In prepping for this blog post I asked Chatgpt to write a critique of Peter Northouse\u2019s book, Leadership: Theory and Practice in the voice of the Reverend Kally Elliott. What follows is the introductory paragraph:<\/p>\n
Greetings, dear readers, and blessings upon your journey! Today, let us embark on a reflective journey into the realms of leadership theory, guided by the pages of Peter Northouse’s insightful tome, “Leadership: Theory and Practice.” As I delve into the depths of this work, I find myself navigating the ebbs and flows of wisdom, grappling with questions that echo through the corridors of my reverent soul.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n I\u2019m not sure what Reverend Kally Elliott Chatgpt was mimicking but it was definitely not me! Obviously I have not spent enough time \u201ctraining\u201d Chatgpt in my voice and perhaps this is yet another example of how taking a shortcut does not make for the most authentic result.<\/p>\n Northouse\u2019s book offers a comprehensive exploration of leadership theories and practical training, with each chapter offering another theory, it\u2019s benefits, drawbacks, and application. As I engaged with the various theories or types of leadership, I found myself trying to find my own leadership style as well as the styles of other leaders with whom I regularly interact. As I (listened) to theories such as the Path Goal theory, I wondered if perhaps, my supervisor might do well to use this kind of leadership with me from time to time! But then I\u2019d engage with the next chapter and think, \u201cOh, no, actually, I probably need some of that *that* kind of leadership in my life!\u201d Meaning, I need someone to lead me in that way AND I need to incorporate it into my own leadership.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Shortcuts are only sometimes and usually minimally helpful<\/strong><\/p>\n Going back to Chatgpt, what I am taking away from this particular engagement with this book \u2013 is that while shortcuts can sometimes be beneficial \u2013 in leadership they are mostly not helpful. I did not fully read Northouse\u2019s book, instead, I listened to a professor from Azusa Pacific teach about each chapter.[1]<\/a> I actually found this very helpful but also know that I did not absorb enough of the material to make much of a difference in my own leadership. It was a shortcut that was helpful because it exposed me to Northouse\u2019s theories and caused me to want to delve more deeply into his book, but for the time being, it didn\u2019t do much to transform how I lead.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Leadership is a process…a long process<\/strong><\/p>\n Northouse\u2019s definition of leadership is: \u201ca process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal.\u201d[2]<\/a> This definition has made me think about when, how, or even, if, I have done such a thing. The reason I wonder \u201cif\u201d I have influenced a group to achieve a common goal is because I either tend to bore easily or get derailed by second guessing the goal. Both, the boredom and the second guessing, are due to the fact that influencing a group of individuals to a common goal is a process<\/em>, and usually a LONG process. Leadership is a process. There is not a shortcut that will get a group of individuals to a common goal. It takes time, planning, prodding, AND because it is a process, it will take a combination, if not all, of the different kinds of leadership that Northouse discusses in his book. Leadership is such a process that my 85 year old church secretary (she refused to be called an administrator) would remind me \u201cKally, you need to bring everyone along with you.\u201d That is now a mantra I use in my leadership\u2026bring them along with you. It requires communication, checking in, and going slowly. It\u2019s a long process but as I\u2019ve learned the hard way, it also works.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Derailment and becoming a better leader<\/strong><\/p>\n Listening to the teaching on the various styles of leadership I am most curious to delve into the psychodynamic process and how my shadow side derails my leadership. After reading Spell Bound<\/em> by Daniel Lieberman and learning how our subconscious affects our behavior,[3]<\/a> often for the worse, and A Failure of Nerve<\/em> by Edwin Friedman, about the non-anxious leader,[4]<\/a> I am beginning to realize how I\u2019ve let my own insecurities derail me, how I have used projection to blame another for my own difficult feelings.<\/p>\n In his book, The Sound of Leadership<\/em>, Jules Glanzer, writes, \u201cLeadership is being that results in doing. Who you are determines how you lead. How you lead flows from who you are.\u201d[5]<\/a> Of course, there are the theories and practical applications Northouse suggests, but if leadership is something we can learn as he also suggests, and if it flows from who we are, I wonder if the process for us is in more deeply learning who we are and Whose we are. I know, I know, I say this in almost every post about leadership but as I consider the subconscious and conscious thoughts and behaviors that derail me, continuing the process of learning who I am and Whose I am seems to be THE thing that will make me the leader I believe God is calling me to be.<\/p>\n [1]<\/a> David Dunaetz, Leadership: Theory and Practice Northouse, 2015, https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/playlist?list=PLx-uqKoW1C5n2PdLpug2kFaw_1YjWESFW<\/p>\n [2]<\/a> Peter G. Northouse, Leadership: Theory and Practice (London: Sage Publications, 2010) 3.<\/p>\n [3]<\/a> Lieberman, Daniel Z.. Spellbound: Modern Science, Ancient Magic, and the Hidden Potential of the Unconscious Mind, BenBella Books. Kindle Edition.<\/p>\n