Toxicity in Leadership

 

The role of senior leaders in creating open dialogue

 

Moving from toxicity to health in organizational leadership

Toxicity in leadership often stems from our inability to control our egos in our interactions with others. If you have ever been in a conversation with a supervisor or boss and feel unlistened to, put down, diminished, your opinion discounted, or attacked verbally, you have experienced an unhealthy ego that needs to be right, superior and get its own way. 

These behaviors destroy trust, create cynicism, hurt hearts and shut down important conversation. At the least is it destructive and discourteous behavior and at the most it is destructive to the very staff who make possible the mission we represent. 

Leaders do not fully understand the power of their words, actions and attitudes to lift up or diminish those who work for them. When ego gets in the way, their staff and the organization suffer greatly.

This is not an uncommon issue. However, as we mature as leaders it is an issue that we must confront and deal with it because not doing so will eventually destroy our leadership. And can destroy our organization as the best people leave because of the toxic behaviors of the senior leader(s). 

In my experience there are several key's to ensuring that we lead from health and not the toxicity of our egos. 

First, you have to want to lead from health! While that may seem obvious it is not because the only way to know how your words or behaviors negatively impact those around you is to openly ask for feedback and very few leaders are willing to do that. The very question is a threat to their fragile ego's.

When I led an organization I would regularly ask those who reported to me if there was anything I did that created issues for them, anything they wished I could change about my leadership or any advice they had for how I could be a better leader. The responses were always very helpful for me in understanding myself and the blind spots I had in my leadership. If a leader is not willing to regularly ask those kinds of questions they are not serious about wanting to lead from health. The most significant risk we run as leaders is that we are not self aware of our own impact on others and the only way to understand that impact is to ask the right questions.

Second, when we learn that we have some significant issues we need to get help. Professional help! Ego will tell us we don't need it but our ego is wrong. Most leaders do. The negative behaviors listed above come from a deep place inside of us. The need to be right, the inability to listen well to others, the tendency to put others down or disregard their opinions, the belief that we should call the plays are all behaviors rooted in our own dysfunctions and often stem from childhood. Unless we understand where these negative behaviors come from, we cannot modify them in a healthy manner. 

This is not an easy journey but a necessary one. It is a journey I have had to take and in my coaching practice I have the privilege of helping others in this journey. The willingness to take that hard journey is a sign of strength rather than weakness and the more disclosing you are to those around you about your journey, the more respect you will have. Those around  us know what our issues are even though we may try to pretend they don't exist. They know and they appreciate the efforts to become a better leader as it impacts them.

Third, we must create open atmospheres in our teams and organizations where candid and honest dialogue can take place. This is the most critical factor in creating healthy organizations and holding everyone, including the leader, accountable for words, actions and decisions. 

The key factor in how open or closed an organization is to honest and candid conversation is always the senior leader. The organization will mirror his/her oppenness or closedness because self preservation will require people to not challenge where their leader will not allow you to go. Those who do find themselves looking for another job. They are marginalized and choose to move on. 

In fact, consider asking your team this question. What are the subjects or topics or issues that you wish we could talk about as a team but you are afraid to put on the table. And then just listen. Make a list on the white board and commit to taking them one at a time until all have been discussed. Only leaders who are serious about leading form health will take that step but it makes a powerful discussion.

"Ask any group of employees to describe an ideal team or organizational culture, and they will tell you: supportive, transparent, authentic, collaborative, trusting. But inquire about their current company's culture, and the list will usually look very different: competitive, political, territorial, untrusting, conflict adverse."

This quote is from Ego Free Leadership by Black and Hughes and is an excellent resource on this topic.

The danger of a culture of consumerism over disciplemaking in the church today

 

There is no country where the church has the American church's resources. And yet, with all the advantages it has: wealth; technology; training; strategy, and Biblical knowledge, we are not doing well in many congregations. In fact, we inadvertently hurt ourselves by focusing on the wrong things, which causes us to miss the best things. We are often building a culture of consumerism over disciple-making and that is hurting us and God's people.  Here are some examples of how we inadvertently hurt ourselves in some quarters.

In our concern for "market share" (yes, that is a thing), we appeal to the consumer mentality of church members rather than to the Biblical Mandate of making disciples. In the city in which I live, the revolving door among the large churches particularly has been evident for the past several decades. A "cool" church will appear and make a splash, and its weekend experience is impressive, and migration takes place from other churches to the cool church. 

The problem is that we are training congregants to look for "what's in it for me" rather than focusing on helping them become disciples who love Jesus, and when another cool church appears that is cooler than the church I am attending, the migration happens again. If we train consumers, they will act like consumers. If we disciple people to follow Jesus, they will follow Him. The two are not the same. 

This goes to our marketing efforts as well. We develop programs and swag and the best stage presence because that is what will bring people in, and yet we miss the magnetic quality that actually builds a long-term family of believers - a congregation that loves Jesus and each other which is the greatest marketing tool a church could have. 

