Unit III. Conduct: Congregational Leadership Grid–Five Styles
Objective:
The “Congregational Leadership Grid” (CLGrid) presents five leadership styles based on behavior patterns and interaction of contextual factors, primarily-
- the practice of servant leadership after the pattern of Christ
- the relationship of members/coworkers
- the preparedness of leaders/coworkers
- the performance of functions, tasks
- the church’s systems/environment/situation
- the fulfillment of the congregation’s kingdom mission
“Charting your course” affirms that you have choices to make: to become a faithful, effective servant leader of the Lord, and then to faithfully continue in that path. The possibilities are challenging, exciting, and rewarding. In our visual roadmap for the course, there are three points of keen interest converging to fulfill kingdom goals:
- the content is servant leadership
- the context is the congregation/leadership situation
- the conduct is your choice of styles and models
Congregational Leadership Grid and Biblical Insights
The CLGrid seeks to be faithful to biblical principles of mission performance and concern for people and relationships. So, let’s examine a basic passage, Ephesians 4:11-16-
- Christ appointed diverse, gifted leaders for His service in the body of Christ (v. 11).
- Leaders have the responsibility to nurture and develop members/coworkers for “works of service” (v. 12).
- Such service builds up, strengthens the body of Christ–the congregation (v. 12).
- The mission of the congregation should include spiritual goals: unity, faith, knowledge, maturity, and the fullness of Christ (v. 13).
- The congregation is to have a “spiritual defense system” against its adversaries (v. 14).
- Church health and growth merges both the concern for people and performance in the life of the church (v. 15).
- Congregational systems–that is, its body life–exists and works together in love, expressing its highest relationship (v. 16).
Reviewing a roll call of biblical leaders, their styles and functions, shows a great variety in servant leadership, going beyond but supporting our study of grid styles. My starter list includes: lawgivers, historians, poets, prophets, priests, judges, kings, family heads, warriors, craftsmen, apostles, pastors, teachers, evangelists, deacons, missionaries, strategists, writers, women leaders, encouragers, supporters—and the list goes on. (See Hebrews chapter 11 and SkillTrack® 1.2 for developing these biblical concepts.)
CLGrid and Contemporary Research
The CLGrid is also based on contemporary research–primarily in the area of contingency/situation/contextual leadership; it becomes a tool for servant leadership. (See the study abstract at end of Unit.) Let me summarize and adapt the findings:
- Leadership is greatly influenced by several factors in the congregational situation, primarily tasks, worker, and leader.
- CLGrid leadership must give consideration to the congregation’s systems, environment, resources, and specific mission.
- Leaders are made, not born, although this can be overstated. The CLGrid focus is not on natural traits but on behavior patterns that can be learned and practiced.
- There is no one-best leadership style that fits all situations. Each person may have a dominant leadership style, may find it difficult to change, but can learn new skills and behavior.
- The CLGrid offers a framework for congregational leaders to make informed choices from among five styles in seeking to be more effective in a given situation.
What is the Congregational Leadership Grid?
- As have other “revisionists,” so I have used “the grid concept” developed by Blake and Mouton, but with intentional changes focusing on servant leadership in a congregation.
- The CLGrid develops and affirms five leadership styles that are usable tools in practicing servant leadership. Each style is not merely measured against a universal one-best style (9,9 of Blake and Mouton), but is presented with its own possibilities and limitations.
- 2,2 may help but is not an effective dominant style
- 8,2 may be efficient in getting work done, but may neglect valid concern for people, relationships
- 2,8 is effective, even necessary, in many congregational settings, but may neglect the congregational mission
- 5,5 makes and owns mutual goals, on a consensus level
- 8,8 “highest good” for major congregational endeavors, but not the “one ideal” for every situation
Grid Measurements and Application
Review the graphic below as you continue this study. The scale is from 2 to 8 rather than 1 to 9 because it affirms the reality that most of us do not live in the grand banquet hall of leadership, nor freeze in its lowest dungeon. Four elements are reported:
- Concern for performance, for mission results: the horizontal axis (1st number) measures the leader’s focus on the task, work to be done, performance of the congregation and its results–usually growth in numerical terms; too often implies the “X” theory that people hate work, must be made to do it.
- Concern for people, for member relationships: the vertical axis (2nd number) measures “the people factor,” the leader’s personal relationship to members and coworkers–including warmth, friendliness, approval, respect, and trust; assumes the “Y” theory that people like to do their best, can be trained and trusted to perform well.
- 3-D–the “third dimension” of the CLGrid focuses on the congregational situation, its leaders, coworkers, functions, environment, and systems. See the Study Abstract (end of Unit) and review Unit II to provide specific help for this.
- “Expresses servant leadership”– this factor indicates the more positive side of each CLGrid style and how it might be the best choice in specific situations; behavior and functions are intentionally combined.
