Saturday, November 17, 2007

Servant-Leadership

I've been reading a lot about leadership the last couple of weeks in preparation for a class in NT leadership that I will be taking in December.
Servant-Leadership has been a focus.

One of the thoughts that I've come across that really intrigues me is the idea that a servant-leader is more concerned about the person or people that he is leading than the organization itself. I've really given this a lot of thought.

How can I be more concerned for the individual when my primary responsibility is leading the organization? How can I be more concerned about a staff person than the well being of a congregation that I'm leading? Wow, that's something to really think about. Who would Jesus have been most concerned about.

OK, I know this could lead to a deep philosophical discussion about the 99 sheep verses the 1 lost sheep, or dialog about the best thing for the many verses the interest of only one. Is it a truth that the servant-leader should be concerned about the welfare of one over the welfare of the entire group?

Hmmm. After pondering this I've come to some conclusions that I think will help me grow.

First of all, in God's plan, if something is best for His Church then it is also best for the individual. If a staffer is not functioning in his zone...his sweet spot...then there's a pretty good chance that they may not be in the best place for them.

Cutting to the chase--I am called and compelled to be very concerned for individuals that I have a responsibility to lead. If I approach situations where an individual is causing detriment to the organization I demonstrate servant-leadership if I approach the situation as a growth opportunity (or a transitional opportunity) for the staffer who is struggling--not for the sake of the organization but for the sake of the individual.

If I can separate out the individual from the global perspective while ministering to that staff person then I can truly look to the best interests not only of the organization but the genuine self interests of the individual.

Anyway, that's what I was thinking about.

No comments: