Personalities have to gel.” According to a best-selling book on establishing effective boards of directors for the nation’s biggest and best corporations, that common sense conclusion is an important first step for effective board participation. “Directors must be able to express their views without offending others or shutting down debate,” New York Times best-selling author Ram Charan wrote in his latest book, “Owning Up.”
Unfortunately many boards of directors have not learned that lesson. Even more unfortunately, many church groups have not learned that lesson either. As a result, deacon groups, church committees, ministry teams, organizational officers, even church staffs fail to work together because personalities fail to gel.
Charan listed both negative and positive characteristics that impact the ability of personalities to gel. His list seems equally appropriate whether one serves on a board of directors or in a local church position.
Chief among the corporate stumbling blocks is a big ego. Because people are leaders in their fields, they are used to being listened to, having power and getting their way.
In the church, such selfishness may be called sin. Still people in the sacred world give vent to ego about as much as anyone else. Sometimes the church becomes the stage for people to demonstrate their importance, much to the detriment of the cause for which they were chosen.
Closely related to ego is the desire to control. Whether in a corporate environment or church setting, people can act to control the process and the outcomes. Control is another form of power. It can be exercised by out-talking everyone else, failing to cooperate, distracting from the primary goal with outlandish proposals or actions or any number of other ways.
At its core, the need to control is about self, not about the goal or group.
Charan also scolded the board member whose answer to every problem is a reflection of that person’s experience. For the salesman, the answer is more sales; for the operations person, the answer is cutting production costs, etc.
In the church, that trait can be seen in the one who met Christ at a Billy Graham revival insisting that what the church needs is more revivals. Those whose Christian life was renewed through a short-term missions project believe everyone taking a missions trip would revitalize the church. Sometimes those in music ministry believe the key to what ails the church is in praise and worship. On and on, the “pushing” goes with participants unable to think beyond their experience.
Sometimes board members act like members of the Republican and Democratic parties. No matter what one says, another says the opposite. Church groups can do the same. Some churches have been plagued by this problem for decades. Others experience it when, for whatever reason, members choose to follow a contrary mindset.
Neither business nor the church can make progress when plagued by a contrary spirit.
The value of a member who never says a word is also questioned. This person might view himself or herself as unable to contribute to the group. He or she might fear the group or even think the group unworthy of his or her participation. Whatever the reason, the person does little more than take up space.
While not all members contribute the same amount of input to any group process, frequently the one who makes a single comment or asks a single question brings clarity to the discussion with his or her insight. That is true in business as well as in the church.
On a more positive track, Charan said effective group members must have “the humility to ask for other points of view.” A Native American proverb says, “Listen or your tongue will make you deaf.” One cannot hear what others are saying unless one listens. Asking for input shows a desire to learn from others and acknowledges the value of other people as well as their ideas. Didn’t Jesus say something about loving one another in John 13:34 that applies here?
In addition to humility, Charan said a good board member must have courage, courage to engage in the decision-making process. Whether in business or the church, asking the difficult question can be a hard thing to do. Group intimidation can keep one from challenging assumptions. Respect for a leader can prevent one from examining alternatives.
Courage to engage in the process shows a commitment to the best outcome, not just the easiest.
Participating in the process should not keep one from being willing to accept the group’s decision. That is not to say the group is always right. Groups — including churches — can be wrong just as individuals can be wrong. But the decision was committed to the group, which means that every member functions under the authority of the group whether it is a board of directors, deacon body or church committee.
When a decision violates one’s principles or scriptural understandings, then one may have to move away from the group altogether.
In reality, few things are that dramatic, which brings up Charan’s next point. An effective group member is willing to change his or her mind. Perhaps it is because of new information. Perhaps it is because information is put together in a new way. Whatever the reason, there comes a time when one might have to acknowledge a new level of understanding and change his or her mind about the issue before the group.
Changing one’s mind is not a sign of weakness. It is an expression of strength when one can learn, grow and change as one engages in the group process.
A good group member also sees the big picture, not just the nit-picky parts. Every member brings strengths to the group process. The good member overcomes the temptation to concentrate only on that part he or she knows well and strives to see how the proposal impacts the whole business or church or ministry.
Personalities have to gel for effective group leadership. That is a fact. Given the challenges facing the church today, there is not time to dabble in the sin of selfishness and all its expressions. It is time to love one another, even in the way we make decisions as a group.
Share with others: