Supervising people with low EQ

Healthy EQ is one of the most important factors in healthy staff, teams and interactions with others in a ministry setting (or otherwise). What does one do when a staff member has poor EQ which inevitably makes supervision more difficult and other relationships problematic?

First, admit the issue exists and needs to be resolved. This may seem  like common sense but the reality is that in the name of Christian "nice" and "grace" we often overlook real issues that have real consequences to people around those whose EQ is problematic. Don't ignore it! It does them no favors, nor those who are impacted by the EQ issues.

Second, have the courage to sit down with offenders and be absolutely honest with them as to how their behaviors are negatively impacting others. This requires a supervisor to be completely candid and honest (nuances are not a specialty of those with EQ issues) and  be clear about how they are impacting others. To be sure they are hearing you, ask them to reflect back to you what they are hearing. Don't sugar coat the issues: they are real and they are impacting others around them.

Third, be clear as to what is acceptable in your organization and what is not. Some behaviors are not acceptable, allowed, or OK because of their negative impact. They need to know this. Provide coaching to them on alternative ways of dealing with situations where they are likely to get themselves into trouble. What they need to hear is your resolve that the issues need to be addressed.

Fourth, if necessary, get a low EQ staff member professional help - coaching or psychological help. In my experience, about half of those who have serious issues can be helped and the other half cannot be because of their own emotional defenses. If necessary, place them on a documented improvement plan to force the issue. 

Fifth, if you cannot help them and if their behaviors are negatively impacting others, either find a role where their presence is not as problematic because they are isolated or be willing to help transition them out of the organization. Remember that it is not just you as a supervisor that pays the price of their issues but those around them who are impacted. The leader and the organization actually lose points with staff when they don't deal with those staff members who negatively impact others.

The bottom line is that you cannot ignore EQ issues. 

Reflections on Emotional Intelligence

Ministry organizations pay far too little attention to the issue of Emotional Intelligence (EQ). When we hire we look at competency and character and fit with our organization. But, we often gloss over the individual's EQ and if the EQ is not good we pay a price for neglecting this issue.

In most ministry settings the single greatest cause of conflict revolves around poor EQ causing relational issues, bad feelings, disempowerment and lack of health.

Emotional Intelligence, often labeled EQ, is the ability to understand ourselves, know what drives us, accurately see who how we are perceived by others, and know how we relate to others. EQ also measures whether we have the relational skill to work synergistically with others while being 'self defining' and allowing others to speak into our lives or work without defensiveness.

Signs of poor EQ include the inability to listen to others, personal defensiveness, unawareness of how we come across to others, lack of sensitivity to the feelings of others, inability to constructively deal with conflict, a need to control others, narcissism, and the need to have our own way.

Good EQ includes openness to the opinions of others, lack of defensiveness, awareness of who we are and how others perceive us, sensitivity to others, the ability to release others rather than control them, allow for constructive and robust dialogue, and the ability to abide by common decisions.

It is possible for someone to have great competence but to have low EQ and leave relational havoc in their wake. Don't put them on your team. In fact, if they cannot be helped to become healthy, they probably should not be an employee of your ministry because no matter how competent they are, the damage they cause relationally in and outside the organization is too high. The alternative is to put them in a spot where they will do the least damage to others.

One of the sins of ministry organizations is that under the guise of 'grace' or 'being nice' we are not honest with people who have EQ issues. We don't tell them when their style hurts others or causes relational chaos. Then having not been honest, we finally get fed up and let them go. That is not helpful nor fair.

The first step in helping people develop better EQ is to sit down with them and honestly share how the behaviors that are problematic cause problems and to suggest ways that they can modify their behavior to minimize the negative fallout. Many times in our organization we will ask people to see a psychologist when there are significant issues to try to bring change. Where change is not forthcoming we will take action to help them find another organization to work for. The alternative is to compromise the health of the team they are on and the missional effectiveness of the ministry.

Good EQ for leaders is especially important. Leaders with poor EQ often control others, micro-manage, are threatened by people who are more competent than themselves, do not foster robust dialogue and consequently are unable to develop healthy teams. The fallout on the team are issues that people don't dare discuss, mistrust, silo mentalities, frustration of team members and lack of cooperation.

Two excellent articles on Emotional Intelligence are Leadership that Gets Results, Daniel Goleman, Harvard Business Review, March-April 2000, reprint number R00204 and What Makes a Leader, Daniel Goleman, Harvard Business Review, January 2004, Reprint number R0401H

Unhealthy avoidance techniques

There is a common methodology for avoiding accountability for our shadow side and that is to become a professional critic of others. All of us have encountered these folks at one time or another – or done the same thing ourselves. They are quick to criticize and distrust, are always questioning motives of others (without doing their homework to validate their distrust), love to become enmeshed with others who are also critics (nothing like another critic to verify our version of reality), love to take on the offenses of others (even when they don’t have the facts and it does not pertain to them) and live in a circle of other unhealthy, distrustful, critical individuals. And yes, there are plenty of these in the church and Christian organizations. They will twist motives, conversations or actions to match their view of reality.


What is really going on behind this behavior is often the justification of their own behavior so that in the critical assessment of others they do not need to do critical assessment of their own shadow side. It is frankly a convenient way to ignore personal issues by focusing on the issues of others. Because everyone has a shadow side, it is not hard to pick it out in others and professional critics will quickly tell other their faults but are unaware or unwilling to deal with their own shadow side. Often the glue that holds their friendships together is not a common mission but a common enemy – someone out there that they can focus their unhappiness, anger or personal unresolved issues on – and it is often a leader because they are visible.

