Category Archives: Leadership

Leadership

The Preparation For Leadership

Introduction:  Generally, people ascribe the success or failure of a leader to their qualification or fitness to lead. For this reason when leaders are sought in the secular world, the qualifications of the individuals are usually given primary considerations. On the contrary, a close examination of the call of great leaders God used in the Bible reveals that God was not primarily concerned about qualifications. Eims Leroy, observed that Leaders like Moses, Gideon and Jeremiah openly confessed their inadequacy to perform the task God called them to do.1 If God was looking for qualified men then he would not have called them.

Does it then mean that preparations are not necessary for Leadership? According to Gottfried Osei-Mensah, there are prerequisites for spiritual leadership. 2 This statement implies that some form of preparation is necessary. In addition, it is clear from scripture that every leader that God used had certain qualities or abilities that were necessary in performing their task. This observation however poses a question: Were those leaders prepared for their calling or did they just happen to have the qualities God required? With God, things do not happen by chance, therefore the thesis of this article is, those whom God used in the Bible as leaders were always prepared for their task.

To clarify this thesis statement selected leaders in the Bible are examined. The goal is, first to prove that the leaders were prepared for leadership and second, to determine the nature of the preparation and its importance to the leaders’ call.

The following three categories of leaders have been selected for this study:

a) Those whose call and commission came as a surprise to them
b) Those who were mentored by their predecessor
c) Those who assumed leadership as a result of a crisis.

Under each leader the presentation will also be divided into three sections:

a) His life history before his call to leadership;
b) His leadership role and achievements;
c) Summary of the specific ways he was prepared for leadership. Finally an evaluation would be made and conclusions drawn.

A. LEADERS WHOSE CALL AND COMMISSION CAME AS A SURPRISE

Among the leaders whose call and commission came as a surprise were Moses and Paul. These were leaders who had personal encounter with God whilst they were pursuing their own goals in life. These leaders would now be discussed individually to determine how each of them was prepared for leadership.

Moses

a) His life history before his call to leadership

The Bible, in Exodus Chapter 2-5, discusses the life of Moses from the time of his birth to that of his call. According to this section, Moses was born in Egypt by Hebrew parents. But because of an edict by Pharaoh to kill all the Hebrew baby boys, his mother was unable to raise him up from childhood to adulthood. However, by what can be termed divine providence, Howard F. Vos stated that Moses probably spent the first two or three ‘years of his life with his own mother. 3 The remaining period of his first forty years was spent in the palace as an adopted son of Pharaoh’s daughter. Commenting on the years Moses spent in Pharaoh’s palace, John C. Maxwell observed that he received the best of what Egypt offered both physically as well as intellectually. Maxwell cited Acts 7:22 which states that Moses was learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians and was mighty in words and deeds.4

In spite of the fact that he was raised up in Pharaoh’s palace Moses acknowledged his Hebrew identity. He had to flee Egypt because he killed an Egyptian to protect an oppressed Hebrew. The next forty years of his life he spent in Midian tending the flock of Jethro. It was in Midian, at about 80 years of age that God made the surprised call to him.

b) His leadership role and achievements

In this section the goal is just to make a brief reflection of Moses’ main task and achievements. According to John D. Hannah, in his commentary on Exodus, God commissioned Moses to deliver the children of Israel out of Egypt. He showed how that call and commission came as a complete surprise to Moses. 5 Although God also promised to take the Israelites to a good and spacious land, that commission, according to Hannah, was not given to Moses. To support his point, he made reference to Stephen’s statement about Moses’ mission in Acts 7:35-36, implying that there was no indication that Moses was supposed to take the Israelites to the promise land.6 Moses indeed accomplished the task God gave him in spite of all his objections about his inability when God called him. This was because he accepted in faith God’s assuring words that he would be with him to accomplish that mission and also because of his ambition to deliver the Israelites from slavery. Commenting on the aspect of his ambition, Ted Engstrom pointed out that “he never lost sight of his ambition and calling in life which made it possible”.7 Throughout his mission these words of assurance had been a motivation for him.

In addition, Maxwell rightly observed, over the course of the years in the desert, Moses’ leadership improved. He cited Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, as one person who helped to make that difference in his life.

Moses also accomplished something else that was not explicitly stated in scripture. D.A. Hubbard, in his article on the Pentateuch said that both Judaism and Christianity accepted without question the biblical tradition that Moses wrote the Pentateuch.8 These writings had been great materials not just for spiritual purpose but also for academic purpose.

Apostle Paul

a) His life history before his call to leadership

According to Act 21:39;22:3, Paul was a native of Tarsus, a city of Cilicia. He was of pure Jewish descent and of the tribe of Benjamin (Phil 3:5). He was a Hebrew and a Pharisee. He spoke Greek and was familiar with Aramaic (Acts 22:2). Paul, learned tent making because it was customary that all Jewish boys learn a trade.

In his book, ‘Paul the Leader’, Oswald J. Sanders made this observation about Paul: “all the formative years were calculated, to prepare him to be an eminent Pharisee and Rabbi like his great mentor Gamaliel”.9 Paul studied under Gamaliel, a distinguished teacher of the law and of the school of Hillel. Sanders also observe that the school of Hillel embraced a broader and more liberal view in education than that of Shammai – the other distinguished school.10 In addition, Sanders stated that unlike the school of Shammai, the school of Hillel was interested in Greek literature. In that school, Paul learned to use works of Gentile authors. He surpassed his fellow-students in both academic achievements and in zeal for both God and the tradition of his fathers. He was almost a member of the Sanhedrin, the supreme legal and civil court.11

b) His leadership role and achievements

Oswald Sanders, noted that Paul became a great spiritual leader when his heart and mind were captured by Jesus.12 Such statements could not have been made if Paul had not made great achievements in the role God gave him to perform. Another writer, Ted E. Engstrom gave the background to Paul’s success: “a Jew living in a Greek city, and with a Roman citizenship. Both by birth and training Paul possessed the tenacity of the Jews, the culture of the Greeks and the practicality of the Romans, and these qualities enabled him to adapt to the people among whom he was to move”13. According to Acts Chapter 9, when Paul encountered the Lord Jesus he was commissioned to take the gospel message to the gentiles. Records of Paul’s accomplishments of his commission can be found in Acts Chapters 13-28. These included missionary journeys to gentile territories, Church planting, training or teaching ministries among the gentiles and successful debates with secular philosophers.

In addition Paul also wrote thirteen of the New Testament Epistles. In these epistles he dealt with important theological concepts like justification, sanctification and the resurrection of Christ. Various portions of defense of the Christian faith against secular philosophies are also included in these epistles. According to 2Tim. 4:7, Paul was sure he accomplished God’s mission for his life when he stated that he has fought the good fight, finished the race and kept the faith.

B. LEADERS WHO WERE MENTORED BY THEIR PREDECESSOR

The second categories of leaders to be examined are those who were mentored by their predecessor. Among such leaders are Joshua, who succeeded Moses and Samuel, who succeeded Eli. These two leaders will be examined individually in this section.

Joshua

a) His life history before his call to leadership

The Bible gave a brief family background of Joshua in Exodus 33:11; Num. 1:10. He was the son of Nun, the son of Elishama, head of the tribe of Ephraim. Apart from this background, there is no other information about him before he met Moses. The scriptures gave much focus to Joshua’s mentoring relationship with Moses. This close working relationship between them can be traced in scripture.

According to exodus 24:13, when Moses went up Sinai to receive the two tablets for the first time Joshua accompanied him part of the way and was the first to meet him on his return (32:17). Also when the Israelites sinned by worshiping the golden calf, Moses moved the tabernacle outside the camp and left the congregation in charge of Joshua. In addition, Joshua was one of the twelve spies sent by Moses to explore the land of Canaan. It was only after about forty years of mentoring by Moses in the desert that God directed Moses to give Joshua leadership authority over the people.

In his book, ‘Leadership Images from the New Testament’, David Bennett mentioned four steps in developing a leader from the example of Jesus. These are:

a) To develop leaders who have learned to follow
b) To train within the context of personal apprenticeship.
c) To make commitment to the community as well as training for a task.
d) To stress on the spiritual aspects of leadership.14

These four steps can be found in the almost forty years mentoring relationship between Moses and Joshua. As Engstrom rightly puts it “Moses had the right attitude, when he knew it was time to train someone else for leadership. He was fearful of being a paternal leader and pleaded with God to give the Israelite a successor”.15 This might have been one of the reasons why he devoted himself to mentor Joshua.

b) His leadership role and achievements

Joshua’s role was made clear to him when he was commissioned as the leader of Israel. His call and commission was mediated through Moses. In Numbers 27:12-22 the Lord reminded Moses that he would not enter the promise Land and that Joshua would replace him. Moses obeyed the Lord’s instructions and commissioned Joshua before the whole Israelite assembly. This commission kept Joshua in focus throughout his mission and he kept his faith in the one who called him. As Donald K. Campbell rightly observed, Joshua interceded for the nation when the Israelites sinned and were defeated.16 God’s mandate was that Joshua would lead the Israelites to the Promise Land and he depended on him to accomplish that mandate. Commenting on the charge given to Joshua to be strong and courageous in Josh. 1:6, Campbell also said it was an affirmation that God would not let Joshua down.17 However this may also be seen as an indication that prior to the time he became Israel’s leader he had potentials, which he needed to build up in leadership.