Reflection/Assessment/Application of CLGrid:
- Learn the major elements of each leadership style.
- Assess your dominant leadership style, and perhaps your second most-often-used style.
- Apply each style to situations in your own leadership.
- Choose to exercise every CLGrid style as a practice of servant leadership after the pattern of Christ.
1. Passive Leadership Style–Congregational Grid 2,2
- 2, low concern for congregational performance and mission results; little energy toward tasks
- ,2 low concern for people, for members, coworkers and relationships; distancing from people
- 3-D gives little or no attention to congregational situations or systems; doesn’t ask the question, “Why?”
Passive (2,2) expresses servant leadership only sometimes: (Matt. 25:25)
- when taking time to recover from illness or exhaustion
- when withdrawing from “24-7” work schedule
- when retreating–spiritual renewal, meditation, regrouping
- when a relationship just isn’t within your limited scope
- when you lack the necessary skill-set for a task
- when the task simply isn’t worth doing
Note: This is not an effective dominant style for congregational leadership, although it may have limited values as suggested above.
Similar Styles–focusing most often on the negative:
- 1,1 Impoverished Management (B/MGrid) exerting minimum effort to do required work, or to sustain organizational membership; fears being abandoned but trys to “hang on”
- 1/1 Passive Paralytic (White), low expression of both authority and servanthood; “just let it happen”
- “Hermit”–the Eroding Style: (Dale) withdrawing from people and work; negative about people needs and passive about congregational mission achievement
- Also, “non-leadership”–inaction, uncaring, bankrupt
Reflection/Assessment/Application of This Grid:
2. Directive Leadership Style–CLGrid 8,2
- 8, high concern for congregational performance and achieving mission results; task orientation
- ,2 low concern for people, for relationships with members and coworkers; for maturity or development
- 3-D gives incomplete, short-term assessment of changing situations, systems, or environment
Directive (8,2) expresses servant leadership sometimes:
- when focusing on a specific task within a new context
- when a coworker is new and has not yet proven maturity: readiness, ability, willingness, or confidence
- when a task is technical or very prescriptive
- when a coworker is in a new position, or has a major change in assignment
- when a coworker has low performance and needs skill or behavior training and improvements
- when a new or existing team needs a “jump start” in the right direction within a given time frame
- when there is an emergency among the coworkers or within the congregational situation: legal, moral, etc.
Similar Styles–even if negative factors:
- 9,1 Authority-Obedience Style (B/MGrid): high on production (9), and low (1) on people, efficiency in operations results from arranging conditions of work in such a way that human elements interfere to a minimum degree; fear of failure, seeks mastery
- 12/1 Divine-Authoritarian (White): claims spiritual truth as basis of authority for leadership; does not emphasize servanthood; concerned chiefly with getting God’s work done; often a “benevolent dictator”
- S1 Telling Style (H/B): a directive leadership style, providing specific instructions and closely supervising performance; when the coworker has low maturity readiness-unable, unwilling and insecure.
- Commanders–the Efficient Style (Dale): active/negative, active toward emphasizing congregational mission; negative, aggressive toward people, overpowering others; often getting what they want in the short run
- Path Goal Directive (House): lets subordinates know what is expected and how to get there
Reflection/Assessment/Application of This Grid:
3. Supportive Leadership Style–CLGrid 2,8
- 2, low concern for congregational goals, performance and mission results; little energy toward tasks
- ,8 high concern for individual persons, coworkers, teams and relationships; mutual warmth and respect
- 3-D gives attention to personal situational dynamics, more to “family systems” than to organizational “systems thinking”; likes one-on-one perspective
Supportive (2,8) expresses servant leadership often: even essential in congregational leadership for many of its leaders, coworkers, and functions:
- serving the servants, encouraging coworkers
- acting in the best interest of others, not self
- caring, pastoral, nurturing, counseling attention to persons, families, and groups
- attention within groups to relationships rather than task issues; seeks to involve others
- celebrating improvements, attainments and victories
- spiritual direction: teach, develop, rejoicing and weeping
- building authentic, caring congregational fellowship
- providing an example of an accepting, believing, quiet presence even in troubled times
Similar Styles–sometimes focusing on the negative:
- 1,9 Country Club Management (B/MGrid): low (1) on concern for congregational performance and results; high (9) on consideration for people and relationships; thoughtful attention to the needs of people for satisfying relationships leads to a comfortable, friendly organization atmosphere and work tempo; fears rejection, seeks warmth and approval
- 1/12 The Submissive-Servant Leader (White): low (1/) on authority, high (/12) on servanthood; overwhelming desire to please everyone, relationships protected at all costs
- Encouragers: the Empathic Style (Dale): passive-positive is warm, trusting, approachable; submissive with people; praised as selfless, often controlled by others; goals and production may be a necessary evil
- Path-Goal Supportive (House): shows concern for the needs of subordinates; makes the work more pleasant and is friendly and approachable
Reflection/Assessment/Application of This Grid:
4. Participative Leadership Style–CLGrid 5,5
- 5, moderate concern for performance, for mission results, but not beyond group agreement or willingness
