Don't allow these issues to derail your leadership

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Why organizations should not leave poor leaders in place

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Don't allow these issues to derail your great leadership

It is possible to have effective leadership skills and still undermine one's leadership. And this is not only a risk for young leaders for often for leaders that have seen significant success. 

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

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

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

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

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

Transformation. It is what God wants to do in our hearts, thinking, priorities (lifestyle), and relationships, and it is a lifelong process. I love the comment my brother made at my father's funeral service. "He was not a perfect man, but he kept getting better." Cooperating with the Holy Spirit to become everything God made us to be and to become more and more like Jesus is one of the prime responsibilities of leaders who model transformation for others. When we lose our intentionality here, others notice, and it sabotages our leadership.

Clarity. Lack of personal and leadership clarity leaves our staff and us without focus. No matter how brilliant one is, a lack of focus confuses those we lead. Life should be a journey toward ever greater clarity about what God wants us to do (and alternatively not do), what our priorities should be (and there should be only a few), and what the target is for our work (without which our staff will lack direction). 

Discipline. No amount of brilliance makes up for the lack of discipline in our lives. Our personal discipline reflects our understanding of God's call on our lives and our commitment to stewarding the gifts He has given for maximum impact. Lack of discipline communicates a carelessness about that stewardship. 

Jesus. Life is not about us but about Him. It is easy to forget that and focus on our things rather than His. But, whenever we take our eyes off Him, we start to sink as Peter did when He left the boat to be with Him. To the extent that we lose that focus, we hurt our leadership - and ourselves.

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

The whiplash effect of leaders who easily change their minds and strategies

 

One of the most difficult challenges many staff teams face is a leader who has new ideas on a frequent basis. Those new ideas can set off a chain of changes that reverberate through the staff and organization as there is a scramble to implement the newest version of the leader's vision or strategy.

Any change that comes from the top impacts the organization. And changes are absolutely necessary from time to time. 

The challenge comes when a leader frequently tries new ideas as they seek the holy grail of organizational success without understanding the disorienting nature of what they think are simple (and brilliant) ideas. 

For the leader, the new solution seems obvious and simple. For staff, the new solution often creates frustration as their prior efforts to implement the last great idea are now supplanted by the need to scrap that work and work on a new strategy. This can create cynicism among staff who scramble to keep up with the latest strategy. Sometimes those new ideas are called the "flavor of the month" as staff knows there will be a new idea soon.

Resisting this temptation is part of the maturity growth of a leader.

This is not about resisting change. It is about being wise and managing change properly. How one does change management matters because many are impacted. Frequent changes indicate that the leader himself/herself is not clear as to where they are going. Lack of clarity in the mind of a leader is problematic!

A leader who frequently changes their mind or strategies often has not done the hard work of clarifying the organization's direction. Clarity of the organization's identity and what they are about must always precede strategies. When strategies come without organizational clarity, you simply get chaos as leaders throw ideas at the wall to see what may or may not stick. 

Wise leaders are clear on who the organization is and where it is going. In addition, they vet any proposed changes with other leaders to ensure that they have considered the unintended consequences of their decisions. And, they talk candidly with those who will be affected by the new direction so that staff is not taken by surprise. 

In my leadership history, I have waited up to a year to make a proposed change until I knew I had the support and understanding of the leadership team. I learned that I could not make unilateral changes but needed the wisdom and support of those around me to negotiate change successfully. That helped ensure I didn't act precipitously and create organizational whiplash. The counsel of others kept me from making changes too quickly, but I had to learn to work with my senior team rather than make unilateral decisions.

Clarity and care in the change process are part of a leader's maturity growth. Guided change based on clear objectives can keep leaders from creating whiplash with their staff. 

What is growing in your organization's culture?

 

Organizational culture and what it looks like is a critical component of any for-profit or not-for-profit enterprise. And you can be sure that your culture is growing either health or dishealth that will impact your organization. In fact, Culture is never neutral. It either contributes to a healthy organization or creates dysfunction and frustration. With culture, there is no neutral ground. 

