Exchange theory of leadership: us vs them

I recently listened to a retiring radio show host describe his years in the business. He used the opportunity to tell the untold story of internal shenanigans and even chose to name names. He was also resentful of the series of events that once catapulted him to the top of his game. His bitterness was expressed as something that would stick in his crawl for the rest of his days. Yet the move to a station recently acquired by his employer was only mismanaged, whilst his career benefited immensely.

The presenter went on to describe how the new station thrived under his influence and went to great lengths to describe how “his ideas” had boosted their ratings.

To be honest I felt nauseas as I listened to a large ego berate employers for decisions that were good for shareholders and which also gave him such a great break, but I almost gagged when he boasted of his personal achievements.

Exchange theory of leadership: all for one, one for all

We all so readily confess that Jesus is the head of the church, but in practice it is rarely so. I have found very, very few contexts that give practical expression to that idea.

A friend spoke of their church being without a leader, because Jesus is their leader. That is commendable, but potentially risky. The truth is that leadership and authority is a serious issue to God. Many of our greatest issues stem from a clash of interest between God’s position on authority and the consequential resentment of followers.

Either way we lose if we don’t get a balanced perspective on leadership. Many churches have been suppressed by self-centered leaders, whilst others have been impoverished by lack of leadership, but far too many individuals are in wilderness places because they could not connect with leadership at all.

Designed for glory

We are not our own. God our maker, called us to serve His purpose and fulfill our design potential.

I read a quote recently, which implied that we cannot reach our potential without Jesus.

That sounds good enough, but I am never happy to just accept motherhood and apple pie. I need to dig into an expression like that and get to its soul.

In 1947, Howard Hughes built a huge, eight-engined propeller powered aircraft out of wood (due to wartime shortages of metals). Critics soon dubbed it the “Spruce Goose”. The eccentric billionaire had taken flying to the edge on many occasions, but he invested all his passions into building this great aircraft: the largest flying boat ever and the reigning world champion for all aircraft in terms of wing span (97m) and overall height (24.2m) – compare that with dimensions for the world’s largest passenger aircraft at 76m wingspan and 24.1m height and you get some idea of how big the Spruce Goose was.

But, alas, the Spruce Goose only flew once at a height of 70m and a speed of 135mph. Critics argue that she lacked the power to climb and only achieved her maiden flight through ground effects. Well, whatever the truth, I am sure the plane was never designed to be parked in a museum, in Long Island. It was designed to fly and carry cargo. But it never reached its potential.

Everything in life is designed. Go and look at the smallest insect and you will see design and logic. Each has its place in the cycle of life, the food chain and the functional balance of nature. Nothing is wasted.

It is as true that we were built to specification. We may not be Spruce Gooses, but each of us is uniquely designed for a purpose. God created humans to serve many general and specific purposes, but He never intended any aspect of His creation to become a mere museum artifact. We were made to live, breathe and be of value.

So, when we speak of reaching our potential, we at least refer to the fulfillment of the potential invested in us by our maker. But there is a more subtle point here. We have not reached our potential merely for the fact of doing or achieving many things or through the exploitation of our talents. We can only reach our potential within the context of God’s will and purpose for our lives – He is the sole judge of what we are supposed to be and whether we realize that potential.

So it is right to say that without Jesus we cannot reach our potential – we can do much and achieve great things, but we can only reach our potential on the terms of our maker.

This introduces two key leadership issues.

Firstly, are you a leader at all, by God’s standard, if you merely achieve. No you are only a leader insofar as you achieve His purpose. That is not at all unreasonable. When shareholders elect a CEO they entrust the stewardship of their investment to the chief executive, which may or may not center around profit growth. In return, the CEO entrusts issues of compensation to them. No CEO who is truly worth his own salt exists for himself. An executive exists to satisfy the objectives of his shareholders and his performance will be judged by them alone.

Church leaders are there to execute God’s mandate. In effect they are really just midwives who oversee the outworking of God’s potential and the realization of Christ-likeness in the lives of individuals.

That brings me to the second point. You are not a leader if you mold followers to your ways or your patterns and make them replicas of yourself, for you are not and shall never be the standard by which their potential shall be measured. You can only consider success in terms of the degree to which Christ is formed in the hearts of people and that is exactly what Paul defined as the whole purpose of ministry (read it for yourselves in Ephesians 4). As partakers of the divine nature of God He has given us all we need for life and Godliness, so that the outworking of His potential may redound to His glory without ever being the product of human ingenuity or original thinking – indeed, no flesh shall ever glory in His presence.