- ,5 moderate concern for people, for member relationships, but not to the extent of high expectation, trust, or development; low risk level; small gains, small losses
- 5,5 could be called consensus, constituency-centered, democratic, or compromising leadership style. I have sometimes called this “the committee leadership style,” or “keeping everyone equally satisfied”
- 3-D usually gives attention to the immediate situation in the congregation (or one of its systems)–or to a specific issue or task at hand; does not usually take the longer or deeper look; pursues a specific job assignment
Participative (5,5) expresses servant leadership often:
- when seeking to build consensus around a specific project or issue; listening to people for their ideas so you can make better or more accepting decisions
- when sharing a task or responsibility between staff and lay leaders: committees, teams, councils; expressing democratic participation: calendar, budgeting, projects
- when pursuing an effort to work with people at their current readiness level; being inclusive in a group with members at differing maturity levels
- when training and developing coworkers to take responsibility for task and mission results, and people concerns
- when risks, impact, and methodology are at limited levels; or options are being developed and tried
- when team morale is part of the task, if not its most significant element
- when following church policy or procedure to get the assigned task done (Organization-Man)
- when “finding out where people want to go, then getting out in front to lead them” (pretty close to some “benevolent dictators”)
Similar Styles–some negative:
- 5,5 Organization-Man Style (B/MGrid): moderate concern for production (5,) and people (,5); adequate organization performance is possible through balancing the necessity to get out work while maintaining morale of people at a satisfactory level; fear of being embarrased, need to be popular; middle-of-the-road style
- 6,6 People Pleaser Style (White): employs some servanthood and some authority according to what people want or will approve; conflict is not acceptable, and decisions are by consensus and/or compromise
- S2 Selling Style (H/B): this leader asks coworkers for input, provides for clarification, makes the decision and sells it; when coworkers have moderate task readiness (R2), unable but willing or confident to do the work
- S3 Participating Style (H/B): this leader provides encouragement and growth; shares ideas and facilitates decision-making; when coworker has moderate maturity, task readiness (M3)–able but unwilling and/or insecure
- Path-Goal Participative Style (House): consults with subordinates and takes their suggestions for consideration when making decisions and setting goals
Reflection/Assessment/Application of This Grid:
5. Transformative Leadership Syle–CLGrid 8,8
The CLGrid 8,8 – transformative leadership style, (Romans 12:2) draws upon contingency styles “transforming” or “transformational” discussed in leadership material. Leaders throughout the congregation–but especially those “to whom much is given, much is requested”–should consider it as a preferred choice and practice. It embraces the content of servant leadership but still draws upon the other four CLGrid styles based on situation factors: mission, values, goals, tasks, people, and systems. Now, let’s continue our interpretation:
- 8, gives high concern for performance in achieving the congregation’s mission results; goals are set that are challenges and moves the congregation in that direction; personal and congregational goals are clearly identified, integrated, and expressed as a stewardship
- ,8 gives high concern for people, and measures member relationship by the high standard of biblical–“koinonia fellowship”; and “agape love” goes beyond warmth, friendliness, and satisfaction to mutual respect, trust, development, caring, and high expectation
- 3-D gives careful consideration to the “third dimension”-the congregation’s systems, situations and environment, and the impact one change has within other systems
- Transformative Leadership Style–expresses elements of other kindred styles, such as: transforming, transformational, collaborative, visionary, mission-centered, charismatic, effective, strategic, courageous, systems, team/partnership,–yes, even Christian, spiritual, or kingdom leadership
- 8,8 expresses servant leadership consistently and with greatest impact when it:
- creates and communicates a vision among members of the congregation and reflects the power of their ownership and passion; paints a challenging dream for the future
- helps to define the realities, challenges, and opportunities of a servant congregation
- inspires the membership and its leadership to live and work together as servants of the Lord
- seeks to transform the congregation’s membership, resources, and culture into its mission achievement
- reflects choices, situational in that 8,8 transformative leadership stays in touch with other CLGrid styles, different situations, systems and coworker task readiness
- develops members into servants, servants into leaders, and leaders into servant teams, providing continued learning, growing experiences; takes risks, learning from them
- delegates toward coworkers who are able, willing, and confident to accept work tasks and people relationships
- accepts change and conflict as normal and potentially beneficial to strengthen relationship and achieve goals
- provides a symbolic frame of reference for the congregation on its spiritual mission
- tells the stories of the church and its members, its past and present, its sorrows and joys, its failures and successes–its preparedness for today’s mission
Similar Styles to 8,8 Transformative–considered by most practioners as the most effective, but not the only one-best style for every situation; (B/MGrid) sometimes raises unrealistic expectations or is over-complex.
