Written by: gfesadmin on October 25, 2012

In my last post I already mentioned Nitin Nohria’s Handbook of Leadership – Theory and practice and how he structures his book into five main topics and 26 different essays. I tried to give an overview about the meta structure and link it to my ministry experiences.

I already mentioned that Nohria collected different research results out of the interdisciplinary discurs on leadership. He tried to consult different disciplines, except theology. Some essays were compelling and a fruitful reading, because of the interdisciplinary focus.But especially in the last essay I found the missing theological perspective striking.

In essay No. 26 Robert Kegan and Lisa Lahey share their results about their research on mental complexities. (“Adult Development And Organizational Leadership”).

They state that good leadership is depending on the leaders ability to develop himself/herself, the people they are entrusted and the teams the work with.

They are introducing three different plateaus in adult development:

The socialized mind, the self-authoring mind and the self-transforming mind.

These three categories enfold a growing ability to handle complexity through time.

1. The socialized mind as the first step builds on teamplaying. The person is aligning,  shapeable and faithful. As a true believer he or she is depending and sharpened by the expectations of the environment.

2. The Self-authoring mind can take charge and act depending on his or her own compass or frame by setting directions or solving problems. This leader learns to lead and acts in independence. Due to the ability to step back and to generate and internal “seat of judgment”, the leader can evaluate external expectations and can decide to step back from them.

3. The self-transforming mind is a meta-leader, he or she can handle multi-frames and endures contradictions. Dialectical environments and situations are no problem hence she or she finds problems and tries to learn from them. He or she is leading to learn in an interdependence surrounding.

This part of the essay describes three development stages in leaders, their counterparts and their team members. Reading about this background information on the mental dimension on leadership are enriching.

While reading the essay I thought about a possible theological dimension on the development stages as a leader, concerning handling complex situation. I thought about Paul and his evolution as a leader.

Rough outline of contrasting the three stages with the biography of Pauls leadership

1a. Dependence

Saul as a son of a Pharisee becomes a Pharisee too (Acts 23:6). Still young he is already traveling from Tarsus to Jerusalem to study at Gamaliel’s school. He already participates the stoning of Stephan (Act 7:58-8:1). He soaks in the hatred and discrimination of his Pharisee culture, tries to live by the Judaic law (Act 26:5) and is one of the main persecutors of the Christians in the country (Atcs 9,1-2; 22:4). He travels to Damascus to arrest Christians.

In this stage of leadership he is sharpened by the culture surrounding him. He stays true to the laws and rules and acts the way he is expected.

Paul said: ‘The Jewish people all know the way I have lived ever since I was a child, from the beginning of my life in my own country, and also in Jerusalem.

They have known me for a long time and can testify, if they are willing, that I conformed to the strictest sect of our religion, living as a Pharisee.

And now it is because of my hope in what God has promised our ancestors that I am on trial today.

This is the promise our twelve tribes are hoping to see fulfilled as they earnestly serve God day and night.

Acts 26,4-7

2.a Independence

On his way to Damascus Saul experiences his conversion. He encounters Christ, changes his name into Paul and gets baptized (Acts 22:1-11; 9:8-18)

He preaches in Damascus (Acts 9:20), Arabia (Gal 1:17), Jerusalem (Acts 9:26; Gal 1:18). And experiences the first conflicts (Acts 9:29).

He starts his first mission trip to Cyprus, Salamis and Paphos (Acts 13:5-13), travels further to Antiochus and Iconia. In Perge John, who accompanied Paul, leaves him to travel back to Jerusalem (Acts 13:13) and in Lystra Paul gets stoned (Acts 14:8-20).

During his second mission trip he then reaches Syria, Sicilia, Troas, Philippi, Thessalonica, Berea, Corinth, Ephesia and Antiochus. On the third trip he visits Galatia, and Phrygia, Ephesus, Macedonia, Greece, Troas, Millet, Tyros and Caesarea.

In this stage of his leadership he faces difficulties and hardship. He deals with tricky situations and people with differing opinions and values. Paul leads independent, even when he gets stoned for his belief or if team members leave him. He is able to step back from the situation and reflect independent.

Paul said: To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law.

To those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God’s law but am under Christ’s law), so as to win those not having the law.

To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all people so that by all possible means I might save some.

1Cor 9:20-22

3.a Interdependence

When Paul gets arrested by the Jews (Acts 21:27-36) he is confronted with his former roots. In his speeches of defense he reflects on his Jewish and his roman heritage (Acts 21:37-23:10). When send to Caesarea he is treaded analogous to his roman citizenship. (Acts 24:1-21; 25:1-12).

Defensing his situation in front of Agrippa Paul not only stays true to his belief and uses the juristic structures of his counterpart, he also instrumentalizes the situation to spread his faith and mission. By telling his story and linking it to Agrippa Paul even uses this tight situation to lead. He is not only creating a large impact on his surrounding he is also learning from the situation he is framing. 25:13-26:32).

 Paul said: King Agrippa, do you believe the prophets? I know you do.’

Then Agrippa said to Paul, ‘Do you think that in such a short time you can persuade me to be a Christian?’

Paul replied, ‘Short time or long—I pray to God that not only you but all who are listening to me today may become what I am, except for these chains.’

 Acts 26;27-29

This rough outline sketches the development of Pauls abilities as a leader.

In the biblical context Paul isn’t only changing concerning his capacities to deal with mental complexity. Paul is also sharpened by the situations he is exposed to and the people he is meeting with. Apart from this influencing parts Paul – more than one time –  mentions God as a factor, with a large impact on his situation. (Acts 26:22-23)

Robert Kegan and Lisa Lahey describe the gain of mental complexity as a active work the person is undertaking to develop. Apart from some minor side effects and surrounding influences they paint a picture of a self-designing leader who is developing himself or herself.

It would be interesting to contrast this with a biblical/theological framework, where not only the leader is the active figure developing but also God as a nurturing factor.

About the Author

gfesadmin