One of the worst things to do is start something new—a new job or vocation—after a really unsavoury experience. I know this from direct and bitter personal experience.
This is because we can at times be a little tender, and it is always safer to recover from trauma in safe places than potentially toxic ones. And new environments are FULL of unknowns, which only compound the essential vulnerabilities we can carry from psychologically unsafe experiences. I could go on but wish instead to redirect.
Here are four reasons leaders contribute to leaving cultures:
1. Burnout – tired, jaded leaders have nothing to give themselves let alone others, and their lack of resources is telling in how poorly their relationships are running. Where there is a lack of vitality, a form of self-protectionism spills forth into seconds and days of one’s life. It is a blessing to have experienced and recovered from burnout. It takes us years to recognise it, and at least a year or two to recover. The leader who is burning out is blessed in their honesty to commence the process of recovery. The only way is up. Hope for a burnt-out leader is they are probably not narcissistic, but fall into the opposite trap of taking too much responsibility. Simply put, leaders must have reserves and resources above and beyond themselves. Burnout plunders these resources. Those who are ‘led’ suffer as a direct result.
2. Non-reflexivity – a killer for all relationships is the inability in a person to examine their own feelings, reactions, and motives. And it’s one hundred times worse with leaders because of the influence they have (or can/do exert) on/over others. How do we teach leaders to look within, to learn to take not of their feelings, and importantly to be honest about motives, who are reticent? The opposite reality, of course, is the leader who navel gazes—theirs is depression for failures they can’t forgive themselves for. But with navel gazing leaders there is the capacity to enter recourse for decisions and actions in error. Those who do not reflect and who do not confess and repent of wrongs lose people.
3. Narcissism... in a word – I know this concept is bandied around too frequently these days. People engaging in narcissistic behaviour whether they are narcissists or not. But let’s tag the behaviour without pathologizing the person. There is a sense of this in anyone, any leader, who lacks empathy, exploits people or situations, and whose attitudes are undergirded by a sense of entitlement. These leaders inflict incredible trauma that can often ripple through the family unit in those who are victims. Traumas such as these are not easy to undo—perhaps impossible. This is why workplaces and churches must bravely do what might be unpopular to deal with such issues. But the narcissistic leader just finds another environment to exert control, manipulate, and intimidate within.
4. Ambivalence – this is the unfortunate leader who stands in a time of opportunity but does nothing to utter the prophetic into the public square of organisational culture. To be clear, the role of prophecy, as opposed to the spiritual gift, is definitely a role of anyone and everyone in leadership; to usher forth truth whether it be listened to or not. A passive leader contributes to the toxicity of a workplace. It is in the domain of every human being to speak truth and to simply accept what we cannot change, which to keep within our own personal control—our thoughts, our words, our actions. Leaders ought to be exemplary human beings. Leaders must find a way to speak constructive truth.
There is, of course, the reality of some of these four (amid other factors) that collide and collude with one another.
It is good when we come out of such experiences to reflect, to take the time to ponder, to learn, to forgive ourselves, and to forgive others what they do not yet understand.
DISCLAIMER: this commentary is NO reflection of my present personal or vocational circumstances.
No comments:
Post a Comment