Not only are these unhealthy individuals but they form pockets of unhealthy individuals since they find others who will validate their view of reality and can deeply hurt organizations through their closed circle of opinions and criticisms.

All of us have strengths and all of us have liabilities that come with those strengths. There are many ways of coping with our own shadow side. One is to face it and seek to deal with it – and it is a life-long practice. The other is to do what many do and mask it, ignore it, spiritualize it or focus on the shadow side of others rather than their own. People of deep influence never mask or ignore. They realize that they are people who have a lower nature and that the process of spiritual transformation is that of exegeting ourselves so that we bring all of our lives under the Lordship of Christ, especially the shadow side which represents more than anything else the residual of that lower nature.

Often, we resist pressing into our shadow side because we are ashamed that we even struggle with one. This is a misunderstanding of God’s work in our lives. Every one of us is a work in progress, every one of us lives with the liabilities of being human and therefore imperfect and limited in our understanding of ourselves and those around us. Paul understood this when he said in Philippians 3:16, “Let us live up to what we have already attained.” God does not expect perfection, simply obedience to where he has brought us at this point in our lives.

Furthermore, humble individuals are transparent about their strengths and weakness, their areas of struggle and their liabilities. Those who pretend they have it all together fool themselves but not those around them. Our influence is not gained by pretending to be something we are not but by transparency in our walk with God and the issues we face in our lives. People of deep influence don’t hide who they are or the struggles they have. In fact, it is precisely because they are honest about their own struggles that we can identify with them and it is their commitment to live with authenticity that draws us to them.

All of T.J. Addington's books including his latest, Deep Influence,  are available from the author for the lowest prices and a $2.00 per book discount on orders of ten or more.

Success, resentment and criticism

It is an interesting phenomenon but it reveals something about our own hearts. The greater one's success in ministry the more criticism they receive and the more cynicism about their ministry. This criticism and cynicism says nothing about the one they are directed against. It says a lot about those who display the attitude.

I have had many conversations with pastors about large churches in their area. It seems as if there is a rule that we need to find something negative about them because they are large and influential. Sure there are times when we ought to have concerns (health and wealth teaching, legalism or teaching that is not Biblical). That I understand. But often, the real issue is our resentment at their success and a need to lower their standing in order to increase ours.

Here is an interesting question. Is it even necessary to speak negatively of other ministries? Usually not...and if we do what is our true motivation? Even Paul had strong detractors - those who didn't like his influence. If Paul did, it is inevitable that others will too. 

No leaders are perfect and none above criticism for some issues. But neither are we. They simply have more attention focused on them because they happen to lead a large ministry. In most cases they did not ask for the attention and may even resent it but it is what it is. Why should we follow the crowd in throwing stones? It was Paul's advice to use words that build up rather than tear down.

The bottom line is that our tendency to criticize those who are successful is most often a reflection of our hearts, our issues, our resentments and our desires rather than the success of others. If we are going to criticize we need first to look inside and ask what in our hearts creates that need.

Overcoming defensive attitudes

Defensiveness among leaders can have a devastating impact on our ability to lead. Defensive leaders end up hurting themselves because their defensiveness prevents people from telling them the truth and if you don’t know the truth about what others think it is very difficult to lead. I would rather know facts I don’t like than not know them at all.

The root of defensiveness is personal insecurity. The logic goes something like this: “If I am wrong, then I am not a good leader so I cannot be wrong. If I cannot afford to be wrong I will push back on those who think another path is a better one.”

Ironically, in adopting a defensive posture, leaders actually lose credibility with others even though they feel they have preserved it by defending their position. Defensive leaders live with the allusion that they know what people think when in reality their defensiveness leaves them clueless and deeply vulnerable as a result.

When leaders are defensive those they lead talk about them to one another rather to them. It may not be healthy but they have trained their team not to address certain issues. Team members are smart enough to know what opinions they are allowed to share and where they need to keep silent.

The cost of defensiveness is not only that of not knowing what others think but a great loss of intellectual capital. It is in multiple counselors and robust dialogue that we come to the best strategy. In addition, it is in the process of that dialogue that we come to a shared ownership of the strategy. But this requires the ability to engage in honest and forthright dialogue. To the extent that a leader is insecure and defensive, that dialogue will not take place. As Lencioni points out in The Five Dysfunctions of a Team, dialogue builds trust while the lack of it generates mistrust.

Over the years I have adopted a principle that I seek to live by: Nothing to prove, nothing to lose. I only need to be right if I have something to prove. If I have nothing to prove I no longer need to be right. Further, I only have something to lose if I’m trying to prove something. If I have nothing to prove, then by definition I have nothing to lose. If leaders understood and lived this principle they would not live with the huge amount of anxiety they live with – anxiety caused by the need to be right – and therefore be a “great leader.”

With an attitude of nothing to prove, nothing to lose, I remind myself when others push back or even attack (it does happen to all leaders) that it is OK. I no longer need to be right, nor do I fear being proved wrong (all of us are at times). I can just be me with great openness to the opinions of others. I do not need to agree with others but I don’t need be defensive with others. In fact, it is through a non defensive attitude that I get the very best thoughts from those on my team and in the organization I lead. It is only through a non defensive attitude that we get the very best intellectual capital and best tackle the problems and opportunities we face.

Insecure leaders

Insecure leaders harm relationships which has a ripple affect down through the ministry. Thus the question becomes, can we increase our EQ (Emotional Intelligence) so that we grow and maintain healthy relationships and don't cause the relational chaos that so often occurs with insecure leaders.

