Four Leadership Styles
DIRECTOR - The authoritarian leader wants everyone to know that he is in complete charge of his operations. He has a deep need to be in control of his people and their activities. He prefers people who are dependent and who do not question his authority. He is interested in overcoming problems in his own way. Often, he finds that his people are hurt by his focus on the tasks at hand. He loves to talk tasks, production, and organization. He is more of a doer than an analyzer. He expects his orders to be carried out to the letter or he demands to know the reasons for non-compliance. He has no problem with issuing letters of discipline or punishment to maintain control over his "troops". He leads more by telling people what they cannot do, than what they can do. This leader looks at his people as those with a sinful heart who cannot ultimately be trusted. He feels that he needs to hold meetings to warn, correct, and chasten the unruly. Much of his preaching and teaching is rule oriented with a large measure of Old Testament judgment mixed in. He tends to rule by fear more than by faith. He expects people to listen to his orders as he is a direct representative of God. He is often rigid, but tends to see results from those who are able to submit to his leadership.
FACILITATOR - This leader seeks to make relationships and tasks easier or seem less difficult. He works to produce the greatest blend of positive relationships and goal achievements. He is skilled in smoothing over conflicts in ways that brings out the best in people and their production. He is able to find the best of both the purposes and the processes in most situations. He is specially equipped to look for proactive ways of improving personal and corporate successes. He learns how to balance both the trust and the participation of the majority of people. By integrating the needs of his people and their responsibilities, he leads through consensus building leadership. He likes to see himself more as a playing coach than a managing director who just gives orders. He sees potential in most individuals and situations because he is able to focus on the essentials while overlooking the non-essentials. He is more interested in empowering his members by building them up into all aspects in Christ than anything. He teaches, strengthens, and assists members in maturity and confidence. He actively takes the initiative to find a favorable way to the majority to accomplish the will of God. He is a master at helping people feel an important part of a significant movement for the Lord.
ANALYZER - This leader is careful to think through every aspect of a situation before making a decision. Shy by nature, this leader prefers to work out every detail of a plan, lesson, or sermon before delivering it. Criticisms cut deeply into his mind, emotions, and will. He is often regarded more as a hermit since he enjoys writing extensive notes before presenting his ideas. Careful to a fault, the analyzer is rarely willing to do anything that would jeopardize his safety. Through the years, many of these leaders have found jobs teaching in seminaries and Bible colleges. They tend to put too much emphasis on the letter of the law and not enough on the spirit of love. Often these leaders are so careful to do things correctly that they seldom accomplish a lot in their ministries. Fearful of rejection, they tend to not want to risk any experimentation. Many times, the analytical are so hesitant to try new things, that they deprive their people of opportunities to fulfill their potentials. Since they are critical of themselves they also tend to be overly harsh on others. Unsure of themselves around people, they tend to prefer independent jobs rather than being forced to work in cooperation with others. Fortunately, they are self-starters and able to sustain their work without a lot of external stimulus. Often, this leader can be too self-deprecating so he lacks confidence. His greatest strength is his sense of dependence on the Lord for everything. More analytical type leaders are found in the scriptures and the ministry than any other type. However, he is usually more comfortable following than leading others. He is allows people to do what they can do without interfering in their ministries. He needs plenty of time alone with God to recharge his batteries. He can become a good teacher, but usually not a good Pastor.
