The Bully Series: When church boards don't confront church bullies

 

Church bullies are toxic to the local church. They create divisions and unhealthy alliances, spread gossip and rumors, and undermine leaders regularly. They do this to accomplish their ends. They may be angry, have an agenda, or want to hurt leaders, whether boards or the senior Pastor. But the end result of their toxic, unethical, and unbiblical behavior is to hurt God's people. If you are a church leader, please read that last sentence again because it matters. 

Here is the problem with church boards and church bullies. Boards are very reluctant to deal with them. They are intimidated by them and don't want to rock the boat. They find all kinds of ways to justify this toxic behavior. "Oh, that is just Joe; get used to it." Listen, Betty is a good person despite all the gossip and malicious lies she tells." "We have always had a problem with Bill." 

And who gets hurt? First, God's people. The leadership becomes complicit in the toxicity when they refuse to deal with it. Bullies use disinformation, unkind words, gossip, malicious charges, and underhanded techniques to get their way. And they refuse to be held accountable. They triangulate leaders and, in the process, create doubt, distrust, and undermine senior leaders. Often, the senior Pastor. 

I am asking passive boards to reconsider their inaction when it comes to those who are toxic in the church. You are the key to solving these issues, and I invite you to do what God needs you to do and protect the body of Christ. 

I have several questions for church boards.

First, if you were the target of this malicious behavior, would you want someone to stand up for you? That is what senior pastors often don't get. They are expected to put up with unacceptable behavior in the church because you, as a board member, will not call the bullies out and confront them on their behavior. Many pastors live in pain or choose to move on when boards will not protect them.

Second, if you were a business or business owner leader, would you allow this behavior in your organization? Of course, you would not. You would recognize that this behavior does not serve you well and is undermining you and what you are trying to accomplish, and you would put a decisive stop to it. So why do you allow it to continue in the church?

Third, what do you make of frequent commands to Timothy and others to deal with divisive people in the church because their behavior is antithetical to what God has called us to? One day, you will stand before God and account for what you did and did not do as a leader and whether you protected the flock for such sinful behavior. 

You cannot have a healthy church with unchallenged toxic behavior! It will not happen, so pretending it is OK and you don't need to act is foolish and naive. Paul specifically commands leaders to deal with the three wolves of heresy (false teaching), sinful behavior (that is ongoing and egregious), and those who sow division in the church. Paul challenged the church in Corinth to deal with those who sowed division and those living in unrepentant sin. 

Church bullies do what they do because they suspect no one will challenge their behavior. After all, they have gotten away with it for a long time. They refuse to be accountable and refuse to repent, apologize, and adopt healthy behaviors. And boards coddle them, don't confront them, and tell pastors this is just the price of ministry. That is wrong, unbiblical, toxic, and makes leaders complicit. And thousands of complicit church leaders refuse to do what they are supposed to do as undershepherds of God's flock and protect the body of Christ. 

If you are one of those board members who will not confront sinful behavior (it is), either step aside or do the job God has given you to do. The health of your congregation is at stake.

Blogs in this series:

How to spot a bully in the church

When church boards don't confront church bullies

Confronting the bad behaviors of church bullies

When the Pastor is the bully

The close connection between narcissism and bully behaviors in the church

When the bully is a church board member

The Bully Series: How to spot a bully in the church

Newsflash: There are often people in a church who are bullies and get away with it because church leadership is too nice to call them out on their destructive behavior. Often, we know something is not right, but how do we know when behavior has crossed a line and is unacceptable? Here are some behavioral signs that you may be dealing with a bully.

They have to get their own way. If a group decision is not their liking and they insist that things are done their way, beware.

They intimidate to get their way. It can be intimidation in attitude, not letting go of an issue, constantly pushing, or threats of some sort.

They triangulate others into their orbit to put pressure on leaders. Talking about their "concerns" (nothing other than manipulation), they develop a group that they rope into their point of view, so now there is a group dynamic to the bullying.

They criticize others, usually leaders in private, seeking to undermine the authority of a leader or leaders. Those they talk to often take up the offense or cause without any reason.

No matter how much attention they are given or how many conversations one has with them, they do not move off their position. It is their way or no way.

They often raise their issues in congregational meetings, seeking to force the hand of leadership. Nor are they nice about what they have to say.

They do not respect authority. Especially church authority - unless they are in church leadership, in which case they demand others respect their authority.