- 9,9 Team Management Style: high concern (9) for production and for people: work accomplishment is from committed people, interdependence through a “common mistake” in organizational purpose leads to relationships of trust and respect
- 12/12 Body Leader Style (White): high concern for authority and for servanthood (12) expresses a healthy balance between authority, service, respect for others, and a good sense of relationship to self and to the Lord
- S4 Delegating Style (H/B): this leader style provides larger goal direction, turns over responsibility for decisions and implementation; when coworker has high maturity/readiness (M4) –when able, willing and confident
- Catalyst–the Effective Style (Dale): active toward mission tasks, positive toward members; participates in the process but is not consumed by it
- Path-Goal Achievment-Oriented Style (House): emphasizes excellence in performance and displays confidence that subordinates will assume responsibility and accomplish challenging goals
Reflection/Assessment/Application of This Grid:
Unit III Action Planning:
CLGrid provides five optional leadership styles/behavior patterns. Now write your action plan. How will you put it into place? Chart your course?
Study Abstract: Behavioral Leadership Studies
Summarized by Lloyd Elder
from Organizational Behavior (Kinicki & Kreitner)
The Leadership Experience (Daft) and other research sources
Earliest Leadership Studies
- In the 1940’s research began to focus on behavior patterns more than traits (characteristics) concluding that leaders are made not born. Traits contribute to but can not accurately predict effective leadership.
- Such research also determined that there is no one best leadership style (ie., behavioral leadership pattern); various were tested for universal application.
- The third major finding is that the effectiveness of any pattern of leadership behavior depends greatly on the situation at hand. Behavioral studies focued on the behavior patterns within the situation rather than leadership traits.
- 1957 – The Ohio State studies determined that there were only two independent dimensions of leader behavior: 1) consideration of group members, and 2) initiating structures to maximize output. Further research confirmed that there is no one best leadership style.
- 1972 – University of Michigan studies sought to identify differences in effective and ineffective leaders. Two leadership styles evolved: 1) employee-centered and 2) job-centered (similar to Ohio State studies). This became the basis of further research.
1977 – Fiedler’s Contingency Model
One of the oldest and best known models in this research of leadership was developed by scholar F.E. Fiedler, simply summarized:
- Leaders are either task-motivated or relationship-motivated; based on this a leader has one dominant style and resists changing that dominant style; “one style fits all.”
- Leaders must influence the leadership situation in order to create a match between the situation and their leadership control; and, control is a key element.
- Three factors contribute favorably to the leader’s situational control:
- The quality of good relationships between a leader and followers, including trust.
- A high degree of structure for the task to be performed by the workgroup.
- Position power referring to the leader’s direct ability to influence work.
- Although research has mixed assessment of Fiedler’s model, there has been agreement:
- to continue examination of the contingency nature of leadership; new elements to be assessed.
- to affirm that there is no one best leadership style.
- to advise leaders to match their style to the situation.
- also other findings have been advanced:
- that employee-centered and job-centered are distinct styles in opposition to one another;
- that leadership behavior may be meaningfully performed by peers in a group, rather than merely by the designated leader; and,
- that within the situation other factors influence performance, not just workers and tasks.
- 1970’s – 1980’s — Path-Goal Theory of Leadership
Yet another behavioral/situational leadership theory, similar to Hersey & Blanchard, contributes to leadership style choices as a servant leader. This theory, based on personal characteristics of the group members and the task structure work environment, presents four leadership styles to move along a path toward a goal: supportive, directive, participative, and achievement-oriented.
1985 – The Management/Leadership Grid developed by Blake and Mouton was based on these earlier studies and additional research.
- Their Grid has been used by many to present the options of both leadership styles and tasks. There are two criteria plotted on their Grid with concern for production as the horizontal axis and concern for people as the vertical axis. Each is measured from 1 (low) to 9 (high) and linked to demonstrate five distinct management/leadership styles; others, of course, are possible. (Explanations usually follow 1,1; 9,1; 1,9; 5,5 and 9,9.)
- The Grid has been criticized because it is two-dimensional, measuring only those two factors. Other studies, including this Congregational Leadership Grid, seek to enlarge the concept to a third “in-depth” dimension, enrich it to other leadership findings and leadership styles, and present the CLGrid as five tools to live out servant leadership.
- The 1991 version of the New Managerial Grid is presented below because it has been enduring and catalytic in the field of contingency leadership studies. Usually it is examined in the following order: 1,1; 9,1; 1,9; 5,5 and 9,9.
Reflection/Assessment/Application of This Grid:
Re-read this abstract and underline or annotate with your thoughts. Look for ways to strengthen your leadership style(s)
