Indicators that a leader is leading from a place of insecurity and even fear

We often do not realize it when our leader is leading from a posture of fear, but some symptoms give it away. It is dysfunctional, and it feels bad, but we often do not understand what is going on. Here are some common symptoms of a leader leading from fear. 

They demand loyalty to themselves rather than to the mission of the organization. Leaders who lack self-confidence require their staff to be loyal to them—usually meaning that their staff agree with their views—rather than loyal to the organization and its mission. They are intimidated by independent voices who speak their minds, and if they perceive that loyalty as they define it is not present, they often marginalize those voices. Loyalty means you cannot disagree with the leader or challenge their thinking.

Those loyal to them are perceived as "their people," while those they don't perceive to be loyal are not. The irony is that loyal people tell their leader the truth as they see it. Those who only tell a leader what they know the leader wants to hear are not, in fact, loyal but sycophants. 

They try to keep people from talking to others about issues they feel strongly about. When pastors, for instance, tell staff that they cannot talk to board members or board members to staff or staff to congregants, it is a sign of fear rather than confidence. Whenever leaders seek to limit the conversation of others (beyond appropriate channels) they are operating out of fear rather than health. 

Prohibiting or discouraging open conversation is usually a precursor to an unraveling of leadership. When I see this trait I know that the leadership will unravel. It is only a matter of time. 

They display an underlying anger that erupts in inappropriate language, statements, requirements, or rules. People who live with fear or insecurity often try to control the environment around them with threats, anger, strong statements that intimidate them, or rules that are meant to keep their staff in line. When it does not feel good, it probably is not good. When it feels intimidating or coming from a place of fear, it probably is. When it does not feel healthy it probably is not healthy.

I have seen staff torn apart by the amygdala hijacks of an insecure leader where the leader goes into angry rants against the staff member who they perceive to have crossed a line with irrational words and anger that are meant to force the staff member back into line through intimidation, fear and the belittling of their character. Because this usually happens in private and because others know they cannot challenge the leader there is often no recourse for the staff member who has been violated.

Those who disagree are let go or marginalized, and the reasons for departures, voluntary or involuntary, are disguised. Truth is usually a victim of insecurity and fear. There is an inordinate desire to control the message and spin the reasons for departures to protect the insecure leader responsible for the staff member's departure. How is the truth disguised? by an alternative narrative determined by the leader—spin, if you will—rather than the truth of the situation. 

This is often the reason departing staff members are pressured into signing NDAs. The goal is to prevent the individual from speaking the truth from their point of view. NDAs are a sign of leadership insecurity and fear and usually mean that something leaders do not want disclosed does not reflect well on them. Ironically, the organization letting the staff member go often does not feel an equal responsibility to speak truthfully.

There is a culture of fear among staff. Anytime fear becomes the culture and people are not allowed to talk with one another or others, it is a sign of an insecure leader. No secure leader creates an environment of fear or intimidation. None. Where there is fear among the staff in general, there is a dysfunctional and usually fearful leader. 

Candid feedback to the leader is not allowed or appreciated. Only insecure or fearful leaders create an environment where candid and honest feedback is limited, controlled, or not allowed/appreciated. It says more about the leader than it does about the staff. It comes from fear and insecurity rather than security and freedom. 

I have been with executive teams who speak candidly together about issues when the leader is not present. When the leader is present, there is not a peep about those same issues. Why? They know that the leader does not appreciate or invite candid feedback, so the issues become elephants in the room that cannot be discussed in his/her presence. This is a classic sign of insecurity and fear.

A leader's board and senior staff must toe the line of the leader. Some years ago, our organization made a decision that irritated a senior pastor within the denomination. He forced his board (through intimidation) to agree with him and to withhold all support for our organization in the face of irrefutable evidence that we had reasons for our decision. But no pushback was allowed, and he forced his board to go along with him. When a board or senior staff must toe the line of the leader, it is usually a sign of control, fear and insecurity.

Boards are often caught up in leaders' insecurity and fear, so they don't ask hard questions or seek clarification about situations that should be clarified. 

My question is why such behaviors are not seen for what they are in the ministry arena and why staff and boards allow this behavior? It demonstrates naivete on the part of boards and usually fear on the part of staff who are put in an impossible situation. Don't be fooled, and don't get sucked into a dysfunctional leader's stuff. It is poison, and it is foolishness. Too many board members get sucked into the dysfunction.