Everyone who has worked anywhere has stories about culture. Many of them are unhealthy. The question is, why does dysfunctional culture so often get ignored? Why do leaders not deal with unhealthy aspects of their organization's culture?

Because culture sits in the background as an invisible, silent backdrop, we can simply get used to what it is without asking why or noticing its lack of health. We say about difficult people, "They are just like that," rather than asking why we tolerate their behavior. We get used to and content with what is rather than asking what could be. 

We may even have a level of cynicism about people or situations that frustrate us but assume nothing will ever change. We learn to accept substandard behaviors or lack of excellence and follow through. We are not surprised or bothered by unproductive meetings or unkept promises. We are used to what is. 

This is why there are often deep pockets of dysfunction in organizations, sometimes around one unhealthy individual that doesn't get addressed, yet it infects the whole. These pockets of dysfunction are like a petri dish of bacteria that is growing ugly stuff, but we are so used to it that we hardly notice. 

Sometimes, an organization's dysfunctional culture is so obvious that all see it. In other cases, that dysfunction is like a quiet illness permeating the company. Those pockets of dysfunctional culture create dysfunctional organizations which impact every individual, every team, and everything they do. 

Try a small experiment. Ask your coworkers or staff these three questions:

• If you could change three things about your workplace, what would they be?
• If you were in charge, what would you do differently?
• How would you rate the health of our culture on a scale of one to ten, with one being the lowest and ten being the highest? Why did you pick that number? What would make your score higher?

These questions and their answers are all about the culture and practices of your workplace. Some would object that the questions ignore many good things. That is probably true, but it is not the good things that create issues in an organization. Rather, it is the problematic things! If you focus on dealing with dysfunction and dishealth, along with a set of agreed-upon behaviors and attitudes, the culture of your organization will improve significantly over time. The result will be a more engaged workplace. 

Five contrasts between healthy and unhealthy leaders

There are significant contracts between healthy and unhealthy leaders. If you lead, take a moment and consider the following contrasts. The reality is that in each case, every leader struggles with some of these and growing in personal health is a lifelong pursuit. Any leader who claims that they are fully healthy in all five is fooling themselves. So....as you read these, consider honestly where you are in each contrasted character trait.

Contrast one: Pride versus humility
Pride sees life as being about us while humility sees life as about others. Pride believes that others should serve us while humility believes that we are here to serve others. People with significant pride focus most of life on themselves while those with true humility focus most of life on others. Prideful individuals like and need the spotlight while humble leaders focus the light on others. For a Christ follower, life is a journey from pride to humility and Jesus is our model of humility.

Contrast two: Personal gain versus a life of stewardship
Leaders have perks. They have more flexibility than others, get paid better, have more power in the organization and have more control over their destiny. Some leaders love it and use their leadership status and power for personal gain whether in salary, power or other opportunities that benefit them. there is a direct connection between an attitude of pride and a desire for personal gain.

Contrast that outlook on life with one that sees leadership as a trust to be stewarded. It is not about personal gain but about stewarding a mission and a staff. Stewards have a humble persona that is not self seeking but is other centric. Leadership as a stewardship sees authority and power as tools to serve the staff and mission and not for personal gain.

Contrast three: Intentionally accountable versus intentionally unaccountable
Unhealthy and self seeking leaders will intentionally foster systems that protect themselves from close accountability or scrutiny. Sometimes the strategy is to surround themselves with people whom they can manipulate. At other times unhealthy leaders use personal intimidation to prevent questions from being raised. Interestingly enough, in the Christian world you can add another strategy: allowing people to place themselves on a pedestal of spiritual leadership which keeps many people from challenging that leader. Make no mistake: These are intentional strategies to screen themselves from close accountability.

Healthy leaders are equally intentional but their intention is to keep themselves accountable so that there are no questions about their integrity, practices and activities. They create cultures that are open and which allow for contrary opinions, allows and encourages questions and is not threatened by debate. In creating this kind of culture healthy leaders create a culture of accountability because nothing is off limits and the open ethos creates natural accountability. While unhealthy leaders try to shield themselves from scrutiny, healthy leaders create a culture of accountability.

