Monthly Archives: July 2018

Financial Integrity: Stewarding Leadership

Posted on by
Reply

“There’s a cross-section of the dechurched community that suffers not from a lack of faith, but a lack of trust.“1

Often the “dechurched” have lost faith in “organized religion” because their leader was misusing the church’s finances, according to John Richards.

As I sat discussing my experience under a toxic leader with a fellow traveler on that painful journey, I recognized a common thread of behavior in our leaders. Both leaders were financially reckless under the guise of building God’s kingdom.

Both of our leaders were heading up large ministries with budgets well over a million dollars. My friend’s ministry was a multi-million dollar, well-respected, educational organization and mine a third world education mission.

Though there were differences in our leaders, both were building a kingdom of their own.

It was apparent they were spending ministry resources to create their own legacy rather than God’s.

That is a difficult judgment to make. Those who are visionaries are gifted at looking to the future and calling on others to trust in God’s faithfulness to build His kingdom through the finances he has given . . . even at times trusting the Lord to provide down the road what is not already banked. Are we not called to step into the mighty Jordan River in faith?

I have used that argument more than once—we need to go out on a limb trusting that God is going to provide and through our faithfulness reach more people with His love.

Motives

But, when does this become reckless? When does it become presumption upon God’s grace? When is it personal kingdom building rather than God’s Kingdom building work? And how can I know a leader is not faithful, but reckless in his building program?

I would suggest it primarily comes down to motive. The leader is either hearing God’s voice or his own as he leads an organization to take steps of faith. If it is his own voice he is hearing (read ego), his motive is self-aggrandizing. He is seeking his own kingdom. He is pursuing his own glory.

How do we determine whether God is directing him or the toxic appetite of ego is gaining the upper hand?

Motives are found in the heart (inner man including cognitive and emotive in biblical language). It is in reading the heart which makes our judgment of leaders a sticky-wicket. Are we truly able to judge another man’s motives—that which flows from his heart?

I would normally answer, “No.”

However, we are at times called upon to make judgments and sometimes we rely on the outward actions and expressions to get a glimpse inside the man (Matthew 18). But, it is evident in the story of God’s people that the ultimate Judge and Master of all on earth provides wisdom to His people for making judgments.

The good king of Judah, Jehoshaphat, set about making reforms in the land. Judges were appointed for the ordering of the society.

He appointed judges in the land in all the fortified cities of Judah, city by city, and said to the judges, “Consider what you do, for you judge not for man but for the Lord. He is with you in giving judgment. Now then, let the fear of the Lord be upon you. Be careful what you do, for there is no injustice with the Lord our God, or partiality or taking bribes.”

[2 Chronicles 19:5-7 (ESV)]

Jehoshaphat’s instructions are helpful to us even though we are not working for our local court system! Note, the justice of those appointed was to be based on God’s true judgments. God is the perfect judge and we are a mere reflection of Him. We are called to consciously mimic the goodness of our Lord’s judgments.

And, it cannot be influenced by political or financial benefit (God is not partial, nor does He take bribes).

Partiality is מַֹשּׂא with פָּנִים, meaning favoring one over another. Our judgments need to involve eyes that are open to see and ears open to hear the truth though it may surprise and shock us. “John couldn’t possibly think that!”

The attractiveness of ministry expansion due to donor excitement over a project cannot rule the day. The attention received (image-building) can simply be the result of pursuing our own ends. The ministry leader may just want to show the world how Christian he is by building, building, building.

Having said that, judging whether someone has acted in evil ways is much easier than judging whether their intent is evil (self-centered). Many good things have been done with evil intent and many evil things done have been intended by their perpetrators as good.

Judgment

Once again, when can we truly judge the motives of a leader who calls on his organization to step out in faith? Especially when he is spending the contributions of supporters on a seemingly good project?

The godliest of men (or women) will struggle with their motives as they set out to build a new program or new ministry structure. No ministry leader can fully claim purity in motive when building something highly visible and that will promote the egos of the organizational leadership. We are broken people and the temptation is great. We do not easily die to ourselves.

