Mutual Submission amidst Point Leadership

Tensions have long blossomed in leadership-world between the concepts of a flat versus hierarchical organizational structure (click here for a brief summary of each). In church world, this really doesn't seem to be that much different. With a continued focus toward Servant Leadership, people often tend to drift to the mindset that it contradicts a more hierarchical structure. Others dislike a more hierarchical approach because of past abuses generated by the point leader, or the guy at the top of the totem.

However, in a talk about leadership, Andy Stanley argues that just because something has been abused, doesn't mean it's something to be cast out (for example, I'm currently abusing a scarf by having it currently act as my dish towel - however, that wrong act isn't enough to get rid of scarfs altogether... okay, bad example, but anyway...). Andy argues that Servant Leadership, or mutual submission within the organization, is not at odds with Point Leadership, but instead they work together.

A couple points from his talk:

Do for one when you can't do for all

It's not feasible to do everything for everyone... that's just plain reality. However, it's easy to use that as an excuse to in turn do nothing. It's easy to think, "I can't do this for you, because if I do that for you, then I'll have to do that for EVERYONE..." The underlining assumption being made is that it is right to be "fair". However, fairness is not a Biblical value... fairness ended at the Garden of Eden. The desire to be fair often conflicts with the ability to do the right thing. "Should I let my son do this, when I didn't let my other son do that at his age?" A desire to be fair could easily inhibit you from doing the right thing. So, again, you can't do everything for everyone, but you try to do something for someone! You do for the one what you wish you could do for all (if it were feasible).

Systematize top-down service

Random acts of kindness are not enough. Leaders need a systematic, built-in component in which to serve others, which flows into the rhythm of their organization. How do you accomplish this? Well, at the end of the day it all comes down to the leader. The blunt truth is that leaders don't have to serve, but others have to serve them... that's just the nature of being at the top. So, incredible intentionality is needed on the leaders part, or else it will never happen. It starts with the leader. A more practical example? A leader needs to develop an organizational culture with a sustainable pace. Meaning, a leader needs a schedule where he has margin. Otherwise, if there is no cushion or margin, the leader will be so consumed with his own busyness of life that opportunities to serve will never arise. Margin allows us to serve.