The consumer mentality of the church impacts our teaching. I am bemused that there are churches that won't even use the word preaching or teaching (two very Biblical words), but they talk on staff about who is doing the "presentation" that week. And the presentation must not be controversial (which Jesus and the Scriptures usually are), must not deal with the hard topics of the Bible (of which there are many), and must be uplifting, relevant, and non-controversial. It is a win, perhaps for market share, but how is it a win for helping people understand God and His Word?

Too often, we want people to love our church and be loyal to our church rather than wanting people to truly love Jesus and be loyal to Him. Think about the Gospels. Jesus did not try to be cool and hip. Rather He was authentic and spoke truth with amazing mercy and grace. He came full of Grace and Truth. 

The early church, likewise, had few of the advantages our contemporary churches do. But what they had was an infectious love for God and one another that was a magnet for those around them. As to the "teach," this is what Paul had to say about his preaching. "When I came to you, brothers, I did not come with eloquence or superior wisdom as I proclaimed to the testimony about God. For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified. I came to you in weakness and fear, and with much trembling. My message and my preaching were not with wise and persuasive words, but with a demonstration of the Spirit's power, so that your faith might not rest on men's wisdom, but on God's power" (1 Corinthians 2:1-5)." Paul would not be invited to speak in many of our cool, large churches today.

Nor, maybe Jesus because He talked about a "narrow gate" to God. He said that no one comes to the Father except through Him, and He spoke of heaven and, if you can believe it, hell and coming judgment. He did it with grace, but He spoke the truth - truths that we are often fearful of speaking ourselves. For those who want to be cool, Jesus said some very inconvenient things. 

And one last thing. Jesus championed humility over pride and ego. Yet many of our congregations today who live in the consumer space are driven by leaders with egos who have an agenda to grow their brand. Why do we brand? Because we are building a brand that is ours and that will set us apart from the rest. But Jesus talked about championing the Father, and Paul build a brand not around personalities (see 1 Corinthians) but around Jesus and the cross and following Him.

These are all contrasts between consumerism and discipleship. Which are you building in the church you attend? It is worth thinking about. 

When leaders cannot be challenged

 

Leaders are stewards: The question is what are you stewarding and for whom?

 

Most would acknowledge that leaders are stewards. By definition, stewardship means that we look after the interests of someone or something else rather than ourselves. However, what we are stewarding and for whom requires some deep thinking and regular realignment because it is easy to get this wrong. We can inadvertently steward the wrong thing! This is true whether you lead a team or an organization. 

At any one time, if we are not careful, we may be stewarding (and looking after the interests of) ourselves or others and a mission. 

Leaders have the power to set agendas and focus. They also have the opportunity to look out for their interests or the interests of others. They can guard or give away authority and power. In fact, when a leader guards their authority, rather than sharing it, it is a sign that their stewardship is more about them than it is about others. 

The more autonomous a leader is in their decision-making (rather than sharing that decision-making with other competent individuals), the more their stewardship is about their interests, their ego, and their power. Often, they do not see it, but those around them do.

In all of this, ego is the enemy. Ego is about me and my interests, and to the extent that we focus on retaining our power and authority or arranging things for our interests and agenda, we are stewarding ourselves, not a mission or on behalf of an organization and its staff. 

There are four characteristics of those who are true stewards rather than faux stewards.

One: they think mission and something greater than themselves, talk about that mission, and encourage the whole organization to align their work around the accomplishment of that mission. It is not about themselves but about something greater than themselves.

Two: they lead from a place of great humility. This means that they bring others into the decision-making process, don't need to get their own way, admit when they are wrong, are non-defensive, open, and take differing opinions easily. 

Three: They share decision-making, power, and authority in appropriate ways, giving these to other competent people rather than hoarding them for themselves.

Four: They genuinely care about people around them, and their words, interactions, and actions reflect that care. Ego-driven people care about themselves, while humble leaders care about others. 

If you lead others, take a moment to reflect on this issue of stewardship and the four markers of those who are true stewards. All of us can improve, and this is an issue that leaders need to be aware of on a regular basis. 

When boards ignore the obvious, people get hurt

 

Here is a scenario that I have seen repeated too often. The board of a large church asked me for help regarding conflict between the senior leader and two other leaders who had just been fired, causing an uproar in the congregation.

I discovered that there were at least six staff members who had been fired or left the church on their own accord in the past two years. I asked the board if they (or anyone) had conducted exit interviews, and of course, the answer was no. I interviewed each of these staff members, and the story was a similar account of abuse and bullying by the senior leader. This was not a case of benign neglect of staff but of active belligerence and unkindness toward his reports. 

I asked why the board had not explored these issues, knowing that there was a pattern. They didn't have much to say. Unfortunately this is one of many instances where I have seen boards ignore the obvious because they did not want to wade into unpleasant waters or challenge their leader. 

In their lack of due diligence, they become complicit in the dysfunctional culture created by their leader and the unfortunate pain caused to staff members poorly treated. In this case, when the issues were brought to light with the congregation, the entire board resigned and new board members were elected. 

Boards have responsibilities to guard the culture and health of the organization they represent. When they don't do that in the face of obvious leadership issues, they become complicit. They contribute to the pain of others. And that disfunction spills over into the rest of the organization.

The Five Responsibilities of every Leader

 

The Practices of Leaders of Deep Influence

 

Don't allow these issues to derail your leadership

 

It is possible to have significant leadership skills and still undermine one's own leadership. This is not only a risk for young leaders but often for leaders who have seen significant success. Here are some of the ways that leaders can sabotage their leadership and even destroy it.

Ego. This should be obvious, but it isn't always! Success breeds confidence, and that confidence can cause us to overestimate our wisdom and underestimate our need for counsel. This can creep up on us over time without our realizing it until we are no longer open to the input of others, which eventually comes back to bite us.

Schedule. Good leaders are in demand. That demand can cause us to say yes too often and no too seldom. Busyness wears us down, tires our bodies and minds, and robs us of thinking time and even God. Schedule erosion eventually catches up to us in negative ways.

Entitlement. Successful leaders can start to believe that the rules don't apply to them as they apply to others. One of the ways this often plays out is in behaviors that they would not allow others to exhibit but which they feel they can. This may be carelessness in the treatment of others in words or attitudes or simply taking staff for granted. Because they have positional authority, they often get away with behaviors that they shouldn't, but by doing so, they lose the respect of their staff.

Laziness. Many leaders who saw success in one period of life lose their edge in another because they no longer feel the need to stay sharp, learn new skills, and understand the changing environment around them. This can be the result of out-of-control schedules or hubris, but whenever we stop being intentional in our own development, we begin to lose our ability to lead well.

Health. This is one I understand, and I have had to become deeply intentional about addressing my own health issues. When we don't, those issues often compromise our energy and our ability to carry out our leadership roles. In the second half of life, this is one that leaders must become more intentional about if they are going to go the distance.

Growth. Learning and development are lifelong processes. I love the comment my brother made at my father's funeral service. "He was not a perfect man, but he kept getting better."  When we lose our intentionality here, others notice, and it sabotages our leadership. This includes growth in areas like Emotional Intelligence, relational intelligence, our leadership skills. When we stop an intentional paradigm of growth, we enter a danger zone. 

Clarity. Lack of personal and leadership clarity leaves both us and our staff without focus. No matter how brilliant one is, a lack of focus creates confusion for those one leads and dissipates the energy that one expends. Life should be a journey toward ever greater clarity about what we ought to be doing (and alternatively not doing), what our priorities should be (and there should be only a few), and what the target is for our work (without which our staff will lack direction). 

Discipline. No amount of brilliance makes up for a lack of discipline in our lives. Each of these areas requires a disciplined life around key areas of personal health. 

What sabotages your leadership? It can be one of these, or it can be other things. Being sensitive to whatever it is will allow us to go the distance.

The gift of irritating questions that disrupt the conversation and current assumptions

 

Have you ever been in a team or board conversation when someone asks the kind of question that disrupts the whole dialogue? It happens when everyone is operating off one set of assumptions and one individual challenges those assumptions which brings the conversation to a standstill. These are golden moments because they force the common assumption to be examined and the disruptive and often uncomfortable question forces the group to deal with a deeper issue that underlies their conversation.

Let me give you an example. Church boards often deal with known issues without getting to the underlying causes (which would raise uncomfortable questions). It takes just one board member who is not conflict adverse to ask the deeper question as to why the issue exists! 

In one church I am familiar with, a long term pastor presided over a congregation that would go up to six or seven hundred and then fall to 300 - a cycle that was repeated fairly often in his career. The board spent a great deal of time trying to figure out how to keep this from happening until someone raised the uncomfortable question as to whether this actually had to do with the senior pastor's competency to lead at that level and his defensiveness that caused good leaders to leave the church. That question got to the table about 15 years later than it should have but it took one courageous board member to ask the disruptive question. And, it did put the issue in its proper perspective, whatever the outcome was going to be. 

Or take a discussion about "making disciples" that regularly takes place in church circles. Often the discussion goes way down the route of strategy for making disciples until someone asks the disruptive question: "Folks, we don't even have a good definition of a disciple so all this talk has no target or focus." An irritating comment that causes the discussion to go back to the beginning and ask what we are actually trying to achieve.

It is not unlike the question why? Why are we doing this? Why are we assuming that our strategy will get us to where we need to go? Why do we think this "conventional" idea is actually a good idea? How does this program or strategy get us to where we are trying to go? Is there a better way? 

Disruptive questions can be irritating but they force groups to clarify what they are after and focus on the right things rather than just the presenting issues. Usually they come from deep thinkers who are unafraid to raise the hard questions. They are a gift to any organization or board. 

Boards, teams and whole organizations get lost in group think, historical ways of looking at issues and assumptions that often no longer apply but remain the conventional wisdom. Here is something to think about. Conventional wisdom is always conventional but it is often not wisdom. It is simply the way we have done things in the past. Disruptive companies and ministries challenge those old ways and look for new ways to accomplish something different or more.