However, there are those who are thoroughly motivated by their egos. To know their motives is usually to see the results of their inward thoughts acted out. Generally, they will give evidence in outward forms to that which dwells within them beyond the purview of their employees or boards. Consider the following actions:

  • The leader shifts the discussion from the merits of the project to a question of loyalty, intelligence, or faithfulness when questioned.
  • The leader has frequently brought attention to himself in other projects.
  • The leader is known for being more concerned about his image than the church’s (organization’s) work.
  • It seems image takes precedence over actual ministry work.
  • The leader is easily angered by pushback regarding the project.
  • The project does not fit the mission of the organization.

There are leaders who greatly blemish the work of Christ as they create in order to gratify their own pleasures and egos. They build neat new buildings. Create new ministry programs. How often have we heard from their lips, “If you aren’t moving forward, you are falling back.”

Financial stewardship is the use of funds as God would have them used.

God may call an organization to step out in faith, with limited present financial backing, because He is a God who is continually challenging His people to live by faith. But, in the hands of a toxic leader, the financial stewardship of an organization is harnessed not to do ministry well, but to do much of it to market either his image or that of the organization.

If your leader is toxic, he is likely to push his vision until ratified and if rebuffed, be angry or sulk. His distrust of others in the decision-making process will become apparent. Most abusive individuals are described as entitled. If they lose the vote, they are likely to make someone else pay for it.

Our Experience

My friend’s CEO sought to purchase buildings for ministry to the impoverished, while the ministry’s mission was education. All the while, the organization was struggling with decreasing contributions and students. My friend interpreted the reckless vision as a means of drawing attention away from failed leadership.

My CEO continued to build buildings and purchase land while the impoverished students of our educational mission took on more and more debt to pay their tuition. He then marketed a scholarship program that did not provide for the students what was promised to donors.

In addition, when giving a tour to a potential donor, science lab items were prominently displayed despite having never been used by the children. It was all about image.

Do You Have a Story?

Though financial abuse is handled in business ethics texts, there is little written or researched that connects toxic leadership with poor financial stewardship. There are leaders who cheat their organizations financially and steal from donors. But, I have yet to see an analysis made of simply bad financial decision-making in relation to abusive leadership.

Have you experienced what my friend and I did? Share with the Pearls & Swine community what you have learned either on our Contact page (will be kept confidential) or Comment below.

NOTES:

  1. John C. Richards and Jr., “Church Hurt as a Barrier to Evangelism,” The Exchange | A Blog by Ed Stetzer, accessed July 27, 2018, https://www.christianitytoday.com/edstetzer/2016/september/church-hurt-as-barrier-to-evangelism.html.

Leadership: Respecting the Image

Posted on by
Reply


It is interesting that in recent years, secular management experts have more and more given leaders help in biblical leadership. Where businesses and organizations were populated by leaders like Henry Ford and more recently, Steve Jobs, the focus in management research has moved towards respecting God’s image-bearers.

God’s Image in My Employees

Mind you, those who have no respect for the Bible do not base their findings on the teaching of scripture, but even their findings are evidence that God created them in His image. They are “thinking the thoughts of God after Him” without knowing it.

Though there is much debate concerning the meaning and implications of this teaching in the early pages of the Bible, there are common threads in the interpretation of it. Genesis 1:26-27 says,

Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” 27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.

God made males and females to have dominion over His creation. In doing so, he gave them personalities, gifts, talents, and abilities to rule. And being like God, though not God, they would be creative in the use of those abilities. They would create incredible systems, products, and relationships though always marked by the brokenness of the Fall. They would develop communication as their Creator communicates. And in all of it, they would be pointing to the One who made it all possible, which in biblical parlance is “glorifying God.”

But, unfortunately there are those who believe they are God’s gift to the world and they believe the world does not return the favor.

Leaders with Hubris

Recently, I watched a tennis match on TV between two world-class players. I was amazed how one of the players clearly expected the ball boys and “towel girls” to snap to when he simply put his hand out. He would extend his hand and one or two young helpers would come running to provide a towel or ball or whatever. There were no words said; I never noticed him express gratitude or thankfulness.