ENCOURAGER - This leader loves to encourage people to feel accepted, love, and understood. He is far more effective in ministering relationally than through systematic teaching or preaching. He prefers to emphasize the importance of interpersonal skills in administration. He feels that the majority of problems can be worked out through cooperative dialogue and the wise use of intercessors. He never seems to tire of meetings where he is a master at diplomatically working out complex issues. He has a sense of when to use his relational skills in private or public ways. He needs people who can help him organize his affairs and ministries because he is too busy thinking about the relational aspects. When conflicts seem too difficult, he tends to become passively cooperative because he hates confrontations. He will go along with the goals of the group, but he prefers to maintain good harmonious relationships. He is a master at being conciliatory when faced with his own faults. His humble and sensitive manner makes him especially effective with the majority of the women in his organization. Being so approachable, he is usually picked to be the intercessor in major conflicts between two powerful leaders. He loves to quote the words of Jesus who taught, "Blessed are the peacemakers for they are called sons of God." (Matt. 5:9) Low in his concern for accomplishments, he is often considered an ineffective administrator. He usually smiles when people are around because he would rather converse than work on projects. He would rather spend 10 hours talking with people than spending 10 minutes working at writing out his sermon. He is especially effective at comforting the hurting and inspiring people to greater service. Whenever you are experiencing conflicts, this is the best person to mediate the peace.
Notice that people can have various degrees of each leadership style. For example a person who is a complete director in the way he leads will be a +10 on accomplishment of tasks while being a 0 in human relations. He is so concerned about winning battles that he often causes offense to nearly everyone around him. Still, he looks at life at as a series of battles that must be won, regardless of the people that must be wounded in the process.
In contrast the encourager could be a +10 on human relationships, but be a 0 in successfully completing his tasks. He is most concerned with keeping harmonious relationships in tact. He is often too concerned about offending people that he has a hard time accomplishing the tasks that are set before him. Since harmonious relationships rank high in his priorities, he has a hard time getting motivated to do more than the minimum in his work. He has a great capacity to win friends and influence people, but he rarely takes advantage of this in building the kingdom of God in either quantitative or qualitative ways.
The analyzer, on the other hand, moves between 0-5 in his human relational skills as well as his ability to achieve objectives. He is in need of assistance in both human relational skills and goal accomplishments because of his tendency to isolate himself from any risks. He has the richest ability to think through the meanings, implications, and reasons behind the issues, but has a hard time winning friends and persevering through hardships. He tends to get discouraged quicker than all other kinds of leaders. Many leaders have learned that their most valuable deputies are analyzers. Without these people, many leaders are forced to guide through a series of tragic trial and errors decisions.
However, the facilitator’s style of leadership has the greatest potential to maximize both human relationships and task accomplishments. The facilitator has the capacity, know-how, and motivations to be able to bring out the best in people for the greatest accomplishment of the overall will of God. Some facilitator are better than others so some people mistake them for one of the other kinds of leaders until they are mature and experienced. Tragically, some leaders who were formerly using the facilitator style of management have sunk back into the other three styles on a permanent basis. While it may be prudent to resort to one of the other styles of leadership during times of crisis, conflict, or instability, the facilitator style will tend to produce the greatest long term results both in people relations and task accomplishments.
The director-chief style of leadership tends to predominate in most organizations. It seems that many leaders have simply followed their cultural chieftaincy models of leadership thereby erecting "modern tribalistic patterns in their churches, schools, and groups.
Instead of looking to what seems familiar, many of leaders should see that Jesus and Paul followed a combination of these styles of leadership. These men occasionally resorted to the director role in overturning the money tables in the temple. Or Jesus might retreat to analyze and pray about his next decision. Moreover, Jesus spent a great amount of time encouraging, fellowshipping, and demonstrating his love with the disciples as well as Mary and Martha.
What is amazing to me about this case study, is that the leaders who designed the extension education program used the facilitator role, but it eventually deteriorated into the analyzers versus the director style of leadership. Over the course of several years, the director gained the advantage since they were more willing to resort to power plays than the analytical who felt the risks to great to continue fighting over ideal principles. As a result, the program is now directed as a General of an Army would give orders under battle like conditions. The most interesting aspect is that this has tended to attract a dependent group of students who probably will not do more with their education that receive a certificate at the end of their studies. If the directors would have realized the following effects of their leadership style they might have been able to prevent the program from deteriorating into a dictatorship where people only feigned obedience on a superficial level. Tragically, the students produced by the extension center were able to contribute very little to the advancement of the kingdom any better than when they started the program. However, the directors felt that they had accomplished their mission regardless of who they had to step on to succeed.
