Moving your organization from mom and pop to mature

According to Google statistics, “Approximately 20-24% of small businesses fail in their first year. After five years, that number rises to about 50%; by the tenth year, nearly 65% have failed.” Why? In my experience, it has much to do with a lack of a culture of discipline, accountability, and results.

It is not that those who start these businesses are not bright and smart. In fact, entrepreneurs are individuals whom I admire greatly. They find niches, take risks that others would not take, and often, through sheer energy, grit, and willpower, manage to get things off the ground and see significant profits in the short to medium term, only to see the business fail in the long term.

Why does that happen? Often, they never transitioned from the mom-and-pop, seat-of-your-pants, unorganized, and unfocused start-up phase to a more mature organization with clarity, discipline, and scalable internal structures and culture, which could allow it to grow with stability.

New businesses are often run in a hub-and-spoke management style. The hub is the entrepreneur, and the spokes are everyone else. Frequently, in this management style, the owner makes major decisions and directs their staff to perform various tasks. Decision making is centralized in one person, and because they got the business up and running, they often find it challenging to share decision-making responsibility with others. They are the experts, and they know what needs to happen…or so they think!

In that environment, there is often no team culture where people can strategize, plan, and make corporate decisions together. The founder finds it challenging to give up control, so he/she is bound by what he/she knows how to do. They are also bound by the hub and spoke system, which limits their growth to the size they can personally control. In other words, scalable systems are not developed, people are not truly empowered, and there is a delegation of responsibility but not authority, which remains with the owner.

This is what happened with one organization I worked with. They grew to a $25 million operation over several years and contracted to a $15 million operation in one year. The lack of internal discipline, team processes, clarity of roles and responsibilities, and reliance on the owner who always had the final say meant that the business had a functioning structure but not internal stability, and it collapsed quickly when it did. The owner had worked in the business, but not properly on the business, and it had never moved from a mom-and-pop management style to a mature organizational style. It worked until it didn’t! And you can imagine the pain of losing 10 million in revenue in one year. The business almost did not survive.

Perhaps you recognize some of these challenges in your business or organization. If you do, I encourage you to get the help you need to move to a more mature organization with a healthier culture. These principles apply equally to not-for-profit as well as for-profit organizations. 

How does this go unnoticed? First, because there are sales and momentum, we assume that all is ok. It is no small thing for a business to be doing 25 million a year in sales. Further, we get used to doing things a certain way, and are comfortable. However, the management needs of an enterprise when it is new differ significantly from those when it is growing in staff and revenue. Third, the skill set of the leader who, through grit and determination, made things happen is critical in a start-up, but not all that the organization needs long term. Finally, the ego of the founder is often a barrier to learning new skills and ways of doing work. 

What are some of the differences between mom and pop and mature organizations?

In a mom-and-pop structures:

• One leader often calls the shots in a hub and spoke system
• There is often not great clarity around processes and procedures
• Things change rapidly
• There is not a well defined organizational culture
• There is often loose accountability because of the lack of organizational clarity
• Not a great deal of attention is paid to the internal structures
• Staff training and development is an afterthought if it happens at all

Remember that in a start-up phase, these are to be expected. What works in that phase, however, hurts the organization if it is not modified long-term. Unfortunately many organizations languish in the mom and pop far longer than they need to and leave tremendous opportunity on the table as a result. 

In mature organizations:

• There is a defined senior team that makes collaborative decisions under good leadership
• Mission,  vision, and direction are clear to all, and while methodology may change, the philosophical boundaries of the organization are constant
• There is great clarity at all levels
• There is a high degree of accountability, and promises are kept
• There are regular, carefully crafted management meetings for alignment and accountability
• A clear and healthy organizational culture is in place and adhered to
• Internal structures, processes, and procedures are clear and consistent

Moving from mom and pop to mature usually takes a coach, as the skills and behaviors are very different. A mature organization that is healthy is far stronger than mom and pop stuctures. The sooner you can move from the one to the other, the stronger you will be. 

The secret of being a self defined leader who can also stay in relationship

One of the key elements of Emotional Intelligence is the ability to negotiate relationships. It is the inability to negotiate relationships successfully that is at the root of a great deal of unnecessary conflict. One of the critical skills of good EQ is being self-defined. A self-defined individual can tell you what they think even when they know that you will disagree with their position. They don’t insist that you see the world as they do, and they are OK if you don’t.

However, the second part of self-definition is also important. I can disagree with you and still be in a relationship with you. Think about that in terms of the political divisions that are tearing up America and much of the world.

This is what it means to be able to negotiate relationships in a healthy way. Poor EQ will state a position and insist that you agree with it. If you don’t, you are marginalized and demonized. After all, you don’t get it. Good EQ, on the other hand, can negotiate relationships with people who are very different from us. This skill is needed in a diverse world, whether inside or outside the workplace. The ability to disagree, engage in honest, candid dialogue, and still stay connected would prevent a lot of conflict. 

This ability for leaders is crucial to creating cultures of open and candid dialogue. By taking a position that may not be popular (which is how all innovation or improvement usually begins) a leader is encouraging others to do the same. It is then in the clash of these views and perspectives that the best solutions are typically found. The alternative is the common groupthink behavior that stifles and hinders progress. 

