The Vacuum
This past week I was conversing with an older mentor when he commented on the vacuum of leadership we have in our nation, and in particular, the state of Montana. It isn’t the first time I have heard this lament, and truth be told, I also have observed this lack of leadership across many sectors of society, and not just Montana. Undoubtedly, we have witnessed the downfall of the family, which in my opinion, has been negatively impacted by the lack of godly leadership in the marriage. But if we are to critique the family unit, I believe we also need to critique the spiritual family, the Church. Have our leaders modeled leadership focused on loving God and others, or have we fallen prey to the pathway of consumerism and self-centered leadership? It doesn’t take long to recall the many fallen spiritual leaders in the past decade.
I have also observed poor leadership in the hospital where my wife works. The longstanding CEO was quietly removed for sexual allegations a few years ago. Since that time, it seems that the primary ambition of the new CEO has been to bring in more business, at any cost, to pad his already ridiculous $1million+ salary. Northouse writes, “Leadership is a highly sought-after and highly valued commodity.”[1] I couldn’t agree more, especially in a vacuum of leadership.
Peter G. Northouse is a Professor Emeritus at Western State University. Having taught for many years at the undergraduate and graduate levels, Northouse has continued to lead the way in leadership theory and practice as a consultant and lecturer. Leadership: Theory and Practice is a leadership book written to evaluate and analyze the various leadership models that have existed for (a) understanding leadership theory, and (b) providing application for the real-world practice of leadership.[2] This book of theory + practice has a broad use for everything from undergraduate training to cutting-edge leadership practice and consultation. As a 9th edition, inclusive leadership was added to an already robust list of leadership models. In my opinion, this is a timely and relevant addition as what I have seen unfold in the past five years is an enhanced consideration of inclusivity in the hiring practice, especially regarding gender and race.
I found Northouse’s timeline for the evolution of leadership fascinating:
- 1900-1921: Leadership is understood to impose the leader’s will upon their followers to induce obedience.
- 1930s: A shift of understanding to view leadership, not as force, but as influence.
- 1940s: Beyond influence, leadership is persuasion.
- 1950s: Three primary themes were evaluating a leader’s effectiveness with groups, relationships, and their influence toward a common goal.
- 1960s: Behavior as a focal point for the influencing of others.
- 1970s: An emphasis on organizational structures and reciprocal process to accomplish organizational goals.
- 1980s: Dominant leadership themes such as, leaders get things done, leadership is about influence, a focus on traits for effective leadership, and understanding leadership as a process of transformation for both leaders and followers.
- 1990s: The leadership process shifted its focus on followers, giving way to such models as servant leadership.
- The 21st Century: Finally, the inclusion of leadership models such as authentic leadership, spiritual leadership, and inclusive leadership, to name a few.[3]
According to Northouse, the four essential components of leadership is that it “is a process… involves influence… occurs in groups… [and] involves common goals.”[4] For this text, leadership is defined as “a process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal.”[5] Over the past year, we have read similar concepts woven throughout the various assigned texts, affirming my understanding that effective leadership cannot be void of these components. Additionally, Northouse also emphasizes the importance of morality for effective leadership. As a point for discussion, he provides the following statement, “Hitler’s rule in Germany could be considered a good example of leadership.”[6] Do you agree with this or not? A fascinating leadership question, without a doubt. If I were to add anything to the essential components of leadership, it would be the importance of identity formation.
Here are a few additional highlights from the text:
- I greatly appreciated the emphasized importance of the reciprocal value between leaders and followers. Northouse writes, “Both leaders and followers are involved together in the leadership process. Leaders need followers, and followers need leaders.”[7]
- Leadership is both a trait you are born with and a process that can be learned.
- Finally, Northouse made a distinction between leadership and management. He writes, “Management is about seeking order and stability; leadership is about seeking adaptive and constructive change.”[8] I especially resonate with this distinction regarding my next steps vocationally. The question I have been asking of various roles that I have considered is, “Is this a management opportunity or a leadership opportunity?” I know myself well enough to know that the last thing I want to do is step into a management role.
