as we get started talking about leadership today this is video one defining leadership now when i propose to you to fill in the blank of this statement leadership is blank leadership is what now this can be answered honestly as many ways as there are people that are trying to define it leadership is kind of like those words like maybe democracy or or love love is love is what or or peace peace is what or or or good good is what i mean each of us sort of intuitively knows what we mean by peace or by good or by love or by democracy and each of us sort of intuitively knows what we mean by leadership we could probably fill in some terms but you know it might be something more in our gut like maybe i can't define it for you but when i see it i can point to it right leadership is sort of one of these terms it's hard to get our our hands around we intuitively know what we mean by it but the word leadership can have different intuitive meanings to different people leadership's been studied as an academic discipline for almost 120 years and an analysis of the academic leadership from 1900 to 1990 shows more than 200 different definitions and they're evolving from the influences that are taking place in the world affairs from politics from perspectives of the discipline as it's been studied and been growing the reality is leadership can be difficult to define academically speaking just in words and i personally believe that the the 200 different definitions and the challenge with defining it i personally believe that that wide range of definitions is because leadership is more of a practice than it is a theoretical discipline within 24 hours of this recording in the past 24 hours i've heard about our churches in the ukraine and in poland and across eastern europe dealing with ministry in a war zone some of them showing extraordinary courage helping out in bringing christ into the middle of a of a cataclysmic violent event we've seen the compassion of our pastors and our churches ministering to those fleeing a war zone now what theory did they apply to figure out how to do that what what definition did they say the definition of leadership says this is what i'm supposed to do where does that courage come from from a definition or from looking at the model of jesus and figuring out how do i bring something to bear also within this 24 hours i heard about a massacre that's taken place on christians in nigeria i don't know much more about it other than young people were slaughtered what is it going to take for the church to to lead in this moment to bring healing to bring compassion to bring justice about in that nation what theory do you apply for that i just got off the phone with one of our global leaders who was telling me about the work that's happening in a closed nation in asia that is suffering the worst persecution that the leaders there have felt in their own lifetime but watching the gospel flourish how how do we conceptualize what leadership looks in like in that moment literally yesterday i talked to some of our leaders who just got back from an incredible uh trip in peru and they were describing how the gospel is being is flourishing among indigenous groups is that as our leaders in peru are taking the gospel out into the amazon basin out into the the region on the ecuador peru line where literally it's the civilization looks completely different than it certainly does here where i sit in north america and they're bringing the gospel in languages that i've never even heard of what does it look like what leadership theory what definition does one apply to see something amazing like that in my local context here in north america the last two years of dealing with political unrest and dealing with racial unrest and watching uh church leaders courageously and tireless tirelessly unite their congregations around the principles of the gospel i i sometimes wonder what definition of leadership are they applying or is it something more that's a practice now we're going to look at some definitions but i want you to know i understand and my belief firmly is that while there are theories we can learn while there are academic principles we can look at i happen to believe that leadership is a practice much more than it is in academic discipline however we can use academic discipline to study the practice and to learn more about it so we're going to look at the through this video and the next series of videos and some of the leading thoughts about leadership and then how leadership is in fact being practiced now leadership can be conceptualized from the perspective of the leader where we focus on the leader which we'll do here in some of these initial videos what is it about the leader that makes them effective in leadership it can be conceptualized from the interaction is there something taking place between leader and follower is there a skill is there a a a feeling an emotion a an inspiration that transpires between the interaction of leader and follower or followers it can also be theorized from the perspective of the follower relating to them helping develop them believing in them producing in the follower something so it could be conceptualized any of these ways and by the way when we read scripture gosh i mean just in jesus leadership alone we see leadership being conceptualized in each of those three ways we see a focus on jesus who he was what he did his character the attributes of god that are on display as we focus on jesus but make no mistake there were also focuses on the interaction between jesus and his followers looking at a poor woman who was being condemned and saying to her go and sin no more and in the compassion and the communication and the interaction between them this woman's whole destiny gets reordered and straightened out we see that we also