Details of how Joshua accomplished his mission have been recorded in the book of Joshua. The conquest of Canaan was however not an easy one but Joshua’s training as a military leader and his dependence upon God gave him added advantage. He made mistakes but he learned from his mistakes.

Samuel

a) His life history before his call to leadership

According to John C. Maxwell, Samuel was special from the time he was born because he was an answer to prayer. He further commented that, as young child, Samuel was placed in the care of Eli the High priest and Judge of Israel.18 This revealed that the mentoring relationship between Eli and Samuel started quite early in Samuel’s life. Like Joshua, Samuel stayed in the same place with his mentor. In addition, at a very early age, God began to speak directly to him and that motivated him to reverence and serve God faithfully. The role played by Hannah in initiating this mentoring relationship should not be overlooked. McChesney and Unger said that it was a vow that Hannah made to dedicate Samuel to the Lord as a Nazarite.19

b) His Leadership Role and Achievements

To better understand and appreciate Samuel’s achievements, one should first examine the religious, political and social situations prior to his assumption to leadership. Eugene H, Merrill rightly observed that “the 300 or so years of the history of Israel under the Judges were marked by political, moral, and spiritual anarchy and deterioration”. It was in this background, where all seemed to have failed that Samuel was groomed and also took up leadership.20

With reference to his achievements, “Samuel’s level of influence with the people continued to increase throughout his lifetime. As a prophet, he was respected because he spoke from God. But in time Samuel also became Israel’s Judge, a position similar to that of a king. He was the nation’s civil and military leader. Samuel judged Israel all the days of his life”.21 Indeed, only leaders with certain qualities can achieve what Samuel achieved. It was that kind of excellent leadership that God was looking for in order to address the deteriorating situation in Israel. Israel enjoyed a time of peace during Samuel’s reign.

C. LEADERS WHO ASSUME LEADERSHIP AS A RESULT OF A CRISIS

During the period between the death of Joshua and the start of Samuel’s leadership, many people ruled Israel as Judges. All of them came to leadership as a result of a crisis need. Gideon and Samson were two of the Judges who ruled Israel at that time. They will be examined in this section, as representatives of the Judges, to determine whether they were prepared for their leadership roles.

Gideon

a) His life history before his call to leadership

In Judges chapter 6-8 the Bible gave a brief historic account of Gideon’s family background. He was the son of Joash the Abiezrite. He was also of the tribe of Manasseh. One may want to suggest that Gideon had no quality or potential for leadership before he became a leader. This assumption is proved wrong in the light of the angel’s greetings to Gideon – “mighty man of valor” (Judg. 6:12). As Joyce Peel rightly said, “the angel calls out his hidden qualities which we see developing in the rest of the story”.22

It can be seen that Gideon already had faith in God from a question he asked the angel – where are all the wonders that our fathers told us about when they said, “Did not the lord bring us up out of Egypt?” His parents have made him realize that in the past they have depended on God for survival. However, Gideon wanted an assurance that it was the God of his fathers talking to him, so he asked God to give him a sign (:17). Joyce Peel’s comment on Gideon’s request is that “it isn’t for the sort of sign an unbeliever asks to evade a challenge but for a sign to confirm to a believer who is ready to obey”.23 Gideon was convinced that God was speaking to him and based on that fact he responded to the call to meet the Midianite crisis.

b) His Leadership Role and Achievements

Gideon was called to perform a specific role and that was to deliver Israel from the Midianites. He had a clear vision in mind as to what he had to do. He also believed that he could accomplish his goal because he had the assurance of God. In addition he had inner qualities, which gave him enough courage to move into action, even though he started at night. Gideon delivered the Israelites from the Midianites’ oppression but he first brought them back to faith in God. However, immediately after his death the people turned back to their foreign gods.