In summary, I am in disbelief that in my many years of educational training, I have not read nor been aware of this exceptional book. In looking at my footnotes, it may seem that I did not read past the Introduction, but I assure you, that is not the case. I found this book to be an exceptional tool for better understanding the various models of leadership and will most certainly review this book in greater depth. I am left pondering two questions: 1) Which leadership model do I most align with? And 2) What leadership model do I believe will be most effective for my NPO and developing leaders from within a vulnerable context?
[1] Peter G. Northouse, Leadership: Theory and Practice, International student edition, ninth edition. (Los Angeles London New Dehli Singapore Washington DC Melbourne: SAGE, 2022), 1.
[2] Ibid., xv.
[3] Ibid., 3–5.
[4] Ibid., 6.
[5] Ibid.
[6] Ibid., 13.
[7] Ibid., 7.
[8] Ibid., 16.
9 responses to “The Vacuum”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Eric: Great analysis of the book. I re-read my post and I think I might have been too harsh a critic of the book. You bring out some great points on the value of this text. It’s important to know that a Leader dos not fit one mold; everyone is and can be an excellent leader. They come in all shapes and sizes. What’s critical to know is that we don’t stop being ourselves in order to become a great leader. Great post.
Thanks Troy. As you think about the book, I wonder what it was about the material (or how it was presented) that it was met with some resistance for you? That might be interesting to consider. I know I have felt that way about a couple of the books this year and had a hard time connecting with them. Then, I read everyone’s post and thought, “Boy, I certainly didn’t have that in mind when I read the book!”
Eric, I enjoyed reading your post and I believe you when you say you read past the Introduction! The question about Hitler is an interesting one. I find it hard to believe that he could do what he did without leadership gifts. Sadly, they got twisted with dark motives and the results were horrific. In your opinion, do you believe an organization or church needs to have a dominant style or can there be a mixture of the many styles listed in the book? Also, do you think Authentic Leadership is really a style in a ministry context? It seems hard to imagine good leadership without the traits attached to that style?
I also agree, Hitler certainly demonstrated some leadership traits… strong ones, in fact. But obviously, it was not for the common good, thus, perhaps one could say “good leadership for the enemy!”
In my opinion, I think that there is a variety of leadership styles that can and deployed. Personally, I have gravitated more toward servant leadership and authentic leadership styles as it is more fitting with my personality, though I would not go so far as to say that one has to use that same leadership framework to lead an organization such as CLDI or a church. However, I do think that pending the leader (and their leadership style), the group of people they lead will be very different.
Eric: Another great post and reflection on the reading. I too found the introduction to be one of the bests from our selections so far.
I think your question about Hitler ties right back into the question you pose in your opening paragraph: “Have our leaders modeled leadership focused on loving God and others, or have we fallen prey to the pathway of consumerism and self-centered leadership?” It reminded me of the fact that anything the Lord has created and intended for good, the enemy can twist, even if it be ever so slightly, and it be used for evil.
It makes me wonder how those leadership skills Hitler possessed (and I would have to say he did by his sheer influence) would have been utilized in a positive manner had he turned towards the Lord and not chose a life of self-centered leadership. And if we bring that in to today, do we say the same thing of Putin?
Great question about Hitler and Putin! I agree completely. To this end, I always find hope in the Scriptures, for the Lord saved the most unlikely of people to fulfill His purposes. Certainly, Putin is not too far from His reach!
Eric, thanks for sharing your burden about the leadership gaps in Montana. Like you, I am also very concerned about the leadership challenges within our families. This is especially important to me because the family is the basic unit of society. How might Christian husbands and wives help remedy this situation?
Thank you, Eric, for this great summary of Northouse’s book! You note that Northouse believes leadership is both a trait you are born with and a process that can be learned. When I saw that in Northouse, it reminded me of Poole’s “Leadersmithing” book; she comes to a similar conclusion. I’m curious what connections you see between Northouse and Poole and their respective approaches to leadership?
Eric, I did not think you had not read the book. Though I have been in that boat more than once this year, so no judgement here 😉
I appreciate you tackling the idea of leadership vacuum. I am curious what are your thoughts about the role of healthy peer accountability in prevention of character failings of leadership? I would also like to hear more about what you mean by “identity formation,” spiritually or in general?