To this point, healthy leaders don’t have a problem with apologizing when necessary. Even when they don’t really need to, they do it because it will alleviate stress or controversy. I recall a time when I made what turned out to be a controversial decision (the right decision, but one that was hard for my organization to swallow). Being a blogger, I wrote a blog post for my staff entitled “Just get over it!” My intention was to explain the decision further and then encourage people to move on.

Unfortunately, many took offense at the blog title. I apologized (though I didn’t need to, but I wanted to lower the angst) and wrote a new blog titled “Build a Bridge and get over it.” It was a way to apologize for how my prior communication had come across and give me another chance to move us forward. It worked, but I had to apologize for it to work.

Healthy leaders keep short accounts. One of my practices is to “Walk toward the barking dog.” If I have offended someone or created an issue, rather than walking the other direction, I will engage the individual, seek understanding, and do whatever is necessary to put the issue to rest so we can move on.

These may seem like small things, but they are not. Much of our leadership capital is based on relationships. The ability to negotiate healthy win-win relationships is a key to good leadership and reflects good EQ.

How Emotional Intelligence training can change your organization

Many organizations have a significant commitment to training and staff development. Often, however, the issue of emotional intelligence training is not on the radar. Yet, the implications of healthy or unhealthy EQ impact everything the organization does and affect every relationship and interaction.

In Daniel Goleman’s words, the cost of emotional intelligence illiteracy is high. It can include unresolved conflicts, lack of cooperation, silos, politics within the organization, turf wars, competition for power, and a range of dysfunctional and toxic behaviors that can hinder our desired outcomes.

Take a moment and consider the financial cost of toxic behaviors: unresolved conflict, turf wars, lack of alignment, lack of cooperation and organizational silos. EQ deficiencies and immature EQ behaviors can be like an aircraft carrier anchor dragging behind a 36-foot sailboat. All deficient EQ behaviors impede, slow down, and cost the organization money. In the case of not-for-profit enterprises, it costs in terms of Return on Mission.

This is a powerful reason to help leaders grow in their EQ as they set the pace for the organization and provide ongoing training to raise the staff's EQ literacy. Here is something to consider. Most behaviors that hold an organization back from being all it can be are EQ in nature. Grow your EQ, and you grow yourself, your organization, and your return on mission.

What would you do as a leader to see the following changes in your business, church, or non-profit?

• Getting everyone on the same page
• Eliminating ego-driven dysfunction for humble leadership
• Moving from competition to cooperation
• Creating an open culture where candid dialogue can take place around any issue
• Building a culture of promises kept and excellent execution of work
• Seeing conflict resolved quickly and cleanly
• Eliminating the politics and turf wars that get in the way of cooperation and a common mission· 
• Creating scalable and clear systems for your processes and workflow
• Eliminating defensiveness and replacing it with a desire for the best solutions possible throughout the organization
• Growing the EQ maturity of all staff all the time
• Seeing toxic behaviors replaced with healthy ones
• Creating a culture that supports all that you do and eliminates all that holds you back
• Rather than settling for what is, create a commitment to what could and should be
• Moving from emotional illiteracy to emotional literacy

·   Each transition or commitment is possible if you commit to continuous EQ training. Each improvement in these areas enhances your ability to generate profits, achieve a better return on mission, retain top talent, and foster innovation and improved solutions.

You can train in all kinds of skills and should. However, without training in emotional intelligence, you cannot address the primary issues hindering your organization: unhealthy EQ and its implications. And all of these are directly related to culture, so you improve your organization’s culture in direct proportion to an improvement in its emotional intelligence.

What it takes is for senior leaders to make this a priority for themselves and then for their entire organization. It can and should be done. 

 

Becoming aware of our own Leadership derailers

If you lead others, there is a good chance that you also struggle with leadership derailers. Actually, every leader does. The question is not whether they have potential derailers but whether they know what their derailers might be. 

Derailers are behaviors, words, actions, or responses that prevent us from acting maturely as leaders.  For instance, the CEO who does not like to be challenged and responds defensively when they are, shutting down critical discussions that senior teams need to have, is dealing with derailment behavior. His/her defensive behavior is a derailer. The behavior is immature leadership, which could threaten their ability to lead well.

Leaders who do not accept and even solicit feedback from others exhibit derailing tendencies. Their lack of receptiveness to the input of those they work with prevents them from seeing themselves clearly and the state of the organization they lead. Their inability to listen to others and accept feedback creates a toxic environment because candid dialogue cannot be had, and real issues cannot be addressed.

Ironically, it takes the input of others to help us understand our derailing tendencies, where our leadership is coming from immature emotional intelligence rather than mature. It highlights the importance of leaders being inquisitive about their own emotional intelligence, receptive to feedback from others, and committed to addressing the derailing tendencies that negatively impact their team members. 

Here is something to consider. Most derailers are not about competency but rather about the emotional intelligence of the leader and how their EQ hurts their leadership, the organization, and those they work with.

It is relatively easy to recognize the derailers in other leaders because we have experienced them. It is often harder to see them in ourselves because we are used to our tendencies. This is where we need people around us who we give permission to speak into our lives and leadership. 