Samson

a) His life history before his call to leadership

In Judges Chapter 13-16 the Bible gave an account of Samson’s life. Samson was the son of Manoah of Zorah and of the tribe of Dan. His birth was foretold to his parents by an angel. They were also told that he would be a Nazarite to God from the womb Iudg. 13:2-5,24). The Bible also says in Judg 3:24-25 that God blessed him and that the spirit of God began to stir him up while he was in Mahaneh Dan. From this account it can be observed that Samson was a man of unusual strength. In Hebrews 11:32 he was recognized as of the great men of faith. During Samson’s time the philistines were suppressing the Israelites.

b) His leadership role and achievements

Samson’s call and commission was mediated through his parents. According to Judges 13:5 he was to start the deliverance of Israel from the hands of the philistines. As John Mazwell rightly points out, “despite his good start, Samson got himself into trouble many times, and in the end he finished poorly: he was weak, blind and enslaved by the enemy from whom he was supposed to deliver his people.”24 Samson had the opportunity of becoming a great leader but his despicable character destroyed his leadership.

Conclusion

Three categories of leaders have been examined in this chapter to prove that the people that God called to leadership in the Bible were always prepared for their tasks. The first category of leaders were those whose call came as a surprise to them. The second were those who were mentored by their predecessor and the third, were those who responded to a crisis. It was proved that all of these leaders had some form of preparation necessary for their particular calling. These preparations may come from God, their parents, religious background, formal education or a mentor. Therefore one could conclude that God does not call any person to leadership who had not been prepared. God’s call or one preparation does not guarantee success because the preparation for effective leadership does not end with one’s call.

END NOTES

1 Eims Leroy, Be The Leader You Were Meant To Be Illinois: Victor Books, 1982), pp 8-13

2 Gottfied Osei-Mensah, Wanted: Servant Leadership (Achimota: African Christian Press, 1990), pp 24-32

3 Howard F. Vos. Moses: The New Unger’s Bible Dictionary (Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press, 1982), p 886.

4 John C. Maxwell, The 21 Most Powerful Minutes In a Leader’s Day: Revitalizing Your Spirit and Empowering your Leadership (Nashville: Thomas \nelson Publishers, 2000), p. 300.

5 John D. Hannah, Exodus: The Bible Knowledge Commentary (Colorado: Chariot Victor Publishers, 1985), p 112.

6 Ibid, P 121.

7 Ted W. Engstrom, The Making of A Christian Leader: How to develop management and human relations skills (Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1976), P 29.

8 D.A. Hubbard, Pentateuch: The New Bible Dictionary (Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press, 1982), p 903.

9 Oswald J. Sanders, Paul the Leader: A Vision for Christian Leadership Today (Eastboume: Kingsway Publication Ltd., 1982), pp 16/17.

10 Ibid, p 17

11 Ibid, p 19

12 Oswald J. Sanders, Spiritual Leadership (Chicago: Moody Press, 1980), p 40.

13 Ted E. Engstrom, The Making of Christian Leader: How To Develop Management and Human Relations Skills (Zondervan Publishing House, 1976), p 20.

14 David W. Bennett, Leadership Images From The New Testament: A Practical Guide (Carlisle: OM Publishers, 1998), pp 33/4

15 Ted W. Engstrom, The Making of a Christian Leader: How to develop management and human relations skill (Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1976), p 30

16 Donald K. Campbell, Joshua: The Bible Knowledge Commentary (Colorado: Chariot Victor Publishing, 1984), p 326.

17 Ibid, P 328.

18 John C. Maxwell, The 21 Most Powerful Minutes In A Leader’s Day: Revitalize Your Spirit and empower Your Leadership (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1982), p 67.

19 E. McChesney and Merrill F. Unger, Samuel: The New Unger’s Bible Dictionary (Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press, 1982), P 1121.

20 Eugene H. Merrill, Samuel: The Bible Knowledge commentary (Colorado: Chariot Victor Publishing, 1985), P 431.

21 John C. Maxwell, The 21 Most Powerful Minute in a Leader’s Day: Revitalize Your spirit and Empower Your Leadership (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2000), p

22 Joyce Peel, A Journey through The Old Testament: The story of God’s relationship with man. woman and the world (Oxford: The Reading Fellowship, 1993), p 60

23 Ibid, p 60
Dr. Leopold A. Foullah is currently Senior Lecturer and Head of the Department of Philosophy & Religious Studies, Fourah Bay College, University of Sierra Leone, Mount Aureol, Freetown. He is also the General Superintendent of the Missionary Church of Africa, Sierra Leone Conference. He holds the following academic qualifications: Dip.Th., B.Th., M.Div., M.Th. and Ph.D (Leeds University, England). He is interested in Biblical Theology and Social Issues. He is External Examiner for both The Evangelical College of Theology (TECT), Jui and the Sierra Leone Theological College & Church Training Center in Freetown. He is married with three children.

Article Source:
https://EzineArticles.com/expert/Leopold_A._Foullah/198393

Continue reading →

Leadership

Creating a Culture of Leadership

Many organizational managers assume that by adding leadership training or a leadership development program that they are able to create a culture that accepts leadership. The move from non-existent leadership to a leadership culture takes time – and a few steps in between. Let’s look at how you can create a culture of leadership.

