Dealing with unhealthy or dysfunctional leaders

Coming out of some recent blogs on dysfunctional leaders the question was put to me in response, how does one confront unhealthy leadership behavior? It is a complex question since these leaders often don't play fair but I have seen this done well and I have seen it done poorly. What I will say at the outset that it is not easy. However, since an organization reflects the ethos and culture of a leader, their unhealthy behavior will directly impact the health of the organization and if not addressed for years after they are no longer in leadership.

Let me remind us of what some of those unhealthy behaviors are: The need to get one's own way, passive aggressive behavior, dividing people into camps (those who are for me and those who are against me), marginalizing those who don't agree with them, significant defensiveness, narcissism couched in spiritual language, using the God card (God told me), lack of accountability to a board or spiritual authority, inability to deal with conflict in a biblical way, words and actions which demean others, creating a culture of fear, an inability to lead, manipulating people to get their way, forcing their way through the strength of their responses and arguments which run over others and I could go on. At the bottom of this blog you will find a series of links to blogs that deal with these behaviors.

The first thing to do when you are feeling uncomfortable with a leaders behavior in any of these or other areas is to tell them how you feel. If it happens in private I would address it in private. If it happens in a board or committee meeting I would most likely address it there by saying something like, "Stu, when you respond the way you just did it feels like other opinions are not valued or that we cannot have robust dialogue around these issues. Is that your intention?" Honest feedback is critical to getting to issues with unhealthy leaders if they are going to have a chance at modifying their behavior.

If the issue is a pastor, or organizational leader, you may well need to have an executive session of the board to put the cards on the table. The goal would be to have an honest conversation, and to talk about a plan of action which must include leveling with the leader you have issues with. Certain behaviors should simply not be tolerated when they negatively impact others or hurt the organization. You may choose to get them coaching or help but what you cannot do is allow the behavior to continue. 

The marketplace is far better at this than ministries where in the name of "grace" we don't honestly confront problematic behavior. And remember, we are not judging motives but we are naming behaviors that are unacceptable. In the name of honoring our spiritual leaders we often overlook behaviors that are problematic but frankly that is why we have a plurality of leadership in the church. No one gets a pass on truly dysfunctional behavior no matter who they are.

The more severe the dysfunction, especially when it borders on pathology the more difficult it is to get through the defenses of an individual. Narcissism is a good example. A highly narcissistic individual may never understand or accept that they are in need of help. The higher the defense mechanism within an individual, the more difficult it is to address the behaviors because they are convinced that the issue is not with them. Pathological liars, for instance, believe what they are saying even when it makes no sense to others. 

Some individuals are simply living in an alternative reality field which cannot be penetrated no matter how much you desire to address it. I have come across leaders whose behavior has been deeply egregious and they are totally unable or unwilling to take responsibility or to admit issues that others around them see all too well. It is a sad reminder of our unlimited ability to deceive ourselves which is why all of us need healthy relationships, accountability and the humility to listen to others.

If there is an impasse between the leader and the supervisor or board don't hesitate to bring in a wise leadership counselor who can help put the elephants on the table and as a neutral party help bring resolution. I have often played this role with elder boards either by Skype or in person. In one case of a deeply dysfunctional leader the elders knew something was wrong but just didn't want to face the hard reality until someone gave them permission to say "this is unacceptable."

One thing to keep in mind is that with dysfunctional leaders, once people have been negatively impacted by them they often refuse to serve in leadership and often migrate out of the church or organization. After all why stay if it means one will be marginalized, not listened too or treated badly. Often those in leadership wake up one day to realize that some of their best people have left because they did not deal with the issues sooner. Ironically, the very people you need to bring the organization back to health are not with you anymore. 

The operative phrase in the title of the blog is that one should not neglect to deal with the dishealth in leadership where and when it exists. Not to do so is to abrogate our oversight or leadership responsibility to the detriment of the ministry. It is hard and needs to be done wisely and with grace and truth. The more unhealthy the leader, the more push back you will get which tells you that they are unwilling to live under Biblical accountability and authority which is a non-negotiable or those of us who serve in leadership. Or that they are unable to see their issues which is a fatal flaw that must be addressed - usually with termination.

Some blogs to consider:

Spiritual narcissism

Ambition, money, power and ministry

Why humility is so important in leaders

Five temptations leaders face

Guarding our humility as leaders

Nine overlooked but unhealthy character issues in leaders

Self Deception

The dangers of arrogance in leadership

The EQ factor in the leadership equation

Enemies of a leader's heart

Five danger zones for leaders that contribute to leadership failure

Would you come back to this church?

Lots of strange things happen in church. Check this out. It is not the way to win friends and influence people!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSJt-LHMNRY&feature=youtu.be

Ambition, money, power and ministry

Ministry not only attracts those who have a deep passion for God and the spread of the Gospel but it can also attract those who have personal and selfish ambition, are driven by money or power and who find ministry platforms a convenient means of realizing their ambitions.

Why choose a ministry platform? Because it is relatively easy to hide behind a facade of spirituality and ministry. It is just another platform to use for their own purposes and believers are not always as discerning as they ought to be.

There are signs of those who are more about ambition, money and power than they are about humble service.

