How do Churches End Up with Domineering Bullies for Pastors - From the Gospel Coalition

How Do Churches End Up with Domineering Bullies for Pastors? 

From the Gospel Coalition

See also
Abuse in the Church: When the bully is the pastor 

Creating cultures of excellence
AddingtonConsulting.org

Understanding what good and bad EQ (Emotional Intelligence) look like

Emotional Intelligence (EQ), is the ability to understand ourselves, know what drives us, accurately understand how we are perceived by others, and understand how we relate to others. EQ measures whether we have the relational skills to work synergistically with others while being ‘self defining’ and allowing others to speak into our lives or work without defensiveness. Many of the actions, responses, attitudes and relational tendencies relate to our EQ. Healthy leadership therefore requires healthy EQ since leadership is all about relationships and people. One can lead from a position of authority with poor EQ but one cannot lead through deep influence without healthy EQ.

I believe that we pay far too little attention to issues of EQ in the hiring of leaders, building of teams or in our own lives. There are many brilliant individuals whose poor emotional intelligence leaves havoc in their wake. Poor emotional intelligence on the part of leaders is the major cause of relational and leadership issues. It is an issue every leader needs to pay close attention to. Those who do not end up hurting their leadership and the organization they lead. Several key issues of EQ stand out for leaders.

Consider these signs of poor EQ

• Defensiveness
• Inability to resolve conflict or negotiate differences in a healthy way
• Lack of empathy and understanding leaving people feeling hurt
• Marginalization of those who disagree with us
• Narcissism, where it is all about “me”
• A need to get our own way
• Control of others rather than empowerment
• Inapproachability by staff, volunteers or board members
• Use of spiritual terms like “God told me” or “spiritual warfare” to shut down discussion
• Lack of flexibility and ability to negotiate issues for a win/win solution
• Holding grudges and lack of forgiveness
• Inability to play on a team
• A history of relational problems with people one has worked with
• Lack of sensitivity to how actions, behaviors or words affect others
• Personal insecurity
• Inability to be self defining while maintaining good relationships
• Attitudes of cynicism and mistrust toward others
• A poor understanding of one’s strengths and weaknesses
• A victim mentality where we are the victims and it is always someone else’s fault when conflict occurs
• Seeing the world in black and white where there are good guys and bad guys and not much in between leading to the demonization of others
• Needing to be popular
• Becoming enmeshed in other people’s issues
• High personal anxiety over aspects of my job
• Saying one thing to one individual and another thing to others

Consider these signs of good EQ

• I am approachable and have a nothing to prove, nothing to lose attitude
• I seek to resolve conflict quickly and well
• I am self defined but always leave the door open for dialogue with those who disagree and work to keep the relationship
• I live with self confidence but not hubris
• I am highly flexible
• I seek to understand myself well including, weaknesses and strengths and the shadow side
• I ask others for feedback on my behaviors
• I am a team player and value “us” more than “me”
• I work very hard to understand others and put myself in their place
• I don’t hold grudges and extend forgiveness easily
• I don’t need to be popular but I do desire to be respected
• When conflict occurs I take responsibility for my part
• There are no issues that are off limits for my team to discuss
• I am patient with people and always give them the benefit of the doubt
• I have a sense of humor about myself and don’t take myself too seriously

Creating cultures of excellence
AddingtonConsulting.org

A question that too few leaders and supervisors ask of their staff

It is a simple question but one that unasked can have significant ramifications. It is this: Are you being used to your capacity? Or another way of asking this is Are you challenged and engaged? Often the answer is NO. The no signifies someone who wants more on their plate, who is underutilized and may not be fully engaged which leaves them vulnerable to looking for another job and another organization.

Of course, the loss to your organization whether they stay or leave is that gifts and potential are left on the table, a situation that few organizations can afford in our competitive day. All organizations have more that we could be doing than we do with the people we have. Leaving coinage on the table is foolish!

Why is this question not asked more often? It is because supervisors take the status quo for granted, and assume that staff are in their lane. When I do staff audits for ministries and organizations I find that there are many instances where staff feel underutilized and long for the opportunity to take on more responsibility. That is a gift to the enterprise if we can uncover it.

It is not unusual for staff to leave one organization and find another opportunity at another with higher responsibility and higher pay. Who loses? Usually it is the organization that missed the cue because they didn't ask and the staff member assumed that there was not way for them to develop in the place that they are. One simple question might have saved an employee who your organization had invested a great deal in.

Watch your staff and their abilities. Talk to them informally. Find out what their passions are and where they are on the happiness scale. Ask if they are engaged and fulfilled. And if not and you value them, try to get them into a place where they can use their gifts and abilities to the fullest degree.

Creating cultures of excellence
AddingtonConsulting.org

What is your word for the year?

