Exam Guide Week 3 PDF

WEEK THREE: From Leading the Congregation (8-10) 1. Identify eight characteristics of effective teams (Page 114 – 115) 1. A clear elevating goal 2. A results driven structure 3. Competent team members 4. Unified commitment 5. A collaborative climate 6. Standards of excellence 7. External support and recognition 8. Principled leadership From Lectures/power point (concepts overlap with assigned readings) 1. What is the difference between content and process? Content refers to the "what" of group dynamics, such as purpose, goals, problems addressed, decisions, and ideas expressed. It focuses on tangible discussions and objectives. Process refers to the "how," involving the morale, emotional atmosphere, implicit rules, guidelines, conflicts, and cooperative dynamics. It encompasses the group's functioning and relational patterns 2. What are group norms? Group norms are the shared rules, guidelines, and expectations within a group that influence member behavior and interactions. They contribute to the group's functioning by defining acceptable and unacceptable behaviors 3. What are the two major issues of psychological safety? Psychological safety involves: (a) creating an environment where team members feel safe to speak up with ideas, questions, concerns, or mistakes without fear of embarrassment or retribution, and (b) establishing trust and respect among colleagues to foster candidness 4. Identify the major finding of Google’s “project Aristotle.” The project revealed that the key factor in successful teams is not who is on the team but how the team works together. Psychological safety emerged as the most critical factor, influencing team effectiveness 5. What are Tuckman’s four stages of team development? (Chp 10. Page 116 – 122) 1. Stage 1: Orientation to team purpose and culture 2. Stage 2: Conflict with the leader and among team members 3. Stage 3: Team Solidarity 4. Stage 4: Individuality, Interdependence and team effectiveness 6. Identify the leadership styles of Situational Leadership Theory According to the Situational Leadership Theory (Paul Hersey & Kenneth Blanchard), leadership styles adapt based on team readiness or maturity levels. The key styles include: Directing: High directive and low supportive behavior. The leader provides specific instructions and closely supervises task completion. Suitable for teams with low competence and high commitment. Coaching: High directive and high supportive behavior. The leader provides guidance and encouragement while engaging team members. Suitable for teams with moderate competence but variable commitment. Supporting: Low directive and high supportive behavior. The leader facilitates and supports efforts without providing detailed instructions. Suitable for teams with higher competence and improving commitment. Delegating: Low directive and low supportive behavior. The leader delegates responsibilities and trusts the team to function autonomously. Suitable for teams with high competence and high commitment 7. Identify characteristics of the operational model of conflict The operational model of conflict highlights key dimensions and responses to conflict situations. Its characteristics include: 1. Types of Conflict: Intrapersonal, Interpersonal, Intergroup, Organizational, Environmental 2. Dimensions of Conflict: Values/traditions, Purpose/goals, Methods/policies 3. Threats Involved: Physical, Psychological, Positional, Financial, Social identity 4. Responses to Conflict: a. Self-Protecting Behaviors: Strike back, Comply/give in, shut down/shut out b. Self-Giving Behaviors: Listen well to understand the other party's perspective, Express one's own views and feelings clearly and non- defensively, Own responsibility for personal contributions to the conflict These characteristics focus on recognizing the root causes, types, and constructive or destructive ways to address conflicts 8. Identify conflict levels/objectives of conflict parties (Chp 11. Page 129 – 130) 1. Problem: Level 1 – Conflict is primarily a problem to be solved 2. Disagreement: Level 2 – Conflict has moved from solving a problem to a real disagreement 3. Contest: Level 3 – Conflict has become a contest with competing objectives to win 4. Warfare: Level 4 – Conflict’s focus has moved into a type of warfare where communications have completely broken down and people believe the other parties will not change 5. Destroy: Level 5 – Conflicts are intractable and vindicative (do what is necessary so that the enemy will not survive) 9. Identify 5 conflict management styles 1. Problem-Solving (Win-Win): a. Focuses on collaboration to find a mutually beneficial solution. b. Emphasizes open communication, understanding, and integration of different perspectives. 2. Compromising (Win-Lose or Lose-Win): a. Strives to find a middle ground where both parties give up something to reach an agreement. b. Useful for temporary or time-sensitive resolutions. 3. Avoiding (Lose-Lose): a. Involves evading the conflict entirely. b. Often leads to unresolved tensions and postponed decision-making. 4. Competing (Win-Lose): a. Aims to assert one's own needs or perspective at the expense of others. b. Useful in high-stakes situations where quick, decisive action is necessary. 