Most people can grow in this area but it can take practice. Here are some suggestions.

Practice an open attitude toward those who criticize or suggest alternate options. You may not feel like having an open attitude but this can be learned. The key to being perceived as open (even if you don't feel like it) is to not react defensively or verbally to those who may disagree but rather to default to questions like, "help me understand," or "unpack that for me." What we are doing is communicating that we are open to dialogue rather than simply being closed.

Dialogue with those who would take an alternate route is one of the most important practices of anyone who has healthy EQ. Closed people tell, declare or clam up while open people dialogue, ask clarifying questions and keep the conversation going.

Dialogue should be combined with the practice of "thinking grey." When thinking grey we are open to options, opinions, opportunities and have not made up our minds. Insecure leaders don't think grey, they need their way or need to be seen to have an answer. Secure leaders are open to all input before they make up their minds.

Thinking grey allows one to learn the art of compromise. Here is the deal. None of us are all wise or right all the time. There is a reason that when God designed church leadership He designed it as a team of overseers or elders. Compromise is not a negative word. We don't compromise on moral issues but we learn to be flexible on other issues. Healthy leaders are flexible, they listen and they don't die on hills that they don't need to die on.

Flexibility is really about humility. Pride says, I must have my way. Humility says, it is not about me but about us. The longer I lead the more I realize that there is a whole lot I don't know and humility means that I am willing to bring others into decisions I make - especially those who might not agree with me. It is easy to be "humble" with those who agree with us - not so easy with those who look at ministry differently.

One can see how these practices build relationship where the alternative destroys relationships. Good practices in relationships build while poor practices destroy. How are you doing?

Managing our strengths and liabilities

Because many individuals have not understood that their greatest assets (strengths) can also be their greatest liabilities, they simply don’t pay the kind of attention to the downside of their strengths that they need to if they are truly going to have significant influence. However, people of deep influence are acutely aware of both their strengths and the liabilities of those strengths. And they pay as much or more attention to the liabilities as they do to the strength.


Think about this: our strengths are just that – strengths. Over time, if we are living in our sweet spot they grow and develop without a whole lot of attention from us. God wired us with those strengths so they are natural. I have the ability and strength to think strategically. I can envision what can be in five or ten years without even thinking about it. What is hard or impossible for others is easy and second nature for me in thinking strategically.

The liabilities that comes with that particular gift, however are not as obvious to me: impatience with those who don’t see what I can see, the potential that others may see my confidence about what direction to take as arrogance.

I will never forget a meeting I had years ago with a bright young woman who reported to me. She came into my office to share an idea with me that she thought had great potential. About two minutes into our conversation her eyes flashed with anger and she said, “Don’t ever look that way at me again?” I said, “What do you mean? What way?” She said, “I can tell from your eyes that you have already dismissed my idea as one that won’t work!” She was right, my eyes had given it away and in the process my strategic strength (in this case I was sure it would not work) had become my liability by sending her a message of disempowerment. It was a learning moment that I had to apologize for and learn from.

Our strengths come naturally. The liabilities to our strengths are not obvious to us unless we spend significant time understanding the liabilities and the ways our strengths can hurt us and others if the liabilities are not managed.

Further, people of deep influence do not become that by focusing on the deficits of others but on their own deficits primarily. They are deeply aware of who they are, they think deeply about their own motivations and how they treat others. They have developed an inner early warning system that warns them when they are going to the shadow side and they discipline themselves to manage their liabilities. They understand the council of Christ that we are first responsible for taking the log out of our own eye before we try to take the splinter out of someone else’s eye.

Every one of us has areas in our lives where we are blind to how our actions impact others. A large part of managing our shadow side is understanding not only how we perceive ourselves but how other perceive us and why they perceive us the way they do. However, because we are dealing with “blind spots” the only way we can get to this awareness is by receiving feedback from others. And that requires self confidence, humility and a nothing to prove, nothing to lose attitude. This is why many young leaders resist such feedback, it is threatening and uncomfortable. I know, I have been there!

One of the most valuable lessons I have learned over the years is to welcome and not resist feedback – particularly from those who I know love me and have my best interests in mind. My wife, Mary Ann is one of those who will always tell me the truth and I know she does it out of love and concern. I have a trusted group of colleagues and friends who have the same right to speak into my life and whose council I trust. I would rather know than not know where I have blind spots or am being misperceived because of actions or words than live like the emperor who had no clothes, oblivious to his nakedness. The key, of course, is knowing who one can trust to have one’s best interests in mind. Another one of those groups is my prayer team who regularly share with me feedback that they have as they have interceded on my behalf.

I have also learned to ask feedback from those I trust rather than just hope it will come. I know, for instance, that I can be perceived as distant by some. It is not how I feel but it can be how I am perceived. I would not know that unless I had received feedback that helped me see what I could not see. Knowing that such a perception is possible, I can work to find ways to connect with those who otherwise might see me as distant.

I have learned that the more candid I am about who I am and the struggles I face, the more approachable I become. This has led me to be far more self disclosing with those around me than I was as a young leader when I thought that such self disclosure could be seen as weakness. It also comes out of a nothing to prove, nothing to lose attitude by which I seek to live today. While I may not be wired like some who are deeply relational, the connection that comes through authentic self disclosure is a powerful connection and invites relationship with others.