First, you, as the organizational leader, must acknowledge the existence of leadership potential. It sounds simple, but many leaders do not want to admit that they are replaceable – that someone or more than one person would be capable of taking the reins once they’re gone. Don’t be that leader – seek out and recognize that the organization has talent. Acknowledge that the talent will one day be capable of taking over your vision and moving the organization forward. By making this acknowledgment, you’re telling your mid- and senior-level leaders that a path exists. And you’re telling new hires that the sky is the limit in your organization.

Next, clearly outline what a leader in your organization “looks like” – and hold people to the standard. The list of leadership competencies is a long one. You’ll never find one leader who executes all competencies perfectly. So, you must determine the competencies that mesh well with your organization and its climate. Don’t forget to decide which competencies lend themselves to your vision for the organization and where you see the organization in the future – even after you’ve gone. You should also consider the functional leadership competencies that go along with your organization’s line of business. If you choose too widely, you’ll end up with a picture of a leader who doesn’t exist. Once you’ve determined the competencies, lay them out for the organization. Simply put, you can say that a leader in your organization has these competencies and displays these behaviors. As people move into leadership roles, hold them to the standard.

We’ve already mentioned the fact that organizations do create leadership training and development programs – and you should do that to build a leadership culture. The program should be ongoing and consist of various levels – from “beginning” leadership to the advanced. In fact, your leadership program should begin reaching down into the lowest levels of the organization right away. For example, offer a leadership program to new-hires that details what your leader “looks like”. It’s the seed that will keep leadership growing through all levels. Your program should include seminars, networking, and even real-time project management at the higher levels. By creating a multi-level program, you’re keeping the leadership machinery in motion – and giving the organization a sense that anyone can move up to the leadership ranks.

Now that you’ve got your program, put your mid- and senior-level leaders through the program. You should even include yourself. This way, the message goes out loud and clear that your organization expects the same standard of leadership from everyone – executives included. Any cultural shift should start from the top. If they don’t buy in, how do you expect the lower levels to buy in? It may be an unpopular decision with your executive team, but you’ll be taking big strides in creating the culture of leadership.

At this point, it’s important to explain why you’re making the shift to leadership. The explanation shouldn’t just be afforded to executives and managers but to all levels of the organization. Explain that you’re looking to give everyone an opportunity to advance – and to learn what it takes to do so. Outline the fact that you’re looking for bench strength for all leadership positions – including your own. Not only this, a leadership orientation prepares you for succession planning at all levels, as well as talent management. The benefits to the organization are numerous and it’s your job to explain them.

Finally, focus on the success of the program. When you have a successful advancement due to the leadership program, highlight it publicly. Or, let’s say one of your leadership teams “in training” solve a business problem in their project assignment. Showcase this development as related to the culture of leadership at your organization. When the members of your organization see that the program and its culture are successful, you’ll have no trouble keeping your talent pipeline full.

There are many ways to move to a leadership culture. Follow these steps in the beginning and you’ll find that the transition is simple and beneficial.

Copyright 2008 Bryant Nielson. All Rights Reserved.

Bryant Nielson – Managing Director and National Sales Trainer – assists executives, business owners, and top performing sales executives in taking the leap from the ordinary to extraordinary. Bryant is a trainer, business & leadership coach, and strategic planner for sales organizations. Bryant’s 27 year business career has been based on his results-oriented style of empowering.

Subscribe to his blog – and learn the legendary secrets of top business training programs at: [http://www.BryantNielson.com]

Article Source: https://EzineArticles.com/expert/Bryant_Nielson/142446

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/1307327

Leadership

The Nature of Christian Leadership

The quest to identify an ideal model of leadership that leaders can replicate in order to have better functioning organizations continues to be a challenge for leaders (Kouzes and Posner, 1987). This has lead writers such as Greenleaf, Winston and Brauna to explore the nature of Christian leadership, which has the capacity to change the moral fiber of man and society. This unique model has shown the potential to revolutionize leadership as we know it, and invariably create more successful organizations.