Here is a simple exercise but one that can have a significant impact on your year. It is January so it is not too late to put into action. Consider praying about one word that you would like to focus on this year. My word for this year is peace. To be a person of peace, live in peace, have a home characterized by peace. Each morning as I awake I remind myself that I want to be a person of peace and live a peaceful life.

What is the one word that you would like to characterize your year? Courage? Reconciliation? Intimacy? Love? Joy? Patience? Healing? Leadership? Usually one does not need to think long and hard because you have already been thinking about something in your life that you need to focus on.

Because I journal I can note each day what I did to live out the meaning of the word peace. There are many opportunities and many ways I can do this. It is simply another way that I can be intentional in my life as I listen to God's promptings. If one does this year after year the cumulative affect can be significant.

What is your word?

.Creating cultures of organizational excellence
AddingtonConsulting.org

Life giving behaviors of healthy leaders

There are some life giving behaviors that good leaders engage in and live by. It is what sets them apart from other leaders, gives them great credibility and earns them the loyalty of their staff. It is also what makes their ministry or team successful. I say life giving because they give life to people and to the mission of the team or organization.

One: Good leaders never make it about themselves. They have the humility to understand that their leadership is about the mission they have been given and that they are stewards of that mission. Healthy leaders keep the focus on the mission, not on themselves. While relationships are critical the best glue is missional glue.

Two: Good leaders build a great team. Many leaders hire people who will do what they tell them. The best leaders hire people who they can empower within boundaries and release them. They empower rather then control and are not afraid of staff whose skills exceed their own. In fact they intentionally look for people who are better than they are in the areas they lead.

Three: Good leaders do not take credit for success. They give it to the whole team rather than take it themselves. They know that without God's empowering and the team they work with, success would not happen. It is not about me but about us together. Staff are not always out front and they appreciate it when their leader platforms them.

Four: Good leaders don't blame others for failures. Bad things happen and leaders know that if it happens on their watch they need to take responsibility. This sends a strong message that "my leader has my back." There may be private conversations but in public, there is no blame.

Five: Good leaders don't fail to address known issues. One of the things that gives leaders credibility with their staff is that they deal with issues even when they are hard. Issues that are not dealt with hurt staff and the ministry and staff need their leader to step into the tough places. Respect for a leader comes when they engage the issues rather than ignore the issues.

Six: Good leaders build a healthy life giving staff culture. Healthy cultures have an ethos of candid conversation, collegial relationships, trust, lack of turf wars, common mission, cooperation and humility. They avoid gossip, undermining of others, unresolved conflict, passive aggressive behavior,  and other negative behaviors that destroy healthy cultures.

Seven: Good leaders don't ask others to do what they don't do. They model the values and commitments of the organization, don't take advantage of their position and lead the way by example.

Eight: Good leaders pay significant attention to their staff. Making time for staff, being available to them, removing barriers they face and staying relationally connected are all factors in a healthy staff culture. They are never too busy to ensure that staff have what they need to do their job well.

Nine: Good leaders keep the mission central all the time. Few things are more demoralizing than mission drift because it robs the organization and staff of a cause worth giving their lives for. One of the first jobs of all leaders is to keep the mission front and central with great clarity.'

Ten: Good leaders continually clarify what is important. There is nothing more helpful to any team or organization than clarity. Ambiguity creates all kinds of questions while clarity answers those questions. Leaders clarify all the time.

Eleven: Good leaders foster candid dialogue and a non-defensive spirit.  It is wonderfully refreshing to meet leaders who encourage honest dialogue and who are totally non-defensive when their ideas are challenged.

Twelve: Good leaders lead collaboratively rather than autocratically. Collaborative leadership beats autocratic leadership every time because there is greater intellectual capital at the table as well as greater by-in. Few truly good staff will stay long term without having a voice at the table.

Thirteen: Good leaders require high accountability but exercise low control. They set appropriate boundaries but give a great deal of empowerment. Nor do they insist that staff do things their way but encourage them to use their creativity and gifts.

Fourteen: Good leaders develop their staff and the next generation of leaders. It is life giving when leaders are proactive in helping their staff grow. It is critical to the ministry to develop the next generation of leaders.

Fifteen: Good leaders don't stay beyond their usefulness. There comes a time for leaders to move on and it is better to move on when people want you to stay than leave when people want you to leave. And when they leave, they leave well!

Ignore these employee behaviors at your own peril

Those who lead people are usually optimistic about the staff they lead. But there are times when we need to recognize that it is not going to work with a specific staff member without significant change. In fact, there are behaviors that if not confronted will hurt your team and by extension your leadership. Many leaders err in allowing the behaviors to exist for too long. 

What are the signs that this is the case?

We keep running into attitudes or behaviors that are counterproductive to the mission of the ministry or the team a staff member is on. I spoke to a leader recently who has a staff member whose behaviors indicate unteachability and a significant amount of hubris. He has coached and told the staff member that his behaviors are counterproductive. But nothing changes. I suggested that he is dealing with someone who doesn't listen or believe that what he is saying is true. Unteachable people are unlikely to succeed as they tend to sabotage themselves. They also negatively impact those around them.

