Comments on: Different Styles of Leaders

By: Mark LeHew

Mark LeHew — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 16:39:04 +0000

I think I’m a mix between 1 and 4, but I guess you should ask the people that attend my church. We tend to have a distorted view of ourselves!

By: Links from the Past Few Weeks « Chaotic Ministry

Links from the Past Few Weeks « Chaotic Ministry — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 15:50:50 +0000

[...] An addition to last week’s series on Leadership [...]

By: Prudy Verzo

Prudy Verzo — Sun, 12 Oct 2008 18:06:34 +0000

I always see myself as a relational leader yet God is developing in me as a newly church planting pastor a visionary leader.

By: leadership types from Craig Groeschel « ::huggsblog::

leadership types from Craig Groeschel « ::huggsblog:: — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 15:59:55 +0000

[...] Posted in Uncategorized Different Styles of Leaders [...]

By: Resourcefulness (Leadership 501) « Chaotic Ministry

Resourcefulness (Leadership 501) « Chaotic Ministry — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 15:41:17 +0000

[...] Styles of Leadership [...]

By: Sheriyates

Sheriyates — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 04:03:43 +0000

I am #1 (I love people) and #2…probably depends on the hormones :O) Sybil

By: princessjes

princessjes — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 00:05:51 +0000

#1 for sure!

By: jordan fowler

jordan fowler — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 23:17:34 +0000

craig, edit first word “there” instead of “their”..my bad.

By: jordan fowler

jordan fowler — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 22:56:57 +0000

Their are also inherent problems with each style….

The relational leader can struggle to lead beyond the relationships he/she can maintain.

The visionary leader has the least trouble as long as he/she can communicate the vision clearly. I have seen visionaries struggle here as they are often a Van Gogh or Picasso in a Rembrandt world.

The administrative leader may get so entrenched in systems and processes that they lose the larger question of “What do we do next and how many resources do we apply to it?”

I don’t know if I would separate out innovative leaders as a true style. Mintzberg (in Drucker’s Leading for Innovation) deems “innovation” by its very definition does not mean doing an old thing a new way. That is merely “adaption.” (Example: a wenkal engine is still a gas powered engine, not innovative, just adaptive.)

Most people we would deem great adaptive leaders are also managerial/systems types with merely a different methodology. Most innovators are really visionaries. In that sense, I don’t see it innovative as a separate “style.” (Also, our egos love to think of ourselves as innovative when most are truly just adapters).

By: Jon Wilke

Jon Wilke — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 18:30:41 +0000

Craig,
Great conversation here. At the ministry, I have leaders who are all the above. Our founder is actually is all of the above, which I find very rare. Myself, I’m a lot of #4.

Which type do you respond and follow best?

By: Kevin M.

Kevin M. — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 04:36:14 +0000

@ Craig - I am assuming that you are saying that you should build your team to complement your strengths. Is that correct?

I agree with you that the lead pastor should be the main communicator of the vision and not necessarily the visionary leader. I am curious to hear other peoples thoughts on this.

By: Tom Wells

Tom Wells — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 01:23:05 +0000

I more than lean on #1 and #2, but would prayerfully like to have a little more edge on #4. As a new church planter, my heart tends to be all over the place on a daily basis. But God generally reals me in at the end of the day…….then I begin to make sense, most of the time. Looking forward to more from you, Craig on this post!

By: Lily

Lily — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 00:36:29 +0000

I am a very strong #3 and #1 follows close behind. I have just recently been put into position so that I can use my gifts. In having conversation with my pastor and asking him where he could use the most support/help I found it is where I am strongest. God is so faithful to use us when we just let Him have His way.

By: Craig Groeschel

Craig Groeschel — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 23:38:19 +0000

Kevin, Those are great questions. Maybe someone else can jump in on the conversation.

The pastor will probably be the chief communicator of the vision but doesn’t necessarily need to be a visionary leader. Some of our best campus pastors do a great job casting vision, but they are better relational or administrative leaders.

You will probably want to build your team “around” your weaknesses but “on” your strengths. Make sense?

By: Kevin M.

Kevin M. — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 21:38:04 +0000

@ Craig Thanks for your response! A couple more questions: (1) Would the key then be to build your staff (or in my case my leadership volunteers) around your weak leadership areas? and (2) Can a pastor be THE leader without being the main visionary for the church?

By: Natalie @ I AM (not)

Natalie @ I AM (not) — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 20:19:04 +0000

#2
#1 (this one has to be more intentional though)

By: Jared B

Jared B — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 19:56:57 +0000

Now that I think about it, right now I only have one - and that is #1…I definitely need to work on the other 3 too…

Why do I feel like I must perfect all of them? It must be a sign of immaturity…I know I must work on each of them, but I feel I must perfect each one.

I’m excited to hear more about these! I hope I can learn to focus too if that’s what I really need to do.

Thanks for the wisdom Craig! And thanks everyone else for the comments.

By: Matt Bowman

Matt Bowman — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 19:37:56 +0000

Love the post Craig. I got so inspired I posted some stuff on my blog too. Would love to get everybody’s feedback. Go to: http://pastors.com/blogs/bowman/default.aspx

Great stuff Craig, thanks.

By: Josh Britt

Josh Britt — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 16:59:27 +0000

I think I would probably be 2 and 4. These are the areas I probably excel in more then the others. 2 is probably the first and 4 is the second. Good stuff! Thanks guys for writing.

By: Craig Groeschel

Craig Groeschel — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 16:58:26 +0000

Kevin, Yes, I think a person can unquestionably improve at each of these, but I think he/she is most likely naturally gifted at one or two. Rather than always focusing on building our weaker ones, it is probably more advantageous to run with the strongest ones.