What are cultural tendencies that sabotage Christian leadership? What about Christian followership? This past week, a Team Expansion team leader asked us for insights on this question in hopes of understanding these things and dealing with them more effectively. To get the ball rolling he nominated the idea of democracy. He wrote, “It’s a beautiful thing in many scenarios but the fact that you never see it used on sports teams points out that it has its limits. Doing everything democratically on a mission team might not always be possible.” What can you add? Just click “Comment” below.
I have noticed a couple of different cultural clashes regarding leadership/followership expectations within the USA which I expect can also be found in other places around the world.
1) The Big Man vs. The Servant Leader. Many cultures cannot imagine a humble man being a leader. They feel a need for their leader to be wealthy and influential. To a white American evangelical like myself many Black leaders appear to be too ostentatious in their display of wealth and power and therefore appear disqualified from leadership, yet these people I find “ostentatious” have the very qualities that people in their culture are looking for in a leader and may actually be more qualified than a less assuming person.
2) Another challenge I’ve run into is the difference between open and closed cultural systems of leadership. In cultures which are younger and more democratic (such as the Western USA), leadership positions are available to anyone who can grab the bull by the horns. In older, more controlled cultures (like in the deep South), leadership is a privilege granted by the current leaders to those who have proved themselves to be faithful followers. In a closed culture, a leader who takes initiative is considered a threat to the social order and disqualified for leadership. In an open culture, a person who is trying to earn trust by being a good follower is considered disqualified for leadership because he doesn’t take inititive…