Contrast four: Control versus empowerment and freedom
A major indicator of unhealthy leaders is a need to control. That control can be manifested in control of people, of money and resources, of information through its withholding, of debate questions that disagree with the leader and finally, the need to regularly get their way. The greater the culture of control, the more dysfunctional the system. This is not about legitimate controls necessary to accomplish one's mission but a culture of control that seeks to limit the conversation, questions and ideas.

Healthy leaders understand that unless they can pull out the very best from those around them, the organization will not move forward. They encourage discussion around the allocation of resources, they share information liberally in order to foster a flat organization, give people the freedom to share their opinions and challenge the status quo, and people the freedom to use their gifts and abilities to accomplish their responsibilities. It is a culture of empowerment, not control.

Contrast five: Image control versus mission accomplishment
When you encounter leaders who have a high need to practice image control be wary. Image control is about the leader. It is about the leader looking good which is about pride, ego and narcissism. Healthy leaders are not focused on their image but on helping the organization accomplish its mission. Image control is inward looking whereas accomplishing the mission is outward looking.

For those who lead it is worthwhile to think through these five contrasts and where they fit on the continuum with each. Also, don't be fooled by impressive looking leaders who exhibit the unhealthy characteristics on the left of the continuums above. Where you find symptoms of dishealth above, it will harm the organization.

When senior leaders exert too much pressure on staff

Many senior leaders are highly driven. Maybe most. They tend to see life from 35,000 feet and all the things that need to get done. And, they are often impatient. They want to see results, fix things, explore new opportunities, reinvent old strategies, ensure results, fix disconnects and who knows what else. Are you tired yet? Some years ago my senior team said, "TJ, we are not starting anything new this year!" They had their hands full.

There are predictable results when senior leaders push too hard on too many things. 

Cynicism. Because you cannot do everything at once, leaders who are always pushing for more and for better eventually wear their subordinates out until each new proposal is met with a certain level of skepticism, even cynicism. Better a few important initiatives than many minor ones. More does not equal better. Usually it equals mediocrity. Usually, leaders who push and push also change their minds often leaving staff who have worked on an initiative frustrated when they must change directions mid stream.

Discouragement. There is nothing better than celebrating success. But when many initiatives are on the plate, success is elusive since most will not get accomplished. Or accomplished well. This is discouraging to staff who are working hard to accomplish the mission of the organization. 

Lack of focus. None of us can focus on more than a few important issues at a time. When leaders make unrealistic demands on many fronts, staff don't know where to put their energies and the priority of the senior leader my change quickly. Staff are left to guess as to which initiative is the priority leading to a lack of focus throughout the organization.

Commitments that don't get kept. When pushed hard, many staff will make commitments that they don't want to make and cannot keep. It is the only way to relieve the pressure of the senior leader, however, so they do it. Many of these will not be met because they were unrealistic to start with. This then sets up a cycle of blame for promises not kept which in this case is the fault of the leader rather than the staff member.

If senior leaders will allow their senior team to have a voice in what issues are tackled when there will be a far more realistic view of what can and cannot get done and by when. When leaders exert too much pressure they hurt themselves, the organization and the staff. 

Secretive leaders: Their methodology and psychology

From time to time in working with churches in crisis I run across what I call the "secretive leader syndrome." This is a leader who is reluctant to tell others - often including staff and boards what they are thinking. Or, they let on some of their thinking but not enough for others to fully understand them or their plans.

This creates a great deal of uncertainty on the part of staff who need to mesh their own plans and thinking with that of their leader. For those who work for a secretive leader it is a most frustrating experience. In fact, it usually ends badly for the leader or for their staff because a lack of transparency leads to conflict. If I don't know what is in the mind of my leader I will either have to beg for forgiveness when I get it wrong or lead with caution in case I cross an invisible line I cannot see. It is one of the most discourteous behaviors a supervisor can exhibit.

What is the psychology behind a lack of transparency in a leader's thinking? First, consider that information is power! If I have information others don't have I  have power that they don't have and frankly some leaders want that power. It also allows a leader to share information selectively to those they deem worthy of having it and withholding it from those they don't. If it sounds like a mind game, well, it pretty much is.

