Components to Transformational Leadership

God has called us to transform lives. There are many components that will help the leader become transformational, but here we will consider risk and trust. The transformational leader must be willing to put himself on the line in order to develop the kind of relationship that will ensure influence. This can be a risky proposition because it goes outside the boundaries of conventional relationship. Briscoe, Larson, and Osborne spoke of leadership in terms of risk taking in there book: Measuring up: The need to succeed and the fear of failure. They assert: “Highly successful leaders ignore conventional wisdom and take chances. Their stories inevitably include a defining moment or key decision when they took a significant risk and thereby experienced a breakthrough.” Trust is another key component. There can be no productive relationship without it. Trust can only be built on the foundation of integrity and must be cultivated with care. . God puts an emphasis upon trust when He challenges all people to “Trust in the Lord…” (Psalm 37:3) God places further importance upon trust as He makes it a requisite to blessing. “Blessed are they that put their trust in the Lord.” (Psalm 2:12) Jeswald Salacuse in his book: Leading Leaders: How to Manage Smart, Talented, Rich, and Powerful People, brings this into focus by attaching trust in the relationship to productivity with his assertion that: “Positive relationships engender trust, and trust in a leader is vital in securing desired action from followers.” Certainly the components necessary to becoming a transformational leader are not limited to these, but learning to take a risk and developing trust is a good start.

Building Transformative Organizations

It would seem that success in building transformative organizations has more to do with people than traditional procedures. Jesus broke all the stereotypes by seeking out his followers and building a transformational relationship with them. This was the key to our Lords successful discipleship. This makes sense when you consider the fact that how we treat people is a key concept of transformational leadership. In his book Leadership and Performance Beyond Expectation, B. M. Bass indicates that a transformational leader seeks to transform an organization by transforming the people who operate the organization. Working for a transformational leader can be a wonderful and uplifting experience. They feel they are a vital and appreciated part of productivity. Transformational leadership starts with the development of a vision, a view of the future that will excite and motivate followers because they see themselves as a part. This understanding would tend to suggest that transformational leadership is conducive to building transformative organizations.

Distinguishing Discipleship from Mentoring

Recently I have been on a journey to discover the intricacies that distinguish discipleship and mentoring. I wonder if we could draw a parallel with the depth of relationship necessary to accomplish each one. Jesus influenced multitudes, taught many, and only directly discipled a few. As you look at the ministry of Christ on earth, it would seem that the depth of the relationship defined each level of influence he had on others. With the twelve He had a deep intimate relationship that qualified them as disciples. If the ministry of Jesus is the standard for measuring discipleship, relationship cannot be ignored. Making discipleship a category that is visible through the lens of relationship helps us understand the difference that distinguishes levels of influence. Is this what Warren Blank was suggesting in his book (The 9 Natural Laws of Leadership) when he asserts: “Because the personal relationship defines the existing quality of interpersonal interaction between the leader and would-be followers, followers will not join the leader without the requisite relationship. Leadership is the relationship.”? This is certainly not the only definition, but I think the depth of relationship is one means that can be embraced in our efforts to distinguish discipleship from mentoring.

Jesus Redefines Leadership

Jesus said: “The greatest one among you must be your servant.” (Matthew 23:11) This sounds a lot like servanthood. R. K. Greenleaf, in his book Servant Leadership, attached servanthood to leadership as an ethical issue by encouraging leaders to empathize with their followers and by working to take care of them and nurture them. He goes as far as to assert that an individual emerges as a leader by first becoming a servant. In his book entitled Leadership, J. M. Burns supports this concept with his notable discussion on transformational leadership. His contention is that transformational leadership is distinguished from other leadership theories by its strong emphasis on meeting the needs of the follower. This sounds a lot like the greatest leader who ever lived. Jesus redefined leadership in His day. It was radical for Jesus to define great leadership in terms of servanthood because in His day Jewish free persons, like their Gentile counterparts, considered slaves socially inferior. Shelly, in his book Empowering Your Church Through Creativity and Change, brings this idea of servant leadership home when he states: “I’m becoming more and more convinced that God’s leader will never be allowed to get too comfortable … God’s call to leadership is not a call to privilege and displays of power but a call to servanthood and humility.”

Leadership That Challenges the Status Quo

Jesus challenged the cultural status quo in Mathew 28:18 when He gathered the eleven disciples on the Mountain and told them: (All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.) The Roman Empire, in the first century, represented a growing dynasty, which combined superiority with cruelty and could abruptly change from civilization, strength and power to fear, totalitarianism and self-indulgence. Rome was a beautiful nation with a great deal of inequality at its core. A few people were extremely rich while others lived in severe poverty. It encouraged a very rigid hierarchical system in which the emperor is at the summit of the social economical pyramid, and the further one falls to the base of the pyramid the more difficult life becomes. Authority followed this pyramid in such a way that those at the bottom were expected to be totally submitted to those at the top. Matthew shows Jesus moving counter to this cultural reality by establishing His authority outside this system. Jesus authority came from within as opposed to without. Romans, while they encouraged their own religion, were not intolerant to other religions. Rome had accepted into its pantheon deities from the Italian tribes and from Asia Minor. In the provinces, the great territorial gods-such as Saturn in North Africa and Jehovah among the Jews-were accepted as legal religions on the grounds that their rites, even if barbarous, were sanctified by ancient tradition. The cultural expectation was that religious authority be subservient to civil and military authority. Jesus assertion that He had “all” authority was radical and contradictory to the accepted culture. Jesus, in declaring His ultimate authority, offers an alternative vision of the world.

Lifestyle Mentoring

1 Timothy Chapter 3 is a leadership manual. While in Ephesus, Timothy receives a letter from his mentor. Paul has chosen his closest spiritual child (1 Tim. 1:2) to set forth the organizational principles and leadership expectations that would guide the church of Christ. Timothy was no doubt chosen because of Paul’s confidence in him as a leader (Phil. 2:19-22). In verse 15 we see the purpose of the passage. Paul wants to draw a picture of what a leader in this “church of the living God” is supposed to look like. Paul had already modeled this and now formalizes it with this letter. Smith and Goetz describe this type of mentoring as “Lifestyle Mentoring”. This has a focus on the lifestyle of the leader (modeling) and defines the principles of living (the letter). Paul let Timothy observe him at work then he promoted him to the churches. In this letter he gives the qualifications for the organizational structure previously set up. In the broad sense, we could call Paul a lifestyle mentor to Timothy. Again, Smith and Goetz speak to this by asserting: “This type of mentoring is a kind of parenting without the typical parental responsibilities. The real responsibility falls on the younger to absorb and to observe correctly.” Paul trusts Timothy to insure quality in leadership.

References:
Smith, F., & Goetz, D. L. 1999. Vol. 5: Leading with integrity : Competence with Christian character. The pastor's soul series . Bethany House Publishers: Minneapolis, Minn.

Learning in Discipleship

When Jesus gave His great commission just before He ascended to heaven, He placed an emphasis on learning in discipleship. Notice Matthew 28:19-20 “Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, … teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.” (NIV) Here Jesus identifies “teaching” as a key component in making disciples. In his book (Managers as Mentors), Chip Bell speaks of learning when he declares: ”The best mentors recognize they are first and foremost, facilitators and catalysts in a process of discovery and insight. This is supported by Lois Zachary, in her book (Creating a Mentoring Culture), who asserts: “Learning is the fundamental process and primary purpose of mentoring.” She further states: “One of the principle reasons that mentoring relationships fail is that the learning process is not tended to and the focus of learning is not maintained.” When seeking to understand both discipling and mentoring the common denominator of learning cannot be ignored. This begs the question: Can you have discipleship or mentoring without the basic component of learning? If this question is answered in the negative, then it is incumbent upon us as disciplers and mentors to build a safe environment where real learning can take place.