The Chaos caused by insecure leaders

 In my consulting with troubled churches and ministry organizations I often encounter the chaos that is created by the insecurities of the senior leader. Those of us who lead anything - a team, a church, an organization or in business owe it to our staff to lead from a place of personal security rather than from insecurity. Here are the key issues that are signs of a leader's insecurity. If they pertain to you, pay attention to them. If you are a board member of an organization and these are represented by your senior leader - please get them help. They are destructive and harmful to those around them.

1. When a leader is defensive and resists feedback he is operating out of insecurity. Secure leaders invite feedback even when they may not agree with it and they are not defensive. In fact secure leaders go to great lengths to know what their staff is thinking, to interact with them and to keep themselves from shutting down discussion out of defensiveness. Personal defensiveness and healthy leadership are incompatible.

2. When a leader tells staff that they cannot talk to board members or other about issues or ideas they are operating from a position of insecurity. Secure leaders welcome dialogue and do not put gag orders on their staff. Of course once a team has decided a course of action they should all support it. But gag orders come from leader who know that there is not support from their staff and want to hide it from others rather than resolve it. One of the marks of unhealthy church staff teams is the notion that staff cannot share their opinions or thoughts with others. Inevitably this is a culture that will blow up badly in the end. It is a true sign of leader insecurity.

3. When a leader sees "loyalty" as meaning you must agree with me you have an arrogant or insecure leader. It implies that personal loyalty is more important than loyalty to the mission and well being of the organization. That is a terrible assumption and it comes out of dysfunctional leadership. It also implies that staff are simply there to do the bidding of the leader rather than to make a real contribution to the mission and strategy. Healthy leaders want staff who are loyal to the cause and respectful to one another.

4. When a leader regularly uses their "positional authority" to push people in a certain direction or get their assent you have an insecure leader. Staff who regularly feel pressure to conform to the opinion or decisions of a leader and who have not been invited into discussions where they are stakeholders should recognize that they are dealing with dysfunction rather than health. All leaders use positional authority in certain but usually fairly rare circumstances. Those who use it regularly are saying, "I am in charge and you will do what I say."

5. When people are publicly called out by a leader you are dealing with an insecure leader who is using the public "calling out" as a power play to put others in line. It violates the dictum that we praise in public and deal with disciplinary issues in private. The very leaders who do this would never allow themselves to be called out in public. It is plain intimidation and unhealthy and it says more about the leader than the staff member.

6. When a leader must have their own way on a regular basis you have an insecure leader. Secure leaders want what is best for the organization not their own way. Healthy leaders regularly modify their agendas and strategies in dialogue with their staff. Life is not about getting our own way but about accomplishing a common mission. The "my way or the highway" is an adolescent character trait rather than the trait of a mature leader.

7. When a leader takes credit for the success of others who made the organization look good you have an insecure leader. Secure leaders do not need the spotlight and they do not seek it. In fact, they go out of their way to give credit away rather than to keep it themselves. They know that success comes from a team, not any one individual and they acknowledge that regularly.

8. When a leader regularly puts others down you have an insecure leader. Usually they are putting others down in order to build themselves up. Healthy leaders keep their own counsel on others and do not share negative information about others with others.

This is all about having a healthy self image and good EQ. When that is not there we end up hurting others in ways that may take years to undo. If any of these characteristics represent you as a leader take note and work to correct the damage and your leadership style. 

8 Signs of an insecure leader

In my consulting with troubled churches and ministry organizations, I often encounter the chaos that is created by the insecurities of the senior leader. Those of us who lead anything - a team, a church, an organization, or in business owe it to our staff to lead from a place of personal security rather than from insecurity. Here are the key issues that are signs of a leader's insecurity. If they pertain to you, pay attention to them. If you are a board member of an organization and these are represented by your senior leader - please get them help. They are destructive and harmful to those around them.

1. When a leader is defensive and resists feedback, he is operating out of insecurity. Secure leaders invite feedback even when they disagree with it, and they are not defensive. In fact, secure leaders go to great lengths to know what their staff is thinking, to interact with them, and to keep themselves from shutting down discussions out of defensiveness. Personal defensiveness and healthy leadership are incompatible.

2. When a leader tells staff that they cannot talk to board members or others about issues or ideas, they are operating from a position of insecurity. Secure leaders welcome dialogue and do not put gag orders on their staff. Of course, once a team has decided on a course of action, they should all support it. But gag orders come from a leader who knows that there is no support from their staff and wants to hide it from others rather than resolve it. One of the marks of unhealthy church staff teams is the notion that staff cannot share their opinions or thoughts with others. Inevitably, this is a culture that will blow up badly in the end. It is a true sign of leader insecurity.