Second, if I as the leader have all access to information and others don't I can play people or departments against one another. FDR famously did this in his leadership style and while he achieved great things it was at the expense of the relationships of his senior leaders who were told what he wanted them to know (and different leaders were told different things). Only he had access to all the information and therefore the keys to the kingdom. Others had to figure it out themselves, often at the expense of conflict with others. There is certainly an element of manipulation here.

Third, secrecy allows a leader to keep staff on edge as they present "surprises" in terms of decisions that staff have no context for. Again, this smacks of selfish and problematic behavior. Never would they want their staff to surprise them - ever - but they have no compulsion surprising their staff. They are the leader after all. Which also means that they have different standards for themselves than for others. 

This behavior is unfair, deeply dysfunctional, unempowering and foolish. It usually masks very deep insecurity on the part of the leader. It is a form of control that allows the leader to keep the initiative and ensure that others don't have it. What is amazing to me is that boards allow this kind of behavior to take place. 

There are obviously things a leader does not share for valid reasons but secretive leaders create problems for those around them - whatever their motivation. No healthy leader withholds critical information from their staff and/or board. If they do it eventually comes back to bite them or the organization.

TJ Addington (Addington Consulting) has a passion to help individuals and organizations maximize their impact and go to the next level of effectiveness. He can be reached at tjaddington@gmail.com.

"Creating cultures of organizational excellence."

Six issues to avoid for those in professional ministry

Professional ministry can be a place of great joy and great frustration. It is the frustrating part that can often cause us angst. My own observation is that there are six issues that those in professional ministry need to guard against.

Cynicism: Let's face it, lots of people are not going to get with the program. I remember people who attended the church I pastored who came once in a while but it seemed that God never touched their lives. At least it didn't seem that way to me. It is easy to become cynical but those folks have always been out there. As have the hard times in ministry when the arrows come from the pew and not from the pagans. There are times when we just need to fight cynicism off because it is not what God wants for us and it won't allow us to minister well. Jesus is our judge and He wants us to be faithful.

Anger: It is a close second to cynicism. It is easy to become angry: power politics in the church, how long it takes to get something done, feeling under appreciated, and any number of things. Anger is often about us instead of other people. Things didn't move on my timetable or in my way. It pops up in unexpected places but when it does, it is time to take stock of myself rather than of others. 

Self-focus: The two issues above are really about allowing ourselves to focus on ourselves rather than on those we are called to minister to. No one said ministry was easy, in fact no one should go into ministry who has something better to do. It is hard, and it becomes harder when our focus is on ourselves. There is plenty to complain about but only when our focus is in the wrong place. Read Paul's list of issues he faced. Yet he did not focus on himself but the mission God gave him. It changed the picture for him.

Professional Spirituality: This is about allowing our work for God to take precedence over our relationship with God. It is easy to do and most of us in ministry have done it. But it is a trap because Jesus wants us, not just our work for him. There is no substitute for our own personal time with Jesus and for our own followership. Just because we may know more than others (and it is often not true) it does not translate into a deeper relationship with Him unless we are deeply intentional about it.

Misidentity: This follows from the last. It is allowing our identity to be formed by our work rather than our relationship with the living God. It is also why many Christian professionals are quick to take offence when people disagree with them. They have not separated their identity in Jesus with the work that they do. 

Arrogance: It can come from knowing too much, having the wrong identity and a professional spirituality. No one in ministry should be arrogant but a lot seem to be. The way to guard against arrogance is to be focused on others and to guard our own hearts against its insidious grip. Other focus, accountability with people who know us and will tell us the truth and an identity in Jesus are all keys to remaining humble.

Posted from Oakdale, MN

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.

Leaders who neglect this discipline pay for it dearly

There is one discipline that no leader can do without but too many try. It is that of developing meaningful relationships with key staff and leaders or people of influence in their organization. For instance, I regularly talk with pastors regarding board members that they are having difficulties with and inevitably there is also an absence of a meaningful relationship.