look at some attributes of the followers where jesus is considering who they are and what it is that they need to to be developed and ultimately we see um you know jesus saying to his followers something like if you're gonna follow me you need to do some things you need to lay down your life you need to pick up your cross it's not about me and i leadership it's about you as a follower picking up your cross and following me at the end of the day ultimately people are going to follow they're going to voluntarily follow you if they like who they're becoming based on their interactions with you people are going to voluntarily follow based on their if they like who they're becoming based on their interactions with you so we can focus on ourselves as the leader and look at theories that do that we can look at the interaction between leader and follow and we can look about look at the attributes of the follower what they need to do but when we sum it all up do the followers like who they're becoming by virtue of your influence and your leadership in their life now ross back in 1991 he's a a leadership researcher and by the way much of what i'm going to talk about uh will come from and we'll put in a recommendation is going to come from this book by peter northhouse called leadership theory and practice this is the ninth edition there's i'm going to just kind of give him a sort of a blanket credit for much of what we're going to talk about it'll be a combination of his thoughts uh my thoughts and some other researchers as we're going through these but in this book uh there's a researcher named ross to in 1991 really gave a succinct kind of discussion of leadership and the primary thought through the decades starting back in 1900 from 1900 to 1929 leadership was primarily thought of in terms of power in many ways in terms of of domination kind of the leading thought was leadership is the ability to impress the will of the leader on those being led to induce obedience to induce respect to induce loyalty to induce cooperation so it's this idea of like power centralized power and domination i is the leader wants something to happen in you and i can impress this upon you through leadership at least that's how leadership was being theorized and we now know that that's more maybe power than leadership but that's how it was theorized for about the first 25 to 30 years of academic literature on leadership heading into the 1930s we start to see traits really start to emerge so it's not just can i impress my ideas and values upon you it's really it starts to become a focus on the leader himself and saying what are those attributes what are those traits what are those immutable characteristics of the leader that makes them able to impress their will upon other people so a real focus on traits as we head into the 1940s we start to see leadership now viewed less about an individual one-on-one or one on many and now we start to look a little bit more at the the group interaction so we have some group approaches uh the behavior it's still a trait of the leader and it's still focused on the individual leader but it's more on how is that leader behaving among the group that is now starting to allow him to impress his will upon them we head into the 1950s and a couple more themes start to emerge kind of coming out of this still of focus on the traits of the leaders but now we're looking at the group and the leader among the groups so we're starting to now focus more on the interactions less just on the leader and his individual traits and impressing his will but more now on the interaction between leader and followers particularly in group settings so we start to see leadership now more as a relationship and a relationship based upon shared goals it's moving off of i is the leader wanting command and control this and dominate this but hey as a group what are some goals that are shared between us and what can i as a leader what interactions and behaviors and skills can i employ to help us start to reach those shared goals the concept of effectiveness starts to move and starts to emerge in the 50s is the leader effective are the goals is the organization is the church is the company growing is it meeting its objectives are we effective and leadership now starts to look not just just as can i impress me upon you but can i help us become more effective and reach objectives we move into the 1960s and certainly at least here in north america where much of the research is starting to emerge it was a really tumultuous time it's tumultuous in world affairs in many regards but certainly uh in the u.s where some of the and on u.s college campuses where some of the prevailing leadership theory is emerging and we start to see a real focus on leadership as behavior which now for in for many intent and purposes is opening up leadership to not just the tall the handsome the strong the smart the person with the corner office it's moving away from some of those traits to say if if we can learn to behave a certain way toward one another leadership now becomes accessible because behaviors are something that can be learned and that we have a control over we move into the 1970s and this idea of group focus starts to yield toward organizational behavior so rather than a leader among a group and how they're behaving now how is the organization what are the organization's objectives how is the organization starting to behave um leadership is now kind of initiating and maintaining groups and and we have work groups starting to emerge and leadership teams starting to emerge and groups now as as the substitute for sort of the primary leader we're now developing groups and now leadership becomes something that's more organizational primarily through the 70s and through the 80s and you can start to see if you