Visit here to view the rest of his book reviews! Thanks again Dave!
Missional Renaissance
Changing the Scorecard for the Church
Reggie McNeal
Jossey-Bass, 2009, 193 pp. ISBN 978-0-470-24344-2
Reggie McNeal is the Missional Leadership Specialist for Leadership Network
and the author of several popular books on the church. Becoming a missional
church requires three shifts: from an internal to an external focus, from
running programs to developing people, and from church-focused leadership to
community-engaged leadership. The chapters describe what these shifts mean
and give some suggestions for how to measure progress. [See my observations
and questions at the end. dlm]
Introduction
"Missional is a way of living, not an affiliation or activity. . To think
and to live missionally means seeing all life as a way to be engaged with
the mission of God in the world."
Missional renaissance is reshaping the landscape of what church can and
should be.
1. The Missional Renaissance
Altruism and a hunger for spiritual growth and vitality are giving rise to
increased charity and voluntary entrepreneurship in communities. Churches
must move out of the institutional paradigm and focus on the community, on
developing people, and acquiring a Kingdom mindset.
A growing number of people, both Christians and non-Christians, are able and
willing to take on social issues and engage human need. A church should
monitor its positive community impact.
"The missional church engages the community beyond its walls because it
believes that is why the church exists." (6) "They look for ways to bless
and to serve the communities where they are located." (7)
The missional church works to "help people shape their path for personal
development," shifting the emphasis to "following Jesus into the world to
join him in his redemptive mission." (10)
Innovators see the church as a catalyst to mobilize all the community "to
work on the big things God cares about." (15)
2. Missional Manifesto
God's people must be on mission with him to "restore and heal creation,"
intentionally "blessing people and sharing the life of God with them."
"...both truth and love must be present to reflect the whole heart of God
for people." (32)
The welfare of people captures God's heart, both the restoration in his
relationship with them and the benefits of that relationship. Jesus
followers work to enhance life and oppose things that steal life.
3. Missional Shift 1: From an Internal to an External Focus
Church groups and individuals serve in the communities and with the people
where they live and work. The church converts members to missionaries. It
is not a destination but a "connector," not attractional but incarnational.
It focuses on service, humanitarian efforts and public service more than
proclamation, teaching and evangelism. It deploys people rather than
assimilating and separating them. It helps people integrate their life and
mission.
"They live their lives with the idea that they are on a mission trip. On
mission trips, people focus on the work of God around them, alert to the
Spirit's prompting, usually serving people in very tangible ways, often in
ways that involve some sacrifice or even discomfort." (54)
"Once we see what God is doing 'out there' in the world, it changes
everything we do 'in here' in the church." (65)
4. Changing the Scorecard from Internal to External Focus
The chapter is chock full of possible avenues of service. The church
evaluates itself not by internal statistics of giving and attendance but by
the quality of life of the members and those they serve. The calendar,
schedule, facilities usage, finances, and people resource indicators track
whether key community initiatives are more important than building larger
church buildings, that the church is not a club but a mission post.
Church people may be assigned, and supported financially and with personnel,
as missionaries to various apartment complexes or other housing communities.
The church may adopt a school or some other community institution.
"North America is the largest English-speaking mission field in the world."
(80)
[It is also the "mission field' with by far the greatest concentration of
Christian resources. dlm]
5. Missional Shift 2: From Program Development to People Development
Moving from programs to people development means focusing on maturation more
than participation in church, application and debriefing life events more
than didactic teaching, dealing with behaviors and outcomes as well as
knowledge, growing through serving, and integrating versus
compartmentalizing life. Developing people is a labor intensive,
highly-relational, long-term process.
"We have operated off the faulty assumption that if people participate in
our church programs, they will grow and develop personally." "Developing
people requires building relationships, not just delivering a product or
service." (90)
"We do not share the heart of God with the world because we do not have the
heart of God. This heart transplant does not occur by participation in
church activities. It comes from being in a vibrant, growing relationship
with God." [This seems to be the crux of the issue. dlm]
Americans have outsourced spiritual formation to the church. "Everyday
living is where spiritual development is worked out." "Loving God and our
neighbors cannot be fulfilled at church." ".church activity is no sign of
genuine spiritual vitality. The lifestyles and values of church members
largely reflect those of the culture." (92-93) [Genuine spiritual vitality
grows through exercise, for example, in community service. But if we do not
have it at the outset, does service generate it? How do we get the heart of
God that works itself out in the world?]
"Just as people are taking greater roles in choosing their educational
pursuits, designing their workplaces, and managing their health care, they
feel increasingly qualified to craft their own spiritual quests." "But what
if we actually begin to see ourselves as responsible for creating a culture
where people get to participate in customizing their spiritual journeys
based on their spiritual appetites and ambitions? (97-998) [Of course
people should participate in their own spiritual growth goals, etc. But
there are two obvious dangers here. One is the consumer approach and the
other is people acting as their own judge and god, both big problems we are
trying to overcome. I'm sure the author would agree that outside guidance
is still needed.]
"In a people development culture, the key issue is maturation. Are people
growing in every aspect of their life? Are they becoming more like Jesus?
Are they blessing the world as the people of God?" (100)
People need help debriefing their lives. Rather than simply teach in a
classroom and let people figure out how to apply it, stimulate life
discussions and undertake intentional debriefing to unpack their lives and
experiences and issues in light of Scripture. Help people address their
behaviors. [This is an excellent application.]
6. Changing the Scorecard from Measuring Programs to Helping People Grow
This is the most challenging shift. It requires reallocating every
resource. However, a variety of indicators can be monitored in the areas of
prayer, people, resources, finances, facilities, and technology. Identify
specific results in people's lives that signal genuine progress for them.
"To change a culture, you have to change the conversations." "This reality
should cause spiritual leaders to think long and hard about the culture we
are creating by what we say and how we say it." (122-123)
7. Missional Shift 3: From Church-Based to Kingdom-Based Leadership
Kingdom-oriented leadership is organic, personal, prophetic, empowering, and
focused on leading a movement rather than an institution. The leader is a
viral agent that infects the culture with God's love and creates a culture
of ministry in the community. Leadership is not restricted to clergy.
Leaders are focused on their Kingdom assignment rather than their church
job. They are focused on being missionaries in their sphere of influence.
"The challenge is to connect with a culture that is unacquainted with the
good news of Jesus." (137) "These leaders create a culture of ministry and
leader incubation that multiplies everyone's efforts." (140)
Train like Jesus did. Deploy and then debrief. Learning comes through
debriefing life experiences rather than teaching. It is relational and
intensive on-the-job training, up-close and personal.
Leaders may well need to become bi-vocational in order to shed some church
responsibilities and to provide income for their ministry. [I understand the
need for leaders to model what they want to see in their followers. Jesus
led his followers in ministering to people. At the same time, in Acts 6,
the leaders thought it would not be right to neglect the ministry of the
word of God to serve widows and they assigned this work to others. Where is
the balance?]
8. Changing the Scorecard from Church-Based to Kingdom-Based Leadership
Leaders must consider four areas: perspective, skills development, resource
management, and personal growth.
"I recommend recruiting a personal prayer support team and then figuring out
how to update these helpers on your personal and leadership needs. When
recruiting this team, you may even want to ask people to focus their prayers
on specific aspects of your life and ministry.." (165) [I like this idea and
intend to do it.]
"Leaders have to live the change they seek." (157) "You view life as a
mission trip, and order your own life around that view." (159)
Conclusion
A few of the things we may expect:
. "An explosion of missional communities (MC) will occur. These will be
groups of believers and nonbelievers who will operate in non-institutional
settings. . Their community life will center on an intense desire to grow
spiritually and to aid the community. Some MCs will be connected to
churches; many will not be." (179)
. "Increasing numbers of Jesus followers will live out their missional
expression in the context of their family . attending church services on
special occasions." (180)
. "Many clergy will not be able to make this transition in their current
church roles. Consequently, they will move into the marketplace for
employment in pursuit of their call to be missional leaders."
Additional Observations, Thoughts and Issues
. I believe the missional concept is biblical and churches should pursue
it. I believe Christians have largely failed to be salt and light in their
spheres of influence.
. The book is highly application oriented with many very specific
suggestions and examples.
. I would have appreciated more emphasis on the spiritual dimension, how
we get the "heart of God," how spiritual development takes place in the
missional church. In the book of Acts, while acts of service are mentioned,
the overwhelming emphasis is on the disciples teaching and preaching the
Word.
. I would like to have seen more attention and suggestions for what we
could be doing in the rest of the world beyond our community. While the
world is not excluded, the suggestions for the community predominate by an
overwhelming margin.
. It might also have been helpful to make a larger issue out of living a
life of love, obedience, integrity, and other centeredness in our regular
job roles where we can have influence for Christ within the context of our
regular daily activities among people like us.
. The idea that Christians should be ministers in the community and that
church leaders should equip them for that role is, of course, both
historical and biblical. Does this book make service too central? Is the
church more than service? Is worship more than service? Is blessing more
than service?
. Church leaders will applaud the thrust to spend more time in the world
and less time in church - in principle - but the suggestions that people
meet for growth and serve elsewhere on Sundays instead of attending church
will feel very threatening. It will be very difficult for leaders to feel
good about falling numbers that previously indicated their success and
significance.
. This model requires many more leaders to equip, mobilize, and debrief
the people in our churches. However, we are in a hole of having few leaders
and many "consumers" because that is what the program model has produced.
We lack leaders because we lack disciples.
. Programs are the "levers" that allow a few leaders to "lift" many
people rather than a few. The downside is becoming apparent: programs don't
lift them very far. Doing away with the lever reduces the capacity of
leaders to relate to the many. If leaders get rid of programs and focus on
the relational, labor-intensive discipling of a few, many current church
attenders will be left out. Church leaders will find it extremely difficult
to consider leaving people out.
. Leaders are being asked to take on the additional job of serving
outside the church. Will overloaded pastors be able to give up what appear
to be major important responsibilities to do this? Does Acts 6, the
ministry of the Word and the serving of widows have any input here?
. Because we have learned to think and act in "programs," it is very
difficult to deploy people in large numbers without programs. How would you
adopt a school, for example, without it being a program? How would you help
leaders debrief life experiences without a program to teach them how to do
it? How would you disburse funds and resources to a "missionary" assigned
to a housing community without a program or committee to oversee it and make
the decisions? It will be very hard to stay out of the box.
