leadership vs. leaders

I know we’ve gone this route before, but it just seems totally obvious to me that in EVERY sphere of life leadership is crucial for the progress of any group. Leaders may or may not be good ones, but LEADERSHIP is vital and indispensible in every endeavour. (I know there are some who might argue this with me, and I don’t wish to bother arguing it – I think it is self-evident and obvious in every human endeavour from the macro to the micro, and people who want to argue against this usually do so because of some past pain from poor leaders, thus tossing out the baby with the bath water in their response to leadership. I think this proves my point. Anyhoo…)

What seems more interesting to me is when that leadership is not declared or clear. This came up in a conversation this week in Sydney, and it seems to me that often in groups there is a leader, but they aren’t out in the open, preferring to operate either from the background or from a guise of “non-leader”, when some thoughtful analysis shows that they’re the ones pulling the strings, even if others aren’t quite aware of it. Got me thinking about the dangers of this kind of “subterranean” leadership.

Seems to me that leadership that operates in this subversive sort of way can be quite dangerous and manipulative because it takes the wheel in a quiet, hidden sort of way and then starts directing and moving things in a way that is not obvious to all. Sometimes, to be sure, this might be necessary in some situations where a group has resisted formal leadership and struggles with authority (in it truest sense), etc., and yet still requires leadership towards that which is best for them as a group. But, it’s a very dangerous and morally interesting place to be, when you lead without being clear to those you are leading that you have assumed that role in their lives. Some folks aren’t smart enough to see it, and they might even agree with the subterranean leader that there is no leader, but it’s leadership all the same. Your motives might be the very best, but this is a very interesting place to be. I was once tempted to lead “from the back seat”, and I’m glad I was smart enough to walk away from the temptation because I think it would have caused nothing but damage.

Of course, at its very worst, an “undercover” leader knows exactly what they are doing and their motives are not pure, and their desire is to slowly manipulate and engineer things to their personal benefit, all the time using a kind of sleight of hand approach to moving people were they want them. Sometimes they use other people as their proxies (perhaps even God?!), and sometimes they try to keep up the facade of a leaderless and egalatarian group. Either way, it’s bad in the end.

So, my view is not to knock leadership but to recognize its critical role in the way we have been shaped as humans in community, aspire to great leadership, be clear about what that means, and clarify the authority structures in our communities, and then allow God to take us somewhere through that godly leadership. Leaders who are not clearly leaders are too often leaders who operate without accountability, simply brushing it off with a “Who me?”

Personally, I think this kind of manipulative leadership is no better than the authoritarian nut with an ego problem… it’s just quieter…

This entry was posted on Friday, May 23rd, 2008 at 5:24 pm and is filed under leadership. You can feed this entry. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

9 Responses

  1. Hi Mark,
    This is a very good post. I have seen that a few times in different sporting groups and churches I have been involved with. There are those who where the hat of leader and there are those unofficial leaders who a number of people look to, to see what they think before they move.

    John Maxwell talks about this in one of his books. He said that when he moved in to a new role he would find out who the unofficial leader was, befriend them and influence them to get things done. I am not sure how that sits with me, but it does show that most groups have this sort of underground leadership in place.

    Thanks for the post,
    Dave

    Dave Quinn - May 23rd, 2008 at 7:19 pm

  2. Mark

    Insightful post – time in Sydney is doing you good!

    I’ve seen a few people (young adults) drop out of church life in recent times cos of various issues, including leadership. Influenced by idealistic notions of ‘let’s all lead’ they stray from protective leadership into a dangerous zone.

    Keep writing on this stuff – very good

    John

    John Finkelde - May 23rd, 2008 at 7:56 pm

  3. Great post Mark.
    I am a strong believer in giving leadership to those who are taking responsibility for the ministry, as I know you do.

    I enjoy your challenge to open leadership. People might be initially resistant, but its better than fooling them!

