Three distinct kinds of leaders that every organization needs

Most organizations - including churches - have three kinds of leaders: project leaders; influence leaders; and organizational leaders. Knowing what kind of leader you need to move your mission forward is critical. Knowing what kind of leaders you have is equally critical. When each of these types of leaders are in the right leadership spot they lead well. When they are misplaced they cause frustration, and are frustrated.

None of us are "pure" anything but most of us as leaders have a predominant leadership style. It is not unusual for organizational leaders to be able to play the other two roles when needed. But generally one will find that leaders will fit into one of these three categories.

Project leaders love to work with initiatives that have defined outcomes and timeframes. They are wired to move key actions toward results. Usually they focus on tactics and implementation rather than strategy and philosophy. They are often concrete in their thinking and approach as this is what projects need. A good project leader is able to mobilize and work with people to accomplish a specific goal. Their satisfaction comes with the completion of a project. 

Project leaders do not want to manage something long term. Rather, once the project is completed they are ready to move on to the next project. Often they are wired to solve problems and once the problem is resolved the challenge is gone and they are ready for the next. While they can manage people, their motivation for doing so is to accomplish the project, not manage for the sake of managing. In fact, long term management of people and programs will frustrate a project leader.

Then there are influence leaders who lead not from positional authority (often) but they work with people and ideas to motivate growth, change, initiate thinking and new angles of approaching issues. Their focus is on insight and learning and they use their influence within a system or organization to bring change. Usually they work with or for others to impact and support results.

Influence leaders usually are not motivated to manage other but to influence others. They don't want to manage programs but to influence healthy results. They are thinkers and use their analysis, ideas and relational skills to move others in a key direction. A good consultant is often an influence leader as can be trainers. Ironically, many of the most influential people in any organization do not have positional authority but lead out of influence. This is often true in the local church. 

The third category, organizational leaders also lead for the most part out of influencing others but they have the added ability and desire to bring people, opportunities and structure together in an aligned system to accomplish the overall mission of the organization. They have the ability to connect disparate parts into a whole, move multiple agendas with an overall focus on strategy and outcomes. They enjoy ongoing oversight (not control but empowering others) and primarily work through others to achieve results. Thus they have the capacity to lead a team.

The best organizational leaders are organizers, strategists and architects of overall strategy in order to achieve a mission. They are conceptual thinkers, have the ability to hold different options and ideas in tension and are highly flexible. Their satisfaction comes from getting all the puzzle pieces together so that the mission is accomplished and they understand that they must work through others in order to accomplish their goals.

If you are a leader, which of these descriptions is most like you? If you lead others, can you identify what kind of leaders you lead and are they in their proper lane?  

(Posted from Milwaukee)

When looking for leaders how do you evaluate their potential?

Like most ministries, ReachGlobal is always looking for good leaders. In doing so, however, our staff must be able to evaluate the potential of leaders they encounter. Aside from the obvious qualifications of character and Christian commitment there are four areas we evaluate as we interact with potential leaders. The questions below are not a checklist but the kinds of things we are looking for in these four areas as we dialogue with these potential leaders. They may be helpful to you and your organization.

These apply to both volunteer and paid leaders.

If you are a leader in some capacity you might want to evaluate yourself against these qualities.

PEOPLE

• Do they desire to see more accomplished through others?
• Do they have the ability and inclination to do a critical assessment of people? (Their skills and abilities).
• Are they likeable and able to engage others?
• How do they view people? As tools or human beings?
• Is their need to be liked greater than their need to get something done?

THINKING

• Do they have the ability to think conceptually?
• Do they have the ability to think strategically?
• Do they ask strategic questions?
• Are they able to critically assess organizational issues?
• Are they able to assess situations without placing blame?
• Do they have the mental agility to see multiple possible causes and solutions?
• Are they able to live with ambiguity and hold issues in tension without immediate resolution? (Can they think grey?)
• Are they thoughtful in their response to questions?
• Do they appropriately question conventional wisdom?

EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE

• Are they aware of their own emotions, wiring, strengths and gifts?
• Are they able to manage their emotions appropriately?
• Do they exhibit true humility?
• Are they able to be self-defining?
• Are they able to understand with empathy the emotions of another person?

EXPERIENCE

• Do they have a record of leading others toward some vision or goal?
• Are they more adept at organizational leadership, influence leadership or project management?
• What have they learned from failures and successes as a leader?

Civil and uncivil discourse in the Christian community

I have watched closely the comments (thousands) posted on Christianity Today's website over both homosexuality and World Vision's recent decision and retraction. I have also noted how some high profile leaders among Evangelical's reacted and pontificated.

Of course I was not surprised by the outcry of exception to World Vision's actions. What surprised me was the lack of wisdom and Biblical discernment by World Vision's board.

That aside I was truly appalled by the uncivil discourse by Christ followers in the debate. Unfortunately it is not an uncommon thing. We seem to lack the ability to speak to one another and to those outside our community with respect and kindness while disagreeing with the other side's conclusions. 

We often forget that our position (truth - as we understand it) is just as important as how we communicate that truth (grace - the flip side of truth). Jesus was described as one who was full of "grace and truth."