. It would seem that the younger the church and the younger its leaders,
the more likely the model will be adopted. It may be quite difficult for
large, indebted, "successful" churches to promote this perspective beyond a
safe, surface level.
. To what degree is this happening in younger missional communities that
are flying under the radar screen? What are they doing well and how are
they struggling?
What will happen if churches adopt the missional model on a large scale?
. Will families and small missional communities that meet together in
place of church experience real, ongoing spiritual growth or tend to drift
away?
. To what degree will ministry efforts to serve the community continue
to include spiritual transformation? Will the culture's applause for help
and condemnation of absolute truth affect Christians ministering in the
community? Will community service come to mirror the non-verbal service of
mainline churches?
. What will happen to local church support of global missions? If it
declines what will take its place?
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
Book Summary of "Leading Across Cultures" by James Plueddemann
www.davidmays.org - Thank you David!
Leading Across Cultures
Effective Ministry and Mission in the Global Church
James E. Plueddemann
IVP Academic, 2009, 230 pp. ISBN 978-0-8308-2578-3
Jim Plueddemann is chair of the mission and evangelism department at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. He previously spent a number of years as a missionary educator in Nigeria, taught at Wheaton Graduate School, and served as international director of SIM. Leaders from around the world are partnering in ministry but there is continuing frustration from the clash of leadership expectations originating in cultural values. We are often blind to our own hidden assumptions and others are blind to theirs. Jim draws on biblical reflection, cultural research, and his own experience to develop principles and practices for multi-cultural leadership.
Part I. Multicultural Leadership in the Worldwide Church. In this section, Jim gives examples of the joys and challenges of working and leading cross-culturally.
Chapter 1. Leadership for a New Day in World Missions
“I’ve heard youth pastors tell their mission team, ‘Just be yourself, and everyone will love you.’ This is a formula for crosscultural disaster.” (21). Everyone is doing missions. Is this “the democratization of missions” or “the amateurization of missions?”
“The slogan ‘from everywhere to everywhere’ has become a reality where missionaries are sent from nearly every country of the world into hundreds of crosscultural settings.” (25)
“The very concept of ‘partnership’ is loaded with cultural expectations that can puzzle both sides of the agreement.” (26) “…we must look afresh at hidden assumptions about cultural values regarding leadership while we pursue biblical principles that affirm and challenge these values.” (28)
Chapter 3. Why Crosscultural Leadership?
“Missions is the crosscultural task of making disciples of Jesus.” (47) “The ultimate vision is God’s glory in the worldwide church….” “The path… [includes] five stages: pre-evangelism, evangelism, church planting, leadership development and partnering in world missions.” (47) “Leadership development has always been at the heart of God’s redemption plan. Jesus taught and healed the sick, but his lasting ministry came from the training of the twelve disciples.” (55)
Part II. Leadership and Culture. This section summaries research on the impact of culture on leadership worldviews, values, and practices.
Chapter 4. Leadership, Cultural Values and the Bible
“An understanding of cultural values and biblical leadership principles may not guarantee harmonious relationships, but it is a healthy first step.” (64)
1. Uncover your own unconscious cultural values. We unconsciously assume everyone thinks like we do. They don’t.
2. Discover the cultural values of others. Realize that others also hold values they naively assume to be universal.
3. Look for biblical principles of leadership in all of Scripture. Go beyond finding verses that support your style. Look for a synthesis of principles. Too many leadership books are secular books with verses.
“The image of God can be found in every culture, but the effects of our depravity are also evident. Leadership styles in every culture have the potential of reflecting good or evil in the heart of the leader. Leaders in every culture tend toward the sin of pride.” (65)
We should view our own assumptions with suspicion but neither should we romanticize leadership styles of other cultures.
“The worldview of a culture describes deep philosophical assumptions about the purpose of life and the nature of reality. Cultural practices are the externals, the things we can see, hear, smell, taste or touch: architecture, music, food, clothing, language, transportation and hair style. But in between are values, cultural ideals that link abstract philosophy to concrete practices. For instance, if the worldview of a culture is materialism, we might observe the practice of people in a hurry, doing a lot of things to make money. Tying together worldview and practice we could hypothesize inner values of efficiency, time as money, and business goals trumping personal relationship.” (71) “From my experience, the greatest difficulties in multicultural leadership arise from tensions growing out of internal values.” (71)
“Globalization might make us look more alike on the outside, but localization reinforces the deepest inner being of our identities.” (73) “We may think we understand leaders in other cultures when in fact our ignorance can cause serious misunderstandings.” (73)
Chapter 5. Leadership and Context
Some cultures tune in to subtle innuendoes of meaning and others don’t. “A high-context (HC) communication or message is one in which most of the information is either in the physical context or internalized in the person, while very little is in the coded, explicit, transmitted part of the message.” (78, quoting Beyond Culture by Edward T. Hall) “In low-context cultures, people pay special attention to explicit communication and to ideas.” (78) They are immersed in the world of concepts, principles and ideas. “Tension and confusion between cultures arises in the hidden messages enfolded in the context. Low-context communication can seem cold and uncaring to people in high-context cultures, and high-context communication can seem baffling or even dishonest to idea-oriented people.” (79)
“Direct communication seems to be the proper way of handling conflict in a low-context culture, but it can bring shame in a high-context culture. Low-context cultures tend to speak truth directly rather than seeking to protect relationships. In high-context cultures, truth is spoken in much more subtle forms, seeking above all to preserve relationships.” (81)
Chapter 6. Leadership and Power
“Some cultures assume a large status gap between those who have power and those who don’t. In these cultures, both leaders and followers assume that the power gap is natural and good. These societies are called high-power-distance cultures.” (92) The leader has special privileges and can make unilateral decisions and expect unquestioned obedience. (95) Low-power-distance cultures expect a more consultative approach to leadership. The leader is one of the team.
This often results in conflicting expectations for cross-cultural partnerships, sharing resources, and multicultural teams. “Power distance is a theological and practical paradox. We are often reminded in Scripture both to respect those in authority over us and to submit mutually to one another….” (107)
Chapter 7. Leadership and Individualism
Does the community serve the individual or does the individual serve the community? If you work on a ministry team, do you expect to fit into, report to, and serve the ministry of the team? Or do you expect the team to serve you and assist your ministry? Does the team leader make the decisions or is that person just one of the team?
In collectivistic cultures harmony is important. A public show of displeasure results in shame and must be avoided. In an individualistic culture, personal self-respect is a driving force and a person’s conscience makes him feel guilt. An understanding of the role of the team may differ radically between cultures and misunderstandings arise when individualistic leaders motivate by praising the individual in a collectivist culture.
In a collectivist society, an employer hires from an in-group someone who gives loyalty for protection. The relationship is one of family. You would not dismiss a person for poor performance any more than you would dismiss your child. Evaluation measures the group, not the individual. The task is not more important than relationships. Collectivism exhibits a sense of belonging and living for others. But it creates an us-them mentality wherein one respects his own family or group but may treat those outside as inferior or as the enemy.
Chapter 8. Leadership and Ambiguity
“For some societies, ambiguity is a serious problem… Leaders…avoid uncertainty by attempting to predict and control the future. They set precise goals, make long-range plans, schedule appointments, design contingency plans, purchase insurance, make to-do lists and develop thick policy manuals. But not every society fears uncertainty. Leaders learn to live with ambiguity and with a laid-back attitude toward life. Communities with little desire to avoid uncertainty are puzzled by the stressful ways of those who do. On the other hand, leaders with a low tolerance for ambiguity can’t understand the ‘whatever will be, will be’ attitude toward life.” (128-29) Scripture supports both trusting and planning. It is helpful to see the dilemma as fruitful tension.
Organizational structure reflects uncertainty concerns and becomes an issue when partnering among different cultures. Greater decentralization is required for multicultural organizations. However, too great a decentralization risks losing the vision and core values. There is often a mismatch of values between those setting specific goals and those they seek to serve. Goals framed in terms of purpose and a broad vision may be more suitable than those with projected numbers and dates. The fastest growing churches in the world don’t set precise goals and numerical criteria. The values of each culture have strengths and weaknesses.
Part III. Contextualizing Leadership. This section describes a model for integrating theology with leadership theory. Those who have studied under Jim will recognize the Frankena boxes.
Chapter 9. A Theology of Leadership
Multicultural leaders must be able to shift their leadership approach according to the situation. Too often they assume their cultural assumptions about leadership are both biblical and universal. “Cultural insights describe what the leadership values are, but theology tells us what they should be.” (157) We look to Scripture for the purpose, worldview, goals, methods, and practice of leadership. The ultimate purpose and worldview should be similar in all cultures. Cultural differences should show up in goals and methods.
Purpose. “Godly leadership exists to promote God’s ultimate purpose for the individual, the world and himself.” (159) However, we tend to let other values slip into the purpose category. “The final evaluation of leadership and of organizations is whether our efforts, programs, finances, structures and leadership style bring glory to God?” (161)
Worldview. “All the problems in the world are directly or indirectly caused by sin, and Jesus is the only solution to the sin problem. Poverty, war, greed, oppression and sickness are the result of the fallen world, so the most competent leader in the world cannot solve any major problem without the gospel of Jesus.” (163)
Chapter 10. A Theory of Leadership
A theory is a mental picture of why things work the way they do. Some are informal guesses. “Excellent leadership theory must grow out of good theology and be echoed in the actual practice of leadership.” (171) “Possibly the greatest temptation for leaders is to turn a secondary task into the ultimate one.” (174) “Older leadership theory assumed that the work of leaders was to accomplish a task through people…but…Effective leaders use the task to develop people.” (179)
“The majority of books on leadership, both Christian and secular, teach techniques on how to grow the organization, without taking the time to reflect on the eternal task of developing people.” “Focusing on methods divorced from theological reflection is hazardous.” (181) “Because of vast cultural differences, it is not possible to describe methods of leadership that are appropriate in every culture.” (183)
Part IV. Global Leadership in Practice. This section applies biblical and cultural insights to practical issues in missions.