I get the feeling that the modern shepherd has become more of a cowherd, living with the notion that leadership is all about herding people from meeting to meeting and doing relevant crowd management through good music, entertaining ministry, creative programs and comfortable auditoria. Well that’s all good and well and may have its place, but when you stand before Him one day, the sole shareholder of this divine enterprise will only be concerned with the faithfulness of your stewardship. If we fail to implement the patterns He has prescribed for us, we have not achieved at all and we will have missed our potential.”

Look, simply put, the church is not a good ideas club. It is God’s design for bringing us all (not an exclusive few) into unity of the faith and knowledge of the Son of God unto a perfect man. That is what we are about and what we must achieve, nothing more, nothing less. If people do not grow up into the head, which is Christ, and thus become like Him as true disciples, well then you can only really claim to have formed a museum artifact, something with unfulfilled potential that was designed for greatness.

(c) Peter Eleazar at http://www.bethelstone.com/

Stand in the gap

The power of precedence, is a key biblical principle. It was the watershed of major historic events.

The act of one man, Adam, less so much his wife, determined the future of the entire human race. The act of Saul, when he disobeyed Samuel, blighted his descendents and cut them off from the throne of Israel. A single act of obedience by one old man on a lonely Canaanite outpost, blessed all of Abraham’s descendants from that day onwards. When Esau sold his birthright for some stew, he could never get it back though he sought it with tears, but what he lost to Jacob would remain Jacob’s inheritance forever.

Ultimately these principles point to the cross where the second Adam, paid the price to right the precedence of sin and death that came through the first Adam, so that now through that one man righteousness and life must accrue to all who believe in Him.

These principles allude to the weightiness of leadership and the substance of our stewardship. It is why I, like many other men, drew a line in the sand and declared that whatever errors defined our forefathers, the rot would stop with us.

It is evident from 1 Samuel 10, that God anointed Saul and placed His spirit on him, but that did not prevent his failure because Saul had never been through the forging furnaces of life that are so necessary for preparing us for greater responsibility. But David first proved his heart, then was anointed as a future king and then faced years of struggle and only then was He commissioned to rule as King. That made him a far more resilient and wise leader, but it also ensured his own teach-ability, humility and sensibility.

The problem with leaders that have power without substance, is that they are all too often impulsive, reckless and egocentric, just as Saul was. They also suppress all opposition, just as Saul did. They can break organizations and do untold harm to the teams they inherit, but their insecurity makes them the centre of attention so that everything revolves around the dominant individual, just as it was for Saul. And like Saul, some of them never outgrow their flaws but eventually just fall on their own swords.

A seasoned campaigner has fewer chips on their shoulder and is more likely to be magnanimous, tough when needed, but otherwise unthreatened by other aspirant leaders.

So as moments of decision or key individuals made telling differences to succeeding generations throughout history, so one leader can and often does make a telling difference to the future of modern organizations, including churches. That demands a very accountable, servant-like heart that is in touch with the weight of their role and willing to humbly execute their mandate in obedience to God.

Look what Abraham did after he secured God’s blessing. He paid great attention to detail in ensuring that Isaac was mentored, had the right wife to support him and was otherwise adequately prepared to carry his legacy into the future. I could paraphrase the man’s sense of his blessing and the implications thereof: “Heck, I will not let anyone take this blessing and corrupt it. Listen to me Eliezer, this is not a matter of life and death: it is much more than that. Place your hand on my groin and swear by an oath that you will not fail to ensure a proper wife for my son and a mother to my grandchildren.”

I may have used nice airy-fairy biblical language thus far, but the previous paragraph brings the concept of stewardship into a richer perspective. The kind of heart it takes to carefully watch over and shepherd all that God entrusts to a leader, is the kind of heart that has paid too great a price to ever drop the ball.

Leadership is not a game, nor is it a title, rank, career or symbol for our fragile egotism. It is a fearful and significant thing for God to delegate the weight of His kingdom to us and to call us watch over His beloved people.

When we wound the sheep and drive them away to preserve our own rights, we stand guilty of the presumptuous sin that David so despised. But when we fearfully determine that none shall be lost of those so entrusted to us, then and only then will we have grasped the heart of leadership.