Leadership derailers can be simple, such as the tendency to not solicit feedback from others or ask the kinds of questions that would give us insights into what is truly happening in the organization or team we lead. They can also be more complex, such as narcissistic tendencies that elevate our own leadership at the expense of others. In either case, it comes down to an EQ issue where we have a needed growth opportunity. Derailers hurt our leadership, and they hurt those we lead if not recognized and addressed. 

When I led teams and organizations, I would periodically ask my associates if I did anything that really irritated them. Is there anything I am doing that you think others should do? Is there anything you wish you could discuss with someone, but haven't felt free to do so? In this way, I was being proactive in soliciting feedback and permitting them at the same time to speak candidly.

In the Intelligent Leadership coaching of the John Mattone Global organization, we help leaders understand their leadership styles' relative maturity or immaturity to move toward healthier leadership. This is achieved through a combination of healthy discussions, testing, 360-degree feedback, personal development plans, and a coaching process designed to foster the learning of new behaviors.

The challenge for anyone who leads others is to give permission and opportunity for those around us to speak candidly with us about potential derailers in our leadership. It could make the difference between a highly successful leadership tenure and one that comes off the tracks prematurely.

 

Healthy leaders create a climate of psychological safety in their organization

A climate of psychological safety is where it is safe to be vulnerable, speak up about issues that bother us, challenge a leader or strategy without fear of retribution, and ask for help when needed. Creating such a climate is one of a leader's most important responsibilities—and often one of the most neglected!

My guess is that everyone reading this can remember times in their career when they said or expressed something that a leader did not welcome. Many leaders' defensiveness makes candid conversation around essential issues unsafe. The net result is that staff cannot express themselves with candor, and the organization leaves great potential on the table.

It takes healthy emotional intelligence to permit, welcome, and invite open dialogue about issues that impact the organization. This only happens when there is a culture that embraces this. I call this a culture of robust dialogue, where any issue can be discussed with the exception of a hidden agenda or personal attack.

The senior leader is responsible for creating such a culture, which is then followed by other leaders throughout the organization. If I ask staff in any organization if there are subjects, topics, or areas where they know they cannot speak freely, and they say yes, they are acknowledging that there is not adequate psychological safety in the organization. And that goes to senior leaders and the culture they create. Healthy leaders insist on an open culture where it is safe to speak candidly. It is the only way to a healthy culture. If it is not safe to speak up, the culture is unhealthy!

Here is the thing. Organizations that ask the best questions become the best organizations. No organization gets better without the probing questions of good people who want the best for the organization. Yet, in many instances, the pride of the group or the leader shuts down the questions because they are irritating. Great questions are a means of getting to the truth and better practices.

Good questions should not be seen as threats but as a means of honing strategies, practices, and assumptions that may need reconsidering. This does not mean the current practices are ineffective, but that there may be more effective ways. You get there with questions. Good questions are disruptive to the organization in a significant way. Your culture will either celebrate great questions or shut them down. The result will either be a better organization or one that resists actual progress. Proud organizations and leaders with egos resist good questions and those who challenge the status quo. Humble organizations and humble leaders welcome them because it is not about them but the mission.

Five attitudes of a leader that lead to high trust and significant influence with staff

Why is it that some leaders leave staff and colleagues drained and tired after a conversation, while others leave them uplifted and encouraged? In the first case, meetings with your supervisor or colleagues can be a dreaded exercise, whereas in the second case, something one looks forward to. What leaders often overlook is that their approach to interactions with staff and colleagues either builds or diminishes their trust and influence. You may have a title and a position as a leader, but neither of those makes up for a deficit of trust and influence with those you lead.

There are five attitudes and practices of a leader that contribute to high trust and maximum influence with those you work with.

If one desires influence, it starts with a posture of humility. This means that I don't have to be the smartest person in the room. I don't have to have the answers to every problem, and I don't have to have my way in every situation. Here is the truth: If you are the smartest person in the room, you hired very poorly. If you have the answers to every problem, you are deluded, and if you need to have your way, you will be limited by your own abilities. 

Humility is the attitude that there is a great deal I don't know, that I don't have the answers, but can find good answers with others who have greater expertise than I do. Humility leads to the second practice, which is dialogue with others, along with asking good questions rather than making pronouncements and handing down decisions. 

Dialogue and questions bring others into a productive conversation around issues that need to be resolved. Pronouncements about what should be done often shut down conversation. It is the crucial difference between arrogance and humility. Leaders frequently fail to realize how little they actually know compared to those who work closely with the issues at hand. Engaging others to share their perspectives opens up solutions that will not be found otherwise. 

Both of these attitudes are augmented if the leader approaches staff and colleagues with a non-critical spirit. Critical spirits and words shut down good conversation and are indicators of a lack of humility. If I am critical by nature, it means that I have decided my evaluation is the best. That is arrogance. If I approach issues openly and non-critically, it sends a message that together we can find a good solution. It does not elevate my perspectives over those of others (arrogance), but instead levels the playing field to find the best solutions. 

Add to these three a gracious spirit that truly appreciates the efforts of those around you or below you and assumes the best rather than the worst when it comes to motives and effort.  Graciousness is the opposite of a critical spirit. A gracious attitude invites conversation while a critical spirit shuts it down. Even when I don't understand the actions or decisions of others, they can be addressed with a gracious and non-critical spirit, and I may well learn something that contributed to decisions others made that I am unaware of. 

All of these are the building blocks of trust with both colleagues and staff who report to us. Remember that arrogance, critical spirits, pronouncements rather than dialogue, and a lack of graciousness rob you of trust and influence. They take tokens out of your leadership bank account while consistently displaying the practices and attitudes above add to your leadership bank account. The key here is consistency. Your staff and colleagues need to know that they will get the same from you in any conversation, and if you display these attitudes, they will learn to relax in your presence. They will see you as an ally rather than a threat. And you will have their trust, which leads to greater leadership influence. 

Leaders: Your IQ is far less important than your EQ

The telephone call I received from a leader I worked with was nothing short of crazy. He was massively triggered, and I listened to a tirade of thirty-five minutes where I could not get a word in edgewise. He just went on and on. He had been triggered, and rather than asking me any questions to clarify, had made some crazy assumptions and made equally crazy assertions and accusations. And his response was totally out of proportion to what had actually occurred. He was having an amygdala hijack, and it was not the first time...or the last. 

I chose not to go into work the next day, which made him all the angrier as I had "ghosted him." Everything was my fault; he was sure of his "facts" and "conclusions." Actually, he didn't have a clue! My infraction? I had told him what was going on in the business. Not my opinion, actual facts. He didn't like them and took his angst, frustration, and insecurity out on me. Unfortunately, episodes like this are all too common among leaders. 

Have you ever worked for a leader who struggled to regulate their emotions, leaving damaged relationships in their wake? Or have you struggled with your emotions when things were not going how you wanted them to? This is a common issue for leaders, even smart ones, because your emotional intelligence is more important than your IQ. High IQ does not make up for low EQ. 

The term Emotional Intelligence and its components was pioneered by Daniel Goleman, Ph.D., who authored the bestseller Emotional Intelligence and co-authored Primal Leadership: Learning to Lead with Emotional Intelligence.

Goleman suggested that an individual's emotional intelligence (EQ) mattered more than their intelligence (IQ) because an individual with good EQ was better equipped to understand themselves and how they are perceived by those around them, and has the social skills to negotiate healthy relationships.

He suggested that there were five components to emotional intelligence:

Self-awareness - the ability to recognize and understand your moods and emotions and how they impact others.

Self-regulation - the ability to control your emotions, impulses, and moods and think before acting. If self-awareness is the ability to understand one's emotions, self-regulation is the ability to control those emotions in how one behaves.

Internal (or intrinsic) motivation - having an inner drive to pursue goals for personal reasons rather than because of some external motivation or reward. Our motivation has to do with deep inner core values that inform our actions. 

Empathy - the ability to understand the motivations of others, the reasons for those motivations, and to put oneself in their shoes. If self-awareness is about understanding ourselves, empathy is about living with an understanding of others. 

Social skills - the ability to manage relationships, connect and collaborate with others, manage conflict, build healthy networks, and forge healthy relationships.

Think about this: When leaders get into trouble, it almost always involves the flip side of these components of emotional intelligence. Leaders who are not self-aware have little understanding of how their words and actions impact those around them, often creating significant pain. My guess is that we have all experienced those instances ourselves.

Leaders who do not have self-regulation and cannot control their emotions say and do hurtful things to those around them. I ended up resigning from the leader I described above, who could not control his emotions and therefore his words and actions.

 “An amygdala hijack is a situation where the amygdala, a small, almond-shaped structure in the brain responsible for processing emotions like fear and anger, takes control, leading to an immediate and overwhelming emotional response.” (Study.com).

This is the leader who cannot control their anger and whose response is far greater than the situation merits. In that flood of emotions and fear or anger, things are said that are damaging, people are hurt unnecessarily, and the recipient is left wondering what happened and that they were the subject of a tirade of angry words and accusations. Countless people have encountered this from supervisors. Even when there is an apology after (a good thing), it does not repair the damage done in the heat of emotion, where a leader cannot manage and regulate their emotions. (see Daniel Goleman, Emotional Intelligence, 10^th anniversary edition, Chapter 5, Passion’s Slaves).

When leaders lack empathy, they are unable to understand the perspectives and concerns of others. So, for instance, the sales executive who overpromises services to clients to look good and gain the sale at the expense of the staff who must fulfill those promises—leaving them unable to do so and the bad guys for not doing so and then blaming the staff for the resulting fallout—has an empathy deficit that impacts those around them.

One sure sign of a lack of empathy is leaders who rarely, if ever, ask questions of staff but simply make statements and demands. Empathy means that I care about how my decisions and actions impact those I work with, which naturally requires dialogue and an inquiring mind to understand the perspectives, needs, and wisdom of others. Leaders with empathy ask good questions, listen carefully, and seek to find solutions that work for all. Leaders who are defensive, don’t listen to staff, or take their concerns into account have an empathy deficit that hurts the culture of many organizations.

These are leaders who cannot manage their egos or emotions. Empathy is about others and understanding their concerns. Ego and empathy are incompatible, while humility and empathy are friends. If you struggle with these issues, get help so your leadership is not toxic but healthy. Unhealthy leaders hurt those around them while healthy leaders lift up those around them. A sign of dishealth is uncontrolled anger, which results in hurtful words and actions. 

