- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Well, some of you know I went over the edge with my church commitment (toward lack of commitment) due to some very ungrateful attitudes of local leaders a few years ago. So, I joined a non-profit and had a very fulfilling 9 months or so. Tons of good experiences and personal growth milestones. Then the organizaton’s leaders made similar mistakes as in the church although of a different character and on a lesser scale. I won’t go into details, other than to say the experience taught me a few things.
1) Leaders tend to take their most committed volunteers for granted.
2) Organizations can easily become egocentric about their own temporal interests and not the people their mission says they serve.
3) People tend to look at others through the lens of their own narrow perspective.
4) The idea of comissioning (seeking to overlap organizational interests with individual interests) isn’t something most organizations or leaders put at the front of their leadership style.
Although I’m disappointed with some of the behavior of the leaders in this secular non-profit, I want to say its MUCH easier to take in a secular non-profit and than in the church. This is for a few reasons:
a) one serves for a term, not until they are told they are released. There is always an end in sight.
b) secular non-profits make no claims about being perfect or a divinely connected organization, so we can expect less of them.
c) you can quit at any time, and then never see the people again. In the church, the relationships are permanent, and the fall-out from quitting a calling can be significant.
For that reason, it’s much easier to persist in volunteer service in this secular “calling” than in the church.
In spite of a bit of a bump in the road, I am still planning to complete my term in this non-profit, and see through a number of projects.
Thought I’d share, and ask — do you see any of the phenomenon I described in points 1) 2) 3) and 4) in the first list I made in this post? Do you see it existing in the church?
I do see those things on your list of four in the church, perhaps a little less so for #4 but it is still a factor. The others are spot on. I think I might add to your list of three that there is usually little, if any, guilt associated with lack of service or ending service in secular organizations as opposed to the church. That’s not to say the church or the people therein impose all of the guilt, some of it is brought on internally.
Think you might find this helpful SD. Quote:The importance of good leadership in organisations has come into focus as one listens to news coverage about what is happening with the banks and society at large.
There are many definitions of leadership one of which is stated that leadership is the ability (based on personal attributes and/or behaviours) to influence people to achieve a desired and preferably shared goal. The key factor in leadership is the ability to earn the trust and confidence of a group of people and consequently have an influencing impact on them, turning them into followers. In other words followers make leadership possible.
Without followers a leader cannot lead. People do not work for organisations, they work for their managers, and the level of commitment, engagement and retention is directly dependent on how they respect and rate their managers.
So why do leaders have followers?
A person assumes the mantle of leadership because they
Have people who believe in them and their vision,
Listen and respect the followers’ views, get them involved and energise them.
Gain their followers’ involvement and commitment to work toward the goal.
Have learned to have a measure of confidence and trust in their followers. Have a strong strategic focus, and a clear vision of where the organisation should be going; speak plainly and truthfully and, when necessary, courageously and with principles.
Are accessible, avoid arrogance and even occasionally show that they can be as vulnerable as their followers. Celebrate and appreciate the successes of their followers and make them feel valued.
A leader’s status or position is earned and has to be continuously maintained. A follower may decide at any time not to follow the leader for any number of reasons. When this happens, the leadership role may well be over. Whether it is formal (in a business setting) or informal (in a social setting), the leader without followers loses status and the erstwhile followers become disengaged. This is inevitably more pronounced in today’s society, going by what we see happening around us as business and political leaders fail to lead.
Whatever the framework of leadership, whether through the formal process of organisational hierarchy of power and authority or less formal voluntary followership e.g. mentoring, a leader’s followership is lost in the following circumstances:
Where the leader has an excessive need to control and fails to delegate. This can arise when experts are engaged to do what they do best, but are not given the scope to deliver because the leader is too keen to control everything and micromanage. Micromanaging people that you have retained to do a job can lead to mistrust. Once you lose trust, you may lose your followers.
Lack of dignity and respect, not listening to alternative views, talking over people, use of inappropriate language especially because you are in a position of power, outright disrespect. This does not endear the leader to its followers and they will leave your sphere of influence as soon as they are able to.
Failure to compromise. ‘It is my way or no way at all’ – sticking to a rigid philosophy or approach of doing things even when others around you urge a change will cause a leadership crisis and loss of followers.
Outsourcing blame to others. When a leader believes that they are always right and it has to be the fault of their followers, then the point is reached where trust is broken and influence is lost.
Failure to take accountability. Leadership is about taking personal responsibility and accountability for the team. Leaders who practice “the buck stops here” philosophy will always attract followers. Failing to admit mistakes especially when it is blatantly obvious makes one look small and insincere as a leader and it is instant quick and easy way to lose credibility.
Inability to share the credit for work that is done by others. When a leader takes the full credit for the work of his team without any acknowledgement of the team effort or recognition of the contribution of others, the team may stop following.
Unethical and immoral behaviour. Out of control behaviour in one’s personal life may drive away people who have higher moral standards of conduct. Although the measure of what constitutes moral and acceptable behaviour has evolved somewhat, most people agree that cheating, lying, and stealing are immoral acts. Followers would not want to be associated with this kind of leader.
Yup, imperfect people run all organizations – and people are more alike than different, in the aggregate.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.