I found this interesting because it is not an article, but a statement of the leadership model of this particular organization. It is meant for internal use, but provides a good definition of distributive leadership that is applicable beyond this specific context. Rather than reiterate the definition, I will highlight some insights from the description.
Distribute leadership is not delegating. It involves much more collaboration in terms of idea generation, problem solving, and implementation from all members of the team.
Distribute leadership is team oriented. The focus is on process that engages all members of the team with their skills, interests, and perspectives. Everyone shares a common goal and mission. It is built on cooperation and trust.
Distributive leadership values the individual. Everyone is considered an expert in their area regardless of whether they are a decision maker or not. The individual becomes more effective because of the model of the group.
Distributive leadership does not fear mistakes. Failures lead to new approaches. Controlled and reasoned risk-taking is expected and encouraged.
“The central goal of the approach is for individuals to succeed in a climate of shared purpose, teamwork, and respect.” In my opinion, this is an excellent model that could be easily transferred to the church, especially in the context of decentralized ministry. Everyone is valued and engaged. There is a common purpose and the community comes together as one in order to reach the larger goals and purposes of the body.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteCheryl, great post! I enjoyed reading about this organization's leadership model and found it similar to the collaborative leadership theory. I appreciate the emphasis this model places on inclusiveness, as every member of the organization is valued. In addition, I also appreciate how the model's emphasis upon unity works to instill the mission of the organization within the people. The effectiveness of this model depends upon the unity of the people, not the charismatic personality of one individual leader. The benefit of this approach is that unity of the organization is easily measured. If people are contributing, they are on board with the organization’s mission. Whereas in other leadership models, the effectiveness of the model depends solely upon the CEO/ Pastor of the organization. In these cases, it is more difficult to measure the unity of the organization. For example, people might be attending a congregation’s services, but they aren't necessarily on board with its mission. Therefore, in distributive leadership, purpose and unity precede a follower's commitment/contribution. How liberating might this be for a pastor if purpose and unity preceded a commitment to membership? This would prevent many pointless arguments with people who aren't even invested in the congregation's central purpose!
ReplyDelete