Thom Rainer, the CEO of LifeWay Christian Resources, said, “Leaders with hubris see others as inferior. The rest of the world does not get it. Others are just not as smart. As a result, these leaders do not listen well because others really don’t have anything worthy to say.”1

Leaders with “hubris” are self-absorbed. It is made evident by their lack of respect for those around them, particularly under them. They believe the reason they are the leader – whether CEO, manager, supervisor, or other authority – is because they are smarter, quicker, wiser, and better looking than the rest.

Teaming

The problem with this is found at the end of Rainer’s quote: these leaders do not listen well because others really don’t have anything worthy to say. Management experts are finding, especially in this information age, leaders need all the help they can get from their employees as they seek to make wise decisions and pursue creative ideas.

The term, “teaming” has become common in business leadership. When a leader is “full of hubris,” as Rainer puts it, there is no team, only a despot with minions. Rather than an idea incubated by multiple, gifted individuals, becoming more focused, and taking into consideration various pitfalls and dangers, the idea is ill conceivably hatched by a single leader.

Though a leader may believe he is the all-wise-one, he is not.

The reason I can say this nearly 100% of the time is that every person on earth has been created in God’s image with creative abilities. Though some may indeed have a rare idea that fits with the mission of a particular business or organization, every person has something to say that can mold the ideas of others.

As I worked to develop a mission organization, I failed to take into account the varying personalities of those who served the mission. As an extrovert, with very apparent gifts in building new relationships, I had failed to consider how introverts could find a place to minister alongside those of us popping from one new person to another.

It was my daughter and son-in-law, both introverts, who challenged my perspective and gave my ministry new direction and help.

It is still too soon to see if I have really learned that lesson, but I was able to alter my language and the “jobs” of those who found it murder to walk up to a complete stranger and begin a conversation; something I had made the backbone of the organization over the years. It will take the wisdom of those who are introverts in an extrovert mission to help me develop the space for them to use their gifts.

Have you never experienced someone provide a needed direction change in your thinking and action? I have seen it from those I had no interest or desire in hearing. It takes humility for most of us, who are driven entrepreneurs, to hear and respect the ideas of our team.

Creating the Team

And it takes a humble leader who seeks out the ideas from the team to actually create the team in the first place. Dan Allender says, “The reluctant leader detoxifies power by empowering others to bring their vision, passion, and gifts to the enterprise.”2

Members of the organization must know they are respected and their ideas will not go unnoticed or considered, or worse, laughed at.

This creates collaboration, a key component in using God’s image-bearers in fruitful organizational management. One of the finest texts among the secular sources is “Teaming: How Organizations Learn, Innovate, and Compete in the knowledge Economy” by Amy Edmondson. In it she says,

Collaboration is a way of working with colleagues that is characterized by cooperation, mutual respect, and shared goals. It involves sharing information, coordinating actions, discussing what’s working and what’s not, and perpetually seeking input and feedback.

Something that becomes apparent in an organization that is ruled by a toxic leader is the lack of this kind of interaction. In fact, there is rarely any kind of interaction. People who have been berated and belittled by a leader will not share information, coordinate actions, or discuss what is working and what is not. They will either leave the organization or keep their head down to stay out of the sites of the bully.

Even some non-toxic leaders have difficulty creating this kind of collaboration. As Edmondson points out elsewhere in the book, leaders who continually present their idea first and with passion will find their employees fearful to disagree with them. She points out, this is simply because of the power differential between leader and employee. Leaders need to put a lid on and make a special effort it if they wish their team to grow into an effective idea machine.

Summary

As a Christian leader, my mission must be to encourage and build the abilities of whom I lead. They do not live to serve my ideas. My followers are made in the image of God with perspective and wisdom I do not have.