My point is that the more we learn about ourselves both from our own awareness and from those around us who care about us, the better we become at playing to our strengths and minimizing our liabilities. There are many things I wish I knew years ago but did not. I am simply thankful that I know them now. And, I want to continue in my quest for healthy self awareness for the sake of the influence that I can and want to have in the future.

Passive aggressive behavior is a prime form of dishonesty

Passive aggressive behavior is something all of us should be conscious of and ensure that we don't engage in it. Unfortunately it is all too common and is in my view a prime form of dishonesty.

It is dishonesty because the one engaging in this behavior says one thing to your face - usually indicating assent and agreement or cordiality while in reality they don't mean it. And, to others they may express just the opposite or simply do exactly what they indicated to you they would not do. That is dishonesty. It is also cowardice because they are unwilling to simply tell yo that they don't agree - which could lead to a constructive dialogue and some level of understanding. Instead they essentially lie about what they actually feel and undermine you behind your back.

What is crazy making about passive aggressive behavior is that it is duplicity but a duplicity that is very hard to address because the problematic behaviors are engaged in with others or when you are not present. This is particularly sad among Christians in ministry whose yes should be yes and whose no should be no. It is no less dishonesty than stealing from one's employer or lying on one's tax return. It is dishonest - period.

It may take courage but stating one's position openly and honestly (hopefully with diplomacy) is critical to healthy relationships. The ability to state what one thinks even when it goes against the grain is a sign of healthy EQ. At least at that point there is the possibility of a discussion even if agreement cannot be reached. Not stating it and acting passive aggressively leaves no room for discussion but creates chaos in relationships which is what dishonesty by definition does. The irony is that after a season, the fact that one does not agree (even if one will not admit it) becomes evident in their behaviors.

As a leader I respect those who state their opinions diplomatically even when they disagree with mine. I have no respect for those who lie to me and then engage in passive aggressive behaviors. It is not honest and it is duplicitous. 

When Christian leaders get angry

Few things are more destructive to God's work than angry Christian leaders. First, when God's leaders get angry, they often lose all the grace, wisdom and principles they have taught for decades.

I remember one such angry leader when he realized that he had lost the confidence of the board of his church, blew up and threatened not to leave (he had a zero confidence vote) and said he was willing to see the church of 500 go down to 150 if necessary - with him there. This from someone who had taught in that congregation Biblical principles for over a decade. Everyone around him is shaking their heads (except those he roped into his cause) wondering what snapped in his thinking to even consider such a scenario.

The same can be said for pastors who get into conflict in their churches and choose to plant another church in the community knowing full well that they will split the church they are leaving. Somehow the "ill treatment" they experienced gives them the rationale for now splitting the Bride of Christ and believing it is OK. It is as if a key spiritual discernment fuse blew in his anger and what would have been wrong a year ago is now not only right but the spiritual thing to do. Contrast this with the response of Jesus when he was treated unfairly!

I heard recently of a leader who has left his large church after a disagreement with his leaders - he didn't want to be under their authority anymore - who is telling folks that he is going to start a rival church in town and take a large portion of those who were in his prior church. If one of his own leaders had suggested such a thing in  the past this leader would have immediately put them under church discipline but somehow in his "righteous" anger he is now willing to violate everything he had said was wrong previously - and spiritualize and justify it.

Anger in spiritual leaders can easily lead to irrational, sinful, destructive behaviors where spiritual discernment and wisdom are thrown off and behaviors they once considered abhorrent are now OK for them. Frankly it is scary to watch. It is like watching King Saul implode after he chose to go his own way rather than follow God in the Old Testament. I have recently watched such an implosion and watched a friend who for years exhibited spiritual discernment go in the absolute opposite direction like one making a right turn. It makes me wary of my own spiritual health and the need to stay current with God and not allow my own flesh to decide the rules no longer apply to me.

One other observation. When this happens it seems that spiritual leaders have stopped listening to those who gave them wise counsel in the past and now only listen to those who fuel their new irrational behaviors. It is scary to watch because it could be any one of us in Christian leadership who choose to walk down an angry and self righteous path. A path that the evil one seems to use to destroy much of the good that they had accomplished in the past.

Supervisors and staff: Maintaining appropriate boundaries

Leaders have an interesting dilemma when it comes to how close or distant they are socially from those they lead. It is often something that they don't think much about but it has important ramifications for how they relate to others.

There is a difference in the relationship between peers and those one leads. This is obvious when a leader is promoted from within and goes from peer to supervisor. Everyone knows that something has changed and that the relationship is different.

It is different because now one who was a peer is leading those he or she was a peer with. Now instead of relating as peers, they are asking hard questions and holding others accountable for results. Often the transition is not easy. I remember one such transition myself where I was now supervising former peers and some of them never adjusted to it.

The issue of social distance can be framed this way: How close or distant do I position myself as a leader from those I lead, knowing that while we have a collegial relationship it is not by nature a peer relationship?

Some leaders try so hard to be best buds with those they lead that they lose their ability to speak into the lives, ministries, or strategies of their team because that is not the function of being best buds. In other words, in their attempt to be "one of the boys or girls" they lose their ability and authority to lead well. It is a leadership error.

Other leaders are so intent on their leadership role that they become distant and unapproachable from those they lead. Another leadership error because the human element is lost to the leadership role.

Social distance for a leader really depends on the situation. The best leaders are highly personable on a personal level. They care about families and kids and the personal issues of life and easily engage in discussions that deal with the human issues we all face. On that level, the relationship feels like a relationship of peers.

