Confusion and Nonsense
Despite the vast array of books, papers, research, and training programs, the fact that “finding an all-embracing definition of leadership remains elusive”[1] is both a concern and exciting. Firstly, it is concerning because if it is true that we are yet to grasp an effective understanding of what effective leadership is, it brings clarity as to why Warren Bennis writes, “The nation calls for leadership, and there is no one at home.”[2] Perhaps there is no one at home because we don’t yet understand it? Secondly, it is exciting because it highlights that there is still much to explore and uncover in the ongoing study and discussion of leadership.
Annabel Beerel is an accomplished leadership consultant, educator, and author specialising in organisational transformation and leadership development. A former corporate executive, Beerel holds advanced degrees in leadership and philosophy, and her work emphasises the importance of ethical and adaptive practices. While her book “Rethinking Leadership” offers a thoughtful, well-written summary of leadership theories, to suggest it is a ‘critique’ as Beerel suggests, seems to stretch the boundaries of the author’s achievements somewhat. Don’t misunderstand my statement. I enjoyed the book very much, reading it from cover to cover (apart from three chapters), and her book will become one of the foundational texts for my NPO. For it to be a critique needs more than a paragraph of weaknesses or limitations as written prior to her very helpful chapter executive summaries. As an example, her self-titled “Critique of transpersonal leadership approaches”[3] lasts for two-thirds of a page, surely not enough to provide a comprehensive critique of said leadership approaches.
The content of the book, however, is compelling, and while the chapter ordering is strange at times (why intersperse chapters 9-14 with chapters 12 and 13?),[4] the book provides a comprehensive and enhanced understanding of leadership, offering both depth and breadth to the subject. I will highlight two aspects of the book that were especially enlightening for me.
Firstly, leadership styles.[5] Bereel’s work on transformational leadership integrates seamlessly with the framework of my NPO, which is currently researching the interaction between leadership styles, church health, and church growth. While the author identifies transactional, charismatic, authentic, and servant leadership as components of transformational leadership, this integrated approach is a wholly new concept for me. Bereel does not adequately define why she includes the aforementioned styles within transformational leadership. Previously, my research into leadership styles, drawing on works such as Leadership[6] by Northouse, The Handbook of Leadership Theory[7] by Bass and Bass, Leadership Theory[8] by Dugan, and research papers like Evolution of Leadership Theory[9] by Benmira and Agboola and Path-Goal Theory of Leadership[10] by House, among others, revealed that leadership styles were presented as distinct and separate. In reflection, I surmise that her inclusion of the leadership styles in this manner adds further to her statement regarding the elusive nature of leadership.[11] Are the styles distinct and separate or are they an outworking of transformational leadership is evidence of further work I need to research in understanding my NPO fully.
Secondly, leadership shadow.[12] I must admit, I began the book by reading this chapter before returning to chapter one. In my NPO, I have been exploring the idea that leadership styles inherently possess both light and shade, meaning that every leadership benefit is accompanied by a potential drawback. The term “shade” is one I have been using to articulate this concept. However, Bereel’s chapter on leadership shadow served as a threshold concept[13] for me, igniting a fervent desire to engage deeply with the rest of the book. The chapter on leadership shadow enhanced my understanding of leadership shade and provided me with the language to further articulate this concept as part of my research. Of particular interest was her inclusion of the deadly mix of fear and power[14] and the combination of toxicity and narcissism.[15] During the COVID-19 pandemic, a deeply shallow and, in my opinion, a terrible book called A Church Called Tov[16] by McKnight and Barringer popularised the concept of Narcissistic leadership in the church to the unassuming reader. McKnight and Barringer’s work highlights a fundamental immaturity in their approach to church and leadership, offering a reflective critique of their personal experiences. In contrast, Bereel’s research examines the underlying causes and dynamics of narcissism in leadership in a manner that is not overtly personalised yet deeply resonates on a personal level. While the apparent paradox in this description is intentional, it is difficult to imagine any reader engaging with the chapter on The Shadow Side of Leadership without being prompted to self-evaluate the influence of narcissism in their own life and leadership practices.