The staff member does not seem to value the mission or non-negotiables of the organization and want to do their own thing. Teams and organizations only work well when everyone is in alignment with the rest of the group. Lone rangers don't work well on a team or within an organization even if they are brilliant. If you have one staff member who is allowed to do their own thing, why should the others be in alignment? It is not ok for staff to be out of alignment with the organization's mission, values or practices.

There are significant EQ issues that keep popping up. The question here is whether the individual can be coached toward greater EQ health. If not, and if their EQ issues create issues within their team or organization, it is unfair to other staff to leave them in place. Further, unhealthy behaviors directly impact the culture of the organization. And a healthy culture is a key factor in your success! Often the result of EQ deficiencies is relational conflict, passive aggressive behavior, and unteachable attitudes, all of which create a degree of chaos among staff and often impacts constituents as well. 

You have tried to get someone into a productive lane but you have been unsuccessful. When there are high expectations for team members and there is an unproductive employee, everybody notices. They not only notice but leaders lose points when they don't address the issue because others are held to a higher standard. You cannot give an individual a pass. Sometimes there is no longer a fit. When I have done employee audits in organizations this issue pops up almost every time. It is noticed and it matters. 

When a significant amount of time and energy has been expended in trying to make it work and it continues to remain problematic it is most likely not a good fit. Optimism needs at some point to be tempered by reality. It is amazing how the exit of one staff member can be the key to freedom, joy and productivity of the rest of the team. It is not always a conclusion we desire to come to but in some circumstances it is the right conclusion.

An important factor in all of this is the impact of problematic behaviors on the rest of your staff. It is fundamentally unfair to the rest of your staff to allow unproductive behaviors to continue. What is often considered grace by a leader in allowing a problematic staff member to remain, is not grace for the rest of the team who are all impacted by the behaviors of other team members. Your "kindness" to one is not a kindness to others!

We cannot solve all the issues of staff members. It is not that they cannot find a place of effectiveness somewhere but sometimes it is not with our team or organization. Learning to be realistic as well as redemptive is a skill all leaders need to learn. After all, when it is not working for the leader it is usually not working for the rest of the team either. When we have done our best and it still does not work we need to take action - for our well being as well as for the well being of the organization.  Ironically it is usually the best for the staff member who does not fit as well. Run good process but don't prolong the pain.

 Creating cultures of excellence
AddingtonConsulting.org

8 responses to change: Understanding who will help you and who will hurt you

Many are familiar with the bell curve that describes how people respond to change: innovators, early adapters, middle adapters, late adapters, and laggards. In my experience in the change process, I have another set of suggested categories to watch for. Where individuals are on this continuum from change resistors to evangelists for change makes a significant difference when considering them for either staff or board leadership positions.

Resisters. Like the laggards on the bell curve, these people will actively resist change because they are wired that way. This individual told me, "T.J., you can bring whatever change you want to the organization, but don't expect me to do anything different." No rationale is going to change the mind of a resister.

Protectors. The protector is also highly resistant to change, but for another reason. They believe in the status quo, the way things have been done in the past, and they will actively try to protect "what is" rather than embrace "what could be." This individual told me and many others that the changes I brought to ReachGlobal would destroy the mission. 

Cynics. This group is simply cynical about change unless the proposed change is their idea. They tend to view change as "the flavor of the month" and are often vocal about their opinion. Cynics generally don't trust leaders, so proposals brought by leaders are quickly discounted.

Loyal followers. These individuals have a deep commitment to the organization and team. They accept change if there is a good rationale for it. These staff say, "Just tell me which direction we are going, and I will go with you." 

Idealists. This is an interesting group with an upside and a downside regarding change. When creating change, one inevitably creates a gap between what should be. Idealists are highly impatient to get to what should be and believe we should be there now. On the upside, they want the change. On the downside, they can become highly critical that we have not arrived. Thus, they can be either an ally or a critic on any day.

Realists. This group supports change, realizes it will take time and process, and is generally comfortable with it. They are helpful in realistically figuring out how to get there and can live with the tension of what should and should be.

Change agents. These individuals support proposed changes and will be active agents in helping the organization get there. They are your front lines in speaking a new language, setting a new course, and helping redesign philosophy and strategy.

Evangelists. These champions of change publicly and privately live the change out, help others understand and get there, and advocate for the new direction.

In my experience, realists, change agents, and evangelists will help drive change, while resisters, protectors, and cynics will actively undermine change. Loyal followers and idealists will go with you but will not drive change. 

Think about the implications of these eight ways that people respond to change: who you hire, who you put into leadership, and who you ask to serve on a board. After hearing these descriptions, one church leader aptly commented, "No wonder so many boards are stuck." He is right. Resisters, protectors, and cynics must be managed, but beware of allowing them into positions of leadership and influence!