry” was more apt to be translated as “Whatever I’ve done, will you please just forget it so we can get past this?” 

If the lack of congruence wasn’t enough to identify the obvious disconnection, our social kinesics and proxemics were sure to set off warning sirens.  Crossing her arms tightly across her chest communicated defensiveness and an unwillingness to share her feelings (McKay, Davis, & Fanning, 2009, p. 63).   Wringing my hands and rubbing my forehead, communicated anger rather than understanding.  Normally, when our relationship is strong, we spend our time in an intimate (touching to 18”) and a personal (1 ½’ to 4’) zone.  When we are arguing, the distinct zone of choice is social (4’ to 12’) and sometimes even public (12’ to 20’).  If my wife were to say, “I’m not mad” but refuse to breach the personal or intimate zone, then incongruence would again be raised.  In other words, our personal distance is in direct correlation to our feelings.

In Hope Springs, Arnold and Kay begin their marital session on opposite sides of the couch.  As the sessions move forward and they share their feelings, the distance between them narrows and subconsciously, they are drawn to each other.  When they fall into attacking one another, they move further away from each other on the couch.  It is a perfect dramatization of what is happening both physically and emotionally.  Like the actors, as my wife and I work through our argument, the space between us narrows.  As we move further toward each other, the volume of our speech is brought to a lower level, the tempo slows down, and we resonate a desire to understand each other. 

After twenty-eight years of marriage, my wife and I have learned that our relationship is greater than either of us in particular.  By choosing the higher road of reconciliation and empathy, our desire is to understand each other rather than prove a point.  As a result, we’ve learned a great deal about human communication techniques.  By studying couples in counseling, reading vast amounts of literature, and recognizing our own shortcomings, we’re better equipped to help spouses navigate the rough waters of a difficult marriage.  In the process, we’ve come face to face with McKay, Davis, & Fanning’s eight hidden agendas.

As a refuge for hurting people, the church is a conglomeration of hidden agendas.  As my wife and I discussed the eight hidden agendas described in Messages, we were able to positively assign many names under each category—us included.  There are normally three-tiers of church involvement: Leadership, regular attendees, and uncommitted.  Each category operates with different levels of commitment and agenda.  Here are a few hidden agendas I’ve experienced within the church:

1.                    “I’m Good.” This is the most frequently used agenda within a church.  Leaders use it to avoid losing position, attendees use it to keep people at bay, and the uncommitted use it because there is a lack of trust.

2.                    “I’m Good (But You’re Not).”  This is the “holier than thou” individual who is judgmental and critical of everyone while ignoring his or her own shortcomings.

3.                    “You’re Good (But I’m Not).” This is the person who does not want to change.  Rather than take corrective action, they resign themselves to believing they are who they are.

4.                    “I’m Helpless, I Suffer.” This is normally the people getting the lion’s share of the attention.  These are the ones rarely seeking to help anyone else.  Their goal is to manipulate others to feel sorry for them.

5.                    “I’m Blameless.” This churchgoer is not too far removed from “I’m Good (But You’re’ Not)” agenda.  Either way, nothing is their fault.  I have personally experienced this agenda when offering assistance or advice to an individual.  If they implement my advice and it does not go as they hoped, it is my fault, not theirs.

6.                    “I’m Fragile.”  As I mentioned earlier, church is a refuge for the hurting.  Fragile people come looking for help all the time.  However, the “I’m Fragile” agenda keeps people operating with a victim mentality.  When this agenda is exposed, people either change and incorporate a new mindset or they skip from church to church seeking sympathy.

7.                    “I’m Tough.”  Working in men’s ministry for over twelve years has introduced me to many of these agendas.  Intimidation and busyness cover a host of insecurities and self-esteem problems.

8.                    “I Know It All.”  Every church in every town has at least one of these people.  This is the Bible scholar, the one who has a Scripture verse for every situation, and the person with all the answers.  They hide behind their academics, resumes, and memory verses.

The key to breaking free from hidden agendas is to incorporate the rewards of self-disclosure as described by McKay, Davis, & Fanning.  An increased self-knowledge, closer intimate relationships, and improved communication would help many people suffering from perfection, misaligned perspectives, and legalistic viewpoints.  By overcoming guilt and sharing your feelings with others, there is less guilt and more energy.  Maintaining hidden agendas requires a lot of work and ends in overwhelming loneliness. 

One of my favorite lines in Hope Springs occurs when Arnold and Kay are at dinner.  Much has already been shared between them and some of the walls are down; agendas have been put aside for the night and for the first time in a long time, they feel close.  As the conversation traces back to when they first met, Arnold (in a moment of vulnerability) said to Kay, “You could have had your pick.  I didn’t think you’d ever want me.” In which Kay responds, “I never wanted anything more.”  By breaking through agendas and learning to communicate honestly and authentically, life and relationships are reconciled.

Legacy Never Hides.

Steve

References:

McKay, M., Davis, M., & Fanning, P. (2009). Messages. Oakland, CA: New Harbinger Publications, Inc.