World changers
I am always cautious about Christian leaders who are going to "change the world." Now I am a guy who loves great vision and we are praying that God would allow us to impact 100 million people with the gospel in ReachGlobal. But that is going to happen through indigenous movements in specific areas of the world as God works. No one can "change the world." Jesus will when He returns but grandiose claims are often more about the personal ambition of the one making them than they are about Jesus. I can impact corners of the world through the Holy Spirit. I cannot change the world.

Power brokers
I am always cautious about Christian leaders who broker power, are unaccountable to others and who make major ministry decisions by themselves rather than through team. Power is a dangerous thing and does not leave one unscathed. The healthiest leaders surround themselves with accountability through boards, team and live with great personal humility demonstrated through service to others rather than through power. When I don't see that I am very cautious. The more power one exercises autonomously the more dangerous it is to them and to others.

When it becomes about money
I deeply believe in Christian stewardship and live that out. When, however, ministry becomes more about money than anything else, where there is an emphasis on what money can do or when a leader has not used money with integrity beware. I have had a situation recently where I did an online ministry seminar for an individual before I did my due diligence by checking him out on the web. After all, many prominent names were attached to his "ministry."

When I Googled him I found that he was under several federal charges (regarding money) and was in litigation with a number of churches who charge him with defrauding them of half a million dollars. In addition he has a string of unpaid bills. It is a long list of financial issues. Yet his ministry is all about raising one billion dollars for ministry and he advertises himself as one who can help ministry find those dollars. Of course he will not take my content down because he is making money on it.

In another case in a church I am familiar with the theme became more and more about money and the pressure to give went up and up. Eventually the leader left and has since declared bankruptcy. 

Personal ambition, power and money are warning signs to beware because they can hide behind spiritual language and be lived out in the name of ministry. The ministry veneer does not make them OK.

The truth of the matter is that we often allow behaviors in ministry that would never be tolerated in the secular workplace and the sad thing is that those behaviors are often coated with a veneer of spiritual language that others find it hard to press back on. Bad behavior is bad behavior but it is worse behavior when it is coated in a spiritual facade because one is using the Holy to cover the unholy.

We are far too reluctant to confront unholy behavior in ministry settings under the guise of "grace." Grace, however does not allow sinful behavior. Rather it forgives sinful behavior when it has been confronted or acknowledged.

Jesus told us to be wise as serpents and innocent as doves. Wisdom is about recognizing what is spiritual and what is hiding behind a mask of spirituality. It is also about being aware of our own motivations in ministry because none of us are immune to what can happen when left to ourselves.

How leaders often shut down discussion, stifle dialogue and create stagnant cultures

Have you ever been in a staff meeting at some time in your career where you knew it was unsafe to say what you really felt? Or, where everyone knew that nothing would be said that would be considered contrary to what the leader thought? Where many positive things would be said about the ministry but no one would name the many elephants? 

Whenever I see a culture like this I know that there is a leader who has shut down discussion and stifled dialogue enough times that people will not say what really think, and everyone but the leader seems to know that.

How do leaders shut down discussion, stifle dialogue and create stagnant cultures? One of the easiest ways is simply to make  dismissive statements when suggestions are made: "that won't work," "I don't like it," "We don't do that kind of thing here, "We've never done that." Sometimes it is just body language that says something like "You have to be kidding."

Whether the idea or suggestion is a good one or not these kinds of statements from leaders send a strong message that one is better off just keeping their mouth shut. Not only are such statements pathetic in their lack of EQ but they are designed to end conversation that the leader does not want to have.

Often, leaders who display such behaviors are really saying that if the idea is not theirs it is not going to fly. In other words they are simply not willing to consider anything that does not fit their paradigms which staff quickly pick up on and choose to simply stay quiet. 

Those who continue to speak up and press into things that the senior leader does not want to hear or do quickly find that they are marginalized and sometimes even forced to move on. That sends a very powerful message the conformance and silence are the keys to survival.

Another way that leaders can do this is simply to ignore proposals that are made. In one such case I am aware of, the leader will tell subordinates that he will "think about it" or "study the proposal" and never bring it up again. It dies by deliberate neglect.

All of this creates a culture of stagnation because ideas, suggestions and different paradigms are not welcome at the leadership table. Staff must operate within a narrow band of what is acceptable and cannot be themselves in using their best thinking and creativity. It is a deeply frustrating place to be for anyone who is even a moderately healthy individual.

It also creates a culture of elephants - issues that everyone know are there but which cannot be safely addressed or even identified. What makes this so absurd and crazy is that the issues are not secret but they have to be treated as secrets, or as non-issues. As the number of issues grow that cannot be discussed, so does the dysfunction in the organization. When things do erupt out of frustration, the eruption is often unhealthy because healthy dialogue was shut down long ago. 

Unfortunately there are many examples of leaders who shut down discussion, stifle dialogue and create stagnant cultures. It is a sign of personal leadership dishealth, insecurity, dysfunction and it hurts the staff, organization and even the ability of the leader to lead well. I have vowed that I will never again work for such a leader. 

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?