To fully understand the implications of Christian leadership we must first understand its nature. Hence the questions: what are the fundamentals on which this type of Leadership is based? Why this style of leadership gained preeminence in the work of so many scholars and has proven to be so effective in Biblical Testaments…? What is the nature of Christian leadership that sets it apart from secular leadership styles? In order to ascertain answers to these questions this paper examines the nature of Christian leadership by studying and analyzing Jesus’ Leadership in the 9th chapter in the gospel of Matthew, verses 20-22, by explicitly looking at the attributes which formed the core of Jesus’ Leadership. To assist readers to fully comprehend the nature of Christian leadership in this passage, this paper employs an inter-textual and inner texture approach from Socio rhetoric Interpretation. By examining Jesus’ leadership from different perspectives readers are provided with a more wholesome view of the nature of Jesus’ leadership style. This paper therefore, examines attributes such as: Godly principles, love and purpose of Jesus’ leadership as well as their importance to what constitute Christian leadership. It is my intention that readers will utilize the findings in this paper to enhance their leadership styles which will invariably lead to better leadership and healthier organizations.

Background

Matthean gospel holds much value to the understanding of Christian leadership as it is deemed to have had more influence on the development of the early church and consequently, Christianity. There seems to be much discrepancy about the authorship of Matthew (Desilva, 2004). Some scholars claim that it was written by Matthew, an eye witness, one of the twelve, while others cited the reliance on Mark gospel as evidence against him being an eye witness. Matthew is said to have utilized not only Mark as a source but also the Q. The language while bearing marked similarities to Mark is more elaborate. The Matthean gospel is said to have been written prior to the destruction of the temple in A.D. 70. The citation of various Jewish customs, without accompanying explanations, woven throughout Matthew suggests that it was written for a Jewish audience. In order to portray Christ as the King and Messiah of Israel, Matthew utilizes various quotes from the Old Testament, thus all the principal themes are grounded in the Old Testament.

Method

In analyzing Matthew 9:20-22, socio rhetorical criticism is employed to assist in understanding the intricacies of this passage. Socio rhetorical criticism is a method of analyzing text by looking at the values, conviction and beliefs in the text in relation to the world (Robbins, 1996). There are five approaches in this method of analyzing text: Inner texture, inter texture, social and cultural texture, ideological texture and sacred texture. (Desilva, 2004). For the purposes of examining Matthew 9:20-22, an intertexture is first done to provide a conceptual understanding of the existing culture in that era. This is followed by an inner texture approach to help in comprehending the passage. Inner texture refers to the different ways that a text manipulates language to provide more detailed understanding of the text. The argumentative texture is one branch of understanding the inner working of a text. It provides reasons for readers to think and act in a specific manner. The inter-textual method of analyzing a text, studies the specific text in relation to other texts outside of the particular text. This method of analyzing a text may use different approaches and includes the use of other text in relation to the text being studied, in order for readers to fully grasp the meaning of the text. The use of both approaches provides a richer and fuller meaning of the text.

Intertexture Analysis

In order to understand Matthew 9:20-22, we must understand the history surrounding the two sects operating throughout that era; the Pharisees and the Sadducees. A study of the writings of Flavius Josephus, early rabbinical writings as well as the New Testaments provides an accurate description of these two groups. The term Pharisees is derived from the Hebrew perusim, which means “separated ones.” Later findings suggest that it may have been derived from Hebrew parosim, meaning “specifier,” They were regarded as puritans, in other words they were extremely passionate concerning the principles within the Mosaic laws, as well as those that they added to the Old Testament legislation (Huie, 2007). This sect is symbolic of the orthodox core of Judaism and had very strong influence on the Israelites. The Sadducees are said to have been named after Zadok, a priest during the stint of King David and King Solomon, other theorists presupposes that the name is a derivative from Zadok who lived in the 2nd century BCE. In the same vein there are others who believe the name “Sadducee” comes from the Hebrew tsadiq, which means righteous (Huie, 2007). The Sadducees were famous for their unbelief of supernatural happenings. Matt.22:23 express their refusal to believe the resurrection of the dead. This sect had no regards for tradition and despised legalism. In their view the Pentateuch was the only authority, they were often very affluent, aristocrats, member of the priestly tribes and under Herod’s rule were the owners of the temple.

The degrees of differences between these two groups created an imbalance with regards to the political views throughout that era. These two groups had opposing views/beliefs concerning laws, and regulations (Huie 2002). Matthew 9:20-22 is about the woman with the issue of blood. This story may be seen as an interruption, as it occurs while Jesus was on His way to heal Jarius’s daughter. Matthew relates a story of a woman who had been bleeding for over twelve years. According to Jewish Law, this woman is deemed as unclean because of the insistent bleeding (Lev 15:25-27). This woman was scorned by family members and the society and was barred from synagogue and temples (MacArthur, 2005). A poor woman, Luke mentions that she had spent all that she had, looking for a cure. She was ostracized, an outcast by all accounts. As a result of her illness, the traditions of that era prevented women from touching men, it is possible that this is the reason she approached Jesus from behind and touched the hem of His garment. Her belief in Jesus to cure her was evident in her gesture to touch Him. Jesus did not criticize the woman because she opted to mix with people and thereby breaking all the conventions of that era. Instead He encouraged her “Take heart daughter your faith as made you whole, on approaching Jesus the woman thought “if” I touch his cloak I will be healed.” This statement is often refers to as an enthymeme (Robins, 1996).