A632.9.3.RB_RuggerioSteven

Role of Emotion in Decision Making

Two days ago, in the middle of conducting time-sensitive research, I lost Internet connectivity.  Frustrated, angry, and slightly anxious about my deadline, I called the IT folks for assistance.  Our techy quickly responded and led me to a room chockablock of servers, fans, and wires.  Completely out of my element, I quizzically stared at the chaotic maze before me not knowing where one wire ended and another began.  The sound of the clicking servers mixed with the hum of the fans created an eerie feeling as if I were a spectator in the corner of an operating room.  Standing inside our organization’s electronic brain, I pondered the infinite number of conversations, emails, and decisions flowing through the wires.  With synopses firing and neurotransmitters pinging, the servers reminded me of our brains; each offering a congested interstate of possibilities.  Behind the wires lie thousands of desires, decisions, and deals.  All motivated by one powerful force: Emotions.

In his video, Emotions in Decision Making, Professor Baba Shiv said, “Emotion plays a crucial role in decision making by allowing us to resolve decision conflict.”  They allow us to emerge from a decision feeling confident about the decision; honoring the convictions we feel.  The mental civil war between left brain logic and right brain intuition is as fierce a fight as the blue and gray.  Pursuing a business deal because you feel it in your gut even though the numbers don’t add up or walking away from an unhealthy relationship while your heart longs for your ex are decisions that cause significant internal conflict.   Similarly, in his book Start With Why, Simon Sinek (2009) said, “We make decisions all day long, and many of them are emotionally-driven; rarely do we sift through all the available information to ensure we know every fact” (p. 60).  As leaders, we often face forks in the road separating two equally beneficial decision options.  Deciding which road to take can be difficult.  My advice: When theory has been exhausted, follow your heart.  Moving forward with confidence provides the strength necessary to continue on a course of action.

One of the biggest decisions I’ve made in the past few years was whether to reenlist and remain in the Air Force or choose to retire at twenty-years of service.  The military offers a number of great benefits; one of which is job security.  Choosing to retire means looking for another job…unemployment?  Nearing forty-years of age and carrying more debt than I’d prefer, reenlisting seemed the obvious choice.  I was accelerating well through the ranks and the next promotion was easily within reach.  Colleagues, supervisors, and extended family assumed reenlistment was a forgone conclusion.  For me, it was anything but.

As twenty-years approached, I realized if I were to retire, my family and I would be relocated to another part of the country.  With my children established in school and my wife and I secure in our local church, we talked in great detail about whether to stay-in the Air Force or try our hand in the civilian sector.  Having completed my MBA and taking all the family’s concerns into consideration, I decided to retire.  While most of my friends and coworkers were shocked, I was confident.  While I didn’t know what awaited us after retirement, I knew I had made the right decision. 

There were times after retirement—prior to finding another job—that my emotions wavered from exuberance to anxiety.  With the military behind me and an uncertain future ahead, my confidence grew and became as Dr. Shiva referenced, “contagious.”  My family and I can look back now eight years later with no regrets.  We made the right choice.  As a result of retiring, I landed a great job with Lockheed Martin and best of all, my daughter met her husband and they provided us our first grandchild!  All things considered, I followed the path of my heart (and a lot of prayer) and chose what seemed to be the harder road and it paid off.

Six years later, we’d be making another decision that challenged us to weigh various options: leaving the church we’ve attended for ten years.  Many people attend churches, leave, and find another, then leave again.  The church we attended from 2000 to 2010 had become a second home.  It was a place where we found help, our children grew up, and we met our closest friends.  Furthermore, we had become pivotal leaders within the church. 

In July 2009, my wife mentioned that she felt stirred to leave our church.  Embedded deep in the programs, leading two large ministries, and not knowing where else we would go, I immediately discarded her initial thoughts and continued participating as a member of the cog in ministry.  Six months later, she was ready to go.  By that time, I had agreed that recent changes in the church and its new direction did not fare well with me either and realized the end was near.  Telling everyone we were leaving took a minor toll on my emotions.  Sadness, doubt, uncertainty, and the possibility of hurting others with our departure weighed heavily upon me.

In May 2010, we met with the senior leadership at the church and informed them we were leaving.  While not completely confident we were making the right decision, there were a number of indicators that caused me to lean toward leaving.  By discussing our feelings, weighing our options, and being open about our concerns, we made a decision with enough confidence to face the consequences.  Within thirty days, we were attending another church, met more friends, and are realizing after every passing day that we made the right decision to leave two years ago.  Confidence was low when we left but over time, its been proven that we made the best decision.

Decision confidence provides us with a foundation of faith.  In modeling human decision making, economists generally assume people will maximize their expected utility.  We assume that they will make the choice that appears to offer them the highest benefit relative to the cost (Hoch & Kunreuther, 2001, p. 290).  Trying to conduct a cost/benefit analysis when emotions are running high is like trying to comb your hair on a windy day: just when you think everything is in place, it is quickly messed up.  In the future, rather than trying to ignore or minimize emotions in the decision making process, I will express and evaluate them in terms of the decision options.  Making decisions purely from emotion or completely ignoring emotions can be equally dangerous.   The goal is to allow the right balance of emotions and logic to lead you toward the right decision.  In short, follow your heart but use your mind.

Legacy leads with the heart.

Steve

References:

Hoch, S.J., & Kunreuther, H.C. (2001). Wharton on Making Decisions. New York, NY: John

Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Shiv, B. (2011). Brain Research at Stanford: Decision Making. Retrieved from

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WRKfl4owWKc