It only takes a few bad leaders to destroy the vision of many

The story of numbers 13 is deeply instructive for any ministry organization. As you remember, the spies were sent into the promised land to survey it prior to the Isrealites taking it. On return, two of the spies gave a favorable report while ten did not. Those ten said it was an impossible job to take the land. The people were too big, the cities too fortified and the land to vast. Never mind that God had promised it to them and said that He would go before them as he had so many times before already.

What is scary is that it took only ten individuals to sway the vast majority of the people who then refused to follow God and ended up causing everyone to wander in the desert for 40 years. Hundreds of thousands of people suffered because of ten individuals who refused to follow God or believe his promises, and these were leaders no less.

Ministry success always depends on leaders who are willing to courageously follow Christ and believe that He will take them to the places He wants them to go. Negative leaders, scared leaders, tentative leaders, easily swayed leaders, leaders of little faith - none of these should be leaders in God's Kingdom. Like the leaders in Moses day they will hurt rather than help those whom they lead.

Ministries do way too little to guard the leadership door against those who do not belong. Who you have in leadership matters a lot. The wrong leaders exact a spiritual price on those they lead while good leaders do the opposite. It only takes a few bad leaders to derail an organization.

In almost every ministry meltdown or church conflict I have watched it was the failure of a few leaders to act with wisdom and vision that caused the problems. Who paid the price of their bad leadership? Everyone else!

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.

The challenge and danger of a divided ministry board

If you sit on a ministry board that is divided and in conflict, you need to know that the division is highly likely to negatively impact the organization you oversee. Divided boards are a clear warning that danger is imminent for the ministry as a whole and it is therefore imperative that the board do whatever it needs to do - including disciplining and humbling itself to resolve the issues.

There are a number of ways that boards become divided. How it become divided is not the relevant issue here. That the board is able to get on one page is! Not to do so is to place the ministry in jeopardy which violates the board's responsibility to protect and ensure that the ministry flourishes. 

Let me suggest that divided boards must grapple with a number of key issues:

Clarity 
It is critical that divided boards are clear as to what the mission and the priorities of a ministry are. Philosophical differences reflect a lack of clarity and until that lack of clarity is dealt with the board will remain divided.

Humility
Divided boards are often the result of one or more individuals who will not submit their will to the will of the group. This is both unbiblical and it is poor leadership. If a board member cannot in good conscience submit to the will of the majority they should resign. Allowing the board to remain divided hurts the organization.

Practices
At times, boards are divided because the board does not have good governance practices. For instance, I have worked with boards where disgruntled staff are regularly talking to board members who then have information that other board members don't have and which undermines the leader. Often, a change in governance practices can bring the board greater health.

Makeup
There are times when the only way to solve a divided board is for the minority to choose to step aside so that the board can move forward in in unity. While it is a significant step to take, divided boards are dangerous and if the division be resolved together it is better for the minority to step aside. 

Divided boards usually need an outside consultant to help them work through divisive issues. Consultant's however can only help if the board as a whole is willing to humble itself and deal with its dysfunction, whatever the source. Wherever we stand, the ministry as a whole and its health comes before our own desires. 

Don't ignore a divided board. Do whatever is necessary to deal with it for the sake of the ministry.

Five temptations leaders face

Leadership positions are a mixed blessing. For those wired to lead it is a joy to be in one's sweet spot. However, leadership brings with it a set of very real temptations that trip up CEO's, pastors, presidents and ministry leaders. Given these temptations, the first priority of every leader ought to be health: emotional, relational, spiritual, leadership and skill health. In the absence of that kind of care, there is a high likelihood that a leader will suffer one or more of the following temptations.

Isolation
Leaders find themselves in a difficult place. They higher one rises in leadership responsibility the more isolated it feels. Good leaders, while collegial and approachable are not "one of the boys," or "one of the girls." They must push the missional agenda with those they lead and while the culture may well be collegial, they are still the leader and their focus on the missional along with decisions they must make will not always leave them popular.

Leaders who are promoted from within their organization quickly realize that the relationships they had with their peers have changed. It must if one is going to lead well.

Isolation, however, is a trap because we were not made to live in isolation. Isolation breeds loneliness and loneliness breeds unhealthy habits and addictions in a desire to fill that hole of loneliness. Leaders must face that temptation squarely and intentionally foster deep, meaningful relationships with peers at their level and friendships outside their organization. Isolation is dangerous so there needs to be a strategy to counter it.

Feeding a dark side
As noted above, feeding a dark side is often the result of isolation. Long hours, loneliness, constant travel, lack of genuine friendships all leave one vulnerable to unhealthy addictions: pornography, affairs, gambling, drugs, alcohol or other risky behaviors. The unconscious justification is "I need an outlet to my hectic leadership responsibilities."

Isolation and dark sides go together. Wise leaders have a deliberate strategy for avoiding isolation and the development of healthy habits that minimize the need to feed the dark side - which is simply a way to fill some emotional, spiritual or relational hole.

Running on empty
Many leaders have bought the lie that in order for them to lead well they need to be constantly on the move, running from one important meeting to another, one city or country to another. One cannot run a sprint twenty hours a day, day after day, and not pay the price.