On the other hand, when leading the team, or pressing into a work related issue, they put on the hat of leader and can move into a collegial but clearly a leadership role where they are not afraid to give direct feedback, deal with a difficult issue or press into the work of those they supervise. In this role they are clearly not peers and need to be taken seriously by those they lead.

The most complicated relationships are those where a former peer was also a close friend. Now, there is both a friendship and a supervisory capacity that must be negotiated. In some settings they remain defined by the friendship but in the leadership setting it is the supervisory role that must be realized and acknowledged by both parties.

Wise leaders are both friends and leaders and they understand when it is appropriate for the social distance to be close and when it must be more distant. When social distance is too close it is difficult or impossible to lead. When it is too distant it is difficult to be seen as a leader who cares. Good leaders can and do switch from close to farther depending on the situation. They are collegial and human but also leaders and supervisors. If you are a leader, think about how you negotiate social distance with those you lead.

Leaders can be friends, colleagues and supervisors. They regulate the social distance depending on the situation so that they lead well. But they will never just be "one of the boys or girls."

Pretense, the enemy of authenticity

The enemy of authenticity is pretense, pretending to be what we are not! It is nothing less than dishonesty which compromises our personal integrity and causes us to live with personal dissonance. 

This was the problem with the Pharisees in Jesus' day. They worked hard to "look and play the part," but that is exactly what they were, actors, playing the part, rather than authentic people of God. It is interesting to me that the only people Jesus was "hard on" were the Pharisees. He hated their hypocrisy.

There are many practices that believers are "supposed" to follow. The "rules" that govern how we live, act, talk and behave. Often we are no different from the Pharisees. We play the part even though it does not reflect the real us. And many of the rules have nothing to do with God but are as man made as those of the Pharisees.

Authenticity is one of the greatest gifts that leaders can give their teams. Authentic men and women have problems, experience spiritual highs and lows, make mistakes, need to ask forgiveness, and don't need to pretend that something is not what it really is. What you see is what you get. People can relate to that because that is real life. People cannot relate to perfection (and of course that is a lie anyway).

Authentic people don't do appearances for appearance sake. Jesus certainly didn't. In fact, he went out of his way to tweak the minds of the Pharisees by breaking stupid man made rules. Authenticity is not about legalism or "keeping the rules." It is about being serious about our followership of Christ in a real way, caring about the important matters of the heart and living in the transformational power of the Holy Spirit - the opposite of trying to keep up appearances.

Authenticity is about living honestly. Being honest with ourselves about our followership and where we come up short and honest with others. If there is one thing that turns off non-Christ followers, I think it is the lack of transparency and honesty among those who tell them that they ought to follow as well. People see through pretense.

Pretense actually breeds legalism and more pretense  After all, if my role model is someone who pretends to have it all together, I may well decide that I need to pretend to have it all together as well. And keep the silly rules that accompany such pretense.  Pretense is a prison because it is not real, cannot be sustained and requires way too much effort to keep up the pretense.

Authenticity on the other hand is freedom. What you see is what you get and I don't need to spend energy trying to look like something I am not. Funny thing is that the only people who get ticked off with authenticity are those who are putting up a pretense themselves. Authenticity puts a lie to their lack of authenticity, hiding behind legalism and false spirituality. Jesus was the greatest threat to the Pharisees - and they knew it which is why they had it in for Him.

Here is an interesting question: where in my life do I feel a need to pretend I am something I am not? Why do I have that need? Something to ponder as we live out our faith.

Job competency and emotional competency: which is more important?

Here is an interesting question: What makes a person competent in their job? For many of us the first answer would be that they "do their job well" referring to their professional ability. I believe, however, that professional competency is only part of the equation and that relational and emotional intelligence is just as important as professional skill.

Take a top rate accountant for instance. They may be superbly trained and incredibly accurate but if they cannot get along with their peers they will never be successful. In fact, I believe that we underestimate the impact on poor relational and emotional skills to our detriment because they impact so many others on our teams.

No matter how competent someone is in a specific skill - if they have significant relational or EQ deficits they become a real liability to the health of a team or organization. We often overlook the damage because of their skill but the truth is that a strong skill cannot make up for the negative impact of relational and EQ dishealth. 

This has two important implications. The first is that relational and EQ health must be a significant issue in the hiring process. Can they do the job is an important question. Equally important is whether they can get along with others and display healthy EQ. 

The second implication is that we need to be addressing issues of relational and EQ health on a regular basis with our staff. All of us can grow in these areas unless we have a significant personality disorder. Growth in these areas grows the health of the organization as a whole. Many individuals have never been trained in relational and EQ health. Yet it is perhaps the most significant issue in their professional and personal success.

I meet many professionally competent people. I meet fewer people whose relational and EQ health matches their professional skill. I am committed to developing both sides with our staff and certainly look at both sides when hiring.

A, B and C team players

Potential or current team members can be categorized as A, B or C Team players. This is not about being a good or bad person, but about being able to play well on your team.

A team players have qualities such as being self-directed, highly competent, committed to team and hard working. They are committed to your values and mission, require little management, and are results oriented. A Team players have high EQ's, they work well with others and have good self awareness.

B Team players are committed to team, work hard, buy in to your values and mission, are results oriented, and have high EQ, but may require more direction. Generally, B team players are not as creative or entrepreneurial as A Team players, but given concrete direction, they will do their work diligently and faithfully.

C Team players may or may not be competent (some are very competent and may even by 'stars'). But they have a fatal flow that disqualifies them from serving on your team. Disqualifiers include lack of tangible results, laziness, lack of buy in or adherence to your mission or values, low EQ that disrupts relationships on the team or elsewhere, inability to work productively as a team player, or immaturity requiring constant management.