think of some of you that were alive during the 60s or the 70s or now as we move into the 80s and the 90s what was happening with business culture what was happening with corporate culture was happening geopolitically you can start to see that there are external influences happening in the world or in your nation that started to influence the way leadership is being conceptualized heading into the 80s a lot of the research now uh starts to um actually circle back a little bit to some focus on traits again because what we were seeing is that it's not just the interactions there is a piece of trait so in the 40s 1948 to be precise we'll learn about this next lesson we started to see a shift away from the leader and traits to behaviors and with that shift we started to kind of discard the idea of you know leaders are born versus leaders are made we just kind of threw away the idea that leaders are born and really became that they can they are solely made what we're seeing is we circle back into the 80s with honestly this is sort of the height the prolific proliferation of leadership books of you know bookstores were jammed with leadership theory so there's tons and tons of research being produced in the 80s and what they're starting to find is some of the theories that just moved to situations or interactions and away fully from traits is we we lost something we all know that there is something innate there is leadership gifting by god that takes place now it has to be developed there are skills there are behaviors there are components interactions character that's added to that but some people just lead and you know that if you watch children on a playground right there are those that are going all right guys here's what we're going to do and they're leading they haven't learned one theory they haven't developed their behaviors or skills people just look and go whatever you say it just sort of starts to happen so now we're going to start to see the the merging to together of of the the traits from the early days the skills and behaviors and interactions from sort of the middle years 50s 60s 70s and we're starting to see those uh um not fully get there and in the 80s we're gonna start to begin to see both of those brought together and really come to bear so now we're going to start to see leadership and this term emerge that i really think is one of the best definitions of leadership or needs to be involved in a definition of leadership we start to see the emergence of the word influence and throughout the the research on leadership in the 1980s this is the most prominent word and it's really starts to influence what is influence it's kind of what i described earlier do people like who they're becoming by virtue of your leadership by virtue of your influence the people will voluntarily follow if they like who they're becoming based on their interactions with you that is sort of in my opinion the definition of influence so we start to see influence we actually start to see the word transformation emerge can i lead in a way that transforms this organization can we lead in such a way that transforms the followers that transforms our results heading into the 1990s um the debate is still there whether uh or the debate debate really starts to emerge between leadership and management which we're going to talk about here in just a moment this idea of leading and you know pioneering pushing advancing versus managing doing it better and more effectively and holding the gains that have been made we also start to see the emergence of lead of research on the concept of servant leadership which as a church we tend to know what that is that i'm gonna not sit from on high and issue edicts but i'm gonna be among the people and lead sort of from the middle and demonstrate and serve them and think about bringing those who are under my leadership up we start to see a focus now on followership really for the first time so the early research was on the leader the middle sort of era of it was on the interaction between and the natural step if we're focusing on the leader and then sort of the interaction and servant leadership that i would now start to consider if i'm considering the interaction i would start considering leadership from the perspective of the follower we start to see the emergence of a theory which we'll talk about in a little uh future video called adaptive leadership that brings us up into the 21st century and one of the things that we're starting to find in the in the emerging and the leadership uh literature and the academic theorizing of leadership into the 21st century for the first time primarily we're starting to see moral approaches to leadership we're starting to see ethics become elevated in many ways because if you think on a global perspective or you think in your nation we've seen leadership crashes and burns we've seen here in america now enron and the collapse of a giant corporation we've seen arthur anderson accounting which is a global accounting firm providing accountability to corporations and they crash and burn in their ethical standards uh in an ethical scandal you can think of things that have happened in the church world right there are global movements that are being rocked by scandals and ethics and morality and what we're starting seeing is leadership is not just the charisma of a leader leaders not leadership is not just the focus of an interaction between some leadership isn't even just you know coming at it and saying how do we best develop there has to be an ethical a spiritual a moral component to it a characterological component so what we start to see is in the in the uh a lot of the literature is we see this idea of authentic leadership are you a leader who can be approached are you leading sort of behind a veneer or are you