This always starts with individuals who are willing to ask the disruptive questions. Those questions challenge the current thinking and force the group to look at issues from a different angle. Many organizations, teams and boards do not realize what a gift this is to their organization but it truly is.

Introducing The Addington Method: Executive Coaching, Culture Audits and Organizational Consulting tailored for you and your organization

 

The plan is The Method, crafted uniquely for you; not a template superimposed on your organization. It is an organic and carefully guided process that clarifies what is important, creates the best possible culture, ensures staff is fully engaged and aligned with your purpose, creates measurable accountability, and encourages non-traditional thinking for non-traditional results.

Often paired with a culture audit, The Addington Method will provide unprecedented insight into what is actually happening within your organization and bring a new level of focus, clarity, alignment and accountability around what is truly important.

If you want to go to the next level personally as a leader, or as an organization, we need to talk. On the website above you can schedule a free 60 minute consult to talk about your situation. Remember, what got you to here, got you to here. It will not get you to there. That is a new and different journey and it is what we specialize in. We can design a path just for you!

Addington Consulting, now The Addington Method has helped individuals and organizations move to the next level for over two decades. The Method encapsulates our methodology of creating unique paths for each individual and organization. Lets talk and see if there is a path that would be helpful to you.

Why organizations should not leave poor leaders in place

 

I have been following the saga of a friend who works for a global company. She is very good at what she does, outperforms her peers and produces results that have cause more senior managers in the organization to take notice and cheer her on. There is one manager, however, who does not and it is her supervisor.

The MO of the supervisor is one we have all probably seen at one time or another. He loves to blame when things don't go well. He has been known to be less than honest. He has a history of berating his staff. When staff need help he often does not come through and rarely on time when he does. One can leave conversations with him feeling belittled and denigrated. My friend has experienced all of these behaviors.

Here is the interesting thing. Everyone seems to know of this individual's behaviors. Fellow staff do and warn one another. More senior staff members have indicated to my friend that they know her manager can be difficult and tell her to let them know if she needs anything, effectively telling her to work around the system when the manager misbehaves. It seems to be common knowledge that this manager does not produce, does not build team, divides rather than unifies teams, is consistently defensive and difficult to work for. Yet, no one seems to be willing to do anything about it except to acknowledge it quietly behind the scenes.

I have seen this scenario played out too often in both for profit and non-profit organizations. Even in places where the vast majority of leadership is healthy and caring. What puzzles me is that there are consequences to allowing poor managers/leaders to stay in place. Those consequences include:

• Poor morale
• People who decide to leave and work elsewhere
• Cynicism among staff
• Loss of respect for other more senior staff who know and do nothing
• The need to negotiate around the very person who is charged with serving their staff
• Division among staff who are played against one another in an atmosphere of mistrust
• Significant loss of teamwork, common mission and morale
• Loss of missionality where staff start to look out for their own interests rather than the mission of the team

The bottom line is that scenarios like this hurt everyone - the entire organization. It is a violation of the pact that organizations make with their staff and eventually it causes loss of good people and effectiveness. If your organization has examples like this, deal with it for the sake of everyone involved.

There are few things more demoralizing to staff than leaders at any level who are allowed to mistreat staff, who are not productive, and who do not live by the values of the organization. What that tells staff is that they are not important. And, that what is professed to be the culture of the organization does not really matter. It reveals a double standard between staff expectations and leadership realities. 

If the individual cannot be coached and mentored and if they are not willing to rethink and renew their behaviors, they simply do not belong with your organization. And staff will tell you that every time!

Good Friday: Things are not always what they appear

 

Things are not always what they appear to be!

One of the lessons of Good Friday is that what appears to be true is not always true. On this day, the cosmic battle between Satan and God culminated in what Satan thought was his greatest victory. That battle had been waged from the time of the fall when God made it clear that one day Satan would be defeated (Genesis 3:15). But on this day, Satan knew he had won. The Son of God is on the cross, alone, abandoned even by His Father, who didn't seem able to rescue Him. Thirty pieces of silver were all it had taken, the best deal ever in the history of evil.

The disciples knew it was over. Jesus' friends knew it was over. The religious authorities knew it was over - their problem solved, a rival gone. Not only that, but evil had won over good and righteousness for those who cared. For the followers of Christ, this was the ultimate sadness. They had expected righteousness to triumph, but instead, evil had prevailed. The one who had called Himself the Son of God, dead on a bitter cross. The dreams of a new kingdom were shattered. Hope itself in the person of Jesus. Gone.

Little did they know that what appeared to be the final chapter was only the beginning of a new chapter. Out of the jaws of apparent defeat, Christ would not only be resurrected, but in that resurrection, he sealed the fate of Satan, evil, and unrighteousness for all time and made it possible for the created to have a relationship with the creator. The apparent defeat was only the prelude to total victory! Things are not always what they appear to be. 

Not for one moment had the events of Good Friday been out of the control of the heavenly Father, even though it looked like the Father had lost all control. He is always sovereign, and nothing under His control can ever be out of control. The world learned that on Easter Sunday but on Good Friday it could not understand.