Let me say what many in the Christian world are unwilling to say: C Team players do not belong on our teams no matter how 'nice' they are or how long they have been with you. To allow them to stay is to condemn the rest of the team to frustration and to compromise the mission of the organization. Remember, we are using God's resources to further God's Kingdom. We have a responsibility to our donors, to the Kingdom and to the mission of the organization to ensure that we deliver on the mission.

The question one needs to ask about C Team players is whether the fatal flaw can be dealt with so the individual can move from a C Team player to a B Team player. It is possible that people operating at a C Team level in terms of results are in the wrong job (wrong seat) in which case you may want to do some testing and try an alternate job if one is available. What is not wise is to leave an incompetent person in place. Your credibility as a leader will be legitimately tarnished with the rest of your team if you do not deal with performance issues - or other fatal flaws.

Before you decide that someone is a C Team player, ask the question whether they have ever been coached or mentored. And, whether anyone has ever been honest with them regarding issues that are problematic. If not, you owe it to them to put them through a process to see if they can be retooled and brought up to a B Team level.

A and B Team folks are the heart of any good team and organization. In some higher-level jobs, you will need A Team players. In many jobs, a solid, faithful B Team player is exactly what you need. Know that you need and work to fill positions based on that need.

One of the realities of organizations is that someone who is an A or B Team player at one phase of an organization's life can slip to a B or a C at another. Most people have a built in "capacity ceiling" where they cease to be effective.  Thus a youth worker who was a star when she had 20 youth in her group (she could personally relate to 20) starts to slip when she has 60 (she cannot relate to 60 and is not able to build a team to help her).

It may be a case of not being able to multiply themselves so that they can lead a larger number of people or it may be they have just quit growing (an all too common scenario). If coaching and mentoring do not solve the issue, you may have to move them to another seat on your bus or help them, redemptively, find a seat on another bus. What you cannot do is allow someone to function at a sub-standard level without directly impacting the rest of your team and the results of your ministry. At any state of your ministry's life, having the right people in the right seat is critical if the ministry is going to develop to the next level of effectiveness.

Your first responsibility as a leader is to ensure the health of your organization while always acting redemptively when a change is needed. People who are not doing well are usually not in their sweet spot, and they often know it. To leave them there is not fair to the organization, to others on your team, and in the end, is not in the best interests of the one who cannot play at the level they need to play at.

Signs of weakness that make for strong spiritual leaders

I doubt a book entitled signs of a weak leader would make the best seller list. Of course, the Scriptures were never that trendy or politically correct and what Jesus and Paul considered good leadership practices are often antithetical to common wisdom. Yet, Paul makes a strong statement that "when I am weak, then I am strong." So what are the signs of weakness that actually bring leadership strength Jesus style?

Dependence
The world celebrates independence while Scripture celebrates dependence on God. When Paul prayed that his thorn in the flesh would be taken away, God said No! It would stay to keep him humble and dependent on Him. Paul got the message and celebrated his weakness because in it he was forced to rely on God's power. Corinthian "pseudo apostles" came in pride and clever words while Paul came in weakness and dependence and the Holy Spirit's power.

Humility
The world celebrates personal power and strength while Scriptures celebrate humility. A humble leader puts himself or herself under the authority of God. They recognize and celebrated the gifts and strengths of others and understand their strengths and weaknesses well and don't pretend to be other than they actually are. Humble leaders don't lead alone but allow the Holy Spirit and others to speak into their leadership.

Service
In the world, leaders are served and fawned upon and often live in a bubble of privilege while in Jesus' Kingdom, leaders serve those they lead to help others be successful. Jim Collins definition of level five leadership in Good to Great redefined leadership along New Testament lines. My leadership is only as good as my service to those I lead and the staff who work under my stewardship.

Meekness
In the world, leaders are celebrated who exert power and authority while the Scriptures celebrated those who exhibit meekness. One of the better definitions of meekness is "power under control." It includes submission to God, teachability, patience in suffering, gentleness, kindness and not needing to platform oneself. Meek leaders are leaders without guile or selfish agenda.

Truth 
The world often celebrates and practices versions of truth designed to strengthen one's position while Scripture celebrates true truth because God is a God of truth. This often means saying things that are hard, admitting that one was wrong, and avoiding spin which is a redefinition of truth (or untruth). Spiritual leaders are not afraid of truth.

Stewardship
In the world, leadership is often about me. In the Kingdom, leadership is about Him and serving His interests and leading as He would lead. It is leadership as a stewardship which is not about us but about leading on His behalf. It reflects a conviction that life is not about us but about Him and His interests.

Weakness can in fact be strength. We can be strong leaders by the definition of the world or by the definition of the Kingdom.Which definition are you leading with?

Facing our insecurities and overcoming them

Much personal dysfunction stems from personal insecurities that have not been addressed. For leaders this is particularly important because whatever behaviors stem from those insecurities will impact their staff and even the culture of their organization. Our insecurities certainly impact us as individuals. 

Since no one has perfect Emotional Intelligence, we all struggle at some level with insecurities. Healthy people understand those areas where they tend to be insecure and seek to manage or overcome them. 

How does one recognize insecurities? Since they stem from areas where we feel personally vulnerable, whenever we feel unease or our ego challenged we are probably dealing with an insecurity. If I, for instance, become defensive when challenged, I am most likely dealing with insecurity - the need to be right and the fear of being wrong! So the question I would need to ask is "why do I fear being wrong?" Why does it matter? Because the dysfunction if not addressed shuts down robust dialogue with others, keeps one from receiving input, creates defensiveness and inner turmoil when challenged. 