among the people are you authentic is this are you leading out of your heart or are you leading by you know sort of um edict in theory with a distance where people don't really know you are you a leader who's known among those that you're leading and creating influence we see the emergence of ethical leadership see the emergence of spiritual leadership we start to see an emphasis on humble leadership we start to see an emphasis on inclusive leadership who are those who have in a prior sense been marginalized we're seeing the the the um mobilization of of women in leadership much of the early trait leadership focus as we'll discuss here in just a moment that looked at either the attributes of a leader or that started to look at the interactions of a leader were actually exclusive in many cultural contexts of women in leadership it was stature it was height it was earning power it was perceived intellect or education those those traits that were primarily male and masculine and then even when the interactions i was forceful i was strong i was assertive there were certain interactions that were seen as indicative of leaders that when a man did him it was seen as high leadership when a women when a woman did the exact same behaviors and utilized the exact same skill they weren't seen as assertive they were seen as aggressive which assertion is good for leadership aggression is seen as a poor leadership quality now in the 21st century we're starting to look from a sense of morality and a sense of inclusion inclusion theory and saying wait a second i think we've not always conceptualized this right and any academic discipline sort of builds on and course corrects as it goes and now we're starting to see this idea of inclusion that includes women includes maybe historically marginalized groups as we move forward so uh that is rust's sort of succinct summary of 120 years of of um leadership literature when we boil down the 200 plus definitions when we boil down the components that are out there when we boil down 120 years of sort of movement and research leadership really has four central components and we'll use these four central components to build a definition four central components to leadership number one leadership is a process it's a process leadership involves influence number two it involves influence number three leadership occurs in groups and number four leadership involves common goals so leadership is a process leadership involves influence leadership occurs in groups and leadership involves common goals nordhouse who we we referenced earlier in the this ninth edition kind of pulls it all together and says this leadership is a process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal we see all the pieces in there leadership is a process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal let's look at each of these components very quickly it's it's a process so it's leadership is not only traits leadership is not only characteristics but it involves the the the interactions or the the transactional events between the leader and the followers it's both it is the event but it's not only the event it's the traits but it's those traits fleshed out in a process in an interactional transactional event leaders which means that leaders affect and are simultaneously affected by their followers because it's an interactive event being a process leadership can be learned really by anyone it can be learned but it is also influenced by the characteristics of both the leader and the followers so it's not leadership is not exclusive to a certain type but a certain type of both leader and follower are going to be maybe more effective or influenced by the characteristics of both in this process of interaction leadership involves influence influence is how the leader affects the followers and let's be honest without influence there is no leadership without influence leadership does not take place influence can be in a small group influence can be in a community group influence can be in a work team i'm sorry that's for the next one excuse me influence is back to influence influence is the essence of leadership so nordhaus's definition says that leadership is a process whereby an individual influences a group of i would say not leadership is a process i would say leading is a process leading is a process to me leadership is influence leadership equals influence leading then is the process whereby an individual influences or leads a group of individuals to achieve a common goal we mentioned that leadership occurs in groups other others are required for leadership to take place if there aren't others leadership is not happening now it can be in a small group it can be in a community group it can be in a work team it can be in a family it could be an entire organization it can be in your church it can be on a campus it could be in a global ministry but others are required for leadership to take place there's a common term out there called self-leadership and self-leadership is not really a thing leadership has to have others for actual leadership to be taking place self-leadership might be the process of self-developing self-awareness it might be the process of self-discovery it might be defined as self-discipline in many ways it's developing you so that you can influence or be perceived as influential among the group so it's not self-leadership it's self-growth so that you can interact with a group in a manner that leadership takes place and lastly leadership involves a common goal there's a mutual process of both the leader and the follower you can choose to influence the group toward the goal by focusing on the goal you can choose to focus uh the or you can choose to achieve the goal by focusing on the followers or you can do a combination of focusing on