They cloak their concerns and language in spiritual terms. When behaviors don't match the words, don't be fooled. This is not spiritual. It is about power and getting one's way.

When confronted, they deny, fight back, or lie. They are not willing to be held accountable.

They hurt people who get in their way but are never wrong and rarely apologize. After all, it is about them, not others.

Why do bullies get their way in many churches? Because they can and because fellow Christians are not very smart about what is happening. After all, would a fellow Christian have ulterior motives??? The answer in many situations is "absolutely." Don't be fooled, don't be intimidated, and don't allow these kinds of behaviors in your church. It is divisive, dangerous, ungodly, and evil. Call it for what it is.

By the way, the Apostle Paul warned of those who create division in the church. That is what Bullies do, but our unwillingness to confront sin often lets them get their way. In fact, in many cases, we would never put up with that behavior in the workplace, but we do it all the time in the church. Sad. 

Blogs in this series:

How to spot a bully in the church

When church boards don't confront church bullies

Confronting bad behaviors of church bullies

When the Pastor is the bully

The close connection between narcissism and bully behaviors in the church

When the bully is a church board member

Toxicity in Leadership

 

The role of senior leaders in creating open dialogue

 

Moving from toxicity to health in organizational leadership

Toxicity in leadership often stems from our inability to control our egos in our interactions with others. If you have ever been in a conversation with a supervisor or boss and feel unlistened to, put down, diminished, your opinion discounted, or attacked verbally, you have experienced an unhealthy ego that needs to be right, superior and get its own way. 

These behaviors destroy trust, create cynicism, hurt hearts and shut down important conversation. At the least is it destructive and discourteous behavior and at the most it is destructive to the very staff who make possible the mission we represent. 

Leaders do not fully understand the power of their words, actions and attitudes to lift up or diminish those who work for them. When ego gets in the way, their staff and the organization suffer greatly.

This is not an uncommon issue. However, as we mature as leaders it is an issue that we must confront and deal with it because not doing so will eventually destroy our leadership. And can destroy our organization as the best people leave because of the toxic behaviors of the senior leader(s). 

In my experience there are several key's to ensuring that we lead from health and not the toxicity of our egos. 

First, you have to want to lead from health! While that may seem obvious it is not because the only way to know how your words or behaviors negatively impact those around you is to openly ask for feedback and very few leaders are willing to do that. The very question is a threat to their fragile ego's.

When I led an organization I would regularly ask those who reported to me if there was anything I did that created issues for them, anything they wished I could change about my leadership or any advice they had for how I could be a better leader. The responses were always very helpful for me in understanding myself and the blind spots I had in my leadership. If a leader is not willing to regularly ask those kinds of questions they are not serious about wanting to lead from health. The most significant risk we run as leaders is that we are not self aware of our own impact on others and the only way to understand that impact is to ask the right questions.

Second, when we learn that we have some significant issues we need to get help. Professional help! Ego will tell us we don't need it but our ego is wrong. Most leaders do. The negative behaviors listed above come from a deep place inside of us. The need to be right, the inability to listen well to others, the tendency to put others down or disregard their opinions, the belief that we should call the plays are all behaviors rooted in our own dysfunctions and often stem from childhood. Unless we understand where these negative behaviors come from, we cannot modify them in a healthy manner. 

This is not an easy journey but a necessary one. It is a journey I have had to take and in my coaching practice I have the privilege of helping others in this journey. The willingness to take that hard journey is a sign of strength rather than weakness and the more disclosing you are to those around you about your journey, the more respect you will have. Those around  us know what our issues are even though we may try to pretend they don't exist. They know and they appreciate the efforts to become a better leader as it impacts them.

Third, we must create open atmospheres in our teams and organizations where candid and honest dialogue can take place. This is the most critical factor in creating healthy organizations and holding everyone, including the leader, accountable for words, actions and decisions. 

The key factor in how open or closed an organization is to honest and candid conversation is always the senior leader. The organization will mirror his/her oppenness or closedness because self preservation will require people to not challenge where their leader will not allow you to go. Those who do find themselves looking for another job. They are marginalized and choose to move on. 

In fact, consider asking your team this question. What are the subjects or topics or issues that you wish we could talk about as a team but you are afraid to put on the table. And then just listen. Make a list on the white board and commit to taking them one at a time until all have been discussed. Only leaders who are serious about leading form health will take that step but it makes a powerful discussion.