Chapter 11. Developing Vision and Strategy
“The greatest danger for any organization…is that leaders will lose their vision while becoming proficient at strategies…. Too often the activity replaces the outcome; the strategy replaces the vision.” (187)
Jim presents three leadership metaphors. The factory metaphor is an assembly line representing the behaviorist model with high value on precision, quantitative goals, predictability, efficiency and control. We aim for what we can measure. The wildflower metaphor emphasizes intuitive personal experience, emotions and dramatic demonstrations of God’s power. It is a go-with-the-flow approach. The pilgrim metaphor pursues a vision with a sense of directions but allows for unexpected twists and turns and serendipitous opportunities.
In visionary planning the leader must a) collect and focus the vision, b) examine the situation, and c) make sure that every strategy contributes to the vision in light of the needs and opportunities of the situation.
“Vision comes through the study of Scripture, prayer and dialogue. It comes through eyes of faith, glimpsing a picture of the future when God will fulfill his purposes. It originates from Holy Spirit-motivated passion to follow God’s vision. Vision is from God and is a faith-picture of what could happen in the lives of people if God were to pour out his blessing.” (192)
The situation is where we are now. Do our programs help solve real and important problems in our present situation? Leaders must be realistic. The situation is always changing. Therefore programs need to change.
Strategy is how we get there, like stepping stones across the river. The vision is the far shore. There is a natural tendency for strategies to migrate into the place of vision.
“The pilgrim leader challenges high-context people to work toward a more definite ‘faith picture’ of results, and encourages the low-context leader to be more open to unexpected outcomes. He or she will seek to sharpen the strategic focus of high-context leaders, while helping low-context leaders to be more open to unfolding opportunities resulting from serendipitous changes. The pilgrim leader will help low-context team members to appreciate insights from an instinctive analysis of the situation, and help high-context team members to appreciate insights from a more objective analysis of the situation.” (199)
Chapter 12. Developing Global Leaders
“Jesus spend three years on earth developing disciples, or followers—not leaders.” (200) Even the best seminary education plays only a secondary role in developing leaders. The gifting of the Spirit and leadership experience are the primary means for developing leaders.” (202) “It would be absurd to expect that a foreign ‘expert’ could teach a leadership course in Nigeria without an understanding of the traditional cultural assumptions about how leaders are developed.” (204)
“The primary stimulus for human development is problems—life challenges and situations that don’t make sense. Disequilibration is the motor that drives leadership development.” “We develop when our world is shaken, when our comfort zone of certainty is challenged.” (204-05)
The most influential leaders have the widest horizons. One of the primary tasks of leadership development is fostering the growth of wider perspectives. “The global-centric leader will look out for the good of the individual, family, clan and nation, within the context of the bigger picture.” (207)
In any culture four steps help develop leaders: “Seek out people with high leadership potential. Assess their current strengths and weaknesses. Challenge them with tasks that are slightly beyond their comfort zone. Support them in the tasks.” (208)
Leading Across Cultures
Effective Ministry and Mission in the Global Church
James E. Plueddemann
IVP Academic, 2009, 230 pp. ISBN 978-0-8308-2578-3
Jim Plueddemann is chair of the mission and evangelism department at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. He previously spent a number of years as a missionary educator in Nigeria, taught at Wheaton Graduate School, and served as international director of SIM. Leaders from around the world are partnering in ministry but there is continuing frustration from the clash of leadership expectations originating in cultural values. We are often blind to our own hidden assumptions and others are blind to theirs. Jim draws on biblical reflection, cultural research, and his own experience to develop principles and practices for multi-cultural leadership.
Part I. Multicultural Leadership in the Worldwide Church. In this section, Jim gives examples of the joys and challenges of working and leading cross-culturally.
Chapter 1. Leadership for a New Day in World Missions
“I’ve heard youth pastors tell their mission team, ‘Just be yourself, and everyone will love you.’ This is a formula for crosscultural disaster.” (21). Everyone is doing missions. Is this “the democratization of missions” or “the amateurization of missions?”
“The slogan ‘from everywhere to everywhere’ has become a reality where missionaries are sent from nearly every country of the world into hundreds of crosscultural settings.” (25)
“The very concept of ‘partnership’ is loaded with cultural expectations that can puzzle both sides of the agreement.” (26) “…we must look afresh at hidden assumptions about cultural values regarding leadership while we pursue biblical principles that affirm and challenge these values.” (28)
Chapter 3. Why Crosscultural Leadership?
“Missions is the crosscultural task of making disciples of Jesus.” (47) “The ultimate vision is God’s glory in the worldwide church….” “The path… [includes] five stages: pre-evangelism, evangelism, church planting, leadership development and partnering in world missions.” (47) “Leadership development has always been at the heart of God’s redemption plan. Jesus taught and healed the sick, but his lasting ministry came from the training of the twelve disciples.” (55)
Part II. Leadership and Culture. This section summaries research on the impact of culture on leadership worldviews, values, and practices.
Chapter 4. Leadership, Cultural Values and the Bible
“An understanding of cultural values and biblical leadership principles may not guarantee harmonious relationships, but it is a healthy first step.” (64)
1. Uncover your own unconscious cultural values. We unconsciously assume everyone thinks like we do. They don’t.
2. Discover the cultural values of others. Realize that others also hold values they naively assume to be universal.
3. Look for biblical principles of leadership in all of Scripture. Go beyond finding verses that support your style. Look for a synthesis of principles. Too many leadership books are secular books with verses.
“The image of God can be found in every culture, but the effects of our depravity are also evident. Leadership styles in every culture have the potential of reflecting good or evil in the heart of the leader. Leaders in every culture tend toward the sin of pride.” (65)
We should view our own assumptions with suspicion but neither should we romanticize leadership styles of other cultures.
“The worldview of a culture describes deep philosophical assumptions about the purpose of life and the nature of reality. Cultural practices are the externals, the things we can see, hear, smell, taste or touch: architecture, music, food, clothing, language, transportation and hair style. But in between are values, cultural ideals that link abstract philosophy to concrete practices. For instance, if the worldview of a culture is materialism, we might observe the practice of people in a hurry, doing a lot of things to make money. Tying together worldview and practice we could hypothesize inner values of efficiency, time as money, and business goals trumping personal relationship.” (71) “From my experience, the greatest difficulties in multicultural leadership arise from tensions growing out of internal values.” (71)
“Globalization might make us look more alike on the outside, but localization reinforces the deepest inner being of our identities.” (73) “We may think we understand leaders in other cultures when in fact our ignorance can cause serious misunderstandings.” (73)
Chapter 5. Leadership and Context
Some cultures tune in to subtle innuendoes of meaning and others don’t. “A high-context (HC) communication or message is one in which most of the information is either in the physical context or internalized in the person, while very little is in the coded, explicit, transmitted part of the message.” (78, quoting Beyond Culture by Edward T. Hall) “In low-context cultures, people pay special attention to explicit communication and to ideas.” (78) They are immersed in the world of concepts, principles and ideas. “Tension and confusion between cultures arises in the hidden messages enfolded in the context. Low-context communication can seem cold and uncaring to people in high-context cultures, and high-context communication can seem baffling or even dishonest to idea-oriented people.” (79)
“Direct communication seems to be the proper way of handling conflict in a low-context culture, but it can bring shame in a high-context culture. Low-context cultures tend to speak truth directly rather than seeking to protect relationships. In high-context cultures, truth is spoken in much more subtle forms, seeking above all to preserve relationships.” (81)
Chapter 6. Leadership and Power
“Some cultures assume a large status gap between those who have power and those who don’t. In these cultures, both leaders and followers assume that the power gap is natural and good. These societies are called high-power-distance cultures.” (92) The leader has special privileges and can make unilateral decisions and expect unquestioned obedience. (95) Low-power-distance cultures expect a more consultative approach to leadership. The leader is one of the team.
This often results in conflicting expectations for cross-cultural partnerships, sharing resources, and multicultural teams. “Power distance is a theological and practical paradox. We are often reminded in Scripture both to respect those in authority over us and to submit mutually to one another….” (107)
Chapter 7. Leadership and Individualism
Does the community serve the individual or does the individual serve the community? If you work on a ministry team, do you expect to fit into, report to, and serve the ministry of the team? Or do you expect the team to serve you and assist your ministry? Does the team leader make the decisions or is that person just one of the team?
In collectivistic cultures harmony is important. A public show of displeasure results in shame and must be avoided. In an individualistic culture, personal self-respect is a driving force and a person’s conscience makes him feel guilt. An understanding of the role of the team may differ radically between cultures and misunderstandings arise when individualistic leaders motivate by praising the individual in a collectivist culture.
In a collectivist society, an employer hires from an in-group someone who gives loyalty for protection. The relationship is one of family. You would not dismiss a person for poor performance any more than you would dismiss your child. Evaluation measures the group, not the individual. The task is not more important than relationships. Collectivism exhibits a sense of belonging and living for others. But it creates an us-them mentality wherein one respects his own family or group but may treat those outside as inferior or as the enemy.
Chapter 8. Leadership and Ambiguity
“For some societies, ambiguity is a serious problem… Leaders…avoid uncertainty by attempting to predict and control the future. They set precise goals, make long-range plans, schedule appointments, design contingency plans, purchase insurance, make to-do lists and develop thick policy manuals. But not every society fears uncertainty. Leaders learn to live with ambiguity and with a laid-back attitude toward life. Communities with little desire to avoid uncertainty are puzzled by the stressful ways of those who do. On the other hand, leaders with a low tolerance for ambiguity can’t understand the ‘whatever will be, will be’ attitude toward life.” (128-29) Scripture supports both trusting and planning. It is helpful to see the dilemma as fruitful tension.
Organizational structure reflects uncertainty concerns and becomes an issue when partnering among different cultures. Greater decentralization is required for multicultural organizations. However, too great a decentralization risks losing the vision and core values. There is often a mismatch of values between those setting specific goals and those they seek to serve. Goals framed in terms of purpose and a broad vision may be more suitable than those with projected numbers and dates. The fastest growing churches in the world don’t set precise goals and numerical criteria. The values of each culture have strengths and weaknesses.
Part III. Contextualizing Leadership. This section describes a model for integrating theology with leadership theory. Those who have studied under Jim will recognize the Frankena boxes.