References:

  1. “How and Why I Could Fall,” ThomRainer.com, June 25, 2018, https://thomrainer.com/2018/06/how-and-why-i-could-fall/.
  2. Dan B. Allender, Leading with a Limp: Take Full Advantage of Your Most Powerful Weakness (Colorado Springs, CO: WaterBrook Press, 2008), page 19.
  3. Amy C. Edmondson, Teaming: How Organizations Learn, Innovate, and Compete in the Knowledge Economy, Kindle 1st edition (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2012), location 1078-1080.

Trouble At The Global Leadership Summit

Posted on by
Reply

A current example of toxic leadership is explained in this open letter from a Willow Creek supporter who is calling out the leadership of Willow Creek after multiple attempts to challenge them to truthfulness and biblical leadership. This can provide an excellent example of how NOT to lead. We need to, as leaders in the church, go against our self-preservation when moral failure occurs.

3 Biblical Ways to Respond to Toxic Bosses: Head Up, Down, or Out of Town

Posted on by
3
https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/kelly-dehnert/episodes/3-Biblical-Ways-to-Respond-to-Toxic-Bosses-Head-Up–Down–or-Out-of-Town-e28il1p

For the Christian, we know God has given us what we need to glorify Him and enjoy Him forever.

However, we sometimes feel trapped by our understanding of His direction. We may think when we are serving in a Christian ministry that there is a one-way road map when dealing with a self-serving and destructive ministry leader. 

However, there is more than one response to toxic bosses found in scripture.

The Bible gives at least three ways by example and instruction for dealing with abusive supervisors:

  • Head Up
  • Head Down
  • Head Out

Head Up

There is Nathaniel who, as a prophet, who went to King David (who had the man-given power to destroy him) and confronted him for his sin against Bathsheba and her husband Urriah (2 Sam. 12). Because David was not a toxic boss (though horribly sinful), he responded well to Nathaniel’s challenge. He repented.

After reposting this blog, a friend pointed out to me the example of Paul when being held by Roman authorities. My friend wrote, “Paul’s response in first submitting, and when wronged, appealing to a higher authority, where his rights were demonstrably violated . . . was helpful in guiding my response as those with authority wronged me . . .” (see Acts 22 for one such story)

On the other hand, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego refused to worship the gods of Nebuchadnezzar and he did not respond as David did. The trio said:

“O Nebuchadnezzar, we have no need to answer you in this matter. If this be so, our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace, and he will deliver us out of your hand, O king. But if not, be it known to you, O king, that we will not serve your gods or worship the golden image that you have set up.” 

Daniel 3:16-18

And the King’s response?

“Then Nebuchadnezzar was filled with fury, and the expression of his face was changed against Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego. He ordered the furnace heated seven times more than it was usually heated.” 

Daniel 3:19

The three men trusted in the Lord, and kept their heads high. Nebuchadnezzar was intending to fry them to a crisp, but God saved them. He does not always save those who stand up against oppression, but he did in their case.

Sometimes, God calls his children to hold their head high when facing abusive authorities so it can be cut off!

Head Down

However, there are those who feel there is nowhere for them to go. They feel trapped and unable to make any real change in their circumstances. They fear the results of the heads up approach.

For example, we see in Peter’s first epistle instructions for the slave dealing with a “unjust” master.

Servants, be subject to your masters with all respect, not only to the good and gentle but also to the unjust.

1 Peter 2:18

When interpreting this passage, we must firstly remember that Peter was speaking specifically to slaves, not your average 21st Century employee. Though there is much to be learned in the passage throughout the ages and in voluntary work situations, these slaves, whether forced into servitude or by choice signed their lives away because of financial need, were not at liberty to leave their place of employment.

Peter says, “Keep your head down so it will not be any worse for you.”

I believe Peter is speaking to those who are convinced nothing good can come of responding to the boss. The employee is convinced that any response will only make matters worse, bring greater emotional trauma, and possibly the loss of his job.

He goes on to say that it is better to be treated badly when doing the right thing than doing wrong.

I believe he is critiquing responding with abusive tactics to the abusive tactics of the leader. We at times feel justified in striking back in anger and using one-line clever quips to put someone down. However, even engagement with evil people should be a witness to the abuser and others.

