In the interest of brevity, I have selected three narratives familiar to readers of the Bible. While there are numerous Biblical narratives that offer insights into Jesus’s leadership practices and priorities, I will simply cite a few central characteristics demonstrated in Jesus’s behavior that I consider worthy of serious consideration if not emulation. When we view Jesus as leader, we must always remind ourselves of the socio-historical backdrop of his sayings and actions.Īlthough the disclaimers stated above are daunting, I remain convinced that Jesus of Nazareth manifests character traits in His speech and actions that transcend time and culture. In contrast, our twenty-first century world often seems a “tradition-less” society (we struggle to find a corporate story), prizes youth and tries desperately to delay aging, frequently values technical expertise over practical wisdom, and challenges authority. To cite a few examples: the first century world valued tradition (the past provided a foundation for the present) age (the elderly often were considered models worthy of emulation) wisdom (defined as well-lived experience) and authority.
To be overly simplistic, any discussion of leadership in relation to Jesus the Galilean must remember the significant differences in values and ethos between the first century eastern world of Jesus and our twenty-first century western world. Apart from any reference point to Jesus of Nazareth, we intuitively know that communities vary in ethos and defining identities, and that leadership styles in these communities can often be charted on a grid from democratic and/or functionally egalitarian to authoritarian and/or autocratic. Leadership entails the means by which authority is made effective any significant change in the nature of a community or organization requires serious and studied attention to the attendant changing needs in leadership. To state the obvious, leadership of a motorcycle gang differs dramatically from that of a Rotary club college dormitories have resident directors and not boot-camp drill instructors. The nature of leadership and its implementation varies with the nature of the communities or organizations being led.
#Charles solomon and best anime of 2017 full#
Interestingly, to the author’s knowledge those writing in this area seldom mention that Jesus recruited as associates and followers individuals many today would consider the least qualified and ill-equipped to lead an organization focused upon transforming society and granting full access and participation to anyone expressing a desire to join the movement.Īttempting to bridge the historical chasm of two millennia reminds us of the importance of socio-cultural context and unstated values for leadership settings. In contrast to that literature, this article avoids superimposing assumed best leadership practices upon Jesus and instead observes his character traits and interactions with people to determine if there are demonstrable qualities and approaches that transcend time and may be applicable and relevant for any leadership setting. Sadly, much of the written literature in this area originates with modern principles and insights considered best practices and remakes Jesus in that image.
Unmentioned is that Jesus never oversaw any formal organization nor managed a budget of any size in contrast, we can make a fairly compelling case that Jesus not infrequently was considered a threat to the corporate and government establishments. The theme often stated, implicitly if not explicitly, is that this itinerant Galilean living 2000 years ago models leadership ideally suited for the modern day CEO or C-level executive. Articles and books proliferate extolling the virtues of leadership exemplified in Jesus of Nazareth.
0 kommentar(er)
