Preferred Leadership Style, Prospective Applications, and the Strengths and Weaknesses

My Leadership
Student’s Name
Course
Date
Since the beginning of the ages, humankind has always appreciated the need for leaders in all aspects of life. Conventionally, leaders perform crucial duties, such as influencing and motivating their followers. They also strengthen their followers by enhancing their competencies.As such, followers look up to their leaders for guidance, while many others view them as their role models. That being the case, leaders must always strive to demonstrate the best leadership skills that will conform to the expectations of their followers. The same is true in church leadership, where followers look to their leaders for spiritual guidance. They also canvass the support and counsel of their leaders, especially when things unfold in unexpected ways. In this regard, church leaders must adopt leadership styles that will enable them to serve their followers efficaciously and without scaring any group away. In essence, the leadership style they assume must be all-inclusive to cater to the needs of all generations. Equally crucial, a leader must have the capacity to establish a personal reputation of being trustworthy. This means they must distinguish themselves as people who can be entrusted with resources and other critical duties. In my field of pastoral care, I have observed that leadership styles are integral in church and pastoral work. As such, I do my level best to adjust my leadership styles to serve the best interest of the church, my followers, and myself.[James Kouzes and Barry Posner,The Leadership Challenge: How to Make Extraordinary Things Happen in Organizations (San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass, 2012), 263.]
Leadership Style That I Would not Emulate
As indicated previously, one of the fundamental responsibilities of a leader, and in this context, a church leader, is to influence and motivate their followers. In pursuit of these critical objectives, there are several leadership styles that I would endeavor to avoid at all costs. First, I must mention that without involving God in my leadership, my undertakings would culminate in undesirable outcomes. Even though my leadership style cannot be entirely similar to those of Biblical leaders, I know God can help me deal with the challenges I encounter more decisively. In my leadership journey, I would always remind myself of the words of Bruce Lee, a former martial arts movie star. He urged people not to pray for an easy life but for the strength to endure.I would espouse the same by acknowledging that my leadership would be riddled with myriad challenges and setbacks, which would require ample reservoirs of inner strength to deal with them.[Guy Kawasaki,The Art of the Start 2.0.: The Time-Tested, Battle-Hardened Guide for Anyone Starting Anything(New York: Penguin Group, 2015), 79.]
Therefore, one leadership style I would strive to avoid is being overly critical. As a church leader, I should acknowledge that people are created differently, which means they can behave differently even in similar circumstances. Some can be better decision-makers, while the contrary is true. I have had first-hand experience in my church where the current pastor harshly and publicly corrects other church leaders, such as deacons and trustees. Even though his near-dictatorial disposition has not impacted his influence negatively, I bet it has hurt the sensibilities of some members. In this regard, when I become a pastor, I would endeavor to extend equal treatment to all my followers, irrespective of their contribution to the church. This goes contrary to the position taken by Kouzes and Posner that leaders must recognize the contributions of their followers by showing appreciation for individual excellence. In my view, this approach is applicable in other settings apart from the church. In the church setting, it would be counterproductive because some followers may not have the capacity to make contributions worthy of appreciation. Therefore, appreciating others and sidelining those who do not make significant contributions would be an implicit way of being overly critical. In addition, it would be akin to setting unreasonable expectations among my followers, which would needlessly occasion pressure and anxiety. For instance, those who make insignificant contributions to the church may feel unworthy and unwanted, ingredients that could potentially brew trouble. In the same connection, I would exercise care in choosing my words when addressing my followers. Some people are pretty sensitive, and they might construe the slightest slip of the tongue as criticism of them. In sum, I would endeavor to show equal empathy to all my followers, their shortcomings or strengths notwithstanding.[James Kouzes and Barry Posner,293.]