Think of some of these common dysfunctions:

• Fear of being wrong and a need to be right
• Fear of failure so I am driven to succeed
• Fear of people knowing the real us so we hide our areas of weakness and don't develop deep relationships
• Fear of not having the answer so we don't ask others for help
• Fear of not getting the credit so we downplay the contributions of others and find ways to platform ourselves
• Fear of people rejecting us so we tell people what they want to hear, don't differentiate ourselves or resolve conflict
• Fear of conflict so we gloss over issues rather than resolve them
• Fear of someone doing better than us so we put them down
• Fear of disappointing others so we never say no
• Fear of looking weak so we pretend to be something we are not

There are many more insecurities but the common word is fear! Whenever we have fears we are likely dealing with some kind of insecurity. While fear can be a positive emotion (the house is on fire and I run for my life) fears connected to insecurities are not and bring us pain and cause behaviors that hurt us and hurt others.

There are three questions related to insecurities worth pondering.

1. Where are my areas of fear and what are my insecurities?
2. What lies behind my personal insecurities? What causes them?
3. What can I do to either manage or overcome my insecurities? What behaviors do I need to change or manage? 

Don't underestimate the power of the Holy Spirit and a right understanding of our completeness in Jesus in this equation. He made us the way we are wired. We don't need to fear or prove anything to Him. If that is true, why do we live with fears or need to somehow prove ourselves to others. When we are complete in Jesus we have far less need to live with our insecurities and fears.

When we take up the offense of others

Some of the most difficult situations I have to deal with as an organizational leader are those who call my office angry and unhappy and irrational over an issue that they have no first hand knowledge of. They have taken up someone else's issue and have gone on a crusade.

The reason these are such difficult situations is this. First, because they don't have first hand knowledge one cannot have a rational conversation about what really happened. All they know is what they "heard" happened and in the context of anger, hurt and raw emotions. Thus this is not a conversation about facts but perceived facts and emotional reactions. Conversations that cannot be focused around objective facts are usually conversations that cannot be resolved. 

Second, the conversations are crazy making because those who take up other's offences usually do not reveal that fact. It is clear from the conversation that there is an issue behind the issue (some one else's offence) but it is never stated so one has a hard time getting at it. If I sense there is an underlying issue I will often probe as to what it is and try to get to the heart of the matter. Dealing with side issues does not help one resolve the real - underlying issues. Unless that is put on the table there is no resolution.

Third, because these conversations are not about facts since first hand knowledge is no present, it ends up being about perceptions and anger. Perceptions of others are usually wrong and anger cannot be resolved without dealing with facts. And facts cannot be established without those with first hand knowledge present. 

Finally these are no win conversations because those who take up the offense of others have no way to move on because they cannot resolve "facts." So while the person whose offense they picked up moves on eventually those who picked up the offense did not and cannot.

When there is conflict, the goal must always be to achieve reconciliation. The goal is to come to understanding and achieve a level of peace. When I take up someone else's offence, however, I am doing just the opposite, enlarging the conflict rather than minimizing it: I cannot solve it for others; my own anger spills over to others; I have no objectivity in the situation and because it is not my issue, I cannot find resolution. It is a no win situation and does nothing to bring reconciliation or peace.

Picking up someone else's offense is foolish, bad EQ, unbliblical and causes relational havoc beyond what was necessary. It is one thing to seek to help resolve an issue in a healthy and productive manner. But once you take up another's offense there is no good way out.  

Controlling conversations

Whenever a conversation starts to feel uncomfortable and one that seems to be deliberately putting you in a corner rather than allowing for freedom of dialogue, pay attention! Conversations that don't feel good or safe probably are not. 

This is not about conversations where two parties might disagree with one another. That is normal. This is about conversations that feel designed to control you, force you to a specific conclusion or force you to agree to something that you don't feel comfortable agreeing to.

Feeling uncomfortable in a conversation is often a sign that you are in an unhealthy conversation that will not end well if it continues. More about that in a moment.

Some people are masters at manipulating others. Most of us are not but the warning signal to us is a feeling of discomfort. That manipulation can come in the form of vigorous debate designed to get you to agree. It may come in the form of veiled or not so veiled threats if they are in a position of authority. It can come in the form of anger which one wants to dissuade, often by agreement. It may come in the form of "facts" that are not facts at all but broad generalizations that sound true but leave a question in your mind. I recently spoke with an individual regarding some issues of disagreement and he kept saying, "T.J. you know...." He was using gratuitous language to flatter me into agreeing with him.

Manipulation is just that. And its sign is discomfort or a feeling that this is not a two sided conversation but a one sided conversation. Manipulation is trying to force other to agree with us. It reflects dis-health in the one using it and we should be aware when it happens.

How can I respond if I am feeling manipulated or controlled in a conversation. Here are some suggestions:

• "It feels to me that you want me to agree with you and frankly I don't."
• "I think it would be helpful to have a third party in on this conversation because I am feeling pushed to agree with you."
• "Is this a two way dialogue or must I agree with your point of view?"
• "While I respect your opinion, you need to know that I don't agree with you but it feels that I must if we are going to keep a relationship."
• "I am feeling uncomfortable with where this conversation is going and I would like to put it off for another time."