Continue reading →

Leadership

Our Obsolete Concept of Leadership

We have heard of folk psychology and folk medicine – age old beliefs now discarded – but what about ”folk leadership?” The idea that a leader is a strong individual at the head of a group is primitive given that it is shared throughout the higher animal kingdom. Casting aside primitive notions of leadership could be as beneficial to organizations as modern medicine has been to our health.

There have been books written on folk psychology and folk medicine. An economist, Paul Rubin, writing in The Southern Economic Journal, Vol. 70, 2003 has introduced the concept of folk economics to label the false beliefs of lay people about the economy.

Folk physics contains many false beliefs, such as that heavier objects fall faster than lighter ones but many of our everyday beliefs about the physical world are good enough for normal purposes. We don’t need any knowledge of modern physics for basic survival. Similarly, folk leadership might be good enough for simple situations but insufficient for complex, fast changing businesses.

Characteristics of Folk Leadership

History is full of heroic exploits of great leaders who are nearly always men, strong decisive types who knew what they wanted and how to get it. We have moved beyond the need to be physically strong, but it still helps to be tall with a strong personality to really inspire followers. Our folk concept of leadership specifies that the leader should be a father figure, someone we can look up to, admire and who we can turn to when we are in trouble. Like our fathers, we want leaders to know what to do, to be decisive and seemingly invincible. Such leaders must have some sort of strength or power to win our respect and to ward off external threats.

Complexity and Leadership

A simple leadership situation is the small group, such as clubs or gangs. In simple groups, an external threat is met by physical attack. Modern organizations that compete through innovation are also locked in battle, but their ammunition is creative thinking, the rapid development of new products and services. The person at the top of a simple group can direct it into physical battle, but in a complex organization driven by innovation, the person at the top may not know where to turn. Our folk concept of leadership runs into trouble here because we expect leaders to have the answers. But today’s executives depend on front line knowledge workers to come up with creative ideas for new products.

We have two ways to address the problem of complexity. Either we say that the person in charge no longer provides leadership or we change our definition of leadership to fit the facts. The second option is the popular choice; we now say that leadership is a facilitative, empowering activity, that it isn’t necessary for the leader to provide direction.

Changing the Meaning of Leadership

Folk concepts address a human need, even if just to explain how things work. Modern medicine and other sciences succeeded in replacing folk concepts because they could come up with better explanations. If the head of a complex group cannot provide direction, there is the option of saying that such a person is a manager not a leader. Instead of deleting the need to provide direction from our concept of leadership, we could maintain that leaders do indeed provide direction but that it can be bottom-up as well as top-down.

Characteristics of Bottom-up Leadership

– Provides new direction by promoting a better way of doing business or by offering a new product, for example, the Sony employee who convinced top management, despite resistance, to develop Playstation.
– Based on the power to innovate, not the power to dominate a group.
– Captures part of folk wisdom – that leaders break new ground, show the way, challenge the status quo.
– Constantly shifting because no one can monopolize good ideas, so it cannot be position based or hierarchical.
– A one-off act, not a role or person; it is a specific impact which can be shown to an organization by teams as well as individuals.
– Can come from outside the business, such as a competitor. It isn’t restricted to organization members, let alone the person in charge.
– Comes to an end once senior management buys the proposed innovation, so it does not entail the leader managing implementation.
– Has nothing to do with managing people.
– Can be shown throughout the organization, as in guerrilla warfare; it is not exclusively top down.

Implications of Reinventing Leadership

Much of what those in charge of groups do must be recast as management. We can upgrade our image of management and regard it as supportive, facilitative and empowering. We can now say that leadership promotes new directions while management executes them as efficiently as possible.

Organizations wanting to foster greater engagement and talent retention, as well as faster innovation, could do so by making front line knowledge workers feel like leaders, by viewing their attempts to promote new products or better processes as acts of leadership. This takes empowerment a big step further. Senior executives need to be emotionally intelligent enough to recognize that they don’t need to show all the leadership that an organization requires. Folk leadership is disempowering. It creates dependency in everyone who is not in a leadership position.