God did not design us to run on empty. It can feel good - after all I am so important that I have this incredibly busy schedule - my input is needed all over the place: balderdash! Busyness may feed our self importance but it is not a necessity of leadership. Wise leaders set a livable pace, building in relational time, think time, rest time, and they say no to tons of good things in order to say yes to the most important things. Run on empty long enough and your leadership will be compromised

Taking short cuts
It is amazing how many leaders run aground on the shoals of ethical issues. After all, I work so hard, I give so much of myself to the organization, I am owed something too! Above all, leaders must model the highest ethical behavior and go the extra mile to avoid any appearance of ethical short cuts.

Arrogance
Arrogance is both the end result of the first four temptations and feeds them further. Arrogance is an attitude that the rules don't belong to me, I am the one with the needed wisdom, as the leader, I am different, and this ministry or company revolves around me.

Many leaders fall to this temptation. In the end it severely compromises their ability to lead because those around them will not give themselves to an arrogant leader - if they have other options.

Leadership is a high calling and for those who lead well a most satisfying job. But we will only be good leaders to the extent that we are healthy leaders. Healthy leaders live lives of significant discipline with a great deal of self knowledge because leadership 101 is avoiding the five temptations that will unravel my leadership!

What happens when churches lose their way

Many of us have experience with churches that lose their way. This happens when there is no longer a compelling vision, when there is not a discernible or consistent direction, when focus and clarity have been lost and leaders cannot answer the important questions of direction, mission, vision, and what we are after. It could be defined as mission malaise with serious consequences that are often not noticed until it is too late.

There are several symptoms of churches that lose their way. If you sense this is happening it is critical to deal with it as quickly as possible because the longer it lasts the more difficult it is to bring health and missional focus back.

Here are symptoms to watch for:

A clearly defined direction and vision is no longer being articulated. When this happens you know that whatever ministry vision was once present has dissipated and leaders have not been able to come to clarity on what is next. It is a dangerous place to be.

A restlessness is felt in the congregation by key leaders. Some people are not bothered by lack of direction and missional energy but good leaders are. That restlessness is felt in raising questions of direction and vision and sometimes pressure put on the senior pastor and the board.

Good leaders quietly leave. One of the most dangerous issues for churches that have lost their way is that good leaders and people who have been deeply involved in ministry over the years quietly leave the congregation. They usually don't make a statement but they want to be in a place where there is missional passion. Life is short and they want to be a part of a congregation that is serious about reaching their community and world. The sad thing is that when the church wakes up (if it does), the very people who could have helped them move forward are now gone.

Politics and infighting increases. When people are not focused on missional issues they start focusing inward and often get involved in petty conflicts that would never have arisen if we had more important issues to tackle. Church conflict is often a symptom of a church that has lost its way.  

Plateau and decline. When a church loses its way it usually stops growing, loses ministry energy and often starts to lose people as mentioned above. 

The explanations of leaders for lack of ministry energy, decline and people leaving does not make sense. Pastors and leaders of churches that lose their way often circle the wagons and either cast blame on others (often those who have left), circumstances or spiritualize the issue. When their explanations don't make sense to the average individual you can extrapolate that they know they are in trouble but don't know the way out. 

If your church has lost its way take action sooner rather than later. The longer you wait to deal with the need to re-envision and re-energize ministry the harder it will be. It is never easy to admit that you are in a bad place but until we face reality we cannot move on toward health.

Dumb things senior leaders do

Complain about their board members

Bad move. First it violates board "rules of engagement," second it will get back to those you complain about and it will destroy trust with those board members and you. I recently heard of a pastor who was actually complaining about a board member of his to staff at another church and it came back to bite him and caused great distress for that board member (as it should) and destroyed any trust that was there. If one needs a healthier board or has issues with a board member, work through the issues on the board but never complain about your board members to others. Just as you would not want them to do that about you.

Create an "us versus them" mentality

This occurs when a leader blames the board for decisions that they or their staff do not like. Wait! The leader is part of that board that made the decision. In fact it is his/her senior team so to blame them is simply not to take responsibility for decisions that they made. In our organization we call this Leadership Default! Any time a leader blames the board for a decision whether subtly or outright he divides the board and the staff and creates an unhealthy us verses them mentality.

Take credit for success

It is a bad thing to do! Yes, organizations need great leadership and the quality of leadership matters. But, the fact is that great leaders create an environment where staff and volunteers can shine and in the end it is everyone involved who was responsible for success. Great leaders always take the spotlight of success off of themselves and put it on all those who made it happen. They are humble, they are appreciative, they thank others and lift others up. They don't have a need to be the one who gets the credit. Where they do, everyone notices!

Blame others for failure

Here is the flip side. When we see success we look out the window at those who created it and lift them up. When we see failure we look in the mirror and take the blame. Great leaders don't blame others but take the responsibility when things don't go well. Hard? Sometimes yes. But then again if we have nothing to prove and nothing to lose and if we are ultimately responsible we do the right thing and take the responsibility.

