Modern Management in The Church
Gilbert W. Fairholm writes, "The transition from headship based on personality and talent to one based on control is the history of the rise of management to preeminence in our social institutions” (Kindle 835-836). He makes the case that managerial leadership is a contemporary phenomena and that it came into being “as the answer to charismatic leadership” (Kindle Location 837). Assuming he is right about the recent rise to power of leadership by management, it is important for the faith community to reflect on the implications for church leadership.
The author cites a number of values that undergird the principles based leadership expressed by the contemporary manager/leader. They are: 1) The Leader’s Role Is in Stakeholder Development, 2) The Leader’s Role is To Create Vision, 3) The Leader Creates a Culture Supportive of Core Values, 4) The Leader's Personal Preparation is in Individual One-on-One Relationships with Followers, 5) Values-based Leadership Asks the Leader to Be a Teacher, and 6) The Values-based Leader Has the Dual Goal of Producing High-Performance and Self-led Followers. (Kindle 886-927). The traditional, organizational, institutional, and programmatic driven church, regardless of the particular organizational model, attempts to reflect these values.
Though a product of the traditional church, my personal spiritual development was primarily influenced by a lifestyle and personal model of spiritual formation. In other words, I grew spiritually in the context of ministry lifestyle. My disciple maker led me into ministry from day one and the mission, indeed the church’s mission, became my mission. It wasn’t until I entered classes in bible college and then seminary that I realized that the church was really modeled after business! As I read the principles in this book it is easy to see why they have a place in the traditional organized church. The question that arises is the difference between how I was motivated and equipped into mission and how managerial leadership, using the noted principles, motivates and equips one into ministry.
The good news teller informed me that God was in the process of redeeming the world to Himself and that I was both an object of His redemption and a potential partner in that process. For me, becoming a follower of Jesus was becoming a stakeholder in God’s cosmic vision! No need for stakeholder pitches or new vision statements! With my disciple maker, I joined the mission! His lifestyle demonstrated Kingdom values! He was a great teacher! But, he never gave me the idea that he was focused on me becoming a high performance church member. He did help me to become a self-feeding and self-leading believer.
I am concerned that the church has been so influenced by this model of leadership. It relies too much on organizational systems and programs. The questions it asks may be right, but the way solutions are sought do not develop the believer. Fairholm writes, "They operationalize a people-oriented philosophy of growth toward self-leadership that involves learning and then teaching principles so followers can lead themselves” (Kindle 881-882). If I understand this correctly, this philosophy relies upon teaching to affect lifestyle transformation. Outward behaviors may change but not necessarily inward motivations and affections. This is core to spiritual formation.
Managerial leadership coupled with the usual pastoral mindset leading in the church, contributes to a lack of mission focused ministry. The church reflects the academy as to its emphasis on teaching with little life change to show for its efforts. What kind of leadership is needed in the church? What changes should be made?
Gilbert W. Fairholm. Perspectives on Leadership: From the Science of Management to Its Spiritual Heart.
