Authentic Leadership - Part 3

This is the third in a series of blog posts examining the subject of “Authentic Leadership.”

Part 1 was posted on June 6, 2016; Part 2 was posted on June 13, 2016.

Abstract

What does it mean to be authentic? What does authentic leadership look like? What are the qualities and characteristics of an authentic leader? What deterrents are there to being authentic? Is authenticity a help or deterrent to strategic communication? What is the place of vulnerability and truthfulness in being authentic? To what leadership models should authentic leaders be compared? In this series of blog posts we will address these questions along with the postulation that authentic leadership must be measured universally against the servant leadership model exemplified by Jesus Christ, and individually against the specific gifts and purpose each individual has been endowed with by their Creator.

Authentic Leadership – Part 3

In parts 1 and 2 of this series we have defined what it means to be authentic: Conforming to, copying, reproducing or having the same characteristics as an original. We have suggested that the best model of leadership to be emulated and conformed to is the selfless leadership exemplified by Christ.

What Deterrents Are There to Being Authentic?

Since authenticity is relative to a model of some kind, it should be noted that not all models are good. There are leaders who are authentically bad or even evil. However, since we are examining authenticity against the model of Christ and our created purpose, we will consider deterrents to being authentically good. There are many ways and means by which authentic Christ-likeness may be deterred. Anything that separates one from God has the capability to keep them from being authentic. We will touch on only a few potential deterrents.

A lack of social awareness can be a hindrance. Albrecht (2006) observes that those who are self-centered, preoccupied with their own feelings, needs and interests, and not open to the needs, feelings and interests of others, will find it difficult to gain acceptance and cooperation from others (p. 34). Albrecht also points out that extreme narcissism that renders one incapable of engaging in two-way relationships of mutuality, sharing and support is certainly a hindrance (p. 98). Perhaps one of the greatest deterrents is the misuse of power by a leader.

Power can be viewed in many different ways from corruptive power to benevolent

exertion of influence. Eisenberg, Goodall & Trethewey (2007) cite French and Raven with describing, “five types of social power, following the assumption that person A has power over person B when A has control of some outcome B wants” (p. 168). These five types are listed as: Reward power, Coercive power, Referent power, Expert power, and Legitimate power. Research conducted by McClelland & Burnham (1976) finds that managers that have a high “power motivation” achieve better results, as judged by the morale of those working for them. But they note that “power motivation” does not refer to dictatorial behavior but rather a strong desire to exert influence and to have impact (p. 120).

J.R.R. Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings is a study in the corruption of power. The narrator of the story bemoans, “Nine rings were gifted to the race of men who, above all else, desire power… The hearts of men are easily corrupted and the ring of power has a will of its own” (Walsh, 2001, Fellowship of the Ring). Bolman and Deal (2003) state, “There is no guarantee that those who gain power will use it wisely or justly” (p. 201). They further state, “there will always be temptation whenever gargantuan egos and large sums of money are at stake. Top managers too rarely think or talk about the moral dimension of management and leadership” (p. 219). That’s where the greatest potential for destructive use of power lies, when the moral dimension is ignored and personal egos and selfish gain are at the forefront. What is the antidote? If it is true that the moral dimension is “too rarely” thought about or talked about, then it should be brought to the forefront and addressed. Again, this is where the selfless model of servant leadership exemplified by Christ must be championed and continuously rehearsed to maintain authentic leadership. Strategic planning, effective communication, sound team building, achievement of goals, and accomplishment of objectives will only be enhanced when this model of authenticity is adhered to.   

(to be continued)

_______________ 

NOTE: Please visit this blog site each week (a new blog is posted every Monday). This blog entry is part 3 of a series of blog posts examining the subject of Authentic Leadership. Part 1 was posted on 2017-07-10, Part 2 was posted on 2017-07-17

Next week: Part 4 - “Is Being Vulnerable and Truthful Prerequisite to Being Authentic?”

References:

Albrecht, K. (2006). Social Intelligence. The new science of success.

San Francisco: Josey-Bass.

Eisenberg, E.M., Goodall, H.L. & Trethewey, A. (2007). Organizational Communication.

 Balancing creativity and constraint. Boston, MA: Bedford/St Martin’s

McClelland, D.C. & Burnham, D.H. (1976). Power is the great motivator. Harvard

Business Review. Jan 2003, Reprint RO301J. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing

Walsh, F., Boyen, P. & Jackson, P. (2001). The Lord of the Rings. Fellowship of the ring.

            Screenplay. New Line Cinema, Wingnut Films Production.

Bolman, L.G. & Deal, T.E. (2003). Reframing Organizations. Artistry, choice, and

leadership. San Francisco: Josey-Bass

Authentic Leadership –Part 2

This is the second in a series of blog posts examining the subject of “Authentic Leadership.”

Part 1 was posted on June 6, 2016.

Abstract

What does it mean to be authentic? What does authentic leadership look like? What are the qualities and characteristics of an authentic leader? What deterrents are there to being authentic? Is authenticity a help or deterrent to strategic communication? What is the place of vulnerability and truthfulness in being authentic? To what leadership models should authentic leaders be compared? In this series of blog posts we will address these questions along with the postulation that authentic leadership must be measured universally against the servant leadership model exemplified by Jesus Christ, and individually against the specific gifts and purpose each individual has been endowed with by their Creator.