This is not about lobbying these individuals. It is about understanding them and they us which only happens in the context of time together. Relationship is the foundation of understanding and where we have meaningful relationships we are willing to give others the benefit of the doubt rather than judging their motives.

My take is that many leaders are so busy doing their thing and building whatever they are building that they are too busy to be bothered by the time and attention it takes to develop meaningful relationships. Eventually this catches up with them when fault lines appear in the ministry and the very people who the leader needs to help them through have lost their confidence and there is no relational glue to hold it together.

This also pertains to leaders with their key staff. It is easy to neglect relationships with staff members, just assuming that all is well. But in the absence of relationships those staff members have no great incentive to stand by their leader when there is difficulty or conflict. This often catches senior leaders by surprise but it is often too late by the time they realize the situation.

All good leadership is based on relational equity. Without relationship there is little or no equity. If you lead anything, make sure that the discipline of meaningful relationships is high on your agenda.

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 discount on orders of ten or more.

Characteristics of gracious leaders

I love meeting gracious leaders. There is a quality about them which endears them to both insiders and outsiders alike. They possess a set of important characteristics that all leaders can emulate and learn from. Here are some of the most important.

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

Gracious leaders like to listen and ask questions. In other words they are focused outwardly toward others rather than inwardly toward themselves. They engage in your life, your ministry, your family and you!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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 discount on orders of ten or more.

Some reflections on the Mars Hill situation

Those who read this blog regularly know that I am an advocate for healthy pastors, elders and churches. You also know that I regularly explore issues of dishealth because they impact others in a significant way. Like many, I have watched the situation in Seattle with Mars Hill Church and have some reflections on a number of issues it raises.

Reflection: Never give senior leaders a pass on behaviors that are unacceptable. I have seen this way too often. Boards often ignore behaviors in their senior leader either because he is getting things done or because he is "God's man" and we should not challenge him. Do we not get the fact that the qualifications for leaders are actually higher than for the rest of the church? If that is so, leaders are held to a higher standard than others yet we often give them a pass because we don't want to challenge them. Lets just say - there is no excuse for bad behavior toward others on the part of senior pastors. 

Reflection: Pay attention to trends and patterns. I worked with a church where a long string of people had been fired or let go as at Mars Hill. Yet the board had never challenged the pastor on why it had happened, nor had they done exit interviews on the circumstances that surrounded the staff who left. One may give leaders the benefit of the doubt but where there is a troubling pattern over time, good leaders must wake up and take notice. When I interviewed staff who had left from the church I mentioned, I heard horrified stories of abuse by a senior pastor. Yet the board had not paid attention to a pattern that should have given them great pause. (See my blog, When the bodies pile up).

Reflection: Bad behaviors when not addressed will spill over into the congregation. It would appear that Mars Hill leaders tried to keep the behaviors of their senior leader private. This led to severance agreements tied to non-disclosure legal documents. Rather than addressing the issues it would appear that they tried to hide the issues. Then when it started to go public in social media they seemed to blame those who made the allegations public. Think about this: If you don't listen to people who have been hurt and try to shut them up the issues will spill out because people have a sense of justice. In my personal view, the only reason that this went public in Seattle was that church leaders did not listen to those impacted by their senior leader, take them seriously or deal with the real issue. (See my blog, Eight dysfunctions of church governance boards)

Reflection: Sad as it is, some pastors are bullies and their agenda gets in the way of their treatment of people. One of the most read blogs on my site is entitled Abuse in the Church - When the Pastor is the bully. What is interesting to me is that this blog post gets consistent hits with a current count of well over 3,000. I can see the blogs being read in my analytics and it always makes me sad to see this one being read. Yet just today I received word of another situation that would indicate an unhealthy pastor who is acting like a bully. My question: Why do those around him allow him to get away with such behavior?

Reflection: Bad behavior on the part of senior leaders hurts the reputation of Jesus. Unhealthy leaders give those around them grounds to become cynical of the church. After all, when people are hurt, marginalized, mistreated, inappropriately treated or fired by the very people who are charged to be their shepherd - and are undershepherds of Jesus, what would one expect? Sometimes the very pastors that are trying to make their ministry accessible to unbelievers are the ones who sabotage those efforts by their own behavior. When public behavior is different than private behavior there is an obvious character flaw that must be addressed.