"Ask any group of employees to describe an ideal team or organizational culture, and they will tell you: supportive, transparent, authentic, collaborative, trusting. But inquire about their current company's culture, and the list will usually look very different: competitive, political, territorial, untrusting, conflict adverse."

This quote is from Ego Free Leadership by Black and Hughes and is an excellent resource on this topic.

The danger of a culture of consumerism over disciplemaking in the church today

 

There is no country where the church has the American church's resources. And yet, with all the advantages it has: wealth; technology; training; strategy, and Biblical knowledge, we are not doing well in many congregations. In fact, we inadvertently hurt ourselves by focusing on the wrong things, which causes us to miss the best things. We are often building a culture of consumerism over disciple-making and that is hurting us and God's people.  Here are some examples of how we inadvertently hurt ourselves in some quarters.

In our concern for "market share" (yes, that is a thing), we appeal to the consumer mentality of church members rather than to the Biblical Mandate of making disciples. In the city in which I live, the revolving door among the large churches particularly has been evident for the past several decades. A "cool" church will appear and make a splash, and its weekend experience is impressive, and migration takes place from other churches to the cool church. 

The problem is that we are training congregants to look for "what's in it for me" rather than focusing on helping them become disciples who love Jesus, and when another cool church appears that is cooler than the church I am attending, the migration happens again. If we train consumers, they will act like consumers. If we disciple people to follow Jesus, they will follow Him. The two are not the same. 

This goes to our marketing efforts as well. We develop programs and swag and the best stage presence because that is what will bring people in, and yet we miss the magnetic quality that actually builds a long-term family of believers - a congregation that loves Jesus and each other which is the greatest marketing tool a church could have. 

The consumer mentality of the church impacts our teaching. I am bemused that there are churches that won't even use the word preaching or teaching (two very Biblical words), but they talk on staff about who is doing the "presentation" that week. And the presentation must not be controversial (which Jesus and the Scriptures usually are), must not deal with the hard topics of the Bible (of which there are many), and must be uplifting, relevant, and non-controversial. It is a win, perhaps for market share, but how is it a win for helping people understand God and His Word?

Too often, we want people to love our church and be loyal to our church rather than wanting people to truly love Jesus and be loyal to Him. Think about the Gospels. Jesus did not try to be cool and hip. Rather He was authentic and spoke truth with amazing mercy and grace. He came full of Grace and Truth. 

The early church, likewise, had few of the advantages our contemporary churches do. But what they had was an infectious love for God and one another that was a magnet for those around them. As to the "teach," this is what Paul had to say about his preaching. "When I came to you, brothers, I did not come with eloquence or superior wisdom as I proclaimed to the testimony about God. For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified. I came to you in weakness and fear, and with much trembling. My message and my preaching were not with wise and persuasive words, but with a demonstration of the Spirit's power, so that your faith might not rest on men's wisdom, but on God's power" (1 Corinthians 2:1-5)." Paul would not be invited to speak in many of our cool, large churches today.

Nor, maybe Jesus because He talked about a "narrow gate" to God. He said that no one comes to the Father except through Him, and He spoke of heaven and, if you can believe it, hell and coming judgment. He did it with grace, but He spoke the truth - truths that we are often fearful of speaking ourselves. For those who want to be cool, Jesus said some very inconvenient things. 

And one last thing. Jesus championed humility over pride and ego. Yet many of our congregations today who live in the consumer space are driven by leaders with egos who have an agenda to grow their brand. Why do we brand? Because we are building a brand that is ours and that will set us apart from the rest. But Jesus talked about championing the Father, and Paul build a brand not around personalities (see 1 Corinthians) but around Jesus and the cross and following Him.

These are all contrasts between consumerism and discipleship. Which are you building in the church you attend? It is worth thinking about. 

When leaders cannot be challenged

 

Leaders are stewards: The question is what are you stewarding and for whom?

 

Most would acknowledge that leaders are stewards. By definition, stewardship means that we look after the interests of someone or something else rather than ourselves. However, what we are stewarding and for whom requires some deep thinking and regular realignment because it is easy to get this wrong. We can inadvertently steward the wrong thing! This is true whether you lead a team or an organization. 

At any one time, if we are not careful, we may be stewarding (and looking after the interests of) ourselves or others and a mission. 

Leaders have the power to set agendas and focus. They also have the opportunity to look out for their interests or the interests of others. They can guard or give away authority and power. In fact, when a leader guards their authority, rather than sharing it, it is a sign that their stewardship is more about them than it is about others. 