Authentic Leadership – Part 2

To What Models Should Authentic Leadership Be Compared?

We began this series last week by defining what it means to be authentic. We found that authenticity has to do with conforming to, copying, reproducing or having the same characteristics as an original. We continue this week suggesting that the best model of leadership to be emulated and conformed to is the selfless leadership exemplified by, arguably the greatest and most influential leader of all time, Christ Jesus.

First, Compare Against the Servant Leadership Model of Jesus Christ

⁵ Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus:

⁶ Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, ⁷ but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. ⁸ And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to death — even death on a cross! (NIV Bible, Philippians 2:5-8).

To the men Jesus himself was mentoring for future leadership, he taught…

²⁵ …“You know that the rulers in this world lord it over their people, and officials flaunt their authority over those under them. ²⁶ But among you it will be different. Whoever wants to be a leader among you must be your servant, ²⁷ and whoever wants to be first among you must become your slave. ²⁸ For even the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve others and to give his life as a ransom for many.” (NLT Bible, Matthew 20:25-28).

Don Howell (2003) notes that, “Those who stand out in Scripture as leaders are designated, first of all, ‘servants of the Lord’” (p. 4). Christ exemplified leadership that brought righteousness through freedom, greatness through servanthood, and salvation through the courage of sacrifice. The apostle Paul admonished those who followed his leadership that they should in turn follow Christ's example: “Follow my example, as I follow the example of Christ” (NIV Bible, 1 Corinthians 11:1).

Second, Compare Against the Gifts and Purpose for Which God has Created You

Secondly, authentic leadership must be compared against the specific gifts and purpose each individual has been endowed with by their Creator. Servant leadership means that one will not think more highly of themselves than they ought. The servant leader will realize the s/he is an equal member of an interdependent team.

⁴ Just as each of us has one body with many members, and these members do not all have the same function, ⁵ so in Christ we who are many form one body, and each member belongs to all the others. ⁶ We have different gifts, according to the grace given us. (NIV Bible, Romans 12:4-6).

Authenticity, in this vein, is when one is doing and being exactly what the Creator has created them to do and be. This is hopefully in concord with others who are doing the same. Nevertheless, regardless of others, an authentic leader will be true to who they have been destined by their Creator to be.

  

(to be continued)

_______________ 

NOTE: Please visit this blog site each week (a new blog is posted every Monday). This blog entry is part 2 of a series of blog posts examining the subject of Authentic Leadership. Part 1 was posted on 2017-07-10.

Next week: Part 3 - “What Deterrents Are There to Being Authentic?”

References:

Howell, D.N. (2003). Servant of the Servant. A biblical theology of leadership.

Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock Publishers.

Some Thoughts on Effective Leadership Habits

Eisenberg, Goodall and Tretheway in their book, Organizational Communication (2007) suggest that great leaders possess a unique combination of habits: habits of mind, habits of character and habits of authentic and compelling communicative performance (p. 281). Let’s briefly think about each of these.

Habits of Mind

Eisenberg et al. (2007) describe habits of mind as patterned ways of thinking that define how a person approaches issues and conceives of resolving or dealing with them (p. 281). They cite Quinn as proffering that, “leadership is less a prescribed set of behaviors than it is a uniquely expansive mindset, one that is focused on the creation of possibility” (p. 281).

As we think about the habits of the mind, I am reminded of the importance of how we direct our thinking. Philippians 4:9 in the Bible tells us. “…whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable – if anything is excellent or praiseworthy – think about such things” (NIV Bible, Philippians 4:8-9). Developing the habit of mind that accentuates our thinking toward good and positive things will help to train ourselves toward more positive attitudes. Maxwell (2003) advises leaders that, “If you are willing to change your thinking, you can change your feeling. If you change your feelings, you can change your actions. And changing your actions—based on good thinking—can change your life” (p. 5). Interesting food for thought.

Habits of Character

Eisenberg et al. state the belief that habits of character revolve around the virtue of modesty which they purport is the essential quality of character. “Modesty—personal humility about one’s accomplishments and a profound commitment to the good of the company—is vital to leadership because it is inspiring” (p. 284). The authors point out that the unique blend of professional will, with personal humility, is what is found in the concept of “servant leadership” (discussed in earlier entries on this blog).

I can certainly relate to each of these three leadership “habits,” but the habits of character and the relationship to servant leadership particularly resonates with me. Habits of character certainly involve looking out for the interests of others, not just your own. From a Christian point of view, servant leadership must first be compared against the selfless model of servant leadership exemplified by Christ.

            ⁵ Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus:

⁶ Who being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, ⁷ but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. ⁸ And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to death – even death on a cross! (NIV Bible, Philippians 2:5-8).

Don Howell (2003) notes that, “Those who stand out in Scripture as leaders are designated, first of all, ‘servants of the Lord’” (p.4).

Habits of character also seek to include others rather than merely leading them. Sashkin & Sashkin (2003) suggest that the best leaders lead in a way that, “when the work is done and the goal attained, the people say, ‘we did it ourselves’” (p. 7).