With any of these comments you are gently but honestly calling the other party on their behavior and your discomfort. They are not used to people confronting them and will usually back off. Whatever you do, don't be manipulated by manipulators.

The emotional EQ of team leaders makes all the difference

Teams are only as good as the Emotional Intelligence of their leaders. Poor EQ makes it virtually impossible to lead a healthy team. Signs of poor EQ include anger, defensiveness, inability to listen well, micromanagement of team members, inflexibility, needing to have their own way, lack of empowerment, to name a few.

Understanding our own selves well and the ability to understand others is a critical skill in any leadership position and ought to be part of the development plan of every leader. The better we understand ourselves and others, the better we manage our emotions (a critical element in EQ), the greater our skill in negotiating conflict and the better we practice the twin issues of empowerment and accountability the better we can lead. Leadership is always about people before it is about strategy and process.

How do we grow in these areas? One is obviously to do personal study on the subject of EQ which can give us a knowledge base. Another is to do personal testing whenever possible that allows us to understand ourselves better. 

I believe, however, that the most helpful practice is to solicit feedback from trusted friends and colleagues about how we are perceived, what we do well with people and where we could do better. The reason feedback is so critical is that there are simply certain aspects of our behavior that we are blind to. Others, though, can reflect back observations that once we become aware of we can pay attention to. 

Because leaders traffic in relationships, people and teams growing our EQ is absolutely essential to our success as leaders and to the satisfaction of those who work with us and under our leadership. Our EQ impacts the whole organization or the part of the organization we lead. For this reason, boards ought to mandate ongoing personal development of their leaders (many businesses do) as well as pay for it. 

Professional development (our particular skill) is important but personal development which includes EQ is just as important for any leader because it impacts those they lead.

The humility to be just us

The real, unadorned, us! Are you comfortable with you? Do you try to hide the real you out of fear for what people will think or see? Or are you OK with how God made you and not trying to be something you are not?

Good questions. Paul wrote "For by the grace given me I say to every one of you: Do not think of yourself more highly then you ought, but rather think of yourself with sober judgment, in accordance with the measure of faith God has given you."

Paul writes this in the context of a discussion of spiritual gifts in Romans 12 where he makes the point that humility is needed because each of us has a unique set of gifts and by definition whatever gifts we don't have are weaknesses. I have three strong strengths: everything else is a weakness. Thus by definition I need others because my gift set is a narrow one - as is yours.

Pride places undue emphasis on me. Humility places proper emphasis on the gifting we have been given and the necessity of having others around us to be all we can be - together. It is not about me! It is about us - together.

This means I don't have to pretend to be something I am not. I know God has gifted me in certain areas and others in other areas and it is the combined gifting that makes for the healthy whole. It means that we can be comfortable in our own skin, knowing that God made us the way he did for a reason.

Walking in humility also means that I will not seek to be something God did not make me to be - in other words I will understand my gifting and wiring and stay in the zone of strength that God gave me. When we move out of our zone of strength we often have to pretend - because we are not walking in the gifting that God actually gave us. Wise men and women use the "sober judgement" Paul speaks of to understand where they can and will be successful given the gifts God granted them and then seek to stay in that zone - in humility and self confidence, knowing they are in the right spot.

Humility and self knowledge lead wise men and women to build ministry teams of gifted individuals so that the deficits of one can be made up by the gifts of others. And, they are not afraid to admit areas of weakness and the need for the help of others. Pride does not ask for help in an area of weakness. Humility does. Pride does not bring other gifted people around us, humility does. Pride turns the spotlight on us, Humility turns it on the group. Pride says, I am good at all things, Humility says I am good at some things.

How are you walking today? In humility - being the real you - or pride - trying to be the you God did not make you to be?

Understanding what truly motivates us in ministry

For those of us who lead others in ministry, understanding what motivates us and drives us is a complicated but important question. There are many possible answers to even ministry motivation. They can include joining God in His work, our own ego, recognition, the applause of others, fulfilling someone else's motivations, personal ambition, or just wanting to be successful. On any given day or period in our lives, the answer could be different. 

Every leader is building something. That is the nature of leadership. Who we are building for is a far trickier question. Here is the issue that should give us pause. The pull of our lower nature is strong and when we are not highly sensitive both to the call of God on our lives and are not intentionally staying in close fellowship with Him, our inner motivations gravitate toward us and our own fulfillment rather than keeping Him and His call preeminent in our leadership. In other words, it is very easy for us to be meeting our own needs in our Spiritual leadership rather than leading on His behalf. It is a subtle but massive shift in motivation.

Why does it matter? Because we lead people toward the individual we lead for. If we are truly motivated by God's call and mission we will lead people on behalf of and toward Him! If we are actually motivated by our own ambition and a personal mission we will lead people on behalf of and toward us. Thus the motivations of our hearts have very real consequences for those who we lead. It is a subtle but it is real!

How do we know what really motivates us? It takes a great deal of introspection, thought, personal evaluation and being aware of our own drives and needs as they intersect with God's call on our lives. Ultimately the closer we stay to Jesus, the more sensitive we will be to Him. When we become distracted from Jesus (even by ministry) we become less sensitive to His call and are easily diverted by our own "shadow mission." It is possible to start our leadership with high sensitivity to leading on His behalf but over time to allow it to become about us rather than Him. 

Never take your motivations for granted. We are all building something and motivated by something. Knowing who we are actually building for and whose motivations we are fulfilling is vitally important. We don't want to get to the end and realize we were chasing the wrong thing. Our hearts are deceitful and we are easily deceived unless we are constantly being transformed by Jesus.