The more autonomous a leader is in their decision-making (rather than sharing that decision-making with other competent individuals), the more their stewardship is about their interests, their ego, and their power. Often, they do not see it, but those around them do.

In all of this, ego is the enemy. Ego is about me and my interests, and to the extent that we focus on retaining our power and authority or arranging things for our interests and agenda, we are stewarding ourselves, not a mission or on behalf of an organization and its staff. 

There are four characteristics of those who are true stewards rather than faux stewards.

One: they think mission and something greater than themselves, talk about that mission, and encourage the whole organization to align their work around the accomplishment of that mission. It is not about themselves but about something greater than themselves.

Two: they lead from a place of great humility. This means that they bring others into the decision-making process, don't need to get their own way, admit when they are wrong, are non-defensive, open, and take differing opinions easily. 

Three: They share decision-making, power, and authority in appropriate ways, giving these to other competent people rather than hoarding them for themselves.

Four: They genuinely care about people around them, and their words, interactions, and actions reflect that care. Ego-driven people care about themselves, while humble leaders care about others. 

If you lead others, take a moment to reflect on this issue of stewardship and the four markers of those who are true stewards. All of us can improve, and this is an issue that leaders need to be aware of on a regular basis. 

Nine internal threats to any organization

Every organization faces threats to its existence and future health. While leaders are often aware of external threats, such as changes in the environment, competition, or technological advances, they often spend less time considering the internal threats within their own organization. Internal threats are often equally or more dangerous than external threats. 

Lack of clarity 
Few threats are more dangerous than a lack of organizational clarity. Diffusion of focus means that different leaders within the organization will choose their own focus leading to multiple agendas and the resulting silos. This is a severe threat because it divides the organization from within. Many well-meaning but disparate agendas cannot substitute for a clearly articulated vision, mission, common guiding principles, and clearly delineated culture. Lack of clarity creates a dangerous diffusion of energy, focus, and strategy. 

Undefined DNA
Every organization has a culture, a DNA. Unfortunately, many have multiple cultures, which means they don't have a single, unified culture. This is not only confusing to staff, but differing cultures will bring with them division and conflict within the organization. Ironically, it is something that we can control and create if we choose to. Culture does not happen by accident. It must be intentionally designed to be meaningful. And it must be emphasized and lived out daily, with leaders setting the tone and the pace. 

Overlooked behaviors
In many business and ministry settings, we overlook behaviors toxic to the organization's health. We don't want to lose the person (despite their behavior), don't want to deal with it (conflict avoidance), or just become used to destructive behaviors to others and the organization, but this corrodes trust, hurts others, and creates cynicism. When we overlook unhealthy behaviors, we allow those behaviors to sabotage the organization, and we send a message that such behaviors are OK. Overlooked behaviors undermine a healthy culture. 

Lack of a leadership bench
This one is hazardous. The test of outstanding leadership is not what happens when we are leading but when we leave because it reveals what we did or did not leave behind. The most important thing we can gift the organization is the next generation of leaders. Not only is it dangerous to ignore the development of future leaders, but it is selfish because someone will inherit what we leave behind.

Inadequate focus on actual results
All organizations are busy with a great deal of activity. The question, though, is not whether we have activity but whether we have results based on our clarity (see above). Most organizations, especially in the not-for-profit space, assume the results are good but need a realistic mechanism to ensure they are. Remember, activity does not equal results. It may just equal activity. Accountability for results must be built into the rhythm of every staff member and team.

Poor staff development
Every organization says its people are its most important asset, but many do little in coaching, mentoring, and developing their staff. To not place significant and intentional emphasis on what truly is your most important asset is to rob your staff of becoming all they could become and to shortchange your organization's impact. Organizations are only as good as the people they have, and the key to better organizations is the ongoing development of staff. When this is not a priority, it speaks poorly to the culture and the organization's future.

Lack of focus on healthy teams
Organizations are made up of groups, and those groups are either healthy teams or dysfunctional teams. Aligned, results-oriented, healthy teams working synergistically together under good leadership are the building blocks of a healthy and productive organization. There will only be health at the organizational level if there is health at the team level. 

A closed rather than an open culture

Closed cultures resist open, candid dialogue. I define robust dialogue as a culture where any issue can be put on the table, with the exception of a hidden agenda or personal attack. The best organizations are open because it is in open dialogue that better ways are found. Closed systems require people to simply accept what they are told. This is a threat to the organization and inhibits better ideas. It also creates cynicism.