3. When a leader sees "loyalty" as meaning, you must agree with me, you have an arrogant or insecure leader. It implies that personal loyalty is more important than loyalty to the mission and well-being of the organization. That is a terrible assumption, and it comes out of dysfunctional leadership. It also implies that staff are simply there to do the bidding of the leader rather than to make a real contribution to the mission and strategy. Healthy leaders want staff who are loyal to the cause and respectful to one another.

4. When a leader regularly uses their "positional authority" to push people in a certain direction or get their assent, you have an insecure leader. Staff who regularly feel pressure to conform to the opinion or decisions of a leader and who have not been invited into discussions where they are stakeholders should recognize that they are dealing with dysfunction rather than health. All leaders use positional authority in certain but usually fairly rare circumstances. Those who use it regularly are saying, "I am in charge, and you will do what I say."

5. When people are publicly called out by a leader, you are dealing with an insecure leader who is using the public "calling out" as a power play to put others in line. It violates the dictum that we praise in public and deal with disciplinary issues in private. The very leaders who do this would never allow themselves to be called out in public. It is plain intimidation and unhealthy, and it says more about the leader than the staff member.

6. When a leader must have their own way on a regular basis, you have an insecure leader. Secure leaders want what is best for the organization, not their own way. Healthy leaders regularly modify their agendas and strategies in dialogue with their staff. Life is not about getting our own way but about accomplishing a common mission. The "my way or the highway" is an adolescent character trait rather than the trait of a mature leader.

7. When a leader takes credit for the success of others who made the organization look good, you have an insecure leader. Secure leaders do not need the spotlight, and they do not seek it. In fact, they go out of their way to give credit away rather than to keep it themselves. They know that success comes from a team, not any one individual, and they acknowledge that regularly.

8. When a leader regularly puts others down, you have an insecure leader. Usually, they put others down in order to build themselves up. Healthy leaders keep their own counsel on others and do not share negative information about others with others.

This is all about having a healthy self-image and good EQ. When that is not there, we end up hurting others in ways that may take years to undo. If any of these characteristics represent you as a leader, take note and work to correct the damage and your leadership style. 

The freedom to speak one's mind

In my experience in working with churches and ministry organizations I find many where it is not safe to speak candidly about issues that exist. I am not referring to undiplomatic communication or attacks - just the ability to share honest opinions without being attacked, censored or privately (or publically) shamed. This is nearly always a result of an insecure leader who is unable to deal with candid dialogue and takes any disagreement as a personal attack. And it is a sign of insecurity and low Emotional Intelligence (EQ).

When this happens, there are a number of negative consequences. First, the leader loses major respect among his or her staff. Their defensiveness is seen for what it is - insecurity. Second, when staff cannot talk openly about issues they will end up talking to each other in private or even with others. People need a place to talk. Third, the unresolved issues that cannot be put out in the open fester and become major irritants to those involved and even minor issues can become large issues in the absence of the ability to talk. Fourth, mistrust flourishes! And mistrust destroys otherwise good teams.

Here is a question to leaders who do not invite candid input: Why are you afraid of being questioned or having issues raised? It is not as if they go away in the absence of conversation. In fact, they get larger! It is not as if ignoring the issues solves anything - they just squeeze out somewhere else. Why would you prefer that these topics get discussed behind your back rather than in your presence so that you are part of the discussion? 

Another question. What is it inside you that resists hearing what others think when it might be critical of you or something you do? You may not agree with their analysis but what keeps you from hearing it? As a consultant I hear from staff on a regular basis that they cannot be honest with their leader. Does this not hurt the leader as much as it hurts the team? It really makes no sense at all for the leader or the team. I would rather know what people are thinking than not know. 

Those who don't listen are not only unhealthy emotionally but have something to prove and something to lose - in their own mind. I prefer to live with a nothing to prove/nothing to lose attitude because that is freedom. If I am wrong in some area, so be it. If someone disagrees with me it is OK. If there is robust dialogue over some issue I can be fine with it. Such a stance prevents discussions from being had in the wrong venues with the wrong people and it fosters the very best ideas in a safe atmosphere. It makes for a healthy team as well as a respected leader.

One can gauge the health of a team and a leader by how many issues they cannot discuss as a group. The more there are the unhealthier the team and leader. And it always ultimately comes back to the leader because teams know where they can and cannot go - that is always a function of the openness of a leader. Some of the largest names in Christian leadership are some of the most closed when it comes to candid discussion and feedback. What does that say about their health?