I titled the blog “Confusion and Nonsense” intentionally. The term “Confusion” reflects the elusive and often perplexing definitions and categorisations of leadership (see also “Ambiguous Definitions of Leadership”).[17] “Nonsense,” on the other hand, expresses my continued frustration with the detrimental impact A Church Called Tov has had on a generation of churchgoers. In contrast, Annabel Bereel’s book provides a refreshing and insightful summary of leadership, effectively addressing and correcting the shortcomings in McKnight’s work.
[1] Beerel, Annabel. 2021. Rethinking Leadership: A Critique of Contemporary Theories. 1st edition. New York: Routledge. 81.
[2] Bennis, Warren G. 1989. On Becoming a Leader. Reading, Mass: Addison-Wesley.
[3] Beerel, 301.
[4] Ibid, vii.
[5] Ibid, 294
[6] Northouse, P G. 2013. Leadership, Theory and Practice. 6th edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc.
[7] Bass, Bernard M., and Ruth Bass. 2008. The Bass Handbook of Leadership: Theory, Research, and Managerial Applications. 4th ed. edition. New York: Free Press.
[8] Dugan, John P. Leadership Theory: Cultivating Critical Perspectives. 1st edition. San Francisco, CA : Hoboken, New Jersey: Jossey-Bass, 2017.
[9] Benmira, S, and M Agboola. “Evolution of Leadership Theory.” BMJ Leader 5, no. 1 (March 1, 2021). https://doi.org/10.1136/leader-2020-000296.
[10] House, Robert J. “Path-Goal Theory of Leadership: Lessons, Legacy, and a Reformulated Theory.” The Leadership Quarterly 7, no. 3 (September 1, 1996): 323–52.https://doi.org/10.1016/S1048-9843(96)90024-7.
[11] Bereel, 81.
[12] Ibid, 303.
[13] Meyer, Jan, and Ray Land. 2006. Overcoming Barriers to Student Understanding: Threshold Concepts and Troublesome Knowledge. 1st edition. London: Routledge. 3.
[14] Bereel, 306.
[15] Ibid, 312 and 315.
[16] McKnight, Scot. 2020. Church Called Tov, A: Forming a Goodness Culture That Resists Abuses of Power and Promotes Healing. Carol Stream: Tyndale House Publishers.
[17] Bereel, 84.
10 responses to “Confusion and Nonsense”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Thank you for your post, Glyn.
Considering Bereel’s integrated approach to transformational leadership and her exploration of the shadow side of leadership, how can leaders balance the light and shade of their leadership styles to foster church health and growth (in your observation)?
Hi Shela. Leadership exists in a tension between its benefits (light) and its potential drawbacks (shade). Leaders can balance this by:
Practicing Self-Awareness & Reflection
Developing Emotional Maturity
Fostering a Healthy Leadership Culture
Recognizing Power Dynamics
Integrating Multiple Leadership Styles
By consciously navigating these tensions, leaders can create an environment where leadership is both transformative and sustainable.
Glyn,
That is great that this really fits in with your NPO and you were able to cross over a threshold. I do wonder about your disdain for A Church Called Tov. After so much toxicity in so many churches is seemed that the book was timely and a call for Christians to see after Tov. Certainly it could be seen as a bit of an overstatement and lacking theory, but it was not a theoretical leadership book. So, I am wondering what in particular you might have found offensive in it?
Hi Adam, thanks for your question. I wrote a blog on this book some time ago. Let me give you three of the ten concerns with the book.
1. Over-personalisation: The book reads as a response to specific church experiences, which makes it feel reactive rather than constructive. While personal stories can be powerful, I found it lacked the depth of research to provide a well-rounded framework for addressing church leadership issues. The authors admit at the end of the book that they themselves only went to church when certain preachers were speaking, showing an infinite amount of immaturity in the way they approached church in the first place.