Are defensive

One of the common sins of ministry leaders is defensiveness. I think of pastors who are not administratively or leadership savvy but won't let qualified lay leaders help. Or leaders who need to be right all the time and have the answers (no one does so we need to get over it). Too many ministry leaders are not teachable, are not approachable, are not willing to listen to truth and in the end hurt themselves and the organization they lead by their hardheadedness. I ran into that buzz saw of defensiveness recently with a leader and it was ugly. Defensiveness and lack of teachability is foolish.

Fail to regularly thank volunteers and staff

We can never thank good people enough for their efforts, their prayer, their financial gifts and their work. Not doing so is a sign of narcissism - obviously it is about us. But ministry is not about us as leaders, it is about unleashing others to be successful whether in a professional or volunteer capacity. Thank people often and with sincerity and you will be loved for it.

Don't develop their staff

One of the top priorities of leaders is to develop those who work for them, to help them become all that they can be in line with how God has gifted and wired them. Why is it foolish not to develop staff or volunteers? Because the success of the organization depends directly on how good our staff are, how well they understand their wiring and strengths and how they are deployed in their sweet spot. And it is what Jesus did with His disciples, and it is what He wants us to do with others (Ephesians 4:12). Leaders who do not develop others do not understand leadership, or think that it is all about them.

Don't set clear expectations
When staff don't know what is truly expected of them, they are in a no win situation. If they move ahead on something and show initiative but it is the wrong initiative (the senior leader was not clear on boundaries) they get dinged. Much staff frustration revolves around unclear expectations or expectations that change unexpectedly - usually because the senior leader is not clear either. Clarity for all is a gift. Lack of clarity is a curse. The number one job of leaders is to communicate clarity for his/her team. The number two job of leaders is to ensure that that missional clarity is delivered on.

Criticize staff in front of others
This is one of the most disempowering and dishonoring things a leader can do. There are certainly times when staff need direct and honest feedback but praise should be public and criticism should be private. It is a matter of honor and respect. Staff rarely resent honest feedback in private but will remember it for a long time if done publicly.

Dictate rather than collaborate
I have a friend who thinks that leadership means telling other people what to do! That is rarely good leadership. Rather, leaders build teams, empower people to use their gifts and wisdom and create a collaborative environment where the team functions together under good leadership. Leaders who dictate, or micromanage do not understand the nature of leadership and will not find or keep quality staff.

Treat staff carelessly
Every interaction with staff carries with it a message of respect, disrespect, appreciation or lack of it. It is easy for leaders to treat these relationships carelessly since they have authority. They expect respect but don't always convey it and there is not much staff can do when they don't receive it. Every interaction that is careless, harsh, unkind or sharp costs a leader coinage with staff. Wise leaders treat others the way the desire to be treated.

Ultimately when we do these dumb things we hurt the organization and the staff who work for us. Every once in a while it pays to take a step back and honestly evaluate the quality of our leadership - and perhaps even ask our staff how we are doing.

Ten ways that ministry boards undermine themselves

Ministry boards undermine their own work when they ignore the following issues.

1. Board members who disagree with board decisions outside the board.
2. Allowing any one board member to hold up a decision because they have a policy on unanimity.
3. Focusing on day to day management rather than on organizational values, direction and those things they want to accomplish.
4. Learning together as a board.
5. Building agendas around the most important issues.
6. Helping the ministry get to maximum clarity on what spells success.
7. Crowding out prayer because of all the business of the board. Prayer is the business of the board!
8. Ensuring that the ministry has an annual ministry plan that drives the missional agenda.
9. Operating without a board covenant that defines relationships, expectations and procedure for the board.
10. Not living with a culture of expectation that God is going to do something significant through the ministry.

Nine overlooked but unhealthy character issues in leaders

Leaders often get a pass on character issues that are not blatantly sin but are problematic nevertheless. This is especially true of leaders who can produce results and it is not uncommon for results to trump character in our evaluation of leaders. 

The problem is that these overlooked character issues do in fact matter. Allowing them to continue is dangerous for the leader as these traits generally grow rather than diminish if not checked. It is also dangerous for the organization and in fact puts the organization at risk both of a problematic culture and the possibility that their leader will get himself/herself into trouble because of these character issues.

Supervisors, colleagues and boards all should be aware of these problematic behaviors and find ways to press into them when they see them - for everyone's sake. No matter how good someone is, these behaviors are a loss for everyone!

Never being wrong. This may mean a lack of admission, blaming others when things go wrong, spiritualizing them away or not apologizing to those for whom wrong decisions had a negative impact. Not admitting errors or bad decisions is a sign either of an insecure or prideful leader. Often the two go together.

Spiritualizing everything. This behavior is problematic on two counts. First, people usually spiritualize when something goes wrong and they don't want to take personal responsibility. Second, it is the "God card." To push back on something that God is "responsible for"  is pretty hard. Lot's of things are not spiritual. They are what they are and they are the results of decisions we have made.

Manipulative behavior. If you feel manipulated in a relationship it is probably present. This can take many forms but its design is to use you for their purposes. Manipulative behavior is really about using others for outcomes we want and is thus a violation of the free will of other people. It is wrong, violates other people and a sign of a personality disorder in the one who uses it.

Exaggeration. This is usually about ministry results or it may also be about ministry possibilities or plans. Exaggeration is dishonesty whether through overly optimistic thinking or wanting to paint a picture so good that it violates truth. It is salesmanship over the top rather than truthful and factual and it goes to the heart of what it means to speak truth and to avoid untruths.