Chapter 9. A Theology of Leadership
Multicultural leaders must be able to shift their leadership approach according to the situation. Too often they assume their cultural assumptions about leadership are both biblical and universal. “Cultural insights describe what the leadership values are, but theology tells us what they should be.” (157) We look to Scripture for the purpose, worldview, goals, methods, and practice of leadership. The ultimate purpose and worldview should be similar in all cultures. Cultural differences should show up in goals and methods.
Purpose. “Godly leadership exists to promote God’s ultimate purpose for the individual, the world and himself.” (159) However, we tend to let other values slip into the purpose category. “The final evaluation of leadership and of organizations is whether our efforts, programs, finances, structures and leadership style bring glory to God?” (161)
Worldview. “All the problems in the world are directly or indirectly caused by sin, and Jesus is the only solution to the sin problem. Poverty, war, greed, oppression and sickness are the result of the fallen world, so the most competent leader in the world cannot solve any major problem without the gospel of Jesus.” (163)
Chapter 10. A Theory of Leadership
A theory is a mental picture of why things work the way they do. Some are informal guesses. “Excellent leadership theory must grow out of good theology and be echoed in the actual practice of leadership.” (171) “Possibly the greatest temptation for leaders is to turn a secondary task into the ultimate one.” (174) “Older leadership theory assumed that the work of leaders was to accomplish a task through people…but…Effective leaders use the task to develop people.” (179)
“The majority of books on leadership, both Christian and secular, teach techniques on how to grow the organization, without taking the time to reflect on the eternal task of developing people.” “Focusing on methods divorced from theological reflection is hazardous.” (181) “Because of vast cultural differences, it is not possible to describe methods of leadership that are appropriate in every culture.” (183)
Part IV. Global Leadership in Practice. This section applies biblical and cultural insights to practical issues in missions.
Chapter 11. Developing Vision and Strategy
“The greatest danger for any organization…is that leaders will lose their vision while becoming proficient at strategies…. Too often the activity replaces the outcome; the strategy replaces the vision.” (187)
Jim presents three leadership metaphors. The factory metaphor is an assembly line representing the behaviorist model with high value on precision, quantitative goals, predictability, efficiency and control. We aim for what we can measure. The wildflower metaphor emphasizes intuitive personal experience, emotions and dramatic demonstrations of God’s power. It is a go-with-the-flow approach. The pilgrim metaphor pursues a vision with a sense of directions but allows for unexpected twists and turns and serendipitous opportunities.
In visionary planning the leader must a) collect and focus the vision, b) examine the situation, and c) make sure that every strategy contributes to the vision in light of the needs and opportunities of the situation.
“Vision comes through the study of Scripture, prayer and dialogue. It comes through eyes of faith, glimpsing a picture of the future when God will fulfill his purposes. It originates from Holy Spirit-motivated passion to follow God’s vision. Vision is from God and is a faith-picture of what could happen in the lives of people if God were to pour out his blessing.” (192)
The situation is where we are now. Do our programs help solve real and important problems in our present situation? Leaders must be realistic. The situation is always changing. Therefore programs need to change.
Strategy is how we get there, like stepping stones across the river. The vision is the far shore. There is a natural tendency for strategies to migrate into the place of vision.
“The pilgrim leader challenges high-context people to work toward a more definite ‘faith picture’ of results, and encourages the low-context leader to be more open to unexpected outcomes. He or she will seek to sharpen the strategic focus of high-context leaders, while helping low-context leaders to be more open to unfolding opportunities resulting from serendipitous changes. The pilgrim leader will help low-context team members to appreciate insights from an instinctive analysis of the situation, and help high-context team members to appreciate insights from a more objective analysis of the situation.” (199)
Chapter 12. Developing Global Leaders
“Jesus spend three years on earth developing disciples, or followers—not leaders.” (200) Even the best seminary education plays only a secondary role in developing leaders. The gifting of the Spirit and leadership experience are the primary means for developing leaders.” (202) “It would be absurd to expect that a foreign ‘expert’ could teach a leadership course in Nigeria without an understanding of the traditional cultural assumptions about how leaders are developed.” (204)
“The primary stimulus for human development is problems—life challenges and situations that don’t make sense. Disequilibration is the motor that drives leadership development.” “We develop when our world is shaken, when our comfort zone of certainty is challenged.” (204-05)
The most influential leaders have the widest horizons. One of the primary tasks of leadership development is fostering the growth of wider perspectives. “The global-centric leader will look out for the good of the individual, family, clan and nation, within the context of the bigger picture.” (207)
In any culture four steps help develop leaders: “Seek out people with high leadership potential. Assess their current strengths and weaknesses. Challenge them with tasks that are slightly beyond their comfort zone. Support them in the tasks.” (208)
Michael Jackson, Shutter Island, Jesus and Ambiguity
1. what we build is an unfinished project
2. we need to build anticipating that what we build will eventually taken apart (and that's ok).
3. what we build is a contribution not the solution.
There are no everlasting edifices - only everlasting life.
- Grant Osborne
In its grammar, the prepositions in Greek were added to clarify the initial ambiguity. It is wrong to fear ambiguity. Dispelling ambiguity may not be only a Western agenda but it is definitely a foundational agenda for the Western world. We have done it through dogma, rationalism, literalism, partisanship and hero worship. The anxiety of ambiguity should be given to Christ, not to a doctrine, a rational argument, a leader, a pattern of self-control, etc... Once the control of ambiguity is given to anything else other than Christ, that choice becomes idolatry. In reverse, we shouldn't hide behind ambiguity and elevate it up to a position of the end-all answer to find recluse in while the world goes to pot around us. Either way, the predominant issue is more that the fear of ambiguity has such a grip on us.
Films such as Shutter Island and Fight Club, do give us some answers but also leave us asking more questions and leaving us in a state of irresolution concerning certain aspects of these films. Ecclesiastes and Job in the Old Testament do the same thing for us as well as the book of Revelation in the New Testament. All of these books have some answers but they leave us with more questions. Though there is some resolution, irresolution is actually created by the end of these texts, an irresolution that the authors, directors and producers were all comfortable with. We are also called to be comfortable with this ambiguity as well - because whether we like it or not - our world is much more ambiguous than we want to accept.
If we are to be comfortable with the tension of ambiguity, then what do we do with that tension when being comfortable is not necessarily that easy? Or what do we do with this tension when it hasn't been practiced consistently in our lives prior to realizing this and why is there a picture of Jesus holding the body of Michael Jackson in this post?
Saturday, July 10, 2010
Should Muslims be allowed to build mosques in the neighborhood of their choosing?
This is incredible - thank you Jon Stewart!
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| Wish You Weren't Here | ||||
| ||||
Was Adam a historical figure? Is Genesis opposed to evolution - short videos to begin the conversation...
The BioLogos Foundation has provided a list of short videos on its site here in order to help people discover how their faith and Science can be reconciled. This path will require viewing and interpreting Scripture differently than we have historically and traditionally done. Take a peek at a few of the short comments by noted scholars such as Greg Boyd, N.T. Wright, Peter Enns, Os Guinness and John Walton. One such interview in the mix done by a noted Old Testament Scholar, Bruce Waltke, actually got him "fired" (though he agreed to resign overnight) from a renowned Reformed Seminary. He was quickly scooped up by a scholarly community that appreciated his work and influence and will benefit greatly from his scholarship. Thank you to Peter Enns for his contribution and courage to also be "dismissed" agreeably from another Reformed Seminary for his stance on some foundational issues in Christian belief.
Truth is a direction, a pilgrimage and a relationship, not a destination or a static list of propositions that encapsulate reality within the scope and brevity of human language and capacity for knowing. Basically humanity is limited for many reasons in the apprehension of the good, right and true and we need all the help we can get, especially when we think that our understanding of the world is right. We camp out in our nomadic tents of certainty when we should journey ever longingly for the palace of unending intimacy and divine discovery.
Truth is a direction, a pilgrimage and a relationship, not a destination or a static list of propositions that encapsulate reality within the scope and brevity of human language and capacity for knowing. Basically humanity is limited for many reasons in the apprehension of the good, right and true and we need all the help we can get, especially when we think that our understanding of the world is right. We camp out in our nomadic tents of certainty when we should journey ever longingly for the palace of unending intimacy and divine discovery.
Religion owes Science a Big Apology. Marilynne Robinson tells us why!
Marilynne Robinson, author of Absence of Mind: The Dispelling of Inwardness from the Modern Myth of the Self , argues that Religion and Science were never meant to be separate. They need to end their separation and renew their vows. My understanding of this issue is that they were always meant to be together but the reality is that historically, Religion was the overbearing and abusive partner who didn't give space or credibility to the place of Science in their relationship. For too long, Science had been the dominated and submissive voice in the Western world. Through the Enlightenment, Science began to find its own identity and voice without the shroud of Religion and as it has happened many times before, the pendulum swung too far in the opposite direction so that now we find ourselves in a world where certain proponents of Science wants to dominate and disband all Religious voices and identity.
Ultimately, this has a psychological dimension. The two need to go to therapy together and figure their stuff out. The truth is, if a one-sided relationship exists for two long between two equal partners, relational reality has a way of correcting itself. The solution is for the dominant partner to make space and time for the "other" to find their identity, embrace their capacity and exist in the relationship as a full fledged partner, both sitting at the table of intimate communion, joyful collaboration and respectful dialogue. This is the best description of oneness - wherein two or more members are distinct in their identity and capacity for contribution but at the same time ultimately united and embracing the new identity that their distinct and previously separate identities forged.
The oneness that is created by two distinct identities communing together and forming a bond is a oneness that is ultimately a mystery for us to understand. That mystery, though difficult to understand, is still a reality and a truth that can be trusted without necessarily verifying its existence through empirical evidence or rational analytics. That best describes the relationship between Faith and Rationality, Religion and Science, the Natural and the Supernatural. We must embrace the tension of that reality and allow time and delightful discovery to slowly unveil the pre-existing union that both Science and Religion have shared in secret for millenia.
Religion owes Science a Big Apology.
Religion should have provided the time and space for Science to define itself in the relationship in order for true health and intimate communion to take place. Religion didn't know where it ended and Science began and as a result broke through and stepped upon the boundaries that were needed to keep one partner from overwhelming, subsuming, fearing and eventually alienating the other.