Habits of Authentic Communicative Performance

Habits of authentic communicative performance deal with the coupling of effective communication skills with genuinely held values and beliefs. Eisenberg et al. (2007) suggest that leadership today is dependent upon 1) the ability to create and verbalize a compelling vision for the future, 2) the development of a credible life story, and 3) the ability to “use language performatively to inspire others to choose those desirable future actions and to work hard to help you attain them” (p. 286).

As we think of “authentic” communication, Ford (1991) refers to the Master communicator—Jesus…

                                                                                         

If we go to Jesus expecting to find a conscious philosophy of communication or specific speaking techniques, we will be disappointed. If, however, we see communication not as a technique, but as an expression of all that we are, then we find in Jesus the model of a master communicator (p. 230).

With all the means of communication available to us today, we may forget that principles of good communication are not new. Ford (1991) cites Aristotle as setting forth enduring principles for effective persuasion. “He (Aristotle) taught the importance of combining logos (the essence of the message), ethos (the credibility of the message) and pathos (the appeal to the inner motives of the hearer)” (p. 230).

Next week, as pertaining to the idea of being “authentic” touched upon above, we will begin a series on the subject of “Authentic Leadership.” So tune in again next week!

_______________________

References:

Eisenberg, E.M., Goodall, H.L. & Tretheway, A. (2007). Organizational communication. Balancingv crativiety and constraint. Boston, MA: Bedford/St Martin’s

Maxwell, J.C. (2003). Thinking for a change. 11 ways highly successful people approach life and work. USA: Warner Books

Howell, D.N. (2003). Servants of the servant. A biblical theology of leadership. Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock Publishers

Sashkin, M. & Sashkin, M.G. (2003). Leadership that matters. The critical factors for making a difference in people’s lives and organizations’ success. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.

Ford, L. (1991). Transforming leadership. Downer Grove, IL: Inter Varsity Press

Servant Leadership

In my last blog entry, “How Do You Define Success?” we introduced a model of leadership taught by Jesus: A leader’s role should be that of a servant. This week let’s examine the concept of servant leadership a little further.

What is the purpose of a king? What is the job of a president? Is the coach the head of the football team—the manager the leader of the baseball team? What is the role of a CEO, a general, a politician, a pastor? All of these positions are occupations of leadership. What then is a leader?

Contemporary leadership scholars emphasize three aspects of leadership activity that effective leadership must recognize and address: the leader, the follower and the context. Leadership always involves relationships with followers. No follower, no leadership. A leader relates to other people and the nature of this relationship is part of his or her success. Further, all leadership happens in some sort of context, i.e., the place, time, circumstances, etc. Because they are always different and changing, the nature of leadership is always fluid and responsive to these changing factors.

Coupling these aspects of leadership together with the concept of slavery and service as positive requisites of leadership causes us to look afresh at what really constitutes leadership. If a king or a president or a CEO or a pastor sees their role only as one of authority, or as a position to bring themselves wealth, power, exultation, etc.—they are missing the mark of a leader. A football coach or a baseball manager’s job is to bring out the best abilities of the athletes under his supervision and to build them into a well functioning team. The manager is a servant to the team she leads; helping to coach, teach, prod and encourage each team member to their best potential. Kings, presidents, CEO’s and pastors should see their roles in the same light. A leader is a servant to those he leads.

Don Howell (2003) notes, “The great leaders of the Old Testament are commonly designated ‘servant of the Lord.’ This is the title of honor par excellence for those who discover a joyful abandonment to the will of the Lord” (p. 7).[1] Therefore, I see that a leader not only serves those over whom he has authority, but also is a servant to whomever is in authority over him. With these considerations I am challenged anew to recognize that my leadership requires me to be a servant first and always to my Lord and also to those over whom my Lord has given me charge.

---

[1] Howell, Don N. Jr. Servants of the Servant, A biblical theology of leadership. Eugene: Wipf & Stock Publishers, 2003

How Do You Define Success?

Here is an interesting leadership concept from the teachings of Jesus:

“You know that the rulers in this world lord it over their people, and officials flaunt their authority over those under them. But among you it will be different. Whoever wants to be a leader among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first among you must become your slave. For even the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve others and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Matthew 20:25-28 NLT).

Jesus here introduces a new concept in leadership: We lead by serving. This was an entirely different idea to the world which had equated leadership with privilege, wealth and comfort. The world today still views it the same way. A successful leader is paid more, lives in the nicest houses, drives the most luxurious cars, enjoys fine dining, wears designer clothes, employs others to serve them, and generally enjoys the highest standard of living. Jesus turns that model upside down. Leadership means giving more and receiving less—giving more of your life’s time and energy to serve those whom you lead and thus having less for yourself.

If you are a leader who believes that the position you have been empowered with is a God-given calling, then your leadership has an added God-given definition. A leader in God’s economy must be more than smart, shrewd, visionary and organized. The successful leader by Jesus’ standards must also become a slave to those whom he or she is called to lead. The successful leader is not the one who gains the most for her or himself, but the one who gives the most for the benefit of others.