Leadership is not eloquence or learning, but may involve both. But when leaders are anointed because they look, sound or seem the part, they are nothing but empty vessels, sounding gongs and clanging symbols (1 Corinthians 13: 1). But when we shepherd faithfully, in a covenant of love and a full understanding that we can make a difference for the kingdom in preserving His legacy, then you will understand why, “love is patient and kind, without boasting or pride. It is never rude (offensive to the sheep) or self-seeking. Nor is it easily angered and it keeps no record of wrongs. It always protects, trusts, hopes and perseveres and it will never fail” (1 Corinthians 13: 4-8).

© Peter Eleazar at http://www.bethelstone.com/

Authority relates to stewardship

Leadership is the highest form of stewardship that imposes the greatest call to personal submission.

Power closely relates to sin and sin feeds on self. Self awareness was the first change that happened in Adam and Eve after they ate of the tree of knowledge. It is the crux of all temptation and has been used by Satan to draw us away from God into deviant purposes. Self-knowledge is a key consideration of the tenth Commandment: “Do not covet”.

It is no coincidence that the grand prize in Satan’s temptation of Jesus, was to get Him to displace His Father’s authority and rule in His own right. That was completely against the grain for Jesus, but it reflects the soul of self-awareness: the instinct to advance ourselves. Whilst I am all in favor of self-development and self-respect, the insidious spirit of self-centeredness relates directly to original sin: the rebellion of Satan against God’s throne.

We tacitly align ourselves with that rebellion when we promote self over the kingdom, for in so doing, we effectively subvert the throne and authority of God. Indeed, whether self-awareness manifests as pride or debasement, as overt or covert behavior, it still detracts from the glory of God, diminishes the power of the kingdom and makes us an unwitting channel for Satan’s subversion of God’s purposes.

Self is a key factor of the power struggle between leaders and followers. Both parties struggle within themselves for mastery and recognition and the issues compete with the healthy attributes of leadership. Most leaders would agree that laying ourselves down to serve the greater cause, in cooperation with leaders, significantly reflects spiritual maturity. I agree and I also adopt the bible’s bias towards leaders. Even imperfect leadership is better than no leadership and taking the law into our own hands is perverse, for leadership represents the whole and the whole is always more than any one individual.

But for submission to be relevant at any level it must be relevant at all levels. Leaders must also be subject to authority and if not they have no right to require submission from their followers, for the essence of all leadership is stewardship of the mandates entrusted to us. If we lose touch with that principle and strike out on our own independent agenda, we will also place ourselves beyond the limits of God’s authority.

It is no wonder that the bible calls “Rebellion, the sin of witchcraft” (1 Samuel 15:23), for it is the heart of corruption, insurrection, conflict, wickedness, vice, malice and lawlessness.

For a leader to give full effect to their own submission, they must take deliberate steps into the context of authority. They must respect that the principle of authority is independent of the person, but dependent on God. This is not just about being accountable to other leaders: we must start with submission to God and His Word.

Now this is where the rub comes. When leaders misinterpret leadership as something sacrosanct, an imposed right of way, they miss the raison d’etre of their calling: which is all about God entrusting His Kingdom and His purposes to our frailty. Indeed, it is about a whole (the kingdom) that precedes us and will outlive us, but nonetheless extends to us (individuals) the privilege of participation.

The reason that Abel and Jacob found favor with God over their brothers, was because they brought back to God what God first entrusted to them. Their brothers tried to impress with the labors of their hands and the originality of their thinking. But Abel and Jacob feared God in the spirit of true stewardship. Abel despised sweat capital and only laid before God a lamb that was first entrusted to his shepherd heart: it was a costly part of his own heritage and the sacrifice was sensitive to the heart of God (he offered a lamb without being told that such a sacrifice would be a recurring symbol of godliness).

Abel brought to God what God wanted, but Cain brought what he wanted. Jacob, on the other hand, showed profound regard for the legacy handed down from Abel through succeeding generations, whilst his foolish brother was willing to trade that legacy for some stew (you could stew for popularity, power, position, symbols or reputation).

Our legacy, the Kingdom of God, has a six thousand year heritage established through faithful hearts, whom God sustained through enormous personal sacrifices. How dare we assume that what we have inherited is our fiefdom or an expression of our own original thinking? Moses would have raised his rod over this generation, saying “He called us only to implement the patterns shown on the mount”.

It is a fearful and noble thing to be called to steward something of such priceless value and we must needs do so with fearful, faithful hearts. Like Joshua we need to apply great attention to detail in handling the wonders of God. That implies personal discipline, submission to the Word, holy living, accountability for our conduct and respect for the pillars of divine governance: the prophetic, the priesthood and ruler-ship.

