Spirit of Organization

Great leaders possess the ability to see beyond the immediate, to make connections between the past and the future, and to use their foresight to formulate a vision that truly serves the organization and its constituents. According to Greenleaf (1977, 2002), it is this ability that constitutes the “lead” in leadership. “Once leaders lose this lead and events start to force their hand, they are leaders in name only” (p. 40). Assuming that the leader has this foresight and has been able to give body and form to the vision that is percolating within the organization and among the people served by the organization, how does the leader then communicate that vision so that it becomes a clear and powerful motivator for the members of the organization? One way that has been suggested is through the use of well-formulated questions.

Handy, (1994) suggests using the question: “If we did not exist, would we re-invent ourselves, and, if so, what would we look like?” (p. 50). Handy calls this “second curve” thinking, referring to the sigmoid curve that illustrates how human endeavors tend to go through a cycle of entrepreneurship, productivity, climax and finally decline and that, to survive in the long run, they should begin developing a fresh vision while they are still on the upward slope of productivity and not wait until they are in decline when it may be tool late. Others talk about creating stories about the future of the organization (Marquardt & Berger, 2000, p. 32) and using visual imagery to help people “see” the vision (Thomas & Velthouse, 1990, pp. 675-676).

Unfortunately, some leaders have turned this “vision thing” into a cheap gimmick. They think that by simply creating a cute slogan and plastering it on every wall and on every computer screen, they have thereby cast the vision. Infusing a vision throughout a church or organization implies far more than this. A vision is a profound sense of calling and purpose, set in concrete imagery about “where we will be in the future.” For Christians, it involves sensing the calling of God and giving voice to that calling so that all can see and hear it.

Questions for Reflection

(1) Think about what you have read about the life of Christ. What were some ways that He helped His disciples to “capture the vision?” (2) How does a servant leader discern the vision of the organization? (2) In what ways might a leader’s vision become abusive or manipulative? (4) Can you think of someone who has infused vision into your life? How did they do it?

[Post a Reply]

Works Cited

Robert K. Greenleaf. Servant Leadership: A Journey Into the Nature of Legitimate Power & Greatness (New York: Paulist Press, 2002).

Charles Handy, The Age of Paradox (Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 1994).

Michael J. Marquardt, and Nancy O. Berger, Global Leaders for the 21st Century (New York: State University of New York Press, 2000).

Kenneth W. Thomas, and Betty A. Velthouse, “Cognitive Elements of Empowerment: An ‘Interpretive’ Model of Intrinsic Task Motivation,” Academy of Management Review 15, no. 4 (1990): 666-668. Journal on-line. Available from Business Source Premier (20 November 2006).

All of us have had to do things out of a sense of obligation or simply because we were forced to do it by a higher power. In fact, just last month, most of us were coerced into sending a part of our hard-earned income to the federal government in the form of taxes. There may be some out there who just find this annual exercise the highlight of their year, but I think it’s pretty safe to say that most do not experience it that way. What I am talking about is the difference between extrinsic and intrinsic motivation. Thomas and Velthouse (1990) defined “intrinsic” motivation as involving “positively valued experiences that individuals derive directly from a task” (p. 668). It is the result of the person internally assessing the task and determining that the task itself is personally rewarding. The focus is on the task rather than the consequences of not performing the task or the “payoff” from accomplishing the task. In other words, it is a motivation that is independent of the attraction of the reward or the fear of the punishment. In my estimation, this was the approach that was most often employed by the Apostle Paul in his efforts to influence people to follow the way of Jesus Christ. For example, in one instance, Paul was trying to raise funds for a gift of charity to the Jewish Christians living in Jerusalem who were suffering a terrible drought. While in the Greek city of Corinth, Paul appealed to the Christians there to give generously, but not out of a sense of obligation. He wrote: “Each one must do just as he has purposed in his heart, not grudgingly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver” (1 Corinthians 9:7, NASB). Most organizational experts agree that, in today’s world, the old approach of command and control no longer works. Our culture and the world as a whole are seeking the kind of leaders who know how to help people discover the power of intrinsic motivation.

Questions for Reflection

(1) Why do you think the system of command-and-control fails to produce the best results? (2) How can a leader tap into the intrinsic motivation of the task? (3) Can you think of some specific things that leaders have done in your life to foster motivation from within? (4) What are the assumptions being made my leaders who seem to only know the command-and-control style of leadership?

[Reply to this Post]

Works Cited

Thomas, K. W., & Velthouse, B. A. (1990). Cognitive elements of empowerment: An ‘interpretive’ model of intrinsic task motivation. Academy of Management Review, 15(4), 666-668.

UNDERSTANDING THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT and how the two interact with one another is critical to organizational effectiveness and survival. This is even true–or perhaps especially true–for the church. Not all leadership experts agree that there really is a difference, but most feel that the distinction is important. Kotter (1997) was the first to take a serious look at this distinction. He writes:

Management is about coping with complexity. . . . Without good management, complex enterprises tend to become chaotic in ways that threaten their very existence. Good management brings a degree of order and consistency to key dimensions like the quality and profitability of products” (p. 25).

Management is the effort to make sense out of the chaos, to clear up the confusion, and to force life into an orderly frame of reference. This is great for calming the nerves and maintaining a sense of peace and tranquility.

This desire for order, however, can also lure us into the illusion of security because real life is not like that. Real life is full of surprises and shifting forces that affect the outcomes of our efforts. This changing and chaotic reality of life is where leadership comes into play. Again, Kotter writes: “Leadership, by contrast, is about coping with change. . . . More change always demands more leadership” (p. 25). The research of Kouzes and Posner (1995) goes even further, providing clear evidence that high-performance leaders are always engaged in the work of leading change (p. 15). Dr. Thomas C. Stanton, vice president for Academic Affairs at James Madison University, maintains that

leaders and managers have common foundation abilities but they differ with respect to their predominant tendencies. [Leaders] tend to be goal-oriented while managers tend to be results-oriented. . . . Managers attempt to adjust to change while leaders attempt to produce it.

Perhaps even more important than simply recognizing the distinction between leadership and management is to also understand how the two functions interact with one another. They are both essential to the survival of any organization, but they often come into conflict with one another. As Yukl (2002) states: “The two processes have some incompatible elements; strong leadership can disrupt order and efficiency, and strong management can discourage risk taking and innovation” (p. 6). Unfortunately, the desire for “keeping the peace” or “not upsetting the applecart,” can lead a church or other organization to reject the innovators as instigators of harm, rebels, and malcontents. On the other hand, those who lean more toward leadership tend to be impatient with the managers, willing sometimes to run roughshod over anyone who gets in the way of their program for change. Healthy churches and healthy organizations manage to create an environment where both can perform their legitimate function.

[Post a Reply]

Sources Cited

Kotter, J. P. (1997). What leaders really do. In R. P. Vecchio (Ed.), Leadership: Understanding the Dynamics of Power & Influence in Organizations (pp. 24-34): University of Notre Dame.

Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (1995). The leadership challenge: How to keep getting extraordinary things done in organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Stanton, T. C. Cited by Mark R. Christian, August 31, 2003,Manager vs Leader, Online threaded discussion forum in Leadership Studies Doctor of Strategic Leadership Forum LEAD771: The Human Side of Leadership, Regent Univesity, Virginia Beach, VA.

Yukl, G. (2002). Leadership in Organizations (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.