So, we are called to show respect for the image of God in that evil person though they be unjust.

Peter bases his instruction on the example of Christ when he went before the authorities who unjustly abused Him and he did not strike back . . . though he could have done away with all of them with one word as the Son of God. Jesus did not attack.

God gives permission to keep your head down and take the abuse at least when you see no other good options in the circumstances.

Head Out

Finally, there is one last way to respond to nasty bosses:

Get out of there.

Jesus, in Luke 4, chose to disappear into the crowd rather than be thrown over a cliff. His time had not come for Calvary and so He walked away from the abuse. There would come a time when he would keep His head up (responding to the Chief Priest especially) and keep His head down (responding to Pontius Pilot), but in Luke 4 He got out of there.

Trauma increases with greater and greater exposure to abuse. Distrust in organizations, boards, leaders and all things Christian build over time. Several of my interviewees testified to these results of their experience of staying in a toxic organization.

My Own Experience

I have seen all three of these responses from others who have suffered under toxic leadership. My wife and I used all three when working with a mission agency for eight years.

  • I challenged the CEO on one occasion (head up) and he shifted the blame and let me know it was not appropriate for me to challenge his views.
  • We refused to get sucked into a discussion (which would likely be used against us) about our issues with the CEO (head down). He had shown himself to be lacking in humility and to use what was said in meetings with missionaries to hurt them later.
  • And, we finally left the organization knowing there was nothing left to be done about the leadership.

Rest in knowing that the Lord leads His people and gives wisdom as we ask (James 1:5). Though we can seek justice (head up), there are other options that are just as biblical and should be considered according to the circumstances, the Lord’s leading, and your conscience.

Keep your head up, down, or head out of town.

Experiencing Matthew 7 Under a Toxic Boss

Posted on by
5

This is part 4 of a series of articles describing the experiences of Christian organization employees working under abusive bosses. These articles are the fruit of interviews with employees who sought diligently to respond to their foul bosses in biblical and thoughtful ways. This article describes their application of Matthew 7:1-6. This site is largely based on this passage as evidenced by the title.

In Matthew 7:1-6, Jesus is coming to the close of his Sermon on the Mount. He challenges his hearers, “Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you.”[1]

In verse six, Jesus goes on to say, “Do not give dogs what is holy, and do not throw your pearls before pigs, lest they trample them underfoot and turn to attack you.”[2]

In my family’s experience under toxic leaders, this passage became very important. For several years it softened our hearts, helping us to give the benefit of the doubt to the founders of the mission, who were toxic in their treatment of missionaries and nationals alike.

When this passage was shared with me by a friend as we struggled with whether or not to engage our leaders, it took on new meaning. My wife and I had never really paid attention to the final 10 words . . . words that made an enormous difference in our engagement with the CEO.

I wanted to know in my research if others saw what we saw in Jesus’ words. I interviewed numerous mission organization managers and asked if they applied this passage when interacting with their toxic supervisor.

Judge Not – Section 1

Deirdre is a missionary in a developing country serving in an orphanage and school.

She focused on the first section of the passage and had not really considered the second. Deirdre noted her discomfort in hers and other missionaries’ lack of application. She said, “We were all judging [the toxic leader] even though we shouldn’t have been.” 

However, she explained, “It was so continuous, all the little things she did, that it was hard not to.”

She found it very difficult to simply overlook the leader’s failings in her authoritarian and demeaning treatment of nationals and staff. But, Dierdra believed the passage was teaching that their judgments of the mission leader were inappropriate.

Adam was a faculty member and interim Director of a college ministry in a developing country. He said,

I think I used it privately to calm myself after any perceived wrong doing or pattern of behavior. After grieving and being angry for a time that passage would come to mind and I would use it against myself to call me back into line. That I was as capable of the same kinds of things, same kinds of attitudes and actions, as the [CEO] was.

Again, Adam focused on the first section and sought to calm his anger at the actions of the CEO. He felt that if he would cease from judging, viewing the leader as a sinner just as he was, he could keep his relationship intact with the boss and continue ministering with the mission.

