You Can Only Lead Where You Know How to Go
While we have read many (many, many, many – a lot, okay) of books thus far in our doctor of ministry educational 
journey. Many of them have been interesting and insightful, many have helped broaden my understanding of leadership, some have confirmed long held beliefs while others have challenged them. Some have been practically helpful, some have expanded my theoretical thinking. This weeks assignment, The Leadership Mystique: Leading Behavior in the Human Enterprise by Manfred Kets De Vries is somehow a combination of all of these at the same time.
The book is full of various quizzes and exercises in the book that are designed to help the reader identify various aspects of their personality, emotional and relational intelligence and leadership style. These resources alone make the book well worth the investment of time and money, but even if you choose not to take advantage of these resources the book is still chock full of insights to help us understand leadership – and what makes someone a good and effective leader.
The real focus of this book is how the psyche and inner life of a leader (or maybe better someone in a leadership position) effects the way they lead and the entirety of their organization. De Vries makes these observations and assertions from his perspective using the ‘clinical paradigm’, a model that is based on three pressies – 1. What you see isn’t necessarily what you get. 2. All human behavior, no matter how irrational it appears, has a rationale. 3. We’re all products of our past. (De Vries, 8) This paradigm helps De Vries identify a key trait that effective leaders have – the ability to ‘reframe’ the situations they are in:
The most effective leaders are those who can reframe complex situations. By changing how they perceive a problem, they alter what the see. Why is reframing so important? There are three kinds of leaders in this world: the rule takers, the rule makers, and the rule breakers. And it’s the last group – those who are able to step outside the existing rules, reframing each problem as it comes up – that gets extraordinary results in the workplace. (De Vries, 9)
Highlighting the importance of this trait, he observes that ‘unfortunately, too many of us have been told by people important to us that it is dangerous to think outside the box and we’ve paid too much attention to them.’ De Vries goes on to state that ‘the challenge of effective leadership is to break out of the box’ (De Vries, 9). As I read this, and agreed with it, I thought it had particular importance for leadership in the church, where the ‘box’ often includes things like ‘tradition’ that can carry 2,000 years of weight, making it that much harder and more taboo to break out of. At the same time, has there ever been a leader more effective or more consistent at breaking out of the box than Jesus? As people claiming to the name of Jesus and seeking to follow in his way, it seems to me this role as a 
‘reframing leader’ is exactly the type of behavior and mode of thinking that we should aspire to.
While much of this book was interesting and even at times inspiring to read, the section, The Failure Factor in Leadership, was almost like reliving a church workers version of a horror movie – Night of the Living Terrible Senior Pastors (and other bad bosses) – The narcissistic senior pastor preening in the pulpit; the pastor that practices conflict avoidance at all cost hiding anywhere there isn’t tension; the music minister that runs rough shod over every one in their path; the boss that micromanages everything you are assigned to do.
This was not a fun trip down memory lane and I imagine that all of us can identify some horror show bosses – even many that had good intentions – and the personality traits that helped steer them, and the organizations they were leading into trouble. So I don’t want to dwell too long on any of that, but as we look at some of the critical concepts to be aware of and the practical helps to guard against narcissism, etc.
Of all the dangerous and difficult personalities to deal with in a leader, perhaps none is more troublesome than someone suffering from the ‘Monte Cristo Complex’ – for these people revenge, for all the things that have happened to them (often real and terrible things), taken on anyone they can is the major motivational force in their life (De Vries, 87). An alternative way of dealing with hurt and pain in our childhood that De Vries suggest he terms ‘reparation’ – making up for a past hurt in the present time, i.e. ensuring your children will have a better, safer, more stable home than you did.
De Vries notes that there are many successful leaders that fall into the category of ‘reparation leaders’ – and he draws attention to the fact that many of the traits that these leaders often share are common to those that lead to narcissistic development: an absent father; forced to take on authority position in the family early on; tend to be competitive; they found people that believe in them and support them. De Vries also highlights that many of those support systems were in the form of strong mothers (De Vries, 88).