    Mark E - May 24th, 2008 at 6:28 pm

  4. having no official leadership structure in our community doesn’t mean we do not experience leadership, nor does it mean different individuals do not lead at different times.

    we choose not to structure it into individual roles and responsibilities – and that is clearly understood, accepted and celebrated by the members of our community.

    we choose to allow each person the same access to the role of leadership, trusting that as we all move towards christ-likeness, the Spirit shapes and leads us in the moment. Our responsibility is to respond to the leading of the Spirit, and as we do we are encouraged, challenged, stretched, edified, drawn together and compelled towards others.

    Now it is understandable to suggest that there could be subversive, manipulative levels of leadership going on – which I’m sure happens in all sorts of communities and leadership teams at different times (and ours would be no different).

    However, we have chosen to trust one another with our own personal journeys and this includes our passions and fears and doubts and sense of calling. By endeavoring to remain intimate and vulnerable we choose to expose our personalities and habits to one another. Hopefully, this will keep our spirits open to constantly considering and examining our motives and leadership tendancies.

    in the end, leadership is shared equally and happens sooner or later – but either way it comes from seeking to respond to the move of the Spirit amongst us as a community. this is a beautiful and treasured characteristic of our gatherings.

    here’s to humble and authentic leadership. regardless of the structure or style it is dresssed up in.

    peace.

    otherendup - May 25th, 2008 at 6:16 pm

  5. well, i guess my main thoughts on this would be two-fold:

    firstly, you may not have an official leadership structure, but you are very right in noting that you do have a structure. i wonder if everyone is as clear on it as you are, because that seems to me to be the place where you are likely to fall into exactly problem that i have written about.

    secondly, your group sounds incredibly mature and quite extraordinary, almost too hard to believe. it seems to be quite the exception to any group or organization i’ve personally ever seen, and i don’t mean that facetiously. i’m all up for exceptions, and perhaps your group is exactly that, but you have to forgive me a little skepticism… it’s just not anywhere close to the norm that i’ve experienced.

    ob1 - May 26th, 2008 at 1:05 pm

  6. and how does it allow for new comers, who do not understand the culture…and if they do…may seek to manipulate the situation.

    Mark E - May 26th, 2008 at 2:08 pm

  7. actually guys I’m more and more convinced that groups like ours are not the exception – in fact groups like ours are flourishing everywhere around the globe.

    Unfortunately, most of them are overlooked or simply invisible, due to their nature of “non-leadership” – this means they do not show up on the radar of most traditional church measuring systems or understanding.

    The dysfunctional ones however, are always cited as the norm rather than the exception to the rule, which only achieves a distortion of truth – something that I know you vehemently reject whenever the same sort of logic is projected onto church structures like your own (which you know I have been guilty of doing ;-) .

    Maybe there is a whole world of “others” out there that we all manage to overlook as we seek to reinforce our own “right” way of doing things. I know I am guilty of that when I look back towards the sort of church structures I struggle with – maybe you fall into this too???

    As to whether people in our group are aware of our structure – oh boy, if only you could have been a fly on the wall over the past 4 years as this has been wrestled with time and time again – people are pretty clear, trust me :-)

    Mark E – our culture? this is one of those loaded words that sends shivers down my spine a bit from past church leadership experience. In my experience, church “culture” has been used to exclude and marginalise and oppress those who are simply different. “Unity” has been warped into meaning conformity and has justified some of the most un-christlike behaviour from some of the most respected church leaders around.

    At the end of the day – in all our communities we should be seeking to be christ-like, to encourage one another on the journey of faith. I think there is far less to protect in our group than say your community, simply because there are not positions of power to abuse, only people who are accountable to each other. New comers are welcomed into our space as being equally able to give and receive. manipulation has more to do with our sinfulness – something everyone in our group is equally able to do “well” :-)

    otherendup - May 26th, 2008 at 5:37 pm

  8. Culture is there….every group has a culture. That is the way I am using it.

    Mark E - May 27th, 2008 at 6:50 pm

  9. Mark, i know and love that culture can be a rich mosaic of possibilities, but I’m being honest with my reservations of the use of this term within certain contexts which can use a “culture of unity” as a covert form of manipulation and exclusion.

    Like i said, all people, including those within and without our group have the potential to be manipulative (just like your church community I’m guessing), so I’m not sure how being aware or unaware of our culture would change that. (?)

    otherendup - May 27th, 2008 at 7:32 pm