As you reflect on the five elements of Emotional Intelligence above, which are you strong in, and which do you need to focus on?

The ONE leadership trait that says everything about your leadership maturity

There is one leadership trait that stands head and shoulders above all others when it comes to one's leadership maturity. And it is, unfortunately, way too rare. You may think you have it, but the test is whether those you lead believe you have it. They know. Leaders often do not know.

Here it is: I call it a commitment to Robust Dialogue in which any issue can be discussed, with the exception of a personal attack or hidden agenda. 

Let me illustrate. Staff instinctively know where they can or cannot go with their leader. I remember a situation where the organization I was a part of was short of funds, and the senior leader was using crazy amounts of money for his pet projects, which were not mission-critical. Few were willing to call this issue out on the senior team and ask the relevant questions out of fear that the senior leader would take offense (and he would have). 

The senior leader was out of the country during one of the Leadership Team meetings, and the subject came up with a candid dialogue about this issue. I asked the team, "Are you willing to have this same conversation with the senior leader in the room?" The team members just looked at me, and no mention was made upon his return. They knew they could not go there with the senior leader. 

What dynamics did this reveal about the senior leader?

One is that the team had a culture of fear. They feared speaking up on issues they knew the senior leader was unwilling to discuss.

Two: This was the case because the senior leader was operating from a place of deep personal insecurity and was unwilling to allow open and candid dialogue about this and many other issues. 

Three: This resulted in many important issues not being discussed, ultimately resulting in a net loss to the organization regarding effectiveness, transparency, and the ability to dialogue openly. This was all due to the leader's poor emotional intelligence. 

The maturity of a leader can be directly determined by their willingness to have candid and robust dialogue on any issue relevant to the success of the team or the organization. The best leaders both allow and encourage open and candid discussion around important topics because they know that it is in the context of open dialogue that the best solutions are found. They do not fear being challenged but, in fact, welcome it. 

Do you encourage open and candid dialogue as a leader? Do you foster an honest exchange of ideas, and are you willing to be challenged by your team members? If the answer is no, what are the insecurities holding you back? Why are you afraid? Are you fearful of not getting your way or having all the answers? Whatever the fear, it is about your insecurities and impacts your leadership. 

For many years, I have lived by the philosophy of nothing to prove, nothing to lose, and nothing to hide. When we have something to prove, it is usually that we are correct (and therefore in competition with those around us). It is about ego! When we have something to lose, it is generally our pride (admitting we don't have all the answers and need others). We don't like to look weak. And when we have something to hide, it is generally our insecurities, which ironically are well-known by those around us even though we try to hide them. 

The alternative is a life of radical transparency unencumbered by a need to prove ourselves. We choose humility over ego and do not worry about hiding our insecurities or weaknesses, which others know. That leaves us free to treat people with dignity, honor, and respect, listen well, collaborate rather than compete, and pursue a common mission collegially. Free of the need to manage our image, we are able to serve those around us rather than serve ourselves. 

If you want to know how well you are doing, simply ask your team how open they perceive you to be and whether there are issues they want to address but don't feel they can. It may take some time, but keep asking for the last ten percent. Then, listen, don't react, and foster a culture of Robust Dialogue. 

Evangelical deconstruction: not of faith but of the church.

I spoke this week to a close friend struggling deeply with the church. He is discouraged, disillusioned, and tired from his years of church leadership: Trying to see issues addressed that needed to be addressed, trying to move the church toward TOV (Goodness), trying to deal with massive dysfunction at the leadership and staff level, and getting nowhere. 

The result is that while he does not question his faith, he is asking much about the church scene and whether he wants to have any part in it. I would describe him as tired, disillusioned, and cynical about his church experiences. 

We have all read a great deal about Christians who are deconstructing their faith. For some time, I have been convinced that there is another, more significant issue: The deconstruction not of faith but of what the church is and should be. If I were to identify the kinds of issues involved, I would look at the following common problems:

• Senior church leaders who are narcissistic to the core create a toxic atmosphere on staff while proclaiming the love of Jesus from the stage. 

• The end result of narcissistic leaders is that many people get hurt: run over, marginalized, and, if they disagree with something, run out. No one cares. 

• Church boards do not hold such leaders accountable, allowing the toxicity to continue and hurting people. It is easier not to rock the boat, especially if the numbers are growing! 

• On Sunday mornings, the church presents a "face" by what happens on the stage. It is happy, optimistic, faith-filled, and Spirit-led. Behind the facade is a toxic staff and a board that facilitates the toxicity to continue. In other words, there is no alignment between the stage, the staff, and the board regarding health or spirituality.

• Rather than focusing on the two cardinal commands for the church to love God and love people, the staff creates programs that give people the illusion that these things are happening. Still, it is about the program, not about individual practice.

• There is little to no disciplemaking strategy in the church, even though the mandate to create disciples is central to the mandate Jesus gave the church.

• While the church is always looking for volunteers for their programs, there is not a culture where people are invited to find their gifts and use them for the Kingdom in meaningful ways. Instead, come to the welcome center, and we will tell you where you can fit. All ministry is tightly controlled. 

• The prayer and spiritual commitment of staff and board are virtually nonexistent. There is no time for such things or that great an interest. There is too much time on programming to spend extraneous time on spiritual issues. 