Information withholding. This is actually a form of control and manipulation. As a leader, if I withhold information that could and should be known by others I have power that they don't have. It is very effective and very unhealthy. Some leaders will share information that makes them or their cause look good but carefully withhold information that would do the opposite. It is a dishonest, manipulative and self serving behavior.

Unwillingness to listen. This behavior conveys an arrogance that I have the answers, I know the direction, I don't need you and you have little to contribute to my thinking. Eventually this behavior and attitude will contribute to problems if not a train wreck. Those who will not listen carefully to others are displaying a dangerous autonomy.

Anger if crossed. This is both a sign of self importance and entitlement - how dare you disagree with me - and well as manipulative - this is what happens when you cross me. Autonomous people don't like to be challenged and autonomous people are dangerous in leadership. Anger shuts down alternative views and robust dialogue.

For or against mentality. This behavior rewards those who agree with and push the agenda of the leader and punishes those who disagree or speak candidly. Those who agree are insiders while those who disagree find themselves outsiders. Like, anger, this behavior shuts down alternate views and robust and healthy dialogue. 

It is not uncommon for those with this behavior to reward their inner circle with gifts, compliments and praise while being critical and cool toward the outsiders. Again, this is manipulative behavior designed to allow the leader to get his/her way and accomplish their agenda. They have the skill of making insiders feel very good and outsiders very bad - even abandoned.

Self importance. All of this is about an inflated self importance and the assumption that "I am the one who can make this ministry flourish." Without me it will fail or be much less than it is with me. Self importance must elevate self and to do that it must also devalue others and their contribution. When it becomes about the leader, healthy team is impossible.

These behaviors are antithetical to the leadership style and teaching of Jesus. They are also destructive to team and devaluing of others. When we choose to overlook them we end up hurting the ministry we represent and the staff who are impacted. 

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 dangers of arrogance in leadership

Arrogance: an attitude of superiority manifested in an overbearing manner or in presumptuous claims or assumptions (Webster). 

Arrogance is one of the potential pitfalls of leadership, especially for highly gifted leaders whose drive and ambition combined with a high degree of self importance and a lack of accountability fuel an ever heightened sense of imperious assurance. 

What are the signs of leadership arrogance? 

Self importance. Arrogance is, after all, all about self. These are leaders who truly believe that they are somehow different from normal human beings. They often speak about what they are doing in extravagant ways and rarely ask about what others are doing. Their focus in on themselves, their ministry and their contribution to the kingdom. The common theme is that it is about them.

Imperious assurance. This is a grossly over confident attitude that what they are doing is right, that it will always work and is often combined with extravagant claims. Any time you hear someone say that what they are doing is going to change the world or the church or something forever, beware. It is often simply the extravagant assurance of an imperious and arrogant mind.

Superiority. This is the natural outcome of arrogance. The belief that one is superior to others and that the decisions they make are better decisions than what others could make. This often plays out in marginalizing other good people because they are by nature not as good or bright or strategic as themselves. The way to elevate oneself is almost always to de-elevate others in some way.

Unaccountability. Arrogant leaders will never admit that they are unaccountable but what they often do is to simply ignore those who  disagree with them (even if it is their board or close colleagues) and do what they are intent on doing. Because the rules do not apply to them and because they are so confident that they are right they simply forge ahead with their agenda regardless of the voices that try to speak into their lives or plans. 

If someone becomes an obstacle to them or strongly disagrees with them they are often marginalized and shunted aside. Arrogant leaders listen to those who fuel their self importance and discount those who don't. Often, those who were once close are discarded once they take the risk of disagreeing with them.

A force of nature. A force of nature is an apt description for highly arrogant leaders. They simply go where they want to go and do what they want to do regardless of who or what is in their path. In many cases, people intentionally get out of the way because being in their way is dangerous. Often boards or colleagues are unwilling to go up against them because the push back is so severe and the ability of arrogant leaders to sell their case and negotiate their way to what they want is exhausting. 

This is nothing other than raw intimidation to get their way. They know it but they also know that they can do it and that others will often scatter. Arrogant leaders are often highly skilled in manipulating those around them to get their way. That manipulation may be flattery, intimidation, anger, marginalization, negotiation, or just stubborn wills that refuse to be bent. What it amounts to is that they intend to get their way no matter what.

Risk and adrenalin. Massive arrogance causes unhealthy leaders to take risks that healthy leaders would never take. They posture the risk as game changing moves that will yield some amazing result. Often, it is risk and the adrenalin of running at warp speed, fueled by situations that must be solved (by them of course) that feeds their ego and need for stimulation. 

This is particularly dangerous in a ministry setting because it puts the entire ministry at risk if decisions are made that compromise it, and arrogant leaders are prone to take risks that others would not. Those risks are usually more for the fulfillment of their own ambitions than for the sake of the ministry they lead. They feed on crisis and complex situations that only they can solve.

It is not unusual for other leaders to not even know of some of the risks that the ministry has been subject to because in their unaccountably many arrogant leaders don't feel a need to disclose everything. They tend to disclose what they want people to know and keep close to their vest what they don't want to be known.