Reflection: When issues like these are not addressed in a timely fashion they hurt the bride of Jesus. We are watching Mars Hill let staff go, close venues, cut budgets and struggle to deal with the aftermath of the issues that have surrounded their former senior leader. They will be a wounded body for a long time to come and I lay the blame on the senior leader and church leaders who could have and should have done something about it a long time ago. All I can say is that it is very sad and a lot of innocent folks will be caught in the middle. 

The drama at Mars Hill is sad. We need to reflect on the lessons we can learn from their situation and ensure that it does not ever happen in ours. 

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 discount on orders of ten or more.

I know my leader is unhealthy when...

• They regularly respond with defensiveness or anger when challenged
• They discourage open and honest dialogue where people are free to share their minds in a safe atmosphere
• They threaten those whose opinions are different from theirs
• They tell one person one thing and another person a different thing
• They need to be popular and loved
• They are not fully candid but tend to spin the truth
• They intimidate or threaten staff in order to achieve compliance
• There are many items that are not safe to talk about in their presence
• They care more about themselves than the team they lead
• They take credit for what others do
• They don't work collaboratively
• They display excessive hubris
• They don't listen but rather talk
• They blame others when things don't go well
• There is no staff development
• They don't deal with unhealthy staff who get in the way of others
• They consistently don't remove barriers that need to be removed in order for me to do my job well
• They think they have all the answers
• They are not ethical

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.

Gag orders in the church. It is responsible for much toxic staff culture.

It is not unusual for me to hear about gag orders by senior leaders or their Executive pastors, effectively telling elders that they cannot talk to church staff and staff that they cannot talk to elders. Usually it is in the name of policy governance which states that the elders have one employee, and that is the senior leader who can manage his staff as he pleases. This is both a misreading of policy governance, an unwise thing to do and often reflects the personal insecurity of the leader.

First lets clear up the policy governance issue. Under this board management tool, what is clear is that elders cannot tell staff what to do. That is the prerogative of the senior leader. They cannot manage staff. And it is also true that staff should not go around their leader to the elders as an end run to get what they want. 

What it does not say is that elders and staff should not talk. In fact I think it foolish for a leadership board to not know the temperature of the staff. Consider this: if staff cannot talk to the board in any fashion, what do they do when they have problems that are not getting solved by their leader? 

My experience is that such gag orders are usually a sign of insecurity on the part of leaders more than anything else. This was part of the massive dysfunction Mark Driscoll created at Mars Hill Church where there were major dysfunctions on staff but staff were not permitted to talk to others about it. In a large church I did crisis management in a long string of staff had been mistreated. The board suspected but had not inquired because they were not supposed to talk to staff.

Healthy organizations are not afraid of conversation around whatever issues they face. Healthy leaders are not afraid of alternate opinions or push-back. We have intentionally created an open culture in ReachGlobal where all issues can be put on the table with the exception of hidden agendas or robust dialogue. We welcome the conversation even if it challenges our current thinking. 

I am always deeply wary of what is actually going on when gag orders appear rather than the invitation to open dialogue.

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.

Vital statistics on pastors that all pastors and church board members should know

How healthy are pastors today? What is their spiritual life like? What do they struggle with? Who are their friends? What is their drop out rate. The following article is sobering for pastors and their congregants alike and calls for some serious discussion.

See article here

The ultimate betrayal

The ultimate betrayal for any staff or congregation (in the case of a church) is to discover that their leader has lived a double life and that he has been teaching truth while living a lie. It is a dissonance that does not compute, often negates in the minds of those betrayed the truth that has been taught and is almost impossible to reconcile apart from acknowledging the fallenness of man.

Truth and lies cannot co-exist forever. And when it becomes known it is as if a fraud has been perpetuated on the organization, especially when it has a long history. It begs the question, "Is everything I have known about this individual a fraud?" "Is it all a lie?" The answer is probably not but the question lingers in the mind and one is never sure.

One cannot underestimate the pain caused by a double life. In the aftermath it leaves confusion, anger, cynicism, a sense of betrayal, chaos and unanswered questions. It can split churches, hurt organizations and wound staff and constituents. The wound takes years to heal.

The personal life of a leader is not an optional concern for those who lead. In taking up the leadership mantel they take up the responsibility to live the life they espouse: Not perfectly but with disciplined attention. If one is not willing to live the life of a leader they should not lead. There is a higher standard because there must be integrity in both the words and the example of those out front. The compromise of either or both leads to betrayal. It is why Paul told Timothy to watch both his life and doctrine closely.

Anyone who has lived through the revelation of such a betrayal knows the wake of pain left behind. Others must come in and clean up the mess, bring healing to wounded hearts and there is anger that sometimes never dissipates as people carry their animosity toward the one responsible. 

Can God bring restoration to the one who betrayed and healing to those betrayed? Yes! Only He can take any sin and use it for His purposes. Only He can redeem and forgive and give us the ability to forgive. But the road back for all is hard. Memories may fade but they don't go away. Forgiveness must be given time and time again. It is a road no one wants to walk.

The slippery slope for leaders is that they see success, begin to believe their own press, marginalize those who don't agree with them, become isolated and isolation breeds the arrogance that the rules don't apply to them. They do!

(Posted from High Point, NC)

Why passive leadership is so disempowering to staff

Actually the term "passive leadership" is an oxymoron since it is not leadership at all. It is someone who is in a leadership position but who does not lead his/her staff. It is deeply disempowering to staff for a number of reasons.

First, non-leadership leaves staff in a quandary. They often lead a team and a ministry. How do they contribute to the whole when there is not overall missional direction? They are forced by virtue of the passive leader to determine what that direction should be and you end up with multiple directions as different staff members fill the void of leadership in their own way.

Second, none of us want to waste our lives. Good staff see the potential around them and deeply desire to make a difference. The opportunity they see and the lack of missional direction create great frustration over opportunity wasted. The end result is cynicism toward the non leading leader and often the loss of good staff who are looking for meaningful direction.

Third, just because a leader is passive does not mean that they don't have opinions and this is one of the most frustrating aspects of passive leadership. Because passive leaders don't set the directional agenda their staff end up doing so. But, passive leaders often don't like what they see so they step in and either change or challenge the hard work that has been done. Thus staff are in a double bind. They are not given the information up front as to the direction and they face the prospect of being disempowered on the back end after they have done their work. It is truly a no win proposition.

Fourth, passive leaders are often threatened by those who step in to fill the void and good staff will try to do just that as organizations need and want directional focus. This creates tension between the passive leader and his/her staff and it is not the staff's doing but the natural result of a passive leader who is not leading. The passive leader wants to be in charge even though they don't know how to steer a healthy team in a healthy direction. Thus they live with an inner conflict that spills over into the team in unhealthy ways.

The bottom line is that no matter how good someone is in some area of work, if they cannot lead they should never be put in a leadership role. Passive leadership is not only bad leadership but it is deeply disempowering to everyone around the passive leader.

(Posted from Oakdale, MN)

Ways that pastors disempower their staff

I frequently talk with church staff who live with disempowering pastors. Ironically, these same pastors are often deeply loved by their congregations who experience a life giving leader while those who work for him experience a life taking leaders. While almost never intentional, the actions of pastors who disempower staff cause discouragement, mistrust and cynicism among staff. Pastoral staff rarely have received training in leading, developing healthy teams or supervision which may be the reason that staff dysfunction is so common.

Here are some common ways that senior pastors disempower their staff.

• Do not develop cultures where robust dialogue can take place. Too many senior pastors take any disagreement as a personal attack which means that they effectively shut down discussion on important ministry issues with those whom they work with.

• Using the God card to manipulate staff. "I am concerned about your spiritual walk," or "Your theology is wrong." Such God talk shuts down conversation rather than inviting it.

• Not preparing for staff meetings. The vast majority of church staff I talk to indicate that their leader is not ready for meetings and seems to be bored by them. Of course, that is a waste of time for everyone present and it sends a message that staff are not an important investment of their time.