Poor EQ of leader(s)

No truth is more pertinent than the fact that the EQ of a leader directly impacts the health of an organization's culture. The responsibility of leaders is to be in an EQ growth mode all the  time. The responsibility of boards is to ensure that leaders create a healthy culture because they are themselves healthy. If not, they need to mandate growth in necessary areas. Organizations rarely rise above the EQ of their leader's health.

The good news about internal threats to our success is that we can do something significant about them. We cannot control external threats, but we can contain internal threats. 

Overcoming the need to control so your staff can flourish

 

Many leaders need to understand the power of moving from high control and a hierarchical structure to a light touch where staff feels empowered rather than controlled. 

Before you say to yourself, "I release staff rather than control them," you might want to check with your staff because, in most cases where leaders believe they empower and release staff, their staff says just the opposite. In fact, when I do culture audits of staff and report back to the senior leader, he/she is almost always surprised when they hear that their team perceives the culture as controlling rather than empowering. 

If you want to find out what the staff thinks, consider asking your team to answer the following three questions: 

"Would you describe the staff culture as controlling - where you need permission to do something, or empowered where you have the freedom to do what you need to do to accomplish your job? Why? How does it make you feel?"

This is a standard question I ask in staff audits, and the responses are revealing and often discouraging, as the majority of staff often report that it is a controlling culture. 

The third question, "How does it make you feel?" is essential. I will often hear responses like:

• "The organization hired me for my ability and expertise, but I cannot do anything without permission. I wish they would trust me rather than to doubt me."
• "I am seriously considering looking for a different job because my expertise and gifts are not being used here. If I don't do something the way my boss would, I hear about it and often have to back up and do it his/her way."
• "I cannot even spend small amounts of money without permission. That holds things up and is frankly demeaning. If I screw up, OK, tell me, but give me what I need to do the job without asking permission."
• "In our organization, decisions need to be made at least twice. First, by me and my team then I have to go through the same stuff with my supervisor, who feels free to override what our team has worked on. You feel disempowered and wonder why you put all the time and effort into a plan when you are often told to do things differently."

Because I often guide organizations through culture change, I also see the fantastic transformation when staff is released from control, trusted to make good decisions, and don't have to ask permission for most of what they do. That transformation is nothing less than impressive - and transformational to the culture.

I hear staff saying, "I cannot believe it. I don't need to ask permission anymore." "I feel much more valued and trusted than I did before." "I feel like I have been let out of my cage, and my self-confidence has increased exponentially." "My happiness factor in my job has gone way up, and I'm not looking to move anymore." "I am waiting to see if our freedom will last or our leaders will try to control us again."

This is all about moving from a permission-withholding organization where you cannot act without permission to a permission-granting organization with the freedom to work within established boundaries.

There is another significant advantage to a permission-granting culture. In a permission-withholding culture, staff doesn't have to take ownership of their work. After all, their supervisor is the one who allows, disallows, or modifies their work. If it doesn't work, that is the supervisor's issue since the staff followed his/her directives.

But when you move to a permission-granting culture. Staff develops the plan to achieve the objectives, and therefore, they must take responsibility for the success or failure of the effort. There is far more corporate buy-in and ownership in permission-granting cultures than in a permission-withholding culture. Which do you want for your organization?

Here is the great irony. We control staff so that everything goes smoothly. In the process, we disempower staff and create low morale, which translates into less ownership - the exact opposite of what we need and want from staff. When we release control of staff (within established boundaries), they flourish, are engaged, and take ownership, which is what we need and want. 

Those who control loose! Those who empower win!

Two things every supervisor must give their staff

 

Nine signs that our ego is getting in the way of our leadership

 

When boards ignore the obvious, people get hurt

 

Here is a scenario that I have seen repeated too often. The board of a large church asked me for help regarding conflict between the senior leader and two other leaders who had just been fired, causing an uproar in the congregation.

I discovered that there were at least six staff members who had been fired or left the church on their own accord in the past two years. I asked the board if they (or anyone) had conducted exit interviews, and of course, the answer was no. I interviewed each of these staff members, and the story was a similar account of abuse and bullying by the senior leader. This was not a case of benign neglect of staff but of active belligerence and unkindness toward his reports. 

