Why Is Leadership The "In-Thing"?

It appears that, over the past 10 to 20 years, leadership has become the one big thing that has attracted so much attention in evangelical circles. Why is that? Is it a good thing, a bad thing or neutral?

Leadership Focus
A quick search of Amazon.com or Christianbook.com reveal dozens and dozens of books written on the subject of leadership. There are even books being written about the books written on leadership. Adding to this are the conferences - some with world-wide followings - that emphasise the development of leadership. I personally have benefited significantly from Bill Hybel's teaching and example and the WillowCreek Leadership Summit. I also subscribe to plenty of email newsletters, etc. that are sent regularly on the topic of leadership.

So, why is leadership the subject of such attention?
Leadership is the art of moving a group of people from their present position to a desirable future. Key elements include exercising influence, direction setting, strategic planning, and change management.

It is this last element that provides the clue to its present popularity. Change is a constant reality in western society. There are plenty of ways of understanding the changes we have been through over the past 50 years. We have moved from an industrial society to an information society. Our national boundaries have become increasingly porous with the globalisation of media and technology. The increasing speed at which life is lived strains relationships, breaks down communities and creates a tribal mindset.

The church has changed from a rural village (parish) concept to a suburban (regional) concept. [Over 80% of Australian now live in the major cities.] These changes were led by highly skilled leaders, such as Bill Hybels and Rick Warren.

The shift of our culture, through multi-culturalism, from Christendom to a post-Christian reality has produced a new generation of leaders arguing for the development of "missional" churches in this "emerging" culture.

So, as I have implied above, leadership is the art of helping the community of the church negotiate the process of change to maintain relevance and connection to the cultural context in which it lives and serves.

When cultural change is fairly minimal, leadership is not greatly needed. Other spiritual gifts - e.g. teaching, pastoral care - come to the fore. But as cultural change occurs leadership is the gift that is needed to keep advancing the Kingdom of God.

Is it good, bad or indifferent?
Teaching may be done well, poorly or indifferently. The style of teaching may be the issue, or the content may be the issue. It's the same with leadership.

Leadership is very demanding within the Christian church, and many people fail to do it well.

Some have an issue with leadership style - they are domineering or vacillating or inappropriate or uncertain of the legitimacy of leadership itself. [Some of this can be traced back to the weaknesses of various church governance approaches.] Several books, including Hybel's "Courageous Leadership" identify different leadership styles. The key to good leadership is using the appropriate leadership style in the appropriate context.

A "command and conquer" style of leadership is appropriate in a team where the leader is vastly more experienced and the deadline is urgent. A "consultative" style of leadership is appropriate when leading an experienced group of peers. But if you switched the situations and didn't switch the leadership styles, both would be inappropriate.

Some leaders have an issue with content. And these are far more dangerous. Like attractive false teachers, false leaders can take a lot of people in a totally wrong direction.

The first sort of bad leader is the one who uses their influence to maintain the status quo within the church when the cultural context surrounding the church is changing. This leader doesn't prevent change because the church will eventually succumb to the surrounding forces. All they do is postpone the pain - sometimes until after their death!

Another bad leader is the one whose firm convictions - on how their church needs to function or what they need to believe - are actually at odds with spiritual reality. No one's views are totally "right" because we are all fallen creatures. The process of sanctification is as much an alignment of our thinking with God's truth as it is a process of aligning our actions with God's moral requirements. Therefore, we need to have convictions about revealed truth and have a humble attitude towards others who hold different views to ours. Our goal as leaders is to keep moving our understanding (knowledge, instinct, etc.) towards the perfect truth of God. I believe that this involves theological reflection, cultural analysis, historical perspective and strategic formulation.

A third bad leader might be driven by subconscious motives for self-fulfillment, power, status, etc. It is wise for leaders to examine themselves, identify their potential "darksides" and question their own motives when sailing close to the wind. Every leader has a darkside. A darkside is simply the opposite of their greatest strength. For example, a firm, visionary leader has the potential to trample over people. Knowing your greatest weakness allows you to compensate when operating as a leader. Spiritual disciplines can be very helpful in combating issues of pride, lust, seeking approval or popularity.

Conclusion
Leadership is a gift God has given the churches to allow his kingdom to advance most effectively during times of change. It may be used well or poorly, but it deserves the increased attention it has received over the past decade or two.