The other leadership style I would avoid as a pastor is being autocratic. While being an effective leader entails having the capacity to make critical decisions, it does not mean making them unilaterally. As such, I would give my followers a free hand to make decisions so long as they remain within the confines of the church’s objectives and Christian tenets. I would also discourage them from implementing my decisions without challenging them when they feel that need. This contrasts with what Kawasaki posits in the book "Enchantment," where he encourages followers to do as their leaders instruct without raising a finger, even if there is no reasonable explanation for it. In business and political circles, the style is known as narcissism, where leaders exhibit arrogance, dominance, and hostility, among other traits. In the church context, this would be detrimental and would portray me in a bad light, and might discourage some church members. I would, therefore, strive to create a culture that encourages my followers to actively engage in decision-making by contributing their ideas and pointing out questionable decisions. This means adopting an open policy where all followers, regardless of their age, gender, or social standing, can discuss issues with me without the fear of reprisals. I observed a similar disposition in my former pastor, Haywood Wiggins, who was a people’s person. He, for instance, allowed all people access to his office without any restrictions. In addition, he informed other church leaders before implementing any changes in the church. He was the humblest person I had ever seen and I never witnessed him scold anyone. This is the reason why I would perpetually involve God in my leadership, and as such, I would ask Him to help me demonstrate the same humility as Jesus did. I would not want to be an autocratic leader who inspires fear among the followers. On the contrary, I would make every conceivable effort to be a servant leader to my followers. This would inevitably set a good precedent for followers to treat others equally and compassionately. Just like pastor Wiggins, I want to make an indelible imprint in my followers’ lives and leave behind a remarkable legacy.[Guy Kawasaki,Enchantment: The Art of Changing Hearts, Minds, and Actions(New York: Penguin Group, 2011), 166.]
My Preferred Leadership Style
Being a leader is certainly not an easy undertaking because, at times, events unfold differently, leaving one feeling discouraged, overwhelmed, or even misunderstood. However, as a church leader, I would have to adopt leadership styles that instill hope, enthusiasm, and proper guidance in my followers. To achieve this, I would like to make it my foremost goal to be at my best to generate extraordinary outcomes among my followers. In this regard, one of the leadership styles that I prefer is episcopal leadership, which suggests I, as the leader, should offer guidance to my followers.[James Kouzes and Barry Posner, 26.]
However, as I indicated before, I would favor abstaining from being an autocratic leader, which means being consultative and open to discussions. Even though my followers will expect me to come up with solutions to the various adversities they encounter, I reckon that it would the height of folly to depend on my knowledge entirely. In order to make decisive and reasonable decisions, I will need to consult widely to get insights from other people. This, in my view, is the hallmark of servant leadership, which means involving others. A church, like other organizations, espouses shared beliefs and objectives, and without proper guidance, achieving them would only be an undertaking in futility. Since the two are shared, it would only logical to bring everyone on board, communicate, and build support to steer the organization (church) in the right direction. In other words, forging common ground on which all people can reach a consensus. Consultative leadership also involves triggering passion among followers for a purpose and urging them on against all odds. Many people ascribe to the misconception that being a consultative leader may result in one losing authority and assertiveness. However, this is not necessarily true because consultative leaders still retain the ability and discretion to make the final decision. I prefer this leadership style because it would enable me to assume the role of a mentor by embracing the opinions of my followers. This is paramount since it would facilitate the cultivation of robust relationships and bonds with them, paving the way for me to serve them more efficaciously. The leadership style would also allow me to appreciate that I, being incomplete as I happen to be, need to learn and grow alongside my followers.[James Kouzes and Barry Posner, 144.]
Further, after being ordained as a pastor, I would strive to be a transparent leader who is open and honest about my life and goals. From experience, I understand that disclosing my interests would earn me trust. This is because people are curious by nature and always wonder what the motivations of their leaders are. Therefore, I know there is immense power in church leaders who keep their lives as open books to their followers. A transparent leader does not engage in the deception of their followers for whatever reason. They also encourage their followers to undertake oversight and provide appropriate feedback without fearing victimization. Therefore, as a transparent leader, I would create avenues for my followers to provide feedback and criticism where needed. I would also not hide anything from my followers, albeit not oversharing. This would enable me to foster and enhance trust in the church organization, which, in turn, would help it achieve remarkable progress...