I asked why the board had not explored these issues, knowing that there was a pattern. They didn't have much to say. Unfortunately this is one of many instances where I have seen boards ignore the obvious because they did not want to wade into unpleasant waters or challenge their leader. 

In their lack of due diligence, they become complicit in the dysfunctional culture created by their leader and the unfortunate pain caused to staff members poorly treated. In this case, when the issues were brought to light with the congregation, the entire board resigned and new board members were elected. 

Boards have responsibilities to guard the culture and health of the organization they represent. When they don't do that in the face of obvious leadership issues, they become complicit. They contribute to the pain of others. And that disfunction spills over into the rest of the organization.

The Five Responsibilities of every Leader

 

The Practices of Leaders of Deep Influence

 

Grow your self awareness and become a better version of you

 

Dictionary

Definitions from Oxford Languages · Learn more

self-a·ware·ness

noun

1. conscious knowledge of one's own character, feelings, motives, and desires.

   "the process can be painful but it leads to greater self-awareness"

Do you know who you are and why you do what you do? Do you know how others experience you? Too often we pay too little attention to understanding ourselves and in the process we hurt others around us and are often not remotely aware that we did so.

Each of us impacts those around us. We cause them to experience emotions like joy, acceptance, grace, condemnation, irrelevance, judgement or any number of positive or negative emotions. Self awareness is the ability to understand how others perceive us and what they experience in our presence. Awareness is the first step toward ensuring that our impact on others is what we desire it to be.

How we impact others is directly connected to our ability to understand our own behaviors, motives and attitudes. Many of us are not completely aware of why we say and do what we do. This can be because we speak and act before we stop and consider what we are doing and why.

Years ago I learned that when I responded quickly, I often did so without the diplomacy I truly desired. What I said may have been true but it was blunt and hard. I actually put a post-it in front of me in many meetings that said KMS. Keep Mouth Shut. Practicing KMS allowed me to consider what I was going to say and how I was going to say it. 

When I was in contentious situations, I leaned to not only KMS but to respond to a frontal attack with a question. It gave me time to think about my response and to invite dialogue rather than to respond out of emotion, thus bringing down the tension rather than contributing to it. 

I also learned that when someone "Pushed buttons in my emotions" the issue was not what they said (no matter how irritating or out of order) but something in me that caused me to react to their statement. Thus I started to become more aware of my own emotional responses and seek to understand why my emotions were struck by their words. 

Those who best understand themselves and who learn to regulate their emotions and responses become healthier versions of themselves. Self aware individuals often have more influence than non-self aware individuals because their responses are more mature, better regulated and in understanding how others experience them they can avoid behaviors that push people away and focus on those that bring people closer. 

Leaders who develop healthy self awareness tend to create healthier cultures in their organizations than those who don't. Do some research, and become more self aware. It will not only help you but it will bless those around you.

The power of disruptive questions

 

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.

The gift of irritating questions that disrupt the conversation and current assumptions

 

Have you ever been in a team or board conversation when someone asks the kind of question that disrupts the whole dialogue? It happens when everyone is operating off one set of assumptions and one individual challenges those assumptions which brings the conversation to a standstill. These are golden moments because they force the common assumption to be examined and the disruptive and often uncomfortable question forces the group to deal with a deeper issue that underlies their conversation.

Let me give you an example. Church boards often deal with known issues without getting to the underlying causes (which would raise uncomfortable questions). It takes just one board member who is not conflict adverse to ask the deeper question as to why the issue exists! 

In one church I am familiar with, a long term pastor presided over a congregation that would go up to six or seven hundred and then fall to 300 - a cycle that was repeated fairly often in his career. The board spent a great deal of time trying to figure out how to keep this from happening until someone raised the uncomfortable question as to whether this actually had to do with the senior pastor's competency to lead at that level and his defensiveness that caused good leaders to leave the church. That question got to the table about 15 years later than it should have but it took one courageous board member to ask the disruptive question. And, it did put the issue in its proper perspective, whatever the outcome was going to be. 

Or take a discussion about "making disciples" that regularly takes place in church circles. Often the discussion goes way down the route of strategy for making disciples until someone asks the disruptive question: "Folks, we don't even have a good definition of a disciple so all this talk has no target or focus." An irritating comment that causes the discussion to go back to the beginning and ask what we are actually trying to achieve.

It is not unlike the question why? Why are we doing this? Why are we assuming that our strategy will get us to where we need to go? Why do we think this "conventional" idea is actually a good idea? How does this program or strategy get us to where we are trying to go? Is there a better way? 