Think about your own life for a moment. Where are the areas that seem to be out of control? Where does it feel like evil has won? Where are the areas where you feel apparent defeat, discouragement, sadness, or pain? It is easy to see the Good Friday moments in our lives when it is clear that God has not acted, and we need His help. However, it is harder to wait for the resurrection moments when God shows up, as He always does, and redeems what we thought was unredeemable - often in surprising and unique ways.

I have had whole seasons of life when it seemed that the darkness prevailed over light. I remember leaving my pastorate years ago, depressed, defeated, and convinced that I had failed. I had been caught in a power struggle where the "bad guys" won, and the rest of us left the church. I was out of a job, out of hope, clinically depressed, and even, at times, suicidal. Yet out of that experience came a new journey to understand God's grace, and a new passion for helping hurting churches so that leaders could lead with greater health and less pain. What looked like Good Friday to me, where life was hard and hope was scarce, turned out to be anything but. I came out of the experience with greater faith, wisdom, and understanding. Yes, it took a while, but it happened. I now realize that what seemed out of control was always in His control, and what seemed like failure to me was part of the building blocks of future ministry.

Whatever your circumstance, you can be sure that Easter is coming and that things are not always what they appear to be. In the end, nothing that is in His control can ever be out of control. 

How do we deal with the Good Friday moments of life when life is hard and hope is scarce? Sometimes you have to borrow faith from others. When my faith is thin and fragile, I can borrow faith from someone whose faith is strong. That is why relationships are so important in the Christian family. We don’t exist alone. We need one another. When I am weak I need someone who is strong and when I am strong I can lift up the weak. Never be ashamed of needing to borrow the faith of others.

We also need to keep our relationship with Jesus current. If He is the vine and we are the branches (John 15), then we need to stay connected to the vine. There are plenty of times in life that we don’t know what God is up to and times when we are discouraged and perhaps even despair. But there is never a time when we cannot stay connected to Him, knowing that He is the source of life and hope. 

Remember in the Good Friday moments this truth: “Christ Jesus who died - more than that, who was raised to life - is at the right hand of God and is also interceding for us. Who can separate us from the love of Christ? Shall trouble or hardship or persecution or famine or nakedness or danger or sword?...No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us. For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present or the future, nor any powers, neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord." (Romans 8:34-39). 

Clearly things are not always what they appear because behind the realities that we see, there is a spiritual reality that is always present and God is always up to something. While life may seem to us to be out of control, nothing under His control can ever be out of control. That is the lesson of Good Friday. And that is true today in those areas of your life where life seems out of control.

Father, on this day the world thought that evil had prevailed. We now know that You prevailed against evil once and for all. Remind me often that life is not always what it appears and that nothing under your control can ever be out of control. Even in my life today. Amen.

When our ministries claim to be transformational but toxicity exists on their staff, we need to take note

 

There is a disconnect in many ministries that claim to be about transformation. That disconnect is that their own internal staff cultures are often toxic, dysfunctional, and highly untransformed. It is a sickness that pervades even high-profile ministries that purport to be at the forefront of leadership and transformational ministries.

I recently worked with a very large multi-ethnic church, where I also did a culture audit. The audit revealed a deeply toxic culture within the staff which spilled over to the ministry of the church in general. The church claimed to be transformational, but in reality, its claim was wishful thinking as there was little staff health. Some staff who had left in recent years would not even step back onto the campus. 

The interesting thing was that when the culture audit findings were shared with the board, there seemed to be little concern, leading me to withdraw from my consulting with them. The church was in decline, as is often the case when there is toxicity among staff. In fact, almost every one of the 70 individuals I interviewed indicated that the congregation was on the downward side of the organizational life cycle. 

If our staff cultures are not healthy, we do not have the moral ground to claim that our ministry is about transformation. There are too many places where fear and intimidation, and lack of care for staff are the norm. It usually reflects the senior leader's lack of EQ or concern for those on their staff. It is often fueled by a leader's drive to succeed or their own insecurities. Whatever the cause, it is inexcusable and sad. And not consistent with the kind of cultures that reflect the culture of Jesus.

Healthy staff cultures are marked by these kinds of characteristics.

• All are treated with dignity
• Grace is extended in all situations - even when tough issues are being dealt with
• Truth is spoken in grace
• People are developed, empowered and valued
• Candid discussion is valued
• People are in their "lane" or sweet spot
• Men and women are treated equally
• There is a high value in helping people become all they can be
• Leaders serve their staff to help them be successful
• There is clarity of roles and people are given the tools to do their jobs
• Teamwork is highly valued
• Relationships are collegial 
• Opinions are valued
• Staff find their roles fulfilling because they understand the mission they are contributing to
• There is high trust
• Fairness is practiced in all situations
• Appreciation is regularly expressed

How does your staff culture measure up, and where could you do better? Transformation starts at home, in our own ministries. As ministry leaders, our commitment to transformation starts with our own staff. Where there is transformation on staff, it will spill over into the congregation and the opposite is also true. 