To make it personal, how open or closed are you? I ask myself the question regularly. I want to lead well.

(Written today from Berlin, Germany)

Secure and insecure leaders

One of the key indicators of success or failure in ministry is the measure of personal security one has. The higher the level of security, the more likely there will be long term ministry success. The higher the level of insecurity, the more likely there will be a train wreck along the way - or a lot of pain.

The reason for this is that insecurity brings with it behaviors which hurt and compromise relationships while security brings behaviors that build long term healthy relationships. Because ministry is all about relationships insecure individuals end up sabotaging the very relationships that give them leadership capital. Secure individuals are able to build long term healthy relationships.

For example, insecure individuals do not know how to deal with those who disagree with them. They often become defensive when they perceive that others either disagree or are pressing for a different direction. That defensiveness says, "I don't want to hear what you have to say!" Which, of course shuts down constructive dialogue. A secure individual is non defensive in the face of alternate options and communicates "I have an open mind, lets talk."

That goes to the issue of dialogue. Have you ever had to negotiate an issue with an insecure individual? It can be like trying to talk to a wall. It is a one way conversation. There is no sense that the other party is open to what one is tying to communicate. This of course kills relationship. The opposite is true with secure individuals who invite dialogue, there is back and forth, questions are asked and answered and often there is movement on both sides to move toward a common view.

Secure individuals understand that compromise is not a bad thing, in fact, getting to a consensus is a healthy place to be. Insecure individuals frankly don't know how to compromise because they have a set view of what should be and anything that does not fit that view is a threat to their personal well being. Thus insecure people polarize others: they either see them on their side or against them. Even good people who disagree with them find themselves on the out list and again relationship is lost.

Because insecure individuals polarize, they are unable to seek and receive counsel from a variety of people who could speak into their lives or situations. Rather they listen to those who agree with them and therefore contribute to their sense of being right. This automatically disempowers anyone who might take an alternate view - and it is one of the reasons that boards become divided when insecure pastors start to only listen to those who agree with them. Those who don't happen to agree are simply marginalized.

Over time when this happens, those who are marginalized simply leave leadership and often the church. They no longer have a voice and don't feel valued.

The personal security or insecurity of senior leaders has huge ramifications for a ministry as a whole. Insecure leaders end up destroying relationships. Secure leaders build relationships. The first will also hurt the ministry. The second will build a ministry. It is a serious issue.

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?

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.

Suggestions for insecure leaders

Insecurity among ministry leaders is common. I am not sure why it is but I know that it is. The ability to overcome insecurity, however, is one of the key factors in a leaders long term success. So, developing some intentional strategies to move from insecurity to greater personal security is a development issue for many!

I have some suggestions to consider.

Insecurity often stems from the need to be right and a fear of being proven wrong on some issue. Here is a question to consider: what is the worst thing that can happen if I am wrong? Or to put it another way: why do I have a need to be right? There is really a more important question and that is "What is the best solution?" If we move from a need to be "right" to what is the "best" we no longer need to worry about whether we get our way. Rather we get the best solution. People respect that - a lot!

Insecurity comes from needing to prove something. Here is a personal issue to ponder: What do I need to prove to others? Is it that I am competent? Is it that I can lead? Is it that I am a success? Needing to prove something is usually about some unfinished business in our own life that is driving us and spills over to others in unhealthy ways.

What if I had nothing to prove? What if I could live in the freedom of just being me? I actually live by a principle of "Nothing to prove, nothing to lose." It is freeing! And, when I start to get defensive over something I just remind myself that I don't have to prove anything. I can just be me. It is a reprogramming of our minds.

Insecurity can make us hostage to the expectations of others, especially if we need their validation for our lives and ministries. Needing the validation of others causes anxiety and fear which is why it holds us hostage. It keeps us from just being ourselves. Often it stems from not having healthy validation and acceptance from our own parents and we are still trying to earn it from wherever we can. Not only that but as leaders we will often be targets for choices we need to make and leaders who need validation from others often cannot lead well as a result.

Learning to get our validation from our heavenly Father first and from close trusted friends second is far healthier than trying to live up to all the expectations of others - an impossible task in the end.

Those who suffer from insecurity can grow into more secure, self defined and mature individuals. However, it starts with some intense self reflection as to the reasons for our insecure behaviors and an intentional effort to change our thinking and behaviors. The alternative is not only personal fear but behaviors which negatively impact those we lead.