So Science has needed its time of separation for many reasons that are healthy and part of natural development that exists in holistic and healthy relational dynamics. The Bible says that God hates divorce. Nobody likes divorce but obviously at times its necessary. What God does understand we need more often in extreme situations is separation. Separation brings perspective, it makes room for respect, it reminds, and it has the ability to renew relationships that otherwise would go on unchecked.
God himself "separated" from Israel in his covenant relationship with them. He never divorced them, but through their abuse of his love, denial of his presence and unfaithfulness, he chose to do the best thing for both of them and separated. The paraphrased version of this is "you are no longer my people and I am no longer your God." This gave them the self-inflicted consequences that were required for them to be reminded of the only true love that ever loved them and what it took to remain faithful to him. In spite of their unfaithfulness, God showed his unending love by remaining faithful, even in the face of their prostitution. But one thing he didn't do was choose divorce - he chose separation. This, at times, is a necessary path on the journey of covenant. In fact, separation can represent an aspect of covenant faithfulness.
Covenanting with another isn't just about commitment, it's more fundamentally about being committed to the commitment. A covenant of faithfulness and love is based upon the foundations of love, selflessness, awareness, dignity, respect, etc... If these values are not being practiced, ignored or being relegated by either one or both members of a covenant, then separation is a likely path to healing between these two, if patterns of destructiveness carry on for too long.
Separation is actually a way to be faithful to the covenant
Therefore separation can represent a healthy break in the spiraling and destructive patterns that many relationships find themselves in. Separation is designed to shock either one or both members of a covenant back to the reality and the foundations that formed their covenant.
It's not the first solution and should be a last resort that has been communicated prior to making the decision (unless there is imminent danger to life), but at times may still be necessary.
We all can easily forget to love as we promised but for some, a shock to their system due to a prolonged and unequal time of one-sided and selfish expectations, may require a separation. At that point, the member or members of the covenant have a choice to re-engage who they love with what their covenant requires for health, or they can continue in their self-destructive patterns apart from the direct effect it will have on their partner, albeit that the effect of separation is always painful for both members in some way or another, directly or indirectly.
So the question is, if separation is necessary, is there a member of the covenant who is more at fault than the other? The answer is yes and no. Both members could be spiraling into destructive and selfish patterns that are ill-effecting the other. Both of them could have possibly conceived of ways to lie to themselves about whether or not they are responsible or whether or not their partner is at fault. But there are times when one member has been more unfitted in their love and respect of the other or just outright abusive without regard, respect or love for their covenant or for their partner.
The separation between Science and Religion was mostly the fault of Religion. The Copernican Revolution to the age of Darwin and for centuries prior, has awaited this separation. It was inevitable and necessary. Religion had been too ignorant, self-focused and unyielding in its fear, self-preservation and power-mongering for too long. Now, at least in the Western World, Religion is getting a dose of its own medicine and of course, doesn't like it. The corrective may take longer than we like but the principle stands: The longer a pendulum is pushed in one direction, the longer it will be required to correct it. The time doesn't have to be as long to form the corrective but the measures to do so may be.
What we can all hope for is that the eyes of each side will be open to their longing for each other, a longing that can only be satisfied, embraced and protected in a covenant relationship. We hope that they would bathe their conversation in love, a universal love value that all humanity agrees is the path to truth and reconciliation. Love keeps no record of wrongs and so our hope is that Science will forgive, though not forget because that is unnatural and unnecessary and ultimately unscientific. Our truest hope will be that Science will keep no records of Religion's wrongs and finally experience the bliss of intimate union, synergistic collaboration and covenant faithfulness.
So what is our place? Well, we are not to endorse or propagate a prolonged separation, we are especially not to promote a call for divorce and we are to never ignore the reality of the pain endured and incurred or make space to repeat it. As reconciliars, we are here to help cultivate the gardens of the other, to cultivate an environment for renewal, for transformed space and for graceful understanding, always remembering that we too have or may need to in the future, experience a painful yet necessary rupture for the health and well-being of our community. Don't promote divorce, don't prolong separation, yet at the same time take steps towards regarding the other in your own life so as to not bring oneself to the point of necessary rupture - no-one is exempt.
Make space for Religion and for Science to be wed once again and more deeply than ever before in your heart and in the hearts and minds of all those whom you have the care of. Recognize which side of the line we may fall on due to our tradition, family line, history, beliefs and convictions - then we are to take steps to bridge the chasms that others may have created for us, though we may have participated. Our call is to embrace mystery and discovery in the same moment, only to realize that in so doing we have participated in and embodied a unity that has always existed. Religion has always been a part of discovery in Science and discovery in Science should have always played a part in understanding Faith. Now is a better time than ever before.
Ultimately, this has a psychological dimension. The two need to go to therapy together and figure their stuff out. The truth is, if a one-sided relationship exists for two long between two equal partners, relational reality has a way of correcting itself. The solution is for the dominant partner to make space and time for the "other" to find their identity, embrace their capacity and exist in the relationship as a full fledged partner, both sitting at the table of intimate communion, joyful collaboration and respectful dialogue. This is the best description of oneness - wherein two or more members are distinct in their identity and capacity for contribution but at the same time ultimately united and embracing the new identity that their distinct and previously separate identities forged.
The oneness that is created by two distinct identities communing together and forming a bond is a oneness that is ultimately a mystery for us to understand. That mystery, though difficult to understand, is still a reality and a truth that can be trusted without necessarily verifying its existence through empirical evidence or rational analytics. That best describes the relationship between Faith and Rationality, Religion and Science, the Natural and the Supernatural. We must embrace the tension of that reality and allow time and delightful discovery to slowly unveil the pre-existing union that both Science and Religion have shared in secret for millenia.
Religion owes Science a Big Apology.
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| Marilynne Robinson | ||||
| ||||
Religion should have provided the time and space for Science to define itself in the relationship in order for true health and intimate communion to take place. Religion didn't know where it ended and Science began and as a result broke through and stepped upon the boundaries that were needed to keep one partner from overwhelming, subsuming, fearing and eventually alienating the other.
So Science has needed its time of separation for many reasons that are healthy and part of natural development that exists in holistic and healthy relational dynamics. The Bible says that God hates divorce. Nobody likes divorce but obviously at times its necessary. What God does understand we need more often in extreme situations is separation. Separation brings perspective, it makes room for respect, it reminds, and it has the ability to renew relationships that otherwise would go on unchecked.
God himself "separated" from Israel in his covenant relationship with them. He never divorced them, but through their abuse of his love, denial of his presence and unfaithfulness, he chose to do the best thing for both of them and separated. The paraphrased version of this is "you are no longer my people and I am no longer your God." This gave them the self-inflicted consequences that were required for them to be reminded of the only true love that ever loved them and what it took to remain faithful to him. In spite of their unfaithfulness, God showed his unending love by remaining faithful, even in the face of their prostitution. But one thing he didn't do was choose divorce - he chose separation. This, at times, is a necessary path on the journey of covenant. In fact, separation can represent an aspect of covenant faithfulness.
Covenanting with another isn't just about commitment, it's more fundamentally about being committed to the commitment. A covenant of faithfulness and love is based upon the foundations of love, selflessness, awareness, dignity, respect, etc... If these values are not being practiced, ignored or being relegated by either one or both members of a covenant, then separation is a likely path to healing between these two, if patterns of destructiveness carry on for too long.
Separation is actually a way to be faithful to the covenant
Therefore separation can represent a healthy break in the spiraling and destructive patterns that many relationships find themselves in. Separation is designed to shock either one or both members of a covenant back to the reality and the foundations that formed their covenant.
It's not the first solution and should be a last resort that has been communicated prior to making the decision (unless there is imminent danger to life), but at times may still be necessary.
We all can easily forget to love as we promised but for some, a shock to their system due to a prolonged and unequal time of one-sided and selfish expectations, may require a separation. At that point, the member or members of the covenant have a choice to re-engage who they love with what their covenant requires for health, or they can continue in their self-destructive patterns apart from the direct effect it will have on their partner, albeit that the effect of separation is always painful for both members in some way or another, directly or indirectly.
So the question is, if separation is necessary, is there a member of the covenant who is more at fault than the other? The answer is yes and no. Both members could be spiraling into destructive and selfish patterns that are ill-effecting the other. Both of them could have possibly conceived of ways to lie to themselves about whether or not they are responsible or whether or not their partner is at fault. But there are times when one member has been more unfitted in their love and respect of the other or just outright abusive without regard, respect or love for their covenant or for their partner.
The separation between Science and Religion was mostly the fault of Religion. The Copernican Revolution to the age of Darwin and for centuries prior, has awaited this separation. It was inevitable and necessary. Religion had been too ignorant, self-focused and unyielding in its fear, self-preservation and power-mongering for too long. Now, at least in the Western World, Religion is getting a dose of its own medicine and of course, doesn't like it. The corrective may take longer than we like but the principle stands: The longer a pendulum is pushed in one direction, the longer it will be required to correct it. The time doesn't have to be as long to form the corrective but the measures to do so may be.
What we can all hope for is that the eyes of each side will be open to their longing for each other, a longing that can only be satisfied, embraced and protected in a covenant relationship. We hope that they would bathe their conversation in love, a universal love value that all humanity agrees is the path to truth and reconciliation. Love keeps no record of wrongs and so our hope is that Science will forgive, though not forget because that is unnatural and unnecessary and ultimately unscientific. Our truest hope will be that Science will keep no records of Religion's wrongs and finally experience the bliss of intimate union, synergistic collaboration and covenant faithfulness.
So what is our place? Well, we are not to endorse or propagate a prolonged separation, we are especially not to promote a call for divorce and we are to never ignore the reality of the pain endured and incurred or make space to repeat it. As reconciliars, we are here to help cultivate the gardens of the other, to cultivate an environment for renewal, for transformed space and for graceful understanding, always remembering that we too have or may need to in the future, experience a painful yet necessary rupture for the health and well-being of our community. Don't promote divorce, don't prolong separation, yet at the same time take steps towards regarding the other in your own life so as to not bring oneself to the point of necessary rupture - no-one is exempt.