This struck a cord with me, not just because so many of the leaders I have seen and worked with fit this bill (some in this program); not just because while it seems like in some ways there are elements of leadership that you are born with – but having them alone isn’t enough (resilience is key for successful leadership); not just because I definitely identify with having a strong mother. More than everything else, it connected two key points for me.
First, that as leaders if we aren’t aware of who we are – and what has made us who we are – we will never be able to effectively lead others. Second, that love and special interest that often develops resilience in leaders is required by those same leaders to be given to the organizations that they serve and lead. In my experience it is leaders that truly love those they work with, serve and the organizations that they lead that are often the most successful.
About the Author
Chip Stapleton
Follower of Jesus Christ. Husband to Traci. Dad to Charlie, Jack, Ian and Henry. Preacher of Sermons, eater of ice cream, supporter of Arsenal. I love to talk about what God is doing in the world & in and through us & create space and opportunity for others to use their gifts to serve God and God's people.7 responses to “You Can Only Lead Where You Know How to Go”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Yes, the book was really packed full of good ideas. I think of folks that are in counseling or pastoral positions, (positions of influence and maybe not just ‘leader’) who might find this book really helpful too.
Kets De Vries had an engaging way of making his points. Like you, I kept thinking of other books we have read throughout LGP.
I especially appreciate your take on the ‘Monte Cristo Complex’. That section was hard for me to understand. One thing Kets De Vries lacked was more ideas on how to go about helping these folks. Any ideas?
Wow Chip, you caught two really important things that I totally missed! First, the premises on page 8 frame this book perfectly and provide the opening to all of the important insights. Secondly, Kets de Vries’ emphasis on strong mothers – how did I miss that!? With three or more generations of strong mothers behind me, I can attest that this is definitely a plus to have in the leadership corner.
Like Mary, I needed your evaluation of the Monte Cristo Complex and The Failure Factor in Leadership. Reading Kets de Vries account pointed out to me some spaces in my own life that are still raw, reminding me that the best way to heal from this is to do better for my own community in the future. Thank you for your insights!
“At the same time, has there ever been a leader more effective or more consistent at breaking out of the box than Jesus? As people claiming to the name of Jesus and seeking to follow in his way, it seems to me this role as a ‘reframing leader’ is exactly the type of behavior and mode of thinking that we should aspire to.”
The problem with following the way of Jesus, is that his way ended up leading to his death.
“an absent father; forced to take on authority position in the family early on; tend to be competitive; they found people that believe in them and support them. De Vries also highlights that many of those support systems were in the form of strong mothers.”
Kets de Vries relied heavily on Freud for his thesis. Not being a psychologist, I’m curious how much credibility and foundational weight Freud still bears in psychoanalysis. I don’t doubt that our past shapes our present (both as individuals and organizations/churches). But my memory of Freud’s work is that he seemed overly reliant on unconscious sexual desires of one’s parents (Oedipus complex). Because this text was written without footnotes and academic sources, I’m curious how much Kets de Vries relied on Freud’s theories and how much on the school of thought that was influenced by him (and who those people are).
Katy,
I do think he probably overdoes it a bit with the Freud connections – and it would be interesting to get an understanding of how De Vries work is viewed academically now.
Having said that, his descriptions and explanations matched up pretty well with many of my experiences….
Reading your post, I see you were really captured by this author. Your post was an easy read.
Your comment on many has experienced someone with the Monte Cristo Complex. I did and that experienced fueled me to demonstrate to management that you don’t have to have that gotcha mentality or do as I say mentality but to show compassion and confidence in your ability.
“as leaders if we aren’t aware of who we are – and what has made us who we are – we will never be able to effectively lead others.”
Excellent point Chip! The position of leader does not make one a leader. It easy to think that just because someone is a leader that they are prepared to lead. Truth is, the work of leadership begins with the leader themself, and for me at least, it’s a continual process. Great post Chip.
Yes, Jim, it is definitely an ongoing process and I do think it has to begin with us.