It should be obvious that these characteristics of arrogance are not only signs of dysfunctionality (think narcissistic personality disorder) but dangerous to the ministry they lead. In many cases, these leaders eventually crash themselves and the ministry they are leading. Often they move on and never acknowledge the damage they have done. In fact, their take is that whatever happened is someone else's fault. It is how they are wired because life is about them.

Whatever you do, if you see these characteristics, don't ignore them.

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.

Leaders who live in a fantasy world!

Leaders run a significant risk of living in a fantasy world that all is well when it is actually not. It is a risk because we want to believe that we lead well and we want to justify our leadership. Those on the outside often see what we cannot see on the inside. All leaders are susceptible to believing we are doing better than we actually are.

Some leaders want to live in their world where all is well - whether it is or not. But for those who want to live in reality, who want to lead from health and continue to grow their leadership there are a number of critical choices they can make to help them lead well.

First, the best leaders create cultures within their organizations where people can openly and candidly share their opinions, observations and opinions. People will not go where they know their leader does not want them to go. Thus leaders either encourage or discourage the very feedback they need from their sharpest people. All leaders make a choice on how much they want candid feedback from within their organization.

Second, the best leaders seek feedback from knowledgeable people outside of their organization as to how they are doing. Bringing in outside facilitators from time to time helps us to think more clearly and to see things we may not see. We need questions that help us sharpen our focus and which challenge our assumptions. One ministry recently asked me for my perception from the outside looking in. They didn't necessarily like what I said but it caused them to think and dialogue.

Third, the best leaders have clearly defined "ends" as to what they are going after in their ministry. The lack of objective results we are after allow us to believe we are doing well when in fact we don't know because we have not defined success. Charlie Brown used to practice archery without a target. When Lucy asked why, he said "because that way I hit it every time." Not knowing what we are after allows us to believe we are hitting the target when we may or may not be.

Fourth, the best leaders create strong boards of thoughtful, healthy members who ask the right questions, question the right things, help us think clearly and never let the missional agenda move away from our central focus. Great boards are not a hassle. They help us lead better by the dialogue, questions, and group wisdom. Good leaders want to know what their boards think and willingly make them accountable to their board. 

Fifth, the best leaders spend a great amount of time thinking about what they are doing and how they are doing and whether we are accomplishing the mission of the organization. Great leaders are honest with themselves about the real results of their leadership and the real results of the missional agenda. They don't gloss or ignore reality. In fact, they are frank with their staff on what is reality in order to keep the organization focused on areas of weakness in order to become stronger. 

Sixth, the best leaders look at all their practices and processes to evaluate them for effectiveness. We actually use a simple tool to improve our practices and processes. We identify them all and then rate them with a red, green or yellow. Green means all is well, yellow means that we could do better and red means that we have a lot of opportunity to improve. Yellows and reds are good colors because they indicate that we can improve. If we have nothing to improve we cannot get better. It is actually a way to do continuous improvement.

I know a group of leaders who will never practice these six suggestions because the truth is that they don't want to be challenged and are threatened by truth. I also know that truly good leaders are willing to go there because they are not threatened by reality. Rather, they want to know areas of weakness so that they can improve and grow!

Independence is a killer of organizational excellence

Organizational excellence - in any ministry or organization requires leaders to work in cooperation toward common goals. Too often, however, leaders want independence rather than interdependence, leaving the organization with multiple directions and a significant lack of alignment. 

In recent conversations with a large church staff, one of the staff members made the comment that what had been rewarded on their staff was the development of successful ministries rather than cooperative efforts - leaving the church with ministry silos without a common direction. There was no incentive to work together.

Here is an irony: Leaders insist that those on their team play ball together and follow their direction. In many cases, those very leaders are unwilling to to play ball with other leaders or to make themselves accountable for their own alignment and cooperation. They insist on alignment below them but do not submit or work toward alignment above them.

The independence of ministry leaders - doing their own thing - hampers many churches from experiencing greater impact and other ministry organizations the same. 

The sad thing is that they are modelling the antithesis of what they tell their own teams. And it does not go unnoticed. The sadder thing is that lack of interdependence, the humility to get on the same page with others and intentional cooperative efforts keeps the organization from experiencing the impact it could otherwise have.

It raises an interesting question. Why do those who lead so often find it hard to follow? And if I cannot follow (if I am part of an organization) do I have the moral authority to lead?  Our fierce independent streak is remarkably close to how Isaiah describes our sinfulness - "each of us has turned to our own way (Isaiah 53:6)." 

Organizational ministry is not an individual sport like golf. It is, rather a team sport like football, basketball or soccer where unless everyone knows their position and cooperates with the rest of the team and executes plays together there will not be a winning team. Often ministries who could be a winning team are leaving great spiritual influence on the table because they are in a team sport but their leaders are doing an individual thing and ignoring their coach. 

Before I am a leader, I am a follower. Even when I am a leader I am a follower. Leaders lead - and they follow, if part of an organization. When they don't, they lose their moral authority to lead. 