Make space for Religion and for Science to be wed once again and more deeply than ever before in your heart and in the hearts and minds of all those whom you have the care of. Recognize which side of the line we may fall on due to our tradition, family line, history, beliefs and convictions - then we are to take steps to bridge the chasms that others may have created for us, though we may have participated. Our call is to embrace mystery and discovery in the same moment, only to realize that in so doing we have participated in and embodied a unity that has always existed. Religion has always been a part of discovery in Science and discovery in Science should have always played a part in understanding Faith. Now is a better time than ever before.
Monday, July 05, 2010
The Stoning of Soyara M.
The latest travesty involving the stoning of a woman in Iran has been covered by CNN here.
We musn't villainize the whole country of Iran or its people. The people of Iran are amazing and are more frustrated and angry with this regime than the rest of the world is.
Watch The Stoning of Soraya M. Full Movie Trailer Online - Watch more Funny Videos
We musn't villainize the whole country of Iran or its people. The people of Iran are amazing and are more frustrated and angry with this regime than the rest of the world is.
Watch The Stoning of Soraya M. Full Movie Trailer Online - Watch more Funny Videos
Sunday, June 27, 2010
Thursday, June 24, 2010
Friday, June 18, 2010
SOCCER vs. FOOTBALL - Viewing theology as World Cup collaboration not as NBA championships
It's ironic that the NBA and the FIFA World Cup have overlapped at this juncture in history. Having won the NBA championship, Lakers' fans and everyone else turn their attention to the World Cup of Soccer. What is striking for a theologian, is that presently, the US has the opposite effect in global theology that it has in the FiFa World Cup. Soccer, as a truly "international" sport, has left the US in the dust and only recently are we catching up. Soccer, or Football as it is known internationally, hails from almost every nation on the planet. This map shows the popularity of football around the world.
The various shades of green (more) and red (less) indicate the number of players per 1,000 inhabitants indicating very strongly that the US is behind the game (literally) and in the last place group which includes countries such as Finland, Japan, Bangladesh, etc... An indictment that we can no longer evade is that we generally do theology like we do our own national sports.
The American public focuses primarily on the MLB, the NBA, and the NFL, with the NHL in tow. Interestingly, we cannot join the globe in naming soccer as it is globally call "Football" because we have reserved that name for a natinoal sport that we have created. Yet, recently a statistic came out that revealed that Americans were the largest purchasing nation of tickets for the World Cup. So, even though two decades ago the Chicago Bulls symbol was the most popular symbol on the planet at the height of their championship run in the 1990's, football emblems have taken over as the internationally renowned and recognized sports symbols of our planet. The U.S,'s recognition in Americanized symbols is fast waning both in sports and in theology. We can no longer afford to ride the wave of our hegemonic influence in the world.
We need to get back to the field and start competing, not violently, but generatively and cooperatively and realize that we may not come out on top for much longer - and that that's o.k. Many of the wounds we've inflicted both on the "other" as well on ourselves, will no longer go unchecked. Healing for the nations as well as ourselves may begin, and as a result cause our hearts to grow simply in community instead of simply growing cold in isolation.
Our historic policy of isolationism was replaced by its opposite extreme of hyper expansionism. It seems that if we cannot run the show, we go and create our own show. Without the entrance of the US into WWI and WWII, many more lives would have been lost, but the benefactor mentality that we adopted does not entail the right to neglect or disrespect the sovereignty and identity of other nations. So let's stop wearing the "world police" badge and discontinue our infantile isolationist policies and join the international communities' need for us in a way that also includes our need for them. We've gone too long hiding our national pathologies behind the wall of our perceived international strength. The pathologies have had their undue influence for too long in our theologies all the way to our foreign policies. It's time to truly need the world so that they we understand what they truly need from us. Am I being too hard on us? Well, as far as a track record, we don't have the worst record on the planet, we just get away with the most.
What if this map represented the influence that local and national (contextual) theologies had on the big picture of global theology? The question is not what if, it is when? I would like to be part of where this is going and contribute to that direction. It might take some time, but the US will soon be doing theology like they're playing Football - world Football - and the results will be astonishing. We need a dedicated group of theologians, activists, writers and organizers, much like the theologians at NAIITS (North American Institute for Indigenous Theological Studies), who will take this direction and run with it. Many already are, but the numbers are truly dismal compared to the need. The need is simple - the primary focus should be taken off of "Lakers'" theology (not because it is unhelpful) and be given to "World Cup" theology.
Some say that the US has this focus when they are in the Olympics except that the sports designated as sports within the Olympics have been distinctly and historically influenced more by the West than by the globe. Football is inherently global because of its access (save the frigid conditions of northern countries, which is easily remedied), its notoriety, its affordability, etc... Doing a local Lakers' Theology will always be necessary, but it should not be primary.
So...the answer - join the World Cup of theology. The results will blow our minds, enlarge our souls and expand our knowledge and awareness of God more than ever before in the history of our dear planet. As the voices of each country roar from its borders when their team scores or ooohingly lament at the scourge of a bad call, let us raise our voices from respective borders, roar our applause, and lament our losses in our pursuit of knowing and loving our Creator together.
The various shades of green (more) and red (less) indicate the number of players per 1,000 inhabitants indicating very strongly that the US is behind the game (literally) and in the last place group which includes countries such as Finland, Japan, Bangladesh, etc... An indictment that we can no longer evade is that we generally do theology like we do our own national sports.
The American public focuses primarily on the MLB, the NBA, and the NFL, with the NHL in tow. Interestingly, we cannot join the globe in naming soccer as it is globally call "Football" because we have reserved that name for a natinoal sport that we have created. Yet, recently a statistic came out that revealed that Americans were the largest purchasing nation of tickets for the World Cup. So, even though two decades ago the Chicago Bulls symbol was the most popular symbol on the planet at the height of their championship run in the 1990's, football emblems have taken over as the internationally renowned and recognized sports symbols of our planet. The U.S,'s recognition in Americanized symbols is fast waning both in sports and in theology. We can no longer afford to ride the wave of our hegemonic influence in the world.
We need to get back to the field and start competing, not violently, but generatively and cooperatively and realize that we may not come out on top for much longer - and that that's o.k. Many of the wounds we've inflicted both on the "other" as well on ourselves, will no longer go unchecked. Healing for the nations as well as ourselves may begin, and as a result cause our hearts to grow simply in community instead of simply growing cold in isolation.
Our historic policy of isolationism was replaced by its opposite extreme of hyper expansionism. It seems that if we cannot run the show, we go and create our own show. Without the entrance of the US into WWI and WWII, many more lives would have been lost, but the benefactor mentality that we adopted does not entail the right to neglect or disrespect the sovereignty and identity of other nations. So let's stop wearing the "world police" badge and discontinue our infantile isolationist policies and join the international communities' need for us in a way that also includes our need for them. We've gone too long hiding our national pathologies behind the wall of our perceived international strength. The pathologies have had their undue influence for too long in our theologies all the way to our foreign policies. It's time to truly need the world so that they we understand what they truly need from us. Am I being too hard on us? Well, as far as a track record, we don't have the worst record on the planet, we just get away with the most.
What if this map represented the influence that local and national (contextual) theologies had on the big picture of global theology? The question is not what if, it is when? I would like to be part of where this is going and contribute to that direction. It might take some time, but the US will soon be doing theology like they're playing Football - world Football - and the results will be astonishing. We need a dedicated group of theologians, activists, writers and organizers, much like the theologians at NAIITS (North American Institute for Indigenous Theological Studies), who will take this direction and run with it. Many already are, but the numbers are truly dismal compared to the need. The need is simple - the primary focus should be taken off of "Lakers'" theology (not because it is unhelpful) and be given to "World Cup" theology.
Some say that the US has this focus when they are in the Olympics except that the sports designated as sports within the Olympics have been distinctly and historically influenced more by the West than by the globe. Football is inherently global because of its access (save the frigid conditions of northern countries, which is easily remedied), its notoriety, its affordability, etc... Doing a local Lakers' Theology will always be necessary, but it should not be primary.
So...the answer - join the World Cup of theology. The results will blow our minds, enlarge our souls and expand our knowledge and awareness of God more than ever before in the history of our dear planet. As the voices of each country roar from its borders when their team scores or ooohingly lament at the scourge of a bad call, let us raise our voices from respective borders, roar our applause, and lament our losses in our pursuit of knowing and loving our Creator together.
Thursday, June 17, 2010
Paradox is a Pedagogy
‘Intellectual uncertainty is not necessarily or simply a negative experience, a dead-end sense of not knowing, or of indeterminacy. It is just as well an experience of something open, generative, exhilarating, (the trembling of what remains undecidable). I wish to suggest that ‘intellectual uncertainty’ is ..a crucial dimension of any teaching worthy of the name.’
(Royle 2003 : 52)
(Royle 2003 : 52)
Sunday, June 06, 2010
Immanuel Kant in 15 seconds!
I got this excerpt from a 5 minute interview BBC did with AC Grayling.
BBC- “Ok, so here’s a challenge: sum up Kant in 15 seconds.”
AC Grayling - “Well…hard one that…well what Kant said was...ah…our understanding of the world around us is in part the result of the contribution that our own cognitive capacities make; so how we see things, how we think about them, how we reason about them, plays its part in constituting the way the world seems to us and once we understand that then our understanding of the world and several of the problems unique within philosophy are resolved thereby.”
Saturday, June 05, 2010
Wednesday, June 02, 2010
Embodiment to Entrenchment
"Our outer world is not something that needs 2b brought in 2line with our inner world but is an expression of it"
-Peter Rollins
-Peter Rollins
Tuesday, June 01, 2010
Human Autonomy can kiss my...
"...If the biblical story is true, the kind of certainty proper to a human being will be one which rests on the fidelity of God, not upon the compentence of the human knower. It will be a kind of certainty which is inseparable from gratitude and trust."
- Lesslie Newbigin (Proper Confidence, 1995)
- Lesslie Newbigin (Proper Confidence, 1995)
Thursday, May 27, 2010
Don't kill 'em, just make like us
Andrea Smith's book, Conquest: Sexual Violence and American Indian Genocide, opens the eyes of those that are not blind but shrouded, the ears of those that aren't deaf but plugged, the hearts of those that are cold but not dead. It may just give a voice to not only the oppressed but also to the unaware yet passive oppressors...
There are options to solving this and it begins with open eyes, ears and hearts...
There are options to solving this and it begins with open eyes, ears and hearts...