In closing, may I hint at the next chapter in this discourse. The wise leader needs to realize that when biblical principles are applied to their leadership, it will enhance their ability to lead effectively. It is incumbent on all good leaders to study divine patterns and principles in the knowledge that real authority is independent of their personality, personal power, charisma, original thinking, vision or any other humanistic concepts of leadership. Real authority relates to what we steward, not who stewards it.

(c) Peter Eleazar at www.bethelstone.com

Authority is not personal power

The idea of separating authority from the office bearer is controversial, but empirically logical..

In the previous article I said that Authority is not a person, but a principle. I wish to explore that further, using a few relevant examples. The examples I have chosen are biblically defined authority structures.

The first is Slavemasters. The term, as such, is no longer relevant, but the principle relates to business leaders. Peter was quick to say that we should submit to these, even when they are harsh and I support that, in principle. Harsh leadership has its place in every leadership context for those who define and preserve boundaries, but I will speak later on leadership styles and roles.

A business leader is empowered by defined terms of reference that are independent of the office bearer. In business we always referred to “the job”, not the “incumbent”. The job is mandated and sanctioned by the organization and its shareholders. The mandate and its compensation is job specific, not specific to the office holder. It ultimately relates back to the stewardship of shareholder value. The authority to do the job is defined within the terms of reference. These are readily accepted principles in business circles, but it surprises me that we cannot translate the principle to other leadership contexts.

When a business leader fulfils his or her given mandate and delivers to their terms of reference, they have authority. I do believe that such authority is more than a human mantle. God nominated such leaders as a legitimate class of authority and I have seen how an intangible spirit of authority seems to accompany appointed leaders. However, I have also seen leaders walk in and out of authority, for they can exceed themselves. Thus, when leaders (be they Christians or not) consciously or unconsciously apply biblical principles, things work. Fairness, equity, integrity, honesty and other timeless principles come to mind and great leaders swear by them. But of equal importance is faithful stewardship of their terms of reference.

A scriptural example of how authority can waver, relates to Joshua. Whilst clearly anointed of God to lead Israel, his authority was diminished by sin within the camp, the sin of Achan. God withdrew His power until the sin was resolved, for the people had effectively stepped outside of His authority. Sin here could be a proxy for corruption, inequity, double-dealing or violation of terms of reference: namely, “disobedience”.

Parental authority

As with the previous discussion, this is another defined biblical authority that carries divine weight. A Father has authority within the home, power to impose discipline and the ability to instill values. It is an intangible spirit of authority that comes from God, regardless of race or creed, but it is specific to Fathers. Mothers also have authority, but it is specific to their role. I frequently hear women express frustration with child discipline and other unnatural roles, but I rarely see men battling with their own natural roles.

However, I have seen men lose authority by stepping outside their mandate and I have also seen at least some of that same authority gradually pass to their wives, by default. A father can and does lose the respect of his wife and children when he fails to live up to God’s terms of reference. I think far too many men are currently disempowered and are being left behind because they do not understand their authority or invoke it. It doesn’t matter how theologians cut or slice this issue, the reality is that despite the defined authority of fatherhood, fathers will suffer diminished authority through sin and misappropriation of God’s mandate.

I once had a major sin issue in my household, but as for Joshua the sin was concealed. I found myself struggling in almost every area of my life because of this, because God held me accountable, just as Joshua was accountable for Israel. When I confronted and resolved those issues, I regained authority in my home and in society. I actually felt very disempowered and ineffective as a man until the issues were resolved.

Church authority

I am amazed at how all the foregoing is held to be valid, but somehow breaks down within church leadership. There are clear biblical principles for leadership that represent the separate mandate of authority. Leaders who live within their mandates, thrive and invoke the power implied by their terms of reference, but leaders who exceed their mandates forever struggle with discipline, submission and support. As someone once said, “If you keep hitting brick walls, you are probably doing something wrong”. That is true for leadership. There is a right way and a high way of leadership, but violations of our divine mandate, always undermine our ability to lead.

To make any form of submission reasonable, it is important that those who lead are themselves in submission: to Godly principle, the Word and to the “pattern” that God prescribed for His church. I do not celebrate many of the original ideas that leaders love to introduce in their pursuit of numbers and popularity, for it will be tough to stand before our King one day and explain how, like Saul, we grew impatient with His way and did it our way. I have limited regard for big ideas like vision or strategy. Jesus set the example, when He said, “I came to do your will O’ God.”