the individual followers and the common goal when we did our disk test our portrait predictor way way way way back at the beginning of term two we had a scale that you focused on the the task or you're focused on the people which one is right for influence they're both equally effective the key is do we have a common goal if i say this is the goal this is what we're going to do i cast vision for this project this is the this is the target i can now mobilize the group to accomplish that target if i say hey guys together we're going to go in this direction and i'm focused on what do you need so that we can get to this destination we can still get to the common goal by the way jesus did both in case you're wondering right gosh we see him setting his face like flint for the joy set before him he endured the cry he had a task in mind and he mobilized his entire followership he mobilized his his his disciples his entire ministry it wasn't just a it's a singular event he endured but he he he created influence and leadership around a common goal where he was had a task in mind but even in the process of focusing on heading to jerusalem to do this he's also constantly turning and equipping and building into the disciples and going hey guys here's where we're going hey guys for the days that are coming up you need this he's constantly interacting with them working with them around the common goal while simultaneously being locked in and focused on that goal all right i want to take these last few minutes and hit a couple descriptions of leadership some some kind of uh before we get into the specific focuses or the sorry specific theories in upcoming videos just a couple descriptions if you will of leadership that i want to take a minute and focus on one is trait versus process i've already discussed and we're going to dive deeper on each of these in a minute in future videos but trait leadership versus process leadership it's are there innate immutable characteristics of the leader that makes him a leader or is it something that's learned or is it a combination of both i'm seven feet tall two meters 11 for those of you uh on a metric system two meters 11 tall that is a very good trait for being a professional basketball player but being tall alone doesn't make you a professional basketball player there is skill that is added and if i can develop the skill the process along with certain traits i have a very very high ceiling and how high i might achieve in the athletic world if i don't have that immutable trait doesn't mean i can't play the game of basketball it just means with that trait and skill development my ceiling is higher if i don't have that trait if i'm quite a bit shorter i can still practice i can still develop the skills i may have additional traits speed strength a cunning mind whatever it might be that i can develop and become a high level basketball player or i can develop other athletic skills and play different sports along with the skill development if i'm not this tall maybe i'm much shorter maybe i could focus on horse racing or i could focus on football or soccer or some other sport that would require a different innate set so leaders when i have trait and process if i understand the best setting for my traits and develop the skills i have a high opportunity to be a very very effective leader trait versus process are leaders born or are they developed and the answer to that is yes both it involves trait and it involves process it involves something that's innate and it involves something that's learned there are cultural considerations what's effective learned process in one culture may be ineffective in another there are gender considerations we even mentioned that earlier some of the behaviors in the past that a woman might have exhibited are seen as detrimental to how they're viewed as a leader versus the exact same behavior displayed by a man in that culture so so taking what traits what processes considering cultural considerations is something we'll be considering as we move through this leadership journey second would be assigned leadership versus emergent leadership assigned leadership versus emergent leadership this is the process of leadership assigned leadership would be leadership based on a formal title based on a formal position emergent leadership is where your influence is perceived by others you may not have the title of boss or leader but everybody around you recognizes that you're a person that can create influence i played for different basketball teams along the way and in some teams we every team i was on had a team captain one who was like the the appointed leader among the players and coaches arrived at who the team captain was different ways sometimes the coach came into the locker room and said this person is the team captain and it was usually based on some trait they were the highest scorer uh or they were the oldest person on the team maybe in in their grade in school right so this is your last year you've been on the tour you've been on the team the longest they would usually look at a trait and say you're the captain i've been on other teams where the coach said you as a team tell me who the captain should be huh what's happening here a coach is looking at assigned leadership here's a trait you lead and just because in many times almost exclusively when the coach picked the captain they were actually not the most influential person in the locker room they had some influence because they were given a title but the reality is that the guys in the locker room knew who we perceived to really be the leader and when the team selected the leader we usually selected that person who had the most influence when the coach selected the leader sometimes it was the person that had the most influence sometimes it wasn't and