• Not giving feedback unless it is negative. Lack of encouragement is deeply discouraging.

• Changing their mind. A common scenario is that senior leaders ask a staff member to work a certain issue and after the work is done, unexplicitly change their mind and either change what has been done or go a different direction completely.

• Make last minute changes to programs or weekend services which sets off a chair reaction of people that need to be redeployed to meet the leaders's wishes.

• Are not open to suggestions or feedback. They expect staff to jump to their needs but are not open to hearing the opinions or feedback of staff.

• A mentality that staff are there to serve them rather that they are there to serve their staff. A disconnect with what Jesus has to say about leadership.

• A lack of significant relationships with staff. Trust comes with relationship and in the absence of relationship that trust is often non-existent.

• Lack of empowerment of staff to do their jobs. Micromanagement kills staff morale.

The fact is that many church staff cultures are toxic and unhealthy and when that is the case, the person responsible is the senior leader who has not created a healthy ethos. Often it reflects a pastor who has problematic EQ. Church boards need to hold their senior leaders accountable for the health of the staff as well as the health of the congregation. Allowing toxicity in the staff is not consistent with what we espouse as a church.

When we disempower or mistreat those who work for us in the name of ministry or Jesus we have a major disconnect. When we talk of the fruit of the spirit and transformation but it is not reflected in our own staff relationships it is a sign that attention needs to be paid to the culture of our ministry. Our internal culture must reflect our external culture. 

If you hare a senior pastor are you willing to ask your staff if any of these examples apply to you? If you are not, it is an indication of your own fear. You have nothing to lose and everything to gain by doing so.

(Posted from Oakdale, MN)

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.

Four characteristics of dysfunctional leaders who create chaos in their organizations

Ministry leaders often bring significant chaos to an organization when their own EQ (Emotional Intelligence) becomes a barrier to their leadership. It may not manifest itself in the beginning but over time these dysfunctions become issues for their staff, the direction of the organization and the ability of the organization to move to a new level

Defensiveness
Defensive leaders face a dilemma. It is not easy for their staff to address issues that need to be addressed, especially if the leader feels that it involves him/her. That inability often creates crisis situations where things finally blow up and then need to be massaged because the feelings of the leader have been hurt. 

The upshot is that issues are never really resolved but often move in a cycle of a blow up, some sort of peacemaking and then another blow up and the cycle goes on. Eventually good people get tired of the drama and choose to move on.

Ego needs
Leaders who confuse their identity with their ministry are usually unable to let go, empower others and allow other voices to speak into situations. Their need for approval, for being at the center of the ministry and a need to control coupled with defensiveness puts staff in a difficult situation. Everything ultimately revolves around the leader and their needs. Ego also needs make it hard for such leaders to see issues in an objective manner because criticism even when constructive is seen as a threat. 

Because of their defensiveness, staff members may regularly play to the ego of their leader in order to get things done which feeds an unhealthy addiction all the while preventing candid, honest dialogue around real organizational issues. The result is a significant amount of drama around the leader and their relationships along with an inability of staff to make independent decisions.

Lack of self definition
The first two dysfunctions feed a third which is the inability of leaders to stake a position that is consistent. Because defensiveness prevents true dialogue and because ego needs drive their leadership, these leaders often move from one position to another - often in the direction of the last individual who stroked their ego. It is why such leaders change their minds often which causes all kinds of issues for staff or volunteers.

Triangulation
Leaders who suffer from these dysfunctions often prefer private conversations with staff or board members rather than laying all the cards on the table in a group setting where they cannot control the outcome as easily. It is a divide and conquer strategy which allows the leader to bond with another individual on issues but not allow the give and take of opinions and options that takes place in a group setting. It comes out of their need to control rather than to allow robust dialogue.

These dysfunctions create a fair amount of chaos, relational issues and drama. Whenever those characteristics are present it pays to look more closely at the EQ of the leader. They set the stage for either a healthy or dysfunctional organization. More importantly these dysfunctions keep the organization from becoming all that it can be. It is literally held hostage by the EQ issues of the leader.