Graham worked for a large Christian organization and confronted the founder with two other Christian leaders. When considering Jesus’ imperative, “take the log out of your own eye,” Graham said, “We tried very hard not to be doing any finger wagging. Like, ‘You are a horrible person and the rest of us are bastions of virtue.’ We tried in all humility to bring him to an awareness of what he had done and its effect on the organization.”

He and his friends were rebutted and he lost his managerial position as a result of their confrontation despite their attempt to apply the first section to their confrontation.

Eugene, who worked with an international evangelical mission agreed, arguing it was “not a judging situation as [much] as a helping situation.” Eugene said he was trying to assist the CEO.

He went on to say he was “trying to help him in his own development of his understanding of himself.” In his evangelistic mission, Eugene also approached the boss, a friend for several years, in humility. He wanted to encourage the CEO as a Christian brother.

But, Eugene was rebuffed and lost his job.

Ben explained the “judging” section of the passage (Matthew 7:1-5) did not come to mind until after several months of being away from the organization. He worked for an educational mission overseas. His application of the first section was to his relationship with his toxic leaders after leaving the organization.

At that time, following writing letters to the board, CEO, and faculty, he said, “I recognized that I just needed to forgive them. I was never going to be asked for forgiveness . . . I didn’t need to be putting myself in the seat of judge.” He believed he needed to turn judgment over to the Lord and move on in his own life knowing God would do what was best.

Casting Pearls – Section 2

While still with the organization, Ben said he “very much ruminated on” verse seven where it says, “Do not cast your pearls to the pigs.” His application of the second section was based on the pigs trampling the pearls sent their way.

He explained,

“I began to feel more and more affirmed in my thinking that my job was not to try to change them. I was going to fry myself if I took that campaign on. It was a waste of time and energy to try to change the situation in that sense of casting pearls.”

Ben believed it would do no good to cast his pearls (give godly advice) before the swine (toxic bosses). They would simply ignore or reject his views.

My Opinion

Unfortunately, none of my interviewees attempted to interpret or apply the final 10 words of the passage. This is common for Christians who are suffering under abusive employers. I would suggest there are at least three reasons for this oversight.

  • Discomfort with making a judgment after Jesus has already said not to judge!

Jesus spends five verses emphasizing that we should not judge others. He provides wonderful metaphors that burn his teaching into our hearts. The second section has only one verse and seems to contradict the first five verses.

However, these two seemingly contradictory teachings actually go wonderfully together. The first emphasizes how we go to a brother who has sinned and humbly instruct him. The second describes the kind of so-called-brother of whom we need to stay clear.

In the first case, we need not fear. He may disagree with us, but generally as we go in humility, he will respond in humility. But, in the second case, we can expect, because of earlier experience or other people’s experiences, the brother will respond very negatively and it is likely we will get hurt as they “turn to attack.”

  • An excessive attention to the pigs “trampling” the pearls.

I spent many years considering only the fact that the pig may “trample” the good words I bring.

He will ignore and reject. Why waste my time? I received some comments on that from my interviewees, but just like me, they did not read on. If the pig may just trample the pearls, we can always give it a shot . . . what’s the worst thing that can happen? They reject the wisdom . . . no big deal.

But, the passage goes on. It goes on to say that they are dangerous and should be avoided.

  • A discomfort with calling someone a “dog” or “pig.”

After being told to be careful in our judgments – remember, there has to be judgment if you are going to go to a brother who has sinned – we are told by Jesus to judge that a person is a pig or a dog. This does not seem to fit.

But, as I said above, Jesus is speaking to two different circumstances. We must judge whether our brother is one who may respond in humility to instruction or will turn and hurt us. This is very important in our engagement with toxic bosses. It is a matter of life-giving or not . . . a matter of safety.

Placing ourselves voluntarily in places of abuse is not required by our Lord. We are not normally called to seek out a fight in which we are guaranteed to lose our lives.

Know your pigs and act accordingly. 

[1]Matthew 7:1-2.

[2]Matthew 7:6.