that's kind of the difference between a signed leadership and emergent leadership or leadership that's really perceived we see it biblically right we see matthias and i'm sure he was an amazing leader clearly met a lot of attributes but they drew straws and he has assigned you are now an apostle you are now among the 12. awesome great not my call but then we see paul come along and he wasn't drawn from straws he just sort of emerged as one who had tremendous influence right we can see that uh biblically leadership can be assigned leadership can emerge sometimes by trait sometimes by process right we can assign leadership not just on a trait who's been here the longest we can assign leadership maybe because they're a really good communicator they have a skill they've developed the ability to network and based on that skill we can sometimes assign influence and by the way based on their ability to communicate their ability to network that they've developed we can also see that as an emergent leadership one thought i do want to give us it's a little bit of a a thought a concept but also maybe a warning or or something to keep in mind with regards to caution assigned leadership versus emergent leadership there's there's a strong theory called social identity theory social identity theory and here's essentially what it says that the longer a group is together the more strongly a sort of group prototype develops think of the quintessential every nation leader or in your local context think of like the prototypical leader in your church right as values merge with the way you know the mission merges with the the prominence of leadership a sort of prototype starts to develop and what we tend to find is that as a prototype develops we tend to off honestly unwittingly unintentionally assign leadership to somebody who most closely resembles the prototype and if we're not careful what we start to see is leaders that are all pressed from the same mold they're assigned to leadership based on how much they look like what we kind of see our social identity becoming it's okay it helps with clarity of mission but man i think sometimes we miss that the reality is some of the best leaders are disruptive to our social identity they're challenging especially in an apostolic sense they're challenging why why are we doing what we've always done right is there a new wine skin they're kind and we the stronger the social identity the more we can tend to spin those leaders out of our orbit because they don't fit the prototype just something to be mindful of just because somebody doesn't fit the prototype doesn't mean they don't have incredible leadership capacity in your setting that was assigned versus emergent leadership we also have power and leadership power and leadership are not necessarily the same thing there are six bases of power that have been identified excuse me i think i'm going to sneeze and i'm trying to do this all in one take i guess i'm not all right praise the lord here we go this is the beauty of live tv here we go six bases of power there's what's called referent power or referent power and this is based on a follower's identification and liking for the leader like i'm gonna follow that person because i like them an example of this would be maybe a teacher who's adored by their students right that the students want to learn from that teacher because they just like the teacher referring to power the next would be expert power and this is based on the follower's perception of a leader's competence right i will follow someone that's competent i probably won't follow someone unless they're assigned leadership if they're incompetent so expert powers based on the followers perception of a leader's competent this would be a tour guide who's knowledgeable right you you go on a tour in a foreign country and if they know so much about it man you're going to follow that tour guide wherever if they stand up and they're like yeah gee i don't really know what this monument is but i'm sure it's amazing because it looks kind of old you're probably going to wander off that tour and try to discover stuff from your for yourself but if they can just boom they know the facts and the data and they're truly an expert you're going to follow much more closely you're going to work your way up toward the front you're going to be much more engaged in their leadership next form of power is legitimate power and this is associated with having the status or the formal job authority so an example of legitimate power would be a judge who's administering a sentence in a courtroom right they have the gavel they're delegated this authority but from the state boom if they say you're going to prison you're going to prison if they say you're paying a fine boom you're paying that fine they have this legitimate power to do that based on their authoritative position next would be reward power and this is a power that's derived from having the capacity to provide rewards to others so a supervisor who complements employees who work hard the person that has the ability to give out financial bonuses right or uh so we we yield power or we we recognize power in someone who can give good things to us the next type of power is similar but kind of the the other side of the same coin and it's coercive power coercive power is derived from having the capacity to penalize others or to punish others reward power comes from i can give you good things coercive power comes from i can penalize or punish so this is a coach perhaps who sits a player on the bench right if you're late to practice you sit they have the ability to control your playing time and lastly would be information power and this is a power that's derived from possessing knowledge that others want or possessing knowledge that others need so this could