Church congregational meetings are an indicator of church health

 

The first congregational meeting I attended in a church I was a member of was a disaster. A staff member had been let go, and a delegation came to defend him and skewer the church leaders. In the heat of the moment, the church chairman told someone to call the police! It went downhill from there. 

The tone, behavior, and tenor of congregational meetings say a lot about the health of the church. If dysfunction exists in the congregation, it is likely to show itself here. Because it is here that leaders either choose to be properly transparent or to hide their agendas and where the congregation has a chance to say what it wants to say in whatever way they choose to do so. Here are some markers of congregational meetings and what they say about the health of the church.

One: Leaders have the opportunity to craft public meetings, which means that they have the ability to control the agenda in ways that are either healthy or unhealthy. When leaders surprise the congregation in public meetings in large ways, they have led poorly, as this is not the place to drop something large on the congregation, and expect that they will act on it quickly. Usually, surprising the congregation in a public meeting means that the leadership did not have the will or the courage to lay the groundwork ahead of time.

Two: How transparent leaders are on issues that they can be candid about says a lot about their leadership. When they are secretive, don't answer the concerns of the congregation or will not explain issues that deserve an explanation, they are usually working from defensive, fearful, or authoritarian positions. Where there are complicated issues to discuss, such as budgets or bi-law changes, good leaders will provide venues prior to the meeting so that all concerns can be addressed. However, in either case, their willingness to listen, respond and be honest is a key indicator of their health.

Three: The attitude of the congregation in public meetings says much about the health of the body as a whole. When public charges are made in a less than loving matter, when opinions are expressed with anger or where there are personal attacks or hidden agendas behind comments and questions, it does not come from Jesus! The fruit of the Spirit in all congregational deliberations is a sign of its health and the absence of its dishealth.

Four: This is one that many leaders don't get. When they don't provide adequate communication, don't listen to their congregation, or have an agenda that the congregation does not desire to follow and does not feel right about, they will be challenged where there is an opportunity, and this is one of those opportunities. When leaders will not address the concerns of many, there will be an eruption somewhere, and it is often in this venue. While I don't condone any eruptions that don't display the fruit of the Spirit on this one, I don't blame the congregation but insensitive leaders who have not done their job well. If you frustrate the congregation long enough, it will come out at some point.

Congregations are families. When families get along, it is because they are operating out of health. When they don't get along, they are operating from dishealth.

How do you know if your meetings are healthy? Ask yourself if you want to go to them. If you have anxiety over them or feel the tension in the room, there is dysfunction afoot. Leaders, especially, ought to be aware of those tensions and do what they need to do in order to lead well.

The Taxonomy of Knowing: What you know, don't know, don't know that you know and don't know that you don't know. By Edumund Chan

 In response to “stewarding knowledge capital”, I was recently asked about Donald Rumsfeld’s “Knowns and Unknowns”, formatted in a paradigm somewhat akin in orientation to Johari’s Window.

While the paradigm is helpful, we must nonetheless humbly recognize that the taxonomy of KNOWING is far more complex in the real world of learning and discovery.

The whole point is to be a lifelong learner, which involves discovery, learning, and growth in community.

Let’s begin with something simple and familiar. There are four basic quadrants of KNOWING -

What I know I know.
What I know I don’t know.
What I don’t know I know.
What I don’t know I don’t know.

But the taxonomy of KNOWING is complex. At least, it’s not as simple as we think!

For KNOWING is not a solitary act. It’s a communal, interactive discovery.

So, we have to move from the individualistic cognition (the “I know” and the “I don’t know”) to add another marker towards a communal cognition (the “you know” and the “you don’t know”).

And with this, the communal experience of you and I KNOWING gets interesting (and mind-blogging!)

Consider this. There are some things I know that I know. And if you know me, you’ll probably know that I know (and that I know that I know).

Likewise, there are some things that you know you know; and if I know you, I would also know that you know (and that you know that you know).

But it doesn’t stop there!

In many other things, I know I don’t know, and you know that I don’t know (and that I know that I don’t know). And likewise, there are some things you know that you don’t know, and I would know that you don’t know (and that you know that you don’t know).

But it gets a little more complicated - when I don’t know that I don’t know, and you know that I don’t know that I don’t know. Or, in reverse, you don’t know that you don’t know; and I know that you don’t know that you don’t know.

Or, it might be another aspect of cognitive dissonance where I don’t know that I know, and you know that I don’t know that I know. Or maybe, it’s the other way around. You don’t know that you know, and I know that you don’t know that you know.

Or, the case might be that I know I know, but you don’t know that I know; or conversely, you know you know, but I don’t know you know.

Add another permutation. I know I don’t know, but you don’t know that I don’t know (or that I know that I don’t know). Or conversely, you know that you don’t know, but I don’t know that you don’t know (or that you know that you don’t know)!

Now it also gets complicated when I don’t know I know, and you don’t know that I don’t know I know. Or perhaps the case might be that you don’t know that you know, and I don’t know that you don’t know that you know, right?

Then again, it might be that I don’t know that I don’t know, and you don’t know that I don’t know that I don’t know. Or conversely, you don’t know that you don’t know, and I don’t know that you don’t know that you don’t know!!!