Invisible Children Meet Obama and he's going "to do something about this issue"
President Obama signed the LRA disarmament bills today that Invisible Children and many others have worked so hard to get passed through Congress. Watch the video of their recap watching President Obama sign the bill in the Oval Office.
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Theological Fragments and an Elephant
Duncan B. Forrester, Emeritus Professor of Christian Ethics and Practical Theology in the University of Edinburgh, Scotland, has written a fantastic approach to theology in his book, Theological Fragments: explorations in unsystematic theology.
The description reads, "Forrester here develops the notion, which is partly borrowed from Kierkegaard, at greater length, also responding to post-modernism and to the so-called end of ideology. This important collection provides a coherent and engaging exploration of a fragmented topic, and the essays contained within demonstrate how fragments of insight can be illuminating and effective guides."
Drawing on the idea that no one perspective can explain what it is perceiving or what it has received comprehensively, Duncan tracks through different chapter titles like,
Theology in Fragments
The Mystery of the Human Person in Community
Good and Gay?
The Pastoral Significance of Mary: A Protestant Perspective
The End of Sacraments: Sacramental Action and Discipleship
While working through this text I was encourage and astounded by it's claim of no center but rather perspectives that should find confluence for greater clarity. Kevin Vanhoozer borrows from this idea in his chapter in Globalizing Theology: Belief and Practice in an Era of World Christianity.
It was six men of Indostan
To learning much inclined,
Who went to see the Elephant
(Though all of them were blind),
That each by observation
Might satisfy his mind.
The First approached the Elephant,
And happening to fall
Against his broad and sturdy side,
At once began to bawl:
"God bless me! but the Elephant
Is very like a wall!"
The Second, feeling of the tusk,
Cried, "Ho! what have we here
So very round and smooth and sharp?
To me 'tis mighty clear
This wonder of an Elephant
Is very like a spear!"
The Third approached the animal,
And happening to take
The squirming trunk within his hands,
Thus boldly up and spake:
"I see," quoth he, "the Elephant
Is very like a snake!"
The Fourth reached out an eager hand,
And felt about the knee.
"What most this wondrous beast is like
Is mighty plain," quoth he;
"Tis clear enough the Elephant
Is very like a tree!"
The Fifth, who chanced to touch the ear,
Said: "E'en the blindest man
Can tell what this resembles most;
Deny the fact who can
This marvel of an Elephant
Is very like a fan!"
The Sixth no sooner had begun
About the beast to grope,
Than, seizing on the swinging tail
That fell within his scope,
"I see," quoth he, "the Elephant
Is very like a rope!"
And so these men of Indostan
Disputed loud and long,
Each in his own opinion
Exceeding stiff and strong,
Though each was partly in the right,
And all were in the wrong!
So oft in theologic wars,
The disputants, I ween,
Rail on in utter ignorance
Of what each other mean,
And prate about an Elephant
Not one of them has seen!
Truth is not relative - we are relative to the Truth!
The description reads, "Forrester here develops the notion, which is partly borrowed from Kierkegaard, at greater length, also responding to post-modernism and to the so-called end of ideology. This important collection provides a coherent and engaging exploration of a fragmented topic, and the essays contained within demonstrate how fragments of insight can be illuminating and effective guides."
Theology in Fragments
The Mystery of the Human Person in Community
Good and Gay?
The Pastoral Significance of Mary: A Protestant Perspective
The End of Sacraments: Sacramental Action and Discipleship
While working through this text I was encourage and astounded by it's claim of no center but rather perspectives that should find confluence for greater clarity. Kevin Vanhoozer borrows from this idea in his chapter in Globalizing Theology: Belief and Practice in an Era of World Christianity.
Their basic premise can be summarized in the story of the blind men and the elephant,
It was six men of Indostan
To learning much inclined,
Who went to see the Elephant
(Though all of them were blind),
That each by observation
Might satisfy his mind.
The First approached the Elephant,
And happening to fall
Against his broad and sturdy side,
At once began to bawl:
"God bless me! but the Elephant
Is very like a wall!"
The Second, feeling of the tusk,
Cried, "Ho! what have we here
So very round and smooth and sharp?
To me 'tis mighty clear
This wonder of an Elephant
Is very like a spear!"
The Third approached the animal,
And happening to take
The squirming trunk within his hands,
Thus boldly up and spake:
"I see," quoth he, "the Elephant
Is very like a snake!"
The Fourth reached out an eager hand,
And felt about the knee.
"What most this wondrous beast is like
Is mighty plain," quoth he;
"Tis clear enough the Elephant
Is very like a tree!"
The Fifth, who chanced to touch the ear,
Said: "E'en the blindest man
Can tell what this resembles most;
Deny the fact who can
This marvel of an Elephant
Is very like a fan!"
The Sixth no sooner had begun
About the beast to grope,
Than, seizing on the swinging tail
That fell within his scope,
"I see," quoth he, "the Elephant
Is very like a rope!"
And so these men of Indostan
Disputed loud and long,
Each in his own opinion
Exceeding stiff and strong,
Though each was partly in the right,
And all were in the wrong!
So oft in theologic wars,
The disputants, I ween,
Rail on in utter ignorance
Of what each other mean,
And prate about an Elephant
Not one of them has seen!
Many have critiqued this poem and held it up as an example of relativism. The problem with that is that the premise of the poem is that all the men are blind and have never seen an elephant before.
In regards to theology, this explains the message of the book. There can't be one way of describing God, especially from one's cultural-linguistical-geographical context. We need the global community to do that and as such have a long way to go.
Truth is not relative - we are relative to the Truth!
Theological Butt Dust?
My sister posted this about my 4 year-old niece and her theological question in church recently,
"This particular Sunday sermon...'Dear Lord,' the minister began, with arms extended toward heaven and a rapturous look on his upturned face. 'Without you, we are but dust ...' He would have continued but at that moment my very obedient daughter who was listening leaned over to me and asked quite audibly in her shrill little four-year old girl voice, 'Mom, what is butt dust?"
"This particular Sunday sermon...'Dear Lord,' the minister began, with arms extended toward heaven and a rapturous look on his upturned face. 'Without you, we are but dust ...' He would have continued but at that moment my very obedient daughter who was listening leaned over to me and asked quite audibly in her shrill little four-year old girl voice, 'Mom, what is butt dust?"
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
"Tribes" by Seth Godin book excerpts - by www.davidmays.org
Tribes
We Need You to Lead Us
Seth Godin
Portfolio, 2008, 147 pp. ISBN 978-1-59184-233-0
Seth Godin is the author of ten international bestsellers, including Permission Marketing and Purple Cow. A tribe is any group of connected people and an idea. With barriers eliminated by the internet, those with a passion have the opportunity to lead their fellow employees, customers, investors, readers, etc. Individuals have far more power than ever before in history. Rather than chapters, the book is divided into segments of ideas, principles, and suggestions.
A tribe needs only a shared idea and a way to communicate. Plus a leader. Tribes are about belief in an idea and a community. Humans need to belong and many can’t resist the thrill of a new idea. There is an explosion of new tools to help people connect around an idea. So it’s easier to create a movement.
A leader doesn’t market to his audience or manage it or push it. He leads it.
Everyone is now a leader.
People work a lot and it is much more satisfying to work on things they believe in. Consumers are deciding to spend time and money on things they believe in.
Heretics are the new leaders. They challenge the status quo and make new rules. “Leadership…is about creating change that you believe in.” (14)
“New rule: If you want to grow, you need to find customers who are willing to join you or believe in you or donate to you or support you. And guess what? The only customers willing to do that are looking for something new. The growth comes from change and light and noise.” (18)
Messages go from leader to tribe, sideways within the tribe, and back to the leader. People are in it together. People wanted to hear the Grateful Dead “together.” “The movement happens when people talk to one another, when ideas spread within the community, and most of all, when peer support leads people to do what they always knew was the right thing.” (22)
“So a leader can help increase the effectiveness of the tribe and its members by
* Transforming the shared interest into a passionate goal and desire for change;
* Providing tools to allow members to tighten their communications; and
* Leveraging the tribe to allow it to grow and gain new members.” (25)
The ideas that spread are remarkable ones.
“An individual artist needs only a thousand true fans in her tribe. It’s enough…because a thousand fans will bring you enough attention and support to make a great living, to reach more people, to do great work.” “…the real win is turning a casual fan into a true one.” (33)
Organizations that destroy the status quo win. The status quo could be the time that ‘everyone knows’ it takes you to ship an order. Changing it gives you the opportunity to be remarkable.
Twitter doesn’t cause an event; it merely enables it to occur because of the respect and permission a tribe allows a leader.
Organizations of the future will be filled with smart, fast, flexible people on a mission. And that requires leadership. (41)
Boring ideas don’t spread. And ideas that spread, win.
Great leaders focus not on their own glory but on the tribe.
A leader may first tighten the tribe by increasing communication among them. This is more important than growing the tribe. A tribe that communicates quickly with emotion thrives.
You do not need a majority to win, only to motivate people who choose to follow you. “Through your actions as a leader, you attract a tribe that wants to follow you. That tribe has a worldview that matches the message you’re sending.” (65)
“Ultimately, people are most easily led where they wanted to go all along. While that may seem as if it limits your originality or influence, it’s true. Fox News didn’t persuade millions of people to become conservatives; they just assembled the tribe and led them where they were already headed.” (66)
“Great leaders don’t water down their message in order to make the tribe a bit bigger. Instead, they realize that a motivated, connected tribe in the midst of a movement is far more powerful than a larger group could ever be.” (67)
“Welcome to the age of leverage. Bottom-up is a really bad way to think about it because there is no bottom.” (75)
Easiest: react. Next easiest: respond. Hardest: initiate. Sometimes it makes more sense to follow. If so, get out of the way and follow.
At first, the new thing will rarely be as good as the old thing. If the new thing has to be better from the beginning, you’ll never begin. Soon enough, the new thing will be better than the old. But if you wait until then, it will be too late. The music industry refused to understand this. Industries don’t die by surprise. It’s not as if you didn’t know it was coming. (95)
The key elements in creating a micromovement:
1. Publish a manifesto.
2. Make it easy for your followers to connect with you.
3. Make it easy for your followers to connect with one another.
4. Realize that money is not the point of a movement.
5. Track your progress publicly and create pathways for your followers to contribute to that progress. (103-04)
Principles:
1. Transparency really is your only option.
2. Your movement needs to be bigger than you.
3. Movements that grow, thrive.
4. Movements are made most clear when compared to the status quo or to movements that work to push the other direction.
5. Exclude outsiders.
6. Build up your followers instead of tearing others down. (104-05)
“Tribes are the most effective media channels ever, but they’re not for sale or for rent. Tribes don’t do what you want; they do what they want.” (107)
The transactional costs of tribes are falling fast while the costs of formal organizations keep increasing.
