Character

Review: The Steward Leader

/ rtrube54 / 1 Comment

steward leaderThe author of this book caught my attention in the third paragraph of his first chapter when he wrote:

“Here is the confession: in my roles as a leader I have been mostly wrong.”

He goes on to describe the trajectory of his career and reputation and observes that the point wasn’t a trajectory of greater responsibility and reputation. It was rather in following Jesus in becoming a leader of no reputation. Fundamentally, he contends that what matters most is transformed character through one’s encounter with God, where one’s greatest desire is to be accounted trustworthy by God, to be a steward of God’s trust. Then one is ready to lead.

The first part of this book lays the foundations for this steward leadership. He traces the work of the Triune God from creation of humankind as stewards of creation to the fall where we act as owners through our redemption and the call to godly stewardship.

He goes on to talk about the freedom of the steward leader, and this, I found, was one of the highlights of the book. Very simply, it is the freedom of trusting and obeying God in our relationship with Him, ourselves, others and the creation. An old chorus says, “Trust and obey, for there is no other way to be happy in Jesus but to trust and obey.” Leaders who live like this are happy and free.

Finally he contrasts being a steward leader, which is about character with other theories of leadership including transactional, transformational and servant leadership. He urges docking the “ship” in leadership that focuses on practices and focusing on transformed character that results in trajectories of leading.

The second part of this book elaborates what transformation looks like in a leader’s relationship with God, oneself, others, and the material world. He then describes “trajectories” of leadership rooted in these transformations. He looks at both the implications for the people and the organizations one leads. Such leaders prioritize relationship with God and living out of one’s call and gifting and empower people and organizations to do the same.

One other critical idea that recurs through this book is that steward leaders are not owners and that the great temptation leaders face is to forget this. Owners are self-reliant and shallow, they consider a vision theirs and resist change, they use others, and exploit the creation.

This book proposes a new model of leading. The idea of a steward is comprehensive, addressing the leader in relation to God, self, others, and the world. The author also gives a number of examples from his own leadership journey to illustrate what it means to be a steward leader. At the same time the book seemed a bit conceptual. Perhaps the next step that would be helpful in developing this model would be to highlight organizations led by steward leaders and committed to developing them. I hope Rodin will consider a follow up book along these lines.

R. Scott Rodin proposes a new approach to thinking about leaders rooted in an old biblical idea–the steward. His focus on character rather than charisma, and on transformation rather than technique, is a welcome departure from bulk of leadership books.

 

A Community of Character?

/ rtrube54 / Leave a comment

One of the perennial questions, at least since the 1960s is that of whether colleges and universities should play a role in the formation of the character of young, emerging adults. With the declining influence of the humanities, there is a back and forth discussion about whether the humanities in their exploration of the best of what we have thought, written or created have a role in character formation.

In yesterday’s post, I reviewed Big Questions, Worthy Dreams by Sharon Daloz Parks. One thing that is clear is that emerging adults are undergoing significant development of moral conviction and belief during their time in the university. The book infers that the university can play an important role in that development but the question remains, what is that role?

I would propose that, unless they are faith-based institutions (which most once were but are no longer in a secularized culture), that the university stay out of the character education business as an explicit part of its agenda because character and moral conviction are rooted in deeply held beliefs, whether religiously based, or not and for the university to engage this as an institution, it will inevitably privilege a particular set of beliefs.

What I think universities and colleges can do is consider carefully the values, which are often tacit rather than explicit, which govern its life and mission and consider what qualities of character are critical to sustain this and become increasingly explicit concerning what is expected of one who as a faculty, staff, or student s a member of this community. Moreover, most people quickly figure out where there is a difference between “ideals” and “how the game is really played.” It is the latter that will have the greatest shaping influence on the character of most people in the community.

Here are a few qualities of character which I think are essential to the life of collegiate communities:

1. Honesty. Of course it is easy to recognize the importance of sanctions against cheating and plagiarism and the falsification of data.  All of these are absolutely crucial to academic inquiry, and if anything need greater clarification in our morally pluralistic climate than ever.  But honesty also extends to how our institutions run. Are the ways policies are formed and funds allocated transparent? Are whistle-blowers punished or rewarded and protected?

2. Respect.  It seems a basic premise of higher education at its best to assume the dignity of every human being in all of their complexity–their gender, orientation, beliefs, ethnicity, social class, and station in life. The real question may be whether you know the name of the person who cleans the bathrooms in your residence hall or the academic building where you spend the bulk of your time. Beyond this, do you accord others the same treatment you would want with regard to your gender, beliefs, body type, ethnicity and more? For students, it might begin with how you treat yourselves and others on a Friday night, and what consideration you give to those who have to live in the same space as you.

3. Humility. This may seem like a strange quality and it is indeed hard to find in academic settings and yet it seems essential to the flourishing of university communities. Increasingly we consider education an entitlement, rather than a blessing. A huge deal, often to the point of silliness, is made of pecking orders and credentials. And there often can be an elitism in academic circles that “looks down” on others. Might it be good to remember how much public money from hard-working non-university types make the work of a university possible? In addition, it has often been noted that it is incredible what can be accomplished when we are not concerned about who gets the credit. And should this not engender a work ethic that strives for excellence, realizing what a gift it is to be in this place? And finally, should not the wonder of what we study and the fact that the more we know, the more we realize we don’t know engender a humility of sorts?

I might be naively ideal here. Yet it seems that even without some “character education” agenda which often is dismissed as so much “window dressing” the university can and ought to uphold and function as a community of character that does have a formative influence.