Those who get their way though intimidation in the church

Intimidation is a great way to get your way in church settings, mainly because most people are conflict adverse and don't want to go head to head with people who are bullies in their tactics. Bullies are no different in the church than in other arenas of life - their tactic is simple: intimidation.

Online Your Dictionary defines it this way: "To frighten into submission, compliance or acquiescence." It is the use of force of personality to get one's way because one is too intimidated to go up against them. By they way, those who do this know exactly what they are doing They know they are trying to force others to agree with them or to a decision or direction they want. Bullies have learned over time that they can bully others into submission.

In church settings, this intimidation may well have a spiritual veneer wrapped around it. Often, the bully will underhandedly bring a few other key voices into his/her circle in order to strengthen their case. Sometimes those they bring in are more vociferous in their tactics than the one who influenced them in their direction which is why one often needs to ask the question, who is the voice behind the voices when common issues are being voiced by several.

Whenever you have one board member who can effectively veto decisions of the board as a whole you have a bully. Whenever there is someone in the church who can veto decisions of the board, you have a bully. In case you feel the word "bully" is not gracious, Paul calls them "wolves" in Acts 21. This kind of behavior ought to be illegal in the church.

Here is something to know about bullies. They play unfair because they have learned that it is how they can get their way which is what bullying is all about - getting their way. What is also true is that when they are confronted on their behavior they get very nervous because at their root they are often insecure people which is why they use dysfunctional means to get their way and bully others. When confronted they will often back off quickly. 

At the board level, one prevents this behavior by a board covenant which does not allow unhealthy behaviors to prevail and when they do it gives them permission to remove the offender from the board.

At the congregational level, the loud, intimidating voices must be met by reasoned response from others who are willing to take them on. Congregations often assume that the loud voices represent a large faction of the congregation when in fact, they usually represent a very small faction (often just themselves) and when another person with courage challenges their position the congregation understands that there are others like themselves out there who have a reasoned position. To let people make loud, intimidating and obnoxious statements without a measured response is irresponsible.

Where it is clear that one has a divisive individual in the congregation it is up to the leaders to confront the individual's behavior and make it clear that it is unacceptable. Most bullies last as long as they do because no one has the courage to confront them. This is wrong.

Paul mentions three kinds of wolves the hurt the flock in the New Testament: The wolf of heresy, the wolf of ongoing unrepentant sin and the wolf of division. We do pretty good on the first two but the most common wolf in the evangelical world - division - is one that we usually don't deal with well. And it does our congregations a great deal of harm. 

In one church I am very familiar with, the board, congregation, district leaders and denominational leaders were unwilling to deal with a wolf of division which led to two decades of division within a congregation. Think of the pain because of a failure of courage. 

Bullies and intimidators don't like accountability. Putting into place measures that bring accountability and then following through is the best remedy for dealing with them. Give them their way and they will disempower and destroy a congregation.

Heart or head leadership

I encounter three kinds of leaders. Those who lead from their heart, those who lead from their head and those who lead from both. Let me explain.

Heart leaders have very tender hearts and because of it everyone loves them. They are like chaplains to their staff and they don't want anyone to be unhappy. When someone is, they want to solve it. 

There is, however, a significant downside to those who lead only from their heart. First, their "chaplaincy" role can get in the way of their leadership and supervisory role. Second, in their desire to make everyone happy they easily agree to things that are not in the best interests of the organization as a whole and may in fact be unfair to others in the organization (when preference is given). Third, they find it hard to make tough choices that impact people because their strongest bent is not to cause anyone unhappiness. And fourth, they often ignore issues that require confrontation since they are deeply conflict adverse. 

The irony is that over time, a leader who leads primarily from their heart creates a dysfunctional organization rather than the healthy one they think they are creating because of their sensitive heart. 

Then there is the leader who leads only from his/her head. They are all facts, policies, figures, and bottom line. Often they will make decisions that may be right but in ways that hurt people. There is no margin for compassion or flexibility on issues that they could be flexible on. The downside is evident. There is not a spirit of empathy or compassion, individual needs are not addressed even when they could be and process is not a high priority so that even good decisions are carried out in a way that disempower people. This style of leadership can be as dysfunctional as the first style, just for opposite reasons.

There is a third option that is far healthier than these two and that is to lead from both our hearts and our head. Here we are committed to always doing the right thing (not meaning the easy thing) but in a way that honors people and takes their concerns into account. In this leadership style we take people's issues into account but at the same time do not do for one what we would be unwilling to do for another and do not show favoritism! Nor do we ignore personnel or work issues because we don't want to make others feel bad. That is simply leadership default and while it may feel fair it is really unfair to everyone else in the organization.

Heart/Head leadership makes these commitments:

• I will always take into account the legitimate concerns of my staff
• I will be flexible to meet their needs without showing favoritism or extending to one what I would not extend to another all things being equal
• I will make decisions that are best for the organization as a whole but be deeply sensitive to how those decisions impact people and are carried out
• I will foster a caring, collegial workplace where people genuinely matter and where we are committed to accomplishing the mission God has given us
• I will do all I can to honor staff in the accomplishment of our mission, even when changes need to be made

Since all of us are wired toward either heart or head leadership, having people around us who can balance out our bent is helpful and important. Both matter!