Disruptive questions can be irritating but they force groups to clarify what they are after and focus on the right things rather than just the presenting issues. Usually they come from deep thinkers who are unafraid to raise the hard questions. They are a gift to any organization or board. 

Boards, teams and whole organizations get lost in group think, historical ways of looking at issues and assumptions that often no longer apply but remain the conventional wisdom. Here is something to think about. Conventional wisdom is always conventional but it is often not wisdom. It is simply the way we have done things in the past. Disruptive companies and ministries challenge those old ways and look for new ways to accomplish something different or more.

This always starts with individuals who are willing to ask the disruptive questions. Those questions challenge the current thinking and force the group to look at issues from a different angle. Many organizations, teams and boards do not realize what a gift this is to their organization but it truly is.

Expectations of others and the role they play in our leadership paradigms

Those who lead inherit expectations from their team or organization. Some of those expectations are critical: Building healthy teams; serving one's staff; removing barriers; clarifying what is important and so on. All supervisors and leaders have an unwritten contract with those they lead around these key issues. Leaders ought to pay close attention to those leadership traits that promote clarity, health, alignment, accountability and results.

But, there are also expectations that simply come from history (what the previous leader did), personal preferences (this is what my leader should do) or my version of what a leader is and does. This is one of the primary issues pastors face because there are as many expectations of what a pastor should be and do as their are members of the congregation. These unrealistic or false expectations can cause issues for leaders unless they are personally clear as to what is important to them in their leadership role.

The expectations of others are a trap because no leader can ever fulfill all the expectations that others have, nor should they. There are simply too many. Leaders must be clear about what is important to them in leading well rather than trying to fulfill the expectations of others. Furthermore those expectations, (other than the critical obligations every leader has) are often distractions to good leadership, rather than contributors to the mission. 

Leaders must have a clear understanding of their strengths and those things they bring to the table that are critical to the team or organization they lead. If we as leaders are not clear on our priorities, others will gladly step in and define our priorities for us. In that scenario we are not leading: others are leading us. 

If we are driven to please others by meeting their expectations we are more concerned that people like us than that we are to lead well. Our goal should not be that everyone likes us but that those we lead respect us, and that we serve them well. There is a big difference between the two. The best leaders have conviction and clarity as to what their priorities are and it does not include meeting all the expectations of others. 

What is important is that leaders can articulate clearly what their priorities are and what staff can expect from them. And then consistently deliver on those commitments. Clarity and consistency generate respect and stability. Lack of clarity and inconsistency confuse those we lead. 

The expectations of others usually come from how they would live or lead. But they are not us. "But our last leader...." is not an uncommon phrase. Bless them for how they did what they did but we are not them. It is why in organizations I have led there are some non negotiable expectations of leaders, but how they do what they do is highly flexible. Leaders are individuals with their unique gifting, personalities and even quirks (yes we all have them). All of us must  lead from who God made us to be. 

When we get caught in trying to meet the unrealistic or false expectations of others we inevitably get out of our best lane and it hurts our leadership. Ironically in trying to meet the expectations of others we often end up hurting our staff because we are no longer leading out of who we are, or focused on the clarity that we ought to have. The clarity of a leader keeps them from the trap of expectations that would otherwise be a distraction to their leadership.

Introducing The Addington Method: Executive Coaching, Culture Audits and Organizational Consulting tailored for you and your organization

 

The plan is The Method, crafted uniquely for you; not a template superimposed on your organization. It is an organic and carefully guided process that clarifies what is important, creates the best possible culture, ensures staff is fully engaged and aligned with your purpose, creates measurable accountability, and encourages non-traditional thinking for non-traditional results.

Often paired with a culture audit, The Addington Method will provide unprecedented insight into what is actually happening within your organization and bring a new level of focus, clarity, alignment and accountability around what is truly important.

If you want to go to the next level personally as a leader, or as an organization, we need to talk. On the website above you can schedule a free 60 minute consult to talk about your situation. Remember, what got you to here, got you to here. It will not get you to there. That is a new and different journey and it is what we specialize in. We can design a path just for you!

Addington Consulting, now The Addington Method has helped individuals and organizations move to the next level for over two decades. The Method encapsulates our methodology of creating unique paths for each individual and organization. Lets talk and see if there is a path that would be helpful to you.

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!