See http://www.leadersdirect.com for more information on this and related topics. Mitch McCrimmon has over 30 years experience in executive assessment and coaching. His latest book, Burn! 7 Leadership Myths in Ashes, 2006, challenges conventional thinking on leadership. Warning: you might find it annoying if you are committed to the usual platitudes about leadership.

Article Source: https://EzineArticles.com/expert/Mitch_McCrimmon/79532

 

Leadership

The Relationship Between Leadership and Influence

What is the relationship between leadership and influence? Is leadership always influence and is influence always leadership?

To say that leadership always entails influence is like saying that all snow is white. It’s true but the inference doesn’t work the other way. That is, not all white things are snow. Similarly, although all leadership is influence, there are lots of types of influence that don’t count as leadership. Here are a few examples:

– Intimidating or forcing someone to do something.
– Bribing someone to do your bidding.
– Paying for things you want someone to do for you.
– Teaching a student to behave better in a classroom.
– Encouraging your children to eat their vegetables.

The last two examples are not leadership because they have nothing to do with a group striving to achieve a goal. Teaching students and encouraging children to eat vegetables is for their own interest, not for the good of a larger group. Similarly, salespeople may be very influential but their influence is self-interested. The salesperson and the customer do not constitute a group.

Formal Authority and Leadership Influence

Suppose you are the boss and you decide to ramp up production by 50%, requiring everyone to work faster and longer hours without overtime. Is this leadership? No, it may be influence but it is not leadership because the employees had no choice. To say that leadership is informal influence means that followers have a free choice to follow or not.

What are some prime examples of true leadership influence? One of the most familiar is Martin Luther King’s demonstrations against segregation on buses which led the U.S. Supreme Court to outlaw this practice. King had no formal authority or other power to move the U.S. government. This is the real meaning of leadership.

Another example of genuine leadership influence was the Sony employee who influenced management to adopt his idea for PlayStation despite their feeling that Sony wasn’t into making toys.

Whenever you convince your colleagues or your boss to adopt a new idea, you have shown them leadership. Or, you might simply set a good example for others and, if they follow, you have shown leadership.

Market leading businesses influence their competitors to change course, another example of real leadership.

When executives make decisions that take their teams in new directions, they are taking managerial actions, NOT showing leadership because employees have no choice.

To count as leadership, influence must be informal and followers must get on board completely of their own free will. Leadership is also a group phenomenon and is aimed at serving some unselfish purpose, something to improve the group’s effectiveness.

For this reason, even if your children willingly follow your plea to eat their vegetables, you haven’t shown leadership because you and your kids are not a group working toward a common goal.

Informal leadership and Influence

We often distinguish between formal and informal leadership. The only difference between these concepts is that the informal leader takes charge informally. The formal leader has been given formal authority to govern the group while the informal leader is granted this role by the group itself. The informal leader has personal power – charisma, knowledge or some form of expertise that the group values.

It is vital to recognize that the conventional concept of informal leadership is not the same thing as saying that all leadership influence is informal. The conventional concept, formal or informal, is all about being in charge of the group. The claim made here is that real leadership is independent of position, as it was in the case of Martin Luther King. He was not an informal leader in the conventional sense – the Supreme Court didn’t recognize him as their informal leader. As another example, a technical geek might influence his peers to adopt a new piece of software. He has influenced them informally. However, this geek might be so disinclined to manage the group that they might never view him as their informal leader – someone who they would turn to for help in organizing their day to day work, who they would look to for advice and the resolution of conflict. The geek’s informal leadership is a one-off act, not an ongoing role. His influence is informal but he is not what we normally call an informal leader because he has no interest or ability to take charge of the group in a managerial sense.

So what? By reformulating the meaning of leadership, I am saying that the old distinction between formal and informal leadership is outdated. There is really only formal and informal management because all leadership is informal where this term refers to willingly following someone’s lead NOT to informally taking charge of the group.

Conclusion

Leadership influence involves a group changing direction because of someone’s informal influence. It is always disinterested because, if you influence people to support you by appealing to their needs, you are effectively operating as a salesperson, not a leader. True leadership asks people to set aside their personal needs and do something for the good of the group. Think again of Martin Luther King. He was campaigning for justice, not to be elected U.S. president. His leadership entailed personal sacrifice in the interest of a higher cause.

See http://www.leadersdirect.com for more information on this and related topics. Mitch McCrimmon has over 30 years experience in executive assessment and coaching. His latest book, Burn! 7 Leadership Myths in Ashes, 2006, challenges conventional thinking on leadership. Warning: you might find it annoying if you are committed to the usual platitudes about leadership.

Article Source: https://EzineArticles.com/expert/Mitch_McCrimmon/79532