But hey, there’s MORE!

Till now, these mind-stretching permutations revolves only around “you” and “I” - it would become even more challenging when we include a ‘THEY’!

For what’s more complex is when I don’t know I don’t know that I don’t know, and you don’t know that I don’t even know that I don’t know that I don’t know; and you likewise don’t know that you don’t know you don’t know, and I don’t know that you don’t know that you don’t know - but THEY KNOW that WE DON’T KNOW!!!

Put simply, I don’t know, and you also don’t know, that WE don’t know we don’t know that we don’t know - but THEY KNOW!

*BUT what if THEY don’t know, YOU KNOW??!!!*

Hey, I better stop here. Who knows WHO knows?!! Except GOD KNOWS!

If you don’t get the above, it’s alright. Get this. My fundamental view is that the taxonomy of KNOWING is complex. And so, we ought to be life-long learners in a community of life-long learners. To keep on learning, discovering and growing!

Have a blessed pilgrimage ahead!

Ten Dysfunctions of Church Governance Boards

 

I want to say this gently but straightforwardly! There is a leadership crisis in the church as it relates to who we put in leadership, whether we call them councils, boards, elders, deacons, or simply the leadership boards. This crisis is responsible for many of the dysfunctions in local churches. Leadership at this level matters a lot. 

Having served for years as a pastor, board member, or board chair, I know it is difficult. That being said, it is vital to the church's health that we have healthy boards. There is much that I could say - my book High Impact Church Boards is an accessible and readable book for boards. But for now, let's look at the top dysfunctions of church governance boards.

Not guarding the gate to leadership.
It takes only one or two wrong board members to sabotage the health of a board. See my blog, Eight kinds of people who should not serve on a church board. This means that how we select leaders for church leadership matters a lot. There are actual implicit and explicit qualifications spelled out in Scripture that must be considered. Most churches do not have a safe and effective way of choosing church leaders, which hurts the board and the church. See The profile of an effective church leader.

Allowing elephants to exist in the boardroom.
Elephants are the issues everyone knows are there, but no one will name them. They are dangerous precisely because the board is unable to talk about them. And they are issues that usually matter. Dysfunctional boards allow elephants to exist that healthy boards do not, and those issues are generally issues that cause harm to the ministry and church body. Periodically, I recommend asking the board if any unspoken elephants need to be named. Once named, elephants are simply issues to be discussed.

Allowing known issues to fester way too long.
There needs to be more courage on many boards. Either we don't talk about known issues (elephants), or we talk about them but only resolve them once they finally become significant issues that must be dealt with. Passive boards that avoid conflict lead passive churches that will do the same. Peter makes it clear in 2 Peter 5 that church leadership is not easy or for the faint of heart. Many boards don't deal with known issues until that issue has caused a lot of damage in the church. Here is a principle. It is relatively easy to deal with an issue straightforwardly when it appears. When you allow it to fester for years, it is far messier to clean up.

Substituting business for the spiritual work of leadership.
Boards must do business, but it is not their only work. It is spelled out in the New Testament as keeping the spiritual temperature high, ensuring that the congregation is taught, cared for, developed, and released into meaningful ministry, protected, and led well. Most boards I work with have allowed prayer to become a perfunctory way to start and end board meetings rather than a central priority of seeking out the heart of God. Boards devoid of significant spiritual life will lead churches of the same nature.

Not doing due diligence on issues.
I have seen associate pastors fired with no questions from a board on the word of the senior pastor when even a cursory conversation with the affected party would have indicated that what they were hearing was highly skewed and inaccurate. I once interviewed all staff who had left a church over 12 months, and they all had the same story of abuse and unfair treatment by the senior leader, yet no one on the board had ever asked and were living in denial. Where there are patterns, pay attention, ask questions, and verify. I have often encountered boards that knew something was happening but chose not to inquire. In the meantime, people were severely hurt.

Not asking the hard questions.

Board members tend to avoid questions that might create conflict or create embarrassment for the senior leader. A good board meeting is seen as one where there is harmony and the avoidance of controversy. This is sad because it is in the hard questions that we get to the heart of existing issues or ensure that we cover our bases in the ministry. In fact, the very best board members are willing to ask the most challenging questions for the sake of the ministry. Hard questions create the dialogue necessary for a church to improve and get better. 

The inability to police their own members.
I am regularly fascinated by the fact that board members want congregants to "behave" and will even sometimes "bully" them into doing so but are unable and unwilling to police their own behaviors. That is a huge disconnect. I tell boards they operate without a board covenant at their own risk. In some congregations I have worked with, the congregation's behavior surpassed that of their presumptive spiritual leaders. 

Lack of a plan, intentionality, and accountability for results.
Part of the biblical mandate of leaders is to lead. Yet many boards cannot articulate where the church is going and why. That is clearly not leadership but rather babysitting the status quo. Where there is a plan, there is often no intentionality about pursuing it, and few church boards hold staff accountable for real ministry results but simply spiritualize the issue (the Holy Spirit is responsible for results). There is a reason some churches see more results than others: they have a  plan, are intentional about the plan, and regularly evaluate how they are doing.

Misusing the authority of a leader.
Some church leaders are frankly bullies and full of themselves because of their title. Most of us have met one. Of course, this goes back to the need to guard the gate on the front end so that people with agendas or a lack of humility don't get into leadership. The predominant job of church leaders is to serve God's people in the spirit that Jesus served people during his life on earth. It is about service more than position, example more than pronouncements, living the Jesus life and pursuing His agenda rather than our personal agendas. I encounter too many leaders who throw their weight around rather than serve.

Passivity

This is the most common dysfunction of boards I have worked with. These are boards that, in the face of apparent issues to any outsider looking in, have ignored the obvious for years. They have simply been passive in the face of issues that need attention. I have often wondered why otherwise brilliant individuals choose to park their thinking at the door of a church boardroom. Is it because they don't feel qualified to deal with spiritual issues? Is it because challenging their pastoral leader messes with "God's anointed?" Or is it simply that we are a culture of "nice," and dealing with issues threatens that culture? As a consultant, the issues often seem so obvious that I have to ask why they have been ignored. Passivity is not leadership and is a sin of many church boards.

Five ways we can create conflict when trying to avoid it

 

It is ironic, but there are many ways to seek to avoid conflict that actually creates it. Think about this:

One: When we try to please others by not telling them what we really think in an attempt to keep the peace, we often unintentionally create a later conflict since our words do not match our true thoughts. Our true convictions come out at some point, and the lack of honesty on the front end creates conflict on the back end.

Two: When we tell one person one thing and another a different thing in order to keep the peace, we eventually create conflict because the two versions don't match up. One of the signs of good EQ is the ability to be defined by what we believe, no matter what the response might be. And to stay in a relationship with those who might disagree with us at the same time. 

Three: When we simply avoid the issues and pretend that they are not there, the end result is far deeper conflict than we could have wished for. Sweeping issues under the rug only leave them for another day when the number of undressed issues is now larger and the potential conflict equally larger. Church boards are often guilty of this. The thinking is that "If we ignore the issues, they will go away." They don't go away. In fact, they get worse, and when you finally do confront them, they are now larger issues than they were.

Four: When we engage in passive-aggressive behavior, hiding our true thoughts and allowing them to emerge in other ways creates even greater conflict because it is disingenuous. This strategy is all too common, and it creates relational chaos since one thing is said, but another thing is lived out. 

Five: When we lie about the conflict or issues that are causing division to get our way, we create larger issues in the future when the truth comes out. This tactic is not uncommon if one wants to create sympathy for their own point of view. However, eventually, truth prevails, and at that point, we now lose our own credibility.

There are many ways to create conflict by avoiding it. There is no upside to not putting issues on the table. We may think there is, but our strategies to avoid conflict actually make even deeper conflict inevitable. Boards and staff teams are guilty of this all the time, and it does not yield healthy results.

Characteristics of Gracious Leaders

 

I love meeting gracious leaders. There is a quality that endears them to insiders and outsiders alike. Moreover, they possess essential characteristics that all leaders can emulate and learn from. Here are some of the most important.

When they are with you, they focus on the conversation rather than thinking about other things. Being present in the moment when with others is a discipline that says, "You are important," and "I am interested in what you are saying." Too many leaders do not allow themselves to be fully present but are obviously thinking about other things.

Gracious leaders like to listen and ask questions. In other words, they focus outwardly on others rather than inwardly on themselves. As a result, they engage in your life, your ministry, your family, and you!

Gracious leaders are generous in their praise, thanks, and appreciation and sparing in criticism. When they need to press into an issue, they do it gently and clearly, but you always get the sense that they care about you and want you to succeed.

They don't hold grudges and have short memories of adverse events in the past. Gracious leaders have a way of focusing on the positive while not ignoring the negative. They keep short accounts, let you know what they think even when course corrections are needed, and then move on.

The language of gracious leaders is uplifting, encouraging, and life-giving. That last quality is critical. Think about those you interact with that discourage or drain you. Gracious leaders are the opposite. After interactions with them, you are filled and encouraged because gracious leaders are life givers rather than life takers. You want to be around them as a result.

Gracious leaders may be busy, but they are never too busy to take the time to stop, acknowledge others, and interact with them. As a result, they give the impression that their staff and constituency are supremely important and do so because it is genuinely true as outward-focused individuals.

Gracious leaders can be generous with others because they are comfortable in their own skin and at home with themselves. In other words, they have paid attention to their own hearts and inner lives, and as a result, that healthy inner life spills out into their relationships with others. Their graciousness is a discipline (how I treat others) and a habit (because they are internally healthy). 

In many ways, the Fruit of the Spirit encompasses the character of a gracious leader. It is a worthwhile exercise for leaders to regularly ask themselves if their relationships are characterized by the fruit of love, joy, patience, kindness, goodness, gentleness, and self-control. The more we focus on these and develop our inner lives around them, the more gracious we will become.