• The stage is performance rather than worship. The difference between a rock concert and worship has become blurred. Teaching is a TED Talk of self-help rather than an exposition of the Scriptures. 

• First impressions give the impression that we are one happy family, while the reality behind the scenes is much different. In fact, if you choose to challenge the system, you quickly find that you are no longer a part of the family, and you are discarded. Over time, the bodies pile up on the side of the road. 

None of this fits with the picture of the church in the New Testament. Sure, the church had its problems, which is why we have many of the New Testament epistles. Still, the biblical image is far from what it often looks like in many corners of American Evangelicalism.

Where does this leave the church? It leaves untaught congregations, discouraged leaders who long for something different, a spiritual drought where there ought to be spiritual life, people controlled rather than released into their faith and gifting, and the loss of some of the best who leave in discouragement after realizing that things will not change. 

In fact, one of the most discouraging indictments of the church today is the number of church boards that have no clue about their responsibilities as church leaders or any sense of ecclesiology (what the church is all about from the New Testament). Many have not read anything on either topic, yet they are ultimately responsible for the church's health. No wonder the church is in trouble. In growing numbers, senior pastors have little theological training. They are pragmatic but not theologically astute. And too often, cannot lead healthy teams. 

I personally know many individuals who no longer attend church after being deeply hurt. Many were church leaders who simply gave up over time. They have not given up on their faith, but they have given up on the church as it exists in American Evangelicalism. To be sure, many churches don't fit the description above, and to be equally clear, leaving the church altogether is not what God desires. However, these factors contribute to a significant deconstruction of faith—or its practice.  

We have lost the Biblical vision for the church in our search to find "success." However, the success we have seen is often a failure if measured against the New Testament teaching of the church.

Ten ways that leaders can sabotage organizational culture

 

Leaders can inadvertently sabotage the culture they desire to create in their team or organization with behaviors that may seem insignificant to them but are very significant to those they lead. They are careless behaviors that leaders that demotivate those they lead because they send a message that their team is not valued or important.

One: Blowing off meetings, showing up late, or coming unprepared for scheduled meetings. I once worked with a colleague who regularly did not show up for scheduled meetings or, if he did, would come in 15 to 30 minutes late. This message was that I was not valued and my time was unimportant. I am sure my colleague thought nothing of it, after all, he valued flexibility but it became so common that the staff just expected that he may not show up. It was aggravating, to say the least. 

Healthy leaders value others' time, show up on time, and are fully present for the meeting at hand. 

Two: Telling people what to do rather than engaging in dialogue to understand the perspectives and ideas of staff. Leaders who simply tell staff what to do create a culture where staff are devalued and their wisdom left on the table. In these cultures, the only voice that really counts is the leader. Eventually, the best people leave the organization rather than work in an environment where their expertise is not valued.

Healthy leaders don't assume they have the answers; rather than telling, they dialogue to understand staff thinking and perspectives and devise better solutions.  

Three: When things go wrong, blame people rather than ask if some processes or systems could be fixed to prevent such failures. Blame is a terrible motivator. It assumes the worst motives when poor motives are rarely the reason for failure. In most cases, underlying issues explain why things go wrong, and failure can be a learning opportunity rather than a blaming opportunity.

Healthy leaders know that things will not always go well. Rather than blaming others, they seek to fix the underlying issue so that the "disconnect" does not happen again.

Four: Not taking the time to listen and ask good questions. Leaders often lack valuable information because they don't ask questions or take the time to listen, which means they assume they know what they need to know. This is not only a faulty notion, but it is also disempowering to staff who have insight that a leader does not have and desire that their voice be heard for the betterment of the organization.

Healthy leaders know many things they don't know, so they intentionally ask many questions and listen well. 

Five: Being quick to criticize and slow to encourage and lift up. Critical leaders create cultures that are fear-based rather than grace-based. Fear-based cultures do not breed healthy dialogue and the necessary give-and-take of ideas. There are often reasons that people have done something that a leader is unaware of unless he/she first asks questions and enters into a conversation. Leaders who criticize carefully and lift up regularly create a healthier culture than those who do the opposite.

Healthy leaders are slow to criticize and quick to encourage and enter into constructive conversation.

Six: Changing one's mind after the work has been completed by staff. I have watched senior leaders give an assignment to staff to work on a particular program, and then when they present the plan, the leader dismisses it because he/she now has a better idea. In one case, the work had taken the better part of a year. This was not because their work was not good but because the leader simply had a new and better idea. This kind of behavior is very demotivating to staff and indicates that the leader did not give good direction on the front end, did not stay engaged along the way, and was willing to dismiss the work out of hand at the end. Leaders who change direction frequently create chaos rather than stability.

Healthy leaders give good direction, stay engaged, and don't quickly change their minds for the "flavor of the month."

Seven: Micromanaging. Micromanagement is the failure to delegate responsibility and authority around a task or project and instead inserting oneself to check up, change, modify, or redo work that is in progress or that has been done. It screams, "I don't trust you to do this right," and often, "I want you to do this my way." So, it is about a lack of trust and needing to do things the leader's way. It is profoundly disempowering behavior.

Healthy leaders set boundaries and empower good people to do their work without undue interference. They don't insist that the work be done the way they might and are very careful about interfering in the process. 

Eight: Lack of appreciation. Leaders have a gift that many others don't have. They have staff available to help them do what needs to be done. They can delegate and get all the help they need. However, the key to healthy staff is to treat them with respect, dignity, and appreciation. When staff feel used, leaders lose coinage—a lot of it. Lack of appreciation creates a feeling among staff that they are being used, which creates cynicism toward leadership.

Healthy leaders never take staff for granted. They show their appreciation in their words, attitudes, and acts of kindness toward those on their teams. Their staff know that their leader is deeply appreciative of their efforts.

Nine: Narcissistic tendencies. To put this one in perspective, each of the behaviors listed above are, in fact, narcissistic behaviors. They are about me: What I want and choose to do rather than how I can best serve the mission and the staff of the organization I lead. Narcissism is the antithesis of servant leadership. Our leadership is not about me but about those we lead and the mission we steward. All leaders have narcissistic tendencies. That is part of the human condition. The question is whether we recognize those tendencies, work to counter them, and manage our shadow side. Narcissistic behaviors include wanting our own way, lack of collaboration and listening to others, treating others poorly, lack of accountability, believing too highly in ourselves, taking credit for success and blaming others for failure and the list could go on. 

Healthy leaders recognize and counterbalance their narcissistic tendencies with a servant-like attitude toward their staff. They also allow trusted colleagues to talk with them when those tendencies show themselves.

Ten: Lack of genuine relationships. A key ingredient to a healthy culture is getting to know those who report to us. Without an authentic relationship, staff will likely not be candid with us. Relationships mean that we take the time to get to know our staff. We ask them questions, learn about their situations, and relate to them as fellow human beings rather than simply staff.

Healthy leaders get to know their staff and create trust and understanding.

A healthy organizational culture is fostered in the little and the big things. The culture will rarely rise above the practices of the head of the organization or the head of the team you lead. Take your assignment seriously, and don't sabotage the culture by unhealthy practices. As a Master Certified Coach in Intelligent Leadership I can help you improve the culture in your organization. You can contact me at tjaddington@gmail.com.

11 Keys to leading organizational change

All leaders must lead their constituency through change at one time or another. And, those of us who have done so have often learned some hard lessons along the way. Here are some of the lessons I have learned in effective change management.

1. Don't surprise people with big changes. Surprise brings with it fear, anxiety and the feeling that our security has been upended. If there is going to be major change, develop a process to bring people into discussion rather than simply dumping it on them and then trying to explain after. Once surprised, people are unlikely to hear your explanation. Lead into change over time and prepare people for what needs to come rather than surprising them.

2. Don't get so far ahead of people that they balk at following. Change need not be and often should not be all at once. Start with those things that you believe your constituency can understand and will follow you on. Some changes will take time and should be set aside for a day when you feel you will have greater support. This may mean talking to people of influence ahead of time to ascertain whether the changes you are proposing have a likelihood of meeting strong resistance. Go where you can go with the support of people rather than where it is going to face fierce resistance.

3. Determine what coinage you have before you propose major change. All leaders have a bank of good will. You need relationship and trust in order to convince people to go places that are uncomfortable. Moving too quickly may overspend your account which can take a long time to redeposit. Be smart about how much trust and relationship you have as the greater the change the more trust and relationship it requires. Don't overspend your account!

4. In explaining change, don't announce, dialogue. People don't like announcements that rock their world. Most, however will enter into a dialogue with you around strongly held values that if understood can help them move toward doing things differently. A conversation is very different than a pronouncement. The former invites understanding and discussion while the latter says "this is the way it is" and sound very much like an ultimatum - which are rarely helpful.

5. Be willing to be flexible on issues that are not essential. You don't want to die on a sand-hill but on a mountain. If you get major push-back on a non essential element of your preferred future, back off and show people that you are reasonable and can listen. Even leaders don't always get their way and probably shouldn't.

6. Talk to wise people. Don't ignore those who have been around for a while in leading through change. If they are resistant, take note. If you cannot get the key influencers on board with you to help you they will likely hurt you. I am not talking about laggards on the change scale but wise individuals of influence whom one needs to navigate successful change. If they balk, you may want to think about what you are proposing or the timing. 

7. Don't lose people you don't need to lose. It is a truism that some people will get off the bus when there is major change but one can minimize the fallout by paying attention to the principles above. Yes, some may leave but don't give people a good reason to leave - which us usually by not leading change wisely, pushing too fast, not running process, or not identifying one's coinage properly. They more you lose the more potential fallout you have on your hands to deal with.

8.  If you are a church leader, never start to think this is my ministry and therefore I can get my agenda. No ministry is ever "my" ministry. It is "our" ministry together under the Lordship of Jesus. Just because I lead it does not mean I always get my way. If I expect others to be flexible and teachable so must I be. When leaders don't show the same flexibility they expect of those they lead, they are bound to get themselves into trouble. I have seen it happen many times.

9. Make sure your key leaders are with you. If your key leaders are not in sync with you as you move into a change process you either have the wrong leaders, have not done enough work with them on the proposed changes or you are moving too fast. If your key leaders balk, those they lead may well do so as well. 