2. Lack of Theoretical Grounding: Unlike Bereel’s approach to leadership shadow, Tov does not engage deeply with leadership theory or organisational psychology. This results in broad and unhelpful generalisations about church leadership rather than equipping leaders with structured solutions. It weaponises words and feelings without offering understanding.
3. One-Dimensional View of Leadership Issues: While I agree that toxicity exists in “some” church settings, the book’s heavy emphasis on narcissism risks oversimplifying leadership problems. Leaders fail for many reasons, not just because they are narcissistic or abusive.
Glyn
I’m thinking of leaders I have experienced over the years and comparing them to the characteristics of a narcissistic leader. A true narcissist is so self-absorbed never believing that they are wrong. Yet for some of these toxic leaders I have experienced I wonder if the exact opposite is true. Are they so insecure in their identity that they overcompensate. I searched Bereel’s book and the term insecure only appears once and only appears in chapter 9 in discussing systems boundaries. I am wondering what title would you give to leadership that is focused on an insecure identity?
Hi Jeff, your question about insecure leadership is a good one. If narcissism is about an inflated sense of self, then insecurity-driven leadership might be described as:
1. “Defensive Leadership” – where leaders act out of self-protection rather than vision or conviction.
2. “Compensatory Leadership” – where insecurity leads to overcompensation, resulting in hyper-control or erratic decision-making.
3. “Fragile Leadership” – where leaders lack the resilience to face criticism, leading to either avoidance or aggression.
4. “Wounded Leadership” – if insecurity stems from unresolved personal issues, it may manifest in an unhealthy need for validation.
Bereel’s omission of insecurity as a leadership motivator is interesting, I didn’t notice. Many leadership failures stem from leaders trying to mask their inadequacies rather than overt self-glorification.
Thanks Glynn. Can you say more about how your research is being impacted by Bereel’s book and a Church Called Tov? What way forward are you developing?
Hey Ryan. Bereel’s book has influenced my research by reinforcing the complexity of leadership styles and the importance of recognising leadership shadow. It has prompted me to consider the following:
1. A more fluid approach to leadership styles rather than necessarily treating them as fixed categories.
2. A deeper exploration of leadership shadow in the church context, particularly how well-intended leadership traits can become liabilities.
3. A stronger focus on power dynamics in church leadership, particularly the interplay between fear, control, and trust.
On the other hand, A Church Called Tov has reminded me that anyone can write anything and publish their own toxic drivel about the church. I read the book and blogged elsewhere my disdain for it. (Three of my thoughts are contained in my answer to Adam above).
Hi Glynn, I appreciated your mentioning that “finding an all-embracing definition of leadership remains elusive.” I think about this often, and I am starting to think it will always be elusive because things change so quickly. However, we can learn from all leadership theories and create maps for our context. I have never read “A Church Called Tov,” but as a pastor’s kid raised in an independent Baptist denomination, I have been saddened by the “shepherding” of certain pastors. However, I know this does not reflect all church leaders. How do you think church leaders can guard themselves from becoming vulnerable to narcissism and the shadow side of leadership? I would also like to say thank you for remaining steadfast as a church leader. I know it is not easy.
Hi Elysse. Your final words of encouragement mean a lot, church leadership is challenging, but it remains one of the most rewarding callings. Thank you for your thoughtful questions! I believe there are several key safeguards:
1. Spiritual Formation & Personal Accountability: Leaders must engage in ongoing spiritual and emotional development, ensuring they are grounded in humility rather than entitlement.
2. Healthy Peer Relationships: Leaders should have trusted mentors and accountability partners who can challenge them and provide honest feedback. Particularly look for leaders who still have their friends from “before” they were a “success.:
3. Commitment to Servant Leadership: Leaders who consistently prioritise serving others over self-promotion build a culture of trust and transparency.
4. Cultivating an Organisational Culture of Honesty: Churches should encourage open dialogue where feedback is welcomed rather than feared.
5. Regular Self-Examination: Leaders should frequently ask themselves: Am I leading for the benefit of others, or am I protecting my own power? Also, the addition of regular 360 degrees is helpful.