Simply put, if leaders are not accountable to God’s mandate and to those who cover them, then they will battle to command authority for by their actions they step outside their mandate into the realm of self-power, an authority that actually usurps divine authority, aligns with God’s enemy, frustrates the purpose of the Kingdom and turns a six thousand year legacy into a personal fiefdom.

Personal authority

The upshot of all that I have said relates ultimately to personal authority. Satan is an illegitimate authority, who assumes legitimacy because we allow his to do so. As rock beats scissors and scissors beat paper and paper beats rock, so anyone who has a right standing in God’s Word will find authority to overcome sin, Satan and the world. We can step into that mandate and step out of it, but the authority is an expression of God that outlives our comings and goings. Divine authority is ordained of God and we need to learn how to live within it if we are ever to be effective as believers. Indeed, whilst the world emphasizes personal charisma as a basis for power, God separates the locus of power and declares that those who live by His Word will prosper in spite of other more obvious limitations: how I thank God then that my success or failure is not something predefined by my birth, my looks, my height or my strength, but by His Word in me.

(c) Peter Eleazar at www.bethelstone.com

Leadership is accountability

Leadership is submission and accountability, for therein lies the mandate that empowers our actions.

When Saul was anointed King, Samuel the priest told him to wait seven days at Gilgal. Now Samuel was Saul’s key point of accountability, his reference point. He would be akin to a covering leader, chairman, boss, stakeholder or shareholder i.e. our locus of authority.

Saul should have obeyed Samuel and gone straight to Gilgal, but he felt there were more important things to do and battles to engage. He only obeyed two years later.

The first principle of leadership is that we are actually not instruments of our own timing.

We are beholden and should respect the authority that anoints us. No matter how well intentioned our actions may be, running off on our own is a sure recipe for a dangerous standoff and loss of confidence. Waiting until our stakeholders give us a mandate to proceed is a vital process in securing real authority, rather than simple positional authority. Positional authority (rank, status, position) has little currency in real leadership contexts and expert authority (knowledge, opinion) has not much more.

Real leaders arise out of a need to implement what they were appointed for and to influence all other power bases (staff, the organization, the public, experts, detractors and other leaders), to buy into the vision. Real leadership is about influence and the ability to command a following. Someone once said, “He who thinketh he leadeth but findeth that no one follweth, merely taketha walk.”

So when Saul was asked to wait, for only a short period, he would have learnt something from Samuel about his role and the expectations that came with his mandate. Ultimately he would have gained something of God’s heart rather than his own head.

The second principle of leadership is to recognize that we are custodians of what is entrusted to us. Israel was God’s heritage, not Saul’s fiefdom. It was God’s kingdom, not Saul’s empire. The heart of God for His own people was all that had to be implemented, not Saul’s own original thinking or presumption. The context is always bigger than us. We are dispensable and God’s heritage will outlast even the most charismatic of leaders.

Saul also needed to realize that his own stature (he was head and shoulders above all his peers), his breeding or his identified skills were of limited consequence. Indeed he was ultimately replaced by a youngster who had no experience in matters of state, but possessed the one thing Saul never had: a heart for God. The authority of Saul lay entirely in his mandate, his anointing. I can be quite outspoken, but hate to defend myself: yet when a principle or the interests of those I represent is at risk, I will put up a defiant struggle, because the mandate of my constituencies carries weight, or authority.

Saul was anointed to be king of Israel, a privilege extended to him by God and His people: with it came a reciprocal responsibility to fight for their cause, defend them and establish a form of government that would facilitate kingdom life and not to feather his nest or champion his ego.

The third principle of leadership is to recognize that the locus of your power lies not in your qualifications, your personal power, your stature (even though men tend to follow men of power) or your background. It rests entirely on your anointing and the role you have been called to assume on behalf of those that anointed you. God said to Moses, “be careful to implement all that I showed you on the mount.” That is exactly what I mean: implement God’s mandate not your own personal ambition or vision. If you can get that right, you will rise to greatness and be entrusted with much.

Saul felt that anointing equaled status and substance, instead of servant-hood. He implemented what he though was a good idea and missed the point, frustrating himself, his people and the throne above his head.

See 1 Samuel 10:8 and 1 Samuel 13:8

© Peter Eleazar at www.bethelstone.com