If the words of Paul were applied to the comments on CT and elsewhere a great deal of them would be gone. "Do not let any unwholesome talk come out of your mouths, but only what is helpful for building others up according to their needs, that it may benefit those who listen...Get rid of all bitterness, rage and anger, brawling and slander, along with every form of malice. Be kind and compassionate to one another...(Ephesians 4:29-32)."

Truth without grace does not reflect Jesus or the fruit of the Spirit. Many outside the evangelical community see us as angry and unloving and they are often right - and that is sad. Is it not possible to speak and write our minds even while demonstrating the heart and kindness of Christ? This applies to controversies like World Vision as well as disagreements within congregations. Angry and unkind believers do not reflect the values or character of Jesus no matter how "right" they might be. And we lose our hearing if our words do not reflect the love of Jesus as well as the truth of Jesus.

(Posted from Milwaukee)

The willingness to say we blew it

While I was critical of World Vision's recent decision to hire "Christians in Gay marriages" I applaud their willingness to acknowledge two days later that they were wrong. Too many organizations and individuals are unable to make that humble statement and it takes humility. They did it and I applaud Rich Stearns and his board. They did the right thing and we should take them at their word and move on.

I have seen elders in local churches do some unfortunate things and on occasion I have seen them own those decisions in front of congregations and say they were sorry. That not only takes courage but it is the right thing to do. I applaud them and their congregations ought to be the first to let go of their anger, forgive and move on together.

As a leader I know that it is not easy to say "I blew it" and sometimes I have had to take responsibility for things that happened on my watch even when I was not directly responsible. But it is the right thing to do - hard as it is. It is interesting that in a few cases, no matter how many times I apologized for certain actions people did not let go of the "offense." 

All of us blow it. All of us need from time to time to own our stuff and ask forgiveness, apologize or make amends. When someone does, we need to celebrate that they did the right thing and move on. The lack of forgiveness among some evangelicals is a sad thing. If I don't forgive, why should I be forgiven and none of us is above that need. So, I hope that believers will not abandon World Vision or the work they do or the kids that are impacted. Let's move on.

(Posted from Milwaukee)

World Vision reverses its decision to hire Christians in Gay married relationships

It took World Vision just two days to reverse its decision to hire Christians in Gay married relationships. It will take years for it to recover its reputation - if it ever does. See the latest here.

(Posted from Milwaukee)

Do fame and notoriety cloud one's thinking?

I have been mulling on a number of situations recently where Christian leaders have made really poor decisions in my view: Rich Stearns and World Vision's new policy to hire individuals in homosexual marriages; Rob Bell and his redefinition of heaven and hell and and the controversy over Mark Driscoll of Mars Hill who tried to manipulate the system to get his book on marriage onto the New York Times best seller list. I have another private list of individuals who have seemingly lost their way when they become Christian public figures. I saddens me and causes me to ask a question:

Do fame and notoriety cloud one's thinking and cause us to make decisions and pronouncements that are Biblically questionable? Does fame tend to give us more confidence in our own wisdom than in God's wisdom? Does it allow us to cross boundaries that we did not dare cross in the earlier years?

Fame and celebrity are a dangerous calling and few seem to handle it well. We see success and that success breeds pride and we begin to believe our own press which leads to the marginalization of those who don't agree with us and soon we become isolated and unaccountable - and eventually crash! Wisdom co-opted by pride! Youthful passion co-opted by ego! Jesus co-opted by us!

I am glad that I am not famous. I never want to be. To those who are I say this: There is never more important a time to develop a cadre who will tell one  the truth than when one is in the limelight. Because when the spotlight shines on us rather than on the One who created us, we have co-opted God and it rarely has a good ending.

To be clear, I don't know the motives or hearts of those named above and am not passing judgement. I am asking a question that their actions prompt. What I do know that when our name surpasses The Name, something is wrong. And when our pronouncements are at odds with His pronouncements, the same is true. 

There is never more important a time to develop accountability and humility and to guard the shadow side as when we become important in the eyes of others. And believe that we actually are.

(Posted from Milwaukee)

World Vision USA will now hire individuals in Gay marriage relationships

In a move that will certainly move World Vision USA away from many traditional evangelical churches they have announced a new policy that they will hire Christian individuals in Gay marriage relationships. This will certainly only add to the perception among many that World Vision, while committed to poverty alleviation, is little more than a secular NGO with a Christian background. 

Internationally it is well known that World Vision hires unbelievers in its development efforts. I find it ironic that just as World Vision is courting evangelical churches for partnerships it is choosing to make a statement about Gay marriage that runs against the grain of the vast majority of evangelicals in their understanding of what marriage constitutes and its implications for society.  

I am not anti-gay, some of my best friends are gay! What is at stake is the institution of marriage and what it means and how God designed the family and defined it. When major "Christian" organizations agree to redefinitions implicitly or explicitly we have a problem. I suspect that World Vision will discover that it is not ahead of its time but that they have literally put a "hole in the Gospel" to use a phrase they use. Gospel holes can be those things we neglect or those things we re-define.

See the Christianity Today article here

(Written today from Milwaukee)