be for example a boss who has information regarding uh a new criteria that's going to decide promotions right so if i'm the boss and i know what we're going to be evaluating on that's information power people want to be around you because they want to know what it is that you know now among these six bases of power what we find is that four of them are based on position two of them or are personal in nature based on position we see legitimate power i'm the judge boom i've been sworn in right i have reward power my position allows me to give you things i have coercive power my position allows me to take things from you or i have information power based on where i sit on this organizational chart i know things that you don't know two of these are more of a personal power referent power is uh is personal i like you and because you and i have had pleasant interactions or there's something about you that i desire to be like i i will grant you power and influence in my life and then expert power it's personal i recognize in you competence you can't do something for me or take something away from me formally but you can do something for me because you're very skilled at what you do and i want to i want to lead like you lead that is our power and leadership we will be talking about that as the courses roll as the course goes on and the videos roll out as well and last would be i want to just talk about this very quickly this concept of management versus leadership management versus leadership management can be described as producing order and consistency so we have an organization i'm put somewhere in the organization and my job within the organization is not necessarily to lead which we'll look at in just a second it is to produce order it's to produce consistency it's to produce scalability it's to produce reproducibility i i my job is to take the chaos that sometimes leadership can produce we're growing wow new nations ripping open new campuses we you know and now how do i how do i organize that and how do i start to bring order and consistency to it leadership on the other hand produces change and it produces movement and change in movement are actually a little bit at odds with order inconsistency if things are changing i can come in tomorrow and go oh we've moved oh we've grown oh this thing has gone forward when we're talking about apostolic leadership you're going to be hearing more on this idea of producing change of producing movement it's why with regards to social identity theory the prototype that gets developed the longer we're together actually is going to become more of a manager because i know how it works i look like what works i produce what works and we run the danger sometimes of spinning out our leaders who produce change who challenge and who produce forward movement some of the traits with regards to management we see the idea of planning and budgeting right so they're establishing agendas they're setting timetables they're allocating resources we also see them organizing and staffing as they're bringing order and consistency so they're providing structure they're making job placements they're establishing rules establishing procedures that are helped to help bring order inconsistency they are work on control and problem solving they're going to develop incentives right they're going to start to bring some of the the power to say you can incentivize you can offer a bonus these kind of things they generate generate creative solutions they take corrective actions those are management functions in many respects from leadership they're going to establish direction so under establishing direction they're going to create vision they're going to clarify the big picture they're going to set strategies they're also going to be responsible for aligning people they're going to communicate the goals we're going to seek commitment we're going to build teams build coalitions those are managed or sorry leadership type of functions motivating and inspiring falls under leadership they're going to inspire they're you're gonna energize you're gonna empower followers you're gonna satisfy unmet needs by the way both management and leadership are essential in my humble opinion to apostolic movement to being an apostolic movement to building an apostolic campus ministry to building an apostolic church you need both you can't just be leading and growing and pioneering because at some point we need to organize and scale at some point we need to train and equip to be able to go right so when we think of of both management and leadership we have the the push from leadership and the organizing from management we've got the growing and the pioneering from leadership and we've got the scale scalability and the reproducibility being developed by management people need to be loved and valued and pastored while they're involved in significant ministry mission and advancement so our pastors are loving people and developing them and they're not feeling like they're just a piece in your agenda they're being managed or pastored well and at the same time they're engaged and involved in significant forward movement and pushing forward all right we are going to take a look i know this was a long video this will hopefully be the longest of them but we are now going to start to look at some of the specific theories uh we'll start initially looking at theorists uh theory theories excuse me that emphasize leadership from the perspective of the leader then we'll talk about some interactional theories then we'll move toward some of those on the followers and then from that point we'll start to talk about spiritual leadership apostolic leadership and we will start rolling into our intensive together thanks for tuning in you can go to the next video now or whenever you're ready [Music]