10. Tie your proposed changes to values that are shared. Many people will resist change because they are change resistant to a greater or lesser degree. However, if you can demonstrate that the proposed changes will allow the organization to best meet its mission and better align itself with its values, this knowledge may well help good people move forward in embracing the proposed changes.

11. Remember that change is a process rather than an event. Significant change means a change in the way we think and in our practices. It is rarely a "one and done" type scenario. Therefore you will need to continue to champion the change and dialogue with your staff on how it is going. Continue to focus on the change process until it is complete rather than prematurely moving on and allowing the change to falter. An incomplete change process creates cynicism when further changes are proposed. 

Taking full advantage of the Advent season

One of the unfortunate byproducts of the age in which we live is the commercialization and busyness of the Advent Season, robbing it of the opportunity to deeply impact our own souls as we consider the amazing story of God becoming man so that man could become more like God. In what other religious tradition does God become a creature so that His creatures could know his creator? 

And how does one explain how the King of the Universe was willing to be born into the world He had created. The infinite becoming finite so that the finite could be transformed by the infinite God. 

This is a story so absurd that it could only have been scripted by a Divine hand. No other writer would have attempted such a script. If they had they would not have claimed it to be true: fiction maybe, but not reality. This is not how the One whose voice had echoed off of a billion galaxies would make His entrance. Without CNN and Fox News, into a hovel known affectionately today as Bethlehem but then nothing more than a tiny village on the path to Jerusalem. 

His entrance was marked not by a proclamation to kings but to astonished herdsmen sleeping with sheep. The heavens opened with ten thousand voices – not over Jerusalem the ancient capital – but over a tiny grazing field for a handful of insignificant shepherds. They would be the only witnesses of the grand entrance of a King. No other writer would have written such a script. 

No other author would have taken such a chance. For behind this story, there are echoes of another story - equally incredulous. Centuries before in the vastness of eternity past – when infinity kissed infinity, The Master of Infinity spoke into being the universe in which we live - 3,000 of whose stars are visible to the careful eye, 30 billion visible from a large telescope, - the other 90% of the universe still hidden from our eyes. Its splendor is an eternal testimony to the Author of the story.

The Author’s heart had love that could not be contained. A heart full of love is not easily satisfied. Transcendent goodness longed to give away infinite love. Again the Author spoke: A planet was expertly crafted. One among billions. A people wonderfully created – in the image of the Author. Free to love, free to experience the infinite goodness of the Author. Free to revel in His infinite Love. But above all free. Love cannot be forced and remain love.

We are not the sole owners of broken hearts. No heart suffered such sorrow as Infinite Love rejected. Image bearers rejected the Image Maker. The story’s characters fired the Author to write their own script. Unmatched, searing pain pierced the Author’s heart as the loved one jilted the Lover.

Chaos infiltrated beauty. A planet was hijacked and spun out of control. Poverty of spirit supplanted endless joy. Unfulfilled hearts realized the pain of lost love. Without the Author, individual storylines faltered – and failed. Sadness reigned. Darkness descended in seeming endless gloom.

Truth can be stranger than fiction. For in the pained heavens the grieving Author plotted love’s revenge. An awesome revenge that only Divinity could contrive – that only Divinity would contrive. Having lost His loved, the Lover would send His most loved to reclaim His heart’s desire. The rejected Creator would kiss the unfaithful created. Tender mercy in place of deserved destruction. An astonished heaven broke into unbelieving applause. Image bearers would be reclaimed by the Image Maker. Light would once again prevail over darkness. Brokenness would be made whole. Peace would triumph over chaos.

All was silent in the heavens on the chosen night. Angels held their corporate breath. For nine months the Son had been absent, resident in a young girl's womb, coming to us, not as a king but incognito, just one of the thousands of children that would be born on a lonely planet that night – into the darkness that our word had become. Placenta covered the Son of the universe arriving to claim back His beloved: this time, one by one, heart by heart. Tender mercy arriving in disguise: one of us, one like us. On that night, the Author personally entered our story. 

Such humility our world has never known. A stunning reversal for a world gone astray. A Heart full of love is not easily satisfied. Transcendent goodness longing to give away infinite love, arriving under cover of night in order to “shine on those living in darkness…to guide our feet into the path of peace.” (Luke 1:27).

When an author writes, each character is unique; each has his or her own story-line. We, each have a story – unique, unrepeated, singular. Each story has its own joy, its own pain, its own pathos and unmatched quality. But each shares one singular, astonishing feature. We are made in the Author’s image, and He will not rest until we have invited Him to join in our story. 

More astonishing than the script He has authored, the story we celebrate today is that He also wants to enter into your story. This is the most ancient of stories but it is also the most contemporary of stories. The Christmas story is but one chapter in the Author’s divine script. The Author is still writing. And every person who invites Him into their story becomes a separate and unique chapter in His unfinished book. And into each story, He brings His light and peace. 

“For God so loved the world that He gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through Him.” (John 3:16-17.)

Take time this month to ponder the gift that God gave our world - and more importantly gave you. Spend time with the One who became part of your story so that you could become part of His story. Allow the message of peace on earth and goodwill toward men to bring you peace and give you the motivation to share His goodwill with others. 

This is what will make the Advent season meaningful.