Initiative is an astonishingly successful tool because it’s rare. (112)
“I despair for most of the top fifty nonprofits in the United States. These are the big guys, and they’re stuck. …the top charities rarely change.” (115)
“The big win is in turning donors into patrons and activists and participants. The biggest donors are the ones who not only give, but also do the work. The ones who make the soup or feed the hungry or hang the art.” (116)
“The Internet allows some organizations to embrace long-distance involvement. It lets charities flip the funnel, not through some simple hand waving but by reorganizing around the idea of engagement online. This is the new leverage. It means opening yourself up to volunteers and encouraging them to network, to connect with one another, and yes, even to mutiny. It means giving every one of your professionals a blog and the freedom to use it. It means mixing it up with volunteers so they have something truly at stake. This is understandably scary for many nonprofits, but I’m not so sure you have a choice.” (116)
“Growth doesn’t come from persuading the most loyal members of other tribes to join you. They will be the last to come around. Instead, you’ll find more fertile ground among seekers, among people who desire the feeling they get when they’re part of a vibrant, growing tribe, but who are still looking for that feeling.” (119)
There is a huge penalty for being too late.
Real leadership rarely comes from the CEO or senior VP. “Instead, it happens out of the corner of your eye, in a place you weren’t watching.” (122)
“Hope without a strategy doesn’t generate leadership. Leadership comes when your hope and your optimism are matched with a concrete vision of the future and a way to get there. People won’t follow you if they don’t believe you can get to where you say you’re going.” (122)
“Caring is the key emotion at the center of the Tribe. Tribe members care what happens, to their goals and to one another.” “If no one cares, then you have no tribe.” (125, 26)
“People what to be sure you heard what they said—they’re less focused on whether or not you do what they said.” (128)
“Tribes grow when people recruit other people. That’s how ideas spread as well. The tribe doesn’t do it for you, of course. They do it for each other. Leadership is the art of giving people a platform for spreading ideas that work.” (129)
“Part of leadership (a big part of it, actually) is the ability to stick with the dream for a long time.” (132)
“(Jerry) Sternin went to Vietnam to try to help starving children. Rather than importing tactics that he knew would work, or outside techniques that he was sure could make a difference, he sought out the few families who weren’t starving, the few moms who weren’t just getting by but were thriving. And then he made it easy for these mothers to share their insights with the rest of the group. This seems obvious, but it’s heretical. The idea that an aid worker would go to a village in trouble and not try to stamp out nonstandard behavior is crazy. ‘The traditional model for social and organization change doesn’t work, he told Fast Company. ‘It never has. You can’t bring permanent solutions in from outside.’” (133)
www.davidmays.org
We Need You to Lead Us
Seth Godin
Portfolio, 2008, 147 pp. ISBN 978-1-59184-233-0
Seth Godin is the author of ten international bestsellers, including Permission Marketing and Purple Cow. A tribe is any group of connected people and an idea. With barriers eliminated by the internet, those with a passion have the opportunity to lead their fellow employees, customers, investors, readers, etc. Individuals have far more power than ever before in history. Rather than chapters, the book is divided into segments of ideas, principles, and suggestions.
A tribe needs only a shared idea and a way to communicate. Plus a leader. Tribes are about belief in an idea and a community. Humans need to belong and many can’t resist the thrill of a new idea. There is an explosion of new tools to help people connect around an idea. So it’s easier to create a movement.
A leader doesn’t market to his audience or manage it or push it. He leads it.
Everyone is now a leader.
People work a lot and it is much more satisfying to work on things they believe in. Consumers are deciding to spend time and money on things they believe in.
Heretics are the new leaders. They challenge the status quo and make new rules. “Leadership…is about creating change that you believe in.” (14)
“New rule: If you want to grow, you need to find customers who are willing to join you or believe in you or donate to you or support you. And guess what? The only customers willing to do that are looking for something new. The growth comes from change and light and noise.” (18)
Messages go from leader to tribe, sideways within the tribe, and back to the leader. People are in it together. People wanted to hear the Grateful Dead “together.” “The movement happens when people talk to one another, when ideas spread within the community, and most of all, when peer support leads people to do what they always knew was the right thing.” (22)
“So a leader can help increase the effectiveness of the tribe and its members by
* Transforming the shared interest into a passionate goal and desire for change;
* Providing tools to allow members to tighten their communications; and
* Leveraging the tribe to allow it to grow and gain new members.” (25)
The ideas that spread are remarkable ones.
“An individual artist needs only a thousand true fans in her tribe. It’s enough…because a thousand fans will bring you enough attention and support to make a great living, to reach more people, to do great work.” “…the real win is turning a casual fan into a true one.” (33)
Organizations that destroy the status quo win. The status quo could be the time that ‘everyone knows’ it takes you to ship an order. Changing it gives you the opportunity to be remarkable.
Twitter doesn’t cause an event; it merely enables it to occur because of the respect and permission a tribe allows a leader.
Organizations of the future will be filled with smart, fast, flexible people on a mission. And that requires leadership. (41)
Boring ideas don’t spread. And ideas that spread, win.
Great leaders focus not on their own glory but on the tribe.
A leader may first tighten the tribe by increasing communication among them. This is more important than growing the tribe. A tribe that communicates quickly with emotion thrives.
You do not need a majority to win, only to motivate people who choose to follow you. “Through your actions as a leader, you attract a tribe that wants to follow you. That tribe has a worldview that matches the message you’re sending.” (65)
“Ultimately, people are most easily led where they wanted to go all along. While that may seem as if it limits your originality or influence, it’s true. Fox News didn’t persuade millions of people to become conservatives; they just assembled the tribe and led them where they were already headed.” (66)
“Great leaders don’t water down their message in order to make the tribe a bit bigger. Instead, they realize that a motivated, connected tribe in the midst of a movement is far more powerful than a larger group could ever be.” (67)
“Welcome to the age of leverage. Bottom-up is a really bad way to think about it because there is no bottom.” (75)
Easiest: react. Next easiest: respond. Hardest: initiate. Sometimes it makes more sense to follow. If so, get out of the way and follow.
At first, the new thing will rarely be as good as the old thing. If the new thing has to be better from the beginning, you’ll never begin. Soon enough, the new thing will be better than the old. But if you wait until then, it will be too late. The music industry refused to understand this. Industries don’t die by surprise. It’s not as if you didn’t know it was coming. (95)
The key elements in creating a micromovement:
1. Publish a manifesto.
2. Make it easy for your followers to connect with you.
3. Make it easy for your followers to connect with one another.
4. Realize that money is not the point of a movement.
5. Track your progress publicly and create pathways for your followers to contribute to that progress. (103-04)
Principles:
1. Transparency really is your only option.
2. Your movement needs to be bigger than you.
3. Movements that grow, thrive.
4. Movements are made most clear when compared to the status quo or to movements that work to push the other direction.
5. Exclude outsiders.
6. Build up your followers instead of tearing others down. (104-05)
“Tribes are the most effective media channels ever, but they’re not for sale or for rent. Tribes don’t do what you want; they do what they want.” (107)
The transactional costs of tribes are falling fast while the costs of formal organizations keep increasing.
Initiative is an astonishingly successful tool because it’s rare. (112)
“I despair for most of the top fifty nonprofits in the United States. These are the big guys, and they’re stuck. …the top charities rarely change.” (115)
“The big win is in turning donors into patrons and activists and participants. The biggest donors are the ones who not only give, but also do the work. The ones who make the soup or feed the hungry or hang the art.” (116)
“The Internet allows some organizations to embrace long-distance involvement. It lets charities flip the funnel, not through some simple hand waving but by reorganizing around the idea of engagement online. This is the new leverage. It means opening yourself up to volunteers and encouraging them to network, to connect with one another, and yes, even to mutiny. It means giving every one of your professionals a blog and the freedom to use it. It means mixing it up with volunteers so they have something truly at stake. This is understandably scary for many nonprofits, but I’m not so sure you have a choice.” (116)
“Growth doesn’t come from persuading the most loyal members of other tribes to join you. They will be the last to come around. Instead, you’ll find more fertile ground among seekers, among people who desire the feeling they get when they’re part of a vibrant, growing tribe, but who are still looking for that feeling.” (119)
There is a huge penalty for being too late.
Real leadership rarely comes from the CEO or senior VP. “Instead, it happens out of the corner of your eye, in a place you weren’t watching.” (122)
“Hope without a strategy doesn’t generate leadership. Leadership comes when your hope and your optimism are matched with a concrete vision of the future and a way to get there. People won’t follow you if they don’t believe you can get to where you say you’re going.” (122)
“Caring is the key emotion at the center of the Tribe. Tribe members care what happens, to their goals and to one another.” “If no one cares, then you have no tribe.” (125, 26)
“People what to be sure you heard what they said—they’re less focused on whether or not you do what they said.” (128)
“Tribes grow when people recruit other people. That’s how ideas spread as well. The tribe doesn’t do it for you, of course. They do it for each other. Leadership is the art of giving people a platform for spreading ideas that work.” (129)
“Part of leadership (a big part of it, actually) is the ability to stick with the dream for a long time.” (132)
“(Jerry) Sternin went to Vietnam to try to help starving children. Rather than importing tactics that he knew would work, or outside techniques that he was sure could make a difference, he sought out the few families who weren’t starving, the few moms who weren’t just getting by but were thriving. And then he made it easy for these mothers to share their insights with the rest of the group. This seems obvious, but it’s heretical. The idea that an aid worker would go to a village in trouble and not try to stamp out nonstandard behavior is crazy. ‘The traditional model for social and organization change doesn’t work, he told Fast Company. ‘It never has. You can’t bring permanent solutions in from outside.’” (133)
www.davidmays.org
Sunday, May 23, 2010
Deer Attacks Redneck...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)