Reading this 2002 article, "Multi-Layered Leadership: The Christian Leader as Builder, Shepherd, and Gardener," almost convinces me that its author must have been in conversation with Peter Drucker. It's not that hard to believe that this would be possible, since Scott Cormode, its author was the chair in Church Adminstration and Finance at the Claremont School of Theology, about a 5 minute walk to the Peter F. Drucker School of Management. Plus, it would explain the references to Peter Senge, Max DePree, and Ron Heifetz.
But outside of this pondering, a number of things have been going through my head. This model which Cormode proposes of the "Gardener," is what other leadership people would seemingly call connective leaders. In that, they recognize that there are different leadership skills requied for different situations, and that they are able to meet these situations with the appropriate skills or know how to let another person with the certain required skills, frames, or training take the lead. It's an example of shared and empowering leadership, which is able to make meaning. When Cormode writes that "the good pastor will begin to acquire skills to work with each of the models. At this point, the models stop being styles and become 'frames'" I wonder, if he was aware of the connective model? (If you click that link, you will be taken to an explanation of it, and to its diagram showing the interdependence and interrelationship of the different areas of leadership.) They seem to compliment each other well. If I had known about this article a year ago, I might have referenced it in my masters work on developing a leadership model for cultivating leadership in Haiti.
The case study which is discussed about a congregation facing a difficult situation would be a useful example of how to implement my tweaks to the Connective Leadership model below. When there is a situation or challenge, an organization, group, or person will be faced with needing to respond. When there is no challenge, and life is in a state of "status quo," this might be a state of "routine." When ideas or assumptions are challenged, rebuilding or remaking one's approach or understanding might be called for. This is where leadership as a way to cultivate meaning is so important. Recovery then, is a way of responding to a challenge, and restoring order. The extent of the challenges might categorize them as "simple, chaotic, complicated, or complex." I, with the help of the work done by Jean Lipman-Blumen and David Snowden and Mary Boone, hypothesize that these states of challenges might require different leadership skills or sets. [1] [2]
A direct approach (what Cormode would likely call the "builder" approach); an instrumental approach (what he terms the Shepherd approach); and a relational apporach (closely resembling his conception of the gardener). I could say much more here, but for now, I will leave it with this background. If there is more interest by you, the reader, I would be hapy to continue to explain the model or even provide you with my paper from last year where this model comes from.
[1] David J. Snowden & Mary E. Boone, “A Leader’s Framework for Decision Making,” Harvard Business Review, November 2007, pages 68-76.
[2] Jean Lipman-Blumen, The Connective Edge: Leading in an Interdependent World, (San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1996), page 112.
