Barnabas File

The 20 th century industrial model thrived on a tight command and control model.   It increased production, but it often fostered an “us” versus “them” approach--industry versus labor union, employer versus employee, “boss” versus workers.     In his New Leadership Paradigm , Steve Piersanti picks up on this in calling for a shift from the old paradigm of control to one of collaboration.  The control approach depended on coercion, dominance, and secrecy to “keep people in line.”  The new paradigm calls for collaboration.  Piersanti describes collaboration in this way: “Leadership is exercised through invitation, request, dialogue, persuasion, respect, openness, kindness, integrity, and partnership, without compulsion.” This is the way that the church was intended to function.  In Romans 12:4-8, the apostle Paul writes, For just as each of us has one body with many members, and these members do not all have the same function,   so in Christ we, though many, form one body,

I n his New Leadership Paradigm model ,   Steve Piersanti challenges organizations to move from the traditional hierarchical structure to an interconnected network.  The former is the pyramid approach that posits ultimate power to a limited number of people at the top who command and control large numbers of people at the bottom of the pyramid.  The alternative is to the network approach that views the organization as a network with leadership and decision-making power disbursed “throughout the many nodes and links of the network.” Ori Brafman and Rod Beckstrom addressed this idea in their book,  The Starfish and the Spider .   They note, “ If you cut off a spider’s leg, it’s crippled; if you cut off its head, it dies. But if you cut off a starfish’s leg it grows a new one, and the old leg can grow into an entirely new starfish.” The Starfish and the Spider  argues that organizations fall into two categories: traditional “spiders,” which have a rigid hierarchy and top-down l

Unless you have been hiding in a bunker, you realize that the challenge of leading an effective organization--whether it is a business, a not-for-profit, or a church--is a daunting task.     Much of my coaching ministry with clergy leaders deals with people issues--working with staff colleagues, interacting with lay leaders, relating to church participants, or dealing with community leaders.     Many of the old ways of leading no longer work.     We must find new ways to lead.     A pathfinder in this task is Steve Piersanti, former CEO of Berrett-Koehler Publishers (he continues with the organization in an editorial role). Steve led his organization to practice what they preach or, rather, publish. B-K Publishers is the source of leadership books by authors like Mark Miller, Ken Blanchard, Bob Johansen, and many others.  Under Steve’s leadership, the company followed principles presented in the books they publish and identified what they called a “New Leadership Paradigm.” A co

We approach the future in different ways.    In coaching, we encourage people to be intentional about their future, but we must realize that there is more than one way to prepare for the future. Becoming a Resonant Leader presents the research of Annie McKee on three ways of thinking about the future. McKee observes that individuals tend to be either goal-oriented, direction-oriented, or action-oriented.  Goal-oriented people lay out specific objectives and work toward them in a straight-forward way. They do not necessarily have a vision or dream for their lives but focus instead on short-term achievement and success. Often this is the approach that we emphasize most in coaching.  The weakness is that it can become rather cut and dried with little passion involved. Other people use a direction-oriented approach that recognizes and chooses a path they wish to pursue without being too specific about each step.  These individuals are very aware of their environment and, ac

In the wake of the resignation of the pastor of a megachurch in our area, the local paper published an article citing the findings of a survey related to pastoral attrition: “LifeWay Research also found that 40 percent left pastoral work before age 65 because they had a change in calling, 25 percent cited a conflict in a church, 12 percent left because of personal finances and 12 percent left for family issues. The online survey conducted in 2015 asked questions of 734 former senior pastors who left in four Protestant denominations, and respondents could choose more than one reason.” In reviewing these results, most of us realize that if a person is continually dealing with conflict, financial concerns, or family issues, he or she will probably consider “a change in calling” for personal well-being and relationship health!  We expect too much of our senior leaders and often fail to provide the support they need in setting boundaries. Most of the challenges cited here rel

The Fourth of July gives us the opportunity to celebrate our freedoms, but the other side of the coin are the responsibilities that go with freedoms.     Paul White of Appreciation at Work addressed these freedoms in a recent blog : The freedom to live where we want. The freedom to choose our vocation. The freedom to speak our minds freely. The freedom to gather in groups publicly. The freedom to choose our religious beliefs. Although we could get into a great discussion about how absolute these freedoms are and how they are limited by socioeconomic circumstances, I want to respond to this question that White asks: “What responsibilities go with the freedoms and rights that we have?” I would suggest first is the responsibility of citizenship.  This involves obeying the laws, paying our taxes, accepting civic responsibilities (voting and serving on juries), and serving our community as volunteers and in military service.  Again, these are not absolute, as I will n