5. Accommodating (Lose-Win): a. Focuses on yielding to the needs or desires of the other party. b. Often used to maintain harmony or relationships but may lead to long-term dissatisfaction 10. What are three ways of resolving a dispute (See cone)? (Chp10. Page 135 – 136) Resolving conflict and managing differences can also be seen through power, rights, and the interests of conflict parties. Power: In power-based methods of conflict intervention, the focus is on who has more power that is generally coercive rather than cooperative or creative. Raw power may win, but at what costs and to whom? Rights: Rights-based intervention appeals to determining who is right. There are independent standards of fairness or legitimacy based on some authority. This is often seen in the need for adequate insurance or in litigious cultures that use attorneys to win the conflict. Interests: Interest-based approaches, based on bargaining power, seek to manage differences by satisfying the interests of each party that include their hopes and desires, values, interests, and needs 11. Identify stages in conflict cycle (Chp 10. Page 130 – 133) 1. Stage 1: Tension Development 2. Stage 2: Role Dilemma 3. Stage 3: Injustice Collecting 4. Stage 4: Confrontation 5. Stage 5: Adjustments 12. Identify 3 P’s in managing conflict a. Participation: Encouraging active and constructive involvement from all parties. b. Process: Establishing clear steps and methodologies to address and resolve conflicts (e.g., open communication, brainstorming solutions). c. Purpose: Focusing on the shared goals or objectives to align perspectives and foster collaboration 13. Identify ground rules in promoting healthy conflict a. Actively listen to understand others’ perspectives. b. Communicate openly and honestly without defensiveness. c. Avoid personal attacks and focus on the issue at hand. d. Respect differing viewpoints and seek common ground. e. Own your role in the conflict and remain accountable. f. Establish a culture of trust and psychological safety 14. Major two insights from the Apostle Paul that are important in managing differences a. Community-Building as a Foundation: Paul exemplified entrepreneurial leadership by crossing boundaries of identity and practice to create inclusive communities of belonging. This approach emphasizes unity and shared purpose as a way to overcome divisions. b. Prioritizing Relational Transformation: Paul’s leadership focused on transforming relationships to build trust, accountability, and effective communication, fostering a sense of belonging and collaboration within groups Christian Leadership STRENGTHENING CHARACTER, COLLABORATION, AND ORGANIZATIONAL EFFECTIVENESS WEEK ONE Hour 1 – Leadership is profoundly contextual Hour 2 – Leaders doing theology Hour 3 – Leading from within – introduction and “best use of self” WEEK TWO Hour 1 – Leaders doing their own “shadow work” Hour 2 – Understanding ”false self” dynamics Hour 3 – Becoming more and more one’s true self in Christ, and being grounded in one’s call, vision, and mission of Christ Roger Heuser 1 VIA – Values in Action Cited in Peter Northouse, Leadership: Theory & Practice Roger Heuser 2 Cited in Peter Northouse, Leadership: Theory & Practice Roger Heuser 3 Cited in Peter Northouse, Leadership: Theory & Practice Roger Heuser 4 Christian Leadership STRENGTHENING CHARACTER, COLLABORATION, AND ORGANIZATIONAL EFFECTIVENESS WEEK THREE This week we introduce the dynamics of “leading with others” through high-quality interpersonal relationships, team development, and conflict management Session 1 – Followership, Group Dynamics. Session 2 – Team development Session 3 – Conflict Management Intro Roger Heuser 5 “I know that leadership creates community. It breaks down barriers between people. It communicates, and it creates synergy. At the same time, it engenders [and earns] respect and builds a following among the people for the leader or leaders who have authority. Leadership also creates something new—something that was not there before. It does so because leaders are not afraid to be creative, to think outside the box, to name something new. At the same time that leadership creates synergy, it also creates controversy, because real leaders are willing to take risks, to be prophetic to the community.” Carol Becker I would add, “Leadership taps into the fundamental aspirations and diverse charisms of others, and promotes healthy conflict and openness toward a shared, compelling purpose.” Roger Heuser & Norman Shawchuck, Leading the Congregation. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2010, 12. Roger Heuser 6 “Leadership is the art of mobilizing others to want to struggle for shared aspirations.” James Kouzes and Barry Posner SESSION ONE Roger Heuser 7 Power of Followership Roger Heuser 8 LEVELS OF SYSTEM Individual Coaching Social fabric is created one room at a time. It is formed from small steps that ask “Who do we want in the room?” and “What is the new conversation that we want to occur?” Interpersonal In community building, we choose the people and the conversation that will produce the accountability to build Conflict Management relatedness, structure belonging, and move the action forward.” - Peter Block, Community: The Structure of Belonging, 11 Dyads, Triads, Inter-group Group Teams, family systems Organization, society Large, Complex Systems Roger Heuser 9 Followership captures current interst Followers play a central role in the leadership process. Historically, leaders have captured most of our attention. Today, researchers view leadership as a shared process. Leaders and followers are interdependent. Increasing numbers are arguing that the world needs more courageous followers, and less glorified leaders. Roger Heuser 10 Leaders Leadership emerges Commitment to Common Purpose and from relationships among Shared Values Followers Roger Heuser 11 Cited in Peter Northouse, Leadership: Theory & Practice Roger Heuser 12 The “courageous follower” is based on ”courageous relationships.” "If I had to reduce the responsibilities of a good follower to a single rule, it would be to speak truth to power.” - Warren Bennis Roger Heuser 13 Instead of followers “serving” leaders, better for followers together with leaders all serve the common purpose of the organization – within a shared value framework 1. Effective followers - cooperative/collaborative 2. Trusted followers - integrate ego into org responsibilities 3. Well-balanced followers - may guide “strong-ego” (self-interest) leaders around pitfalls 4. Caring followers - perceive needs of leader and group and try to form bridge between them Chaleff, The Courageous Follower, 19-20. Roger Heuser 14 We need to aspire to … improve the quality of followership! High Support Supportive and get work done, Takes responsibility for and won’t challenge themselves and leader; leader. supports leader, and willing to challenge when necessary. Low Challenge High Challenge Speaks up -- lets leader know Does enough to get by. where they stand. May be reluctant to own responsibilities esp when leaders are not going their way. Lots of talk in the Low Support hallway. Chaleff, The Courageous Follower, 39-41.. Roger Heuser 15 Effective followers share same qualities: 1. They self-manage and think for themselves; exercise control, work without supervision. 2. They show strong commitment to organizational goals and well as personal goals. 3. They build their competence and master job skills. 4. They are credible, ethical, and courageous. Courage is not absence of fear; but courage is what we need in the face of fear. Roger Heuser 16 Curiosity is better than judgment. Compassion and respect are better than disdain. Seeing is better than blindness. - Barry Oshry We must pay attention to and nurture our social fabric. Roger Heuser 17 Leaders must understand the essence of what it means to be in community 1. Jesus formed a community; mission followed. 2. Paul’s exemplified entrepreneur leadership crossed “missional’ boundaries of identity and practice by establishing communities of belonging. 3. Community-building provides a shift in mental models -- how we think and frame reality, what we pay attention to in priorities of our actions. 4. Small groups are the most important unit of transformation in an organization. 5. How we relate to one another in groups creates or diminishes trust, accountability, support, sense of belonging, and effective communication. 6. The conversations we have in small groups create future realities. Roger Heuser 18 Sample Questions with Little power: How do we get people to show up and be committed? How do we get others to be more responsible? How do we get people to come on board and to do the right thing? - Peter Block, Community, The Structure of Belonging, 104 Sample Questions with Great power: What is it about being on this team that gives you the deepest joy? What makes you most proud to be part of this team? OR what would it take for you to be most proud to b on this team? What impact do you hope this team will have on individual lives … the entire org? … in our community? What are the desires/gifts you hold that have not been brought fully into the world? What desires/gifts remain inside that you hope can be expressed? Have you thought about the price you are willing to pay to be an active member of this team? How much risk/sacrifice are you willing to take? What have I done to contribute to the very thing I complain about or want to change? What is the story about this community or organization that you hear yourself most often telling? The one that you are wedded to and maybe even take your identity from? Roger Heuser 19 EFFECTIVE LEADERS KNOW GROUP DYNAMICS Roger Heuser 20 Content Process The “What” The “How” - purpose/goal - morale - problem addressed - emotional atmosphere - decisions - “implicit” rules, guidelines - Ideas expressed - conflict - discussion content - leadership struggles - competition/cooperation The “Words” The “Music” Roger Heuser 21 Two kinds of action in groups Task Process are actions taken to get a Maintenance Process are actions taken to job done, accomplishing the work of a satisfy the psychological and social needs group of the group and its members Purpose and agenda Participation - active, high energy, Time frames defensive, withdrawn Dividing up the work Control - dominating, submissive, Problem-solving steps/methods cooperative Idea generation methods Checking the process (e.g. brainstorming) Dysfunctional behaviours - dealing with, Decision-making processes ignoring Testing for agreement Supporting / affirming Testing reality Gate-keeping Roger Heuser 22 Participation Maintenance Functions Influence Group Atmosphere Styles of Influence Membership Decision-Making Process Feelings Task Functions Norms Link to pdf copy Roger Heuser 23 Agenda/Norms/ CONTENT Rules/Roles/ Purpose/Objectives PROCESS Roger Heuser 24 Break Out Sessions Personal journaling for 2-3 minutes – jot down some thoughts about the following questions: WHAT? (stands out for me? What interests me?) SO WHAT? (are the implications of the key points to what you are doing?) NOW WHAT? (may you consider doing or practicing? … etc) Roger Heuser 25 Roger Heuser 26 Developing a Culture of High-performance … 1. What is your experience of being on a. team? 2. What is a high-performance team? 3. What do you find challenging about being on a team? … about being a team leader? SESSION TWO Roger Heuser 27 Definitions of Teams ‘A team is a small number of people with complimentary skills who are committed to a common purpose, set of performance goals, and approach for which they hold themselves mutually accountable.’ (Katzenbach and Smith, HBR, March 1993) ‘…a High performing team: effectively meets and communicates in a way that raises morale and alignment, engages with all the teams key stakeholder groups in a way that grows performance and provides constant learning and development for all its members and the collective team.’ (Hawkins, 2011) Roger Heuser 28 Relational Context Roger Heuser 29 Roger Heuser 30 Psychological Safety and High Performance Roger Heuser 31 Psychological safety An individual’s perception of the consequences of taking an interpersonal risk. ‘A belief that it is ‘safe’ to speak up with ideas, questions, concerns or mistakes’ Amy Edmondson Roger Heuser 32 Envisioning the psychologically safe workplace Psychological safety exists in work groups, rather than between specific individuals. Is the work environment itself safe for interpersonal risk taking… feeling able to speak up with relevant ideas, questions, or concerns. Psychological safety is present when colleagues trust and respect each other and feel able – even obligated – to be candid. Amy C. Edmondson, The Fearless Organization: Creating Psychological Safety in the Workplace for Learning, Innovation, and Growth. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2019. Roger Heuser 33 Empowered followers and leaders = PSYCHOLOGICAL SAFETY Psychological safety is broadly defined as a climate in which people are comfortable expressing and being themselves. More specifically, when people have psychological safety at work, they feel comfortable sharing concerns and mistakes without fear of embarrassment or retribution. A 2017 Gallup poll found that only 3 in 10 employees strongly agree with the statement that their opinions count at work. Amy C. Edmondson, The Fearless Organization: Creating Psychological Safety in the Workplace for Learning, Innovation, and Growth. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2019. Roger Heuser 34 Project Aristotle – 5 yr study on teams Why do some google teams do better than others? What matters less is who is on the team, what matters more is how the team works together Roger Heuser 35 Why do we ‘withhold’ …...because we don’t want to look: Ignorant………...so we don’t ask a question Incompetent……so we don’t admit weakness or a mistake Intrusive……......so we don’t offer other ideas Negative………. so we don’t criticise the status quo And the more ‘successful’ we are, the better we get at ‘impression management’ Roger Heuser 36 Measuring psychological safety Scale 1 ……2…….3……..4…….5…….6……..7 1. If you make a mistake on this team, it is often held against you. (R) 2. Members of this team are able to bring up problems and tough issues. 3. People on this team sometimes reject others for being different. (R) 4. It is safe to take a risk on this team. 5. It is difficult to ask other members of this team for help. (R) 6. No one on this team would deliberately act in a way that undermines my efforts. 7. Working with members of this team, my unique skills and talents are valued and utilized. Amy C. Edmondson, The Fearless Organization: Creating Psychological Safety in the Workplace for Learning, Innovation, and Growth. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2019. Roger Heuser 37 The five keys to a successful google team…. Psychological safety - Feel safe to take risks and be vulnerable with each other Dependability - Get things done on time and meet high bar for excellence Structure and clarity - Have clear roles, plans, and goals Meaning - Work is personally important Impact - Believe their work matters and creates change And the most important key BY FAR is psychological safety Roger Heuser 38 How would you rate your team’s performance on results of Aristotle’s findings… (scale 1-5) 1. We fundamentally believe that our work really matters and makes a difference ____. 2. Our work is personally important to each of us ____. 3. I’m confident that board goals, roles, and executions will be clear ____. 4. We can count on each other to do high quality work on time ____. 5. We can take risks with each other without feeling insecure or embarrassed ____. Roger Heuser 39 Individuals on teams with higher psychological safety… were less likely to leave Google were more likely to harness the power of diverse ideas from their teammates brought in more revenue per head were rated as effective twice as often by Google executives. Roger Heuser 40 Back to Amy Edmondson Roger Heuser 41 Creating a high-performance team when confronted with challenging issues: High High High Psychological Safety Psychological Safety Low Comfort Learning High Psychological Safety Performance Standards Zone Zone Performance Standards and Accountability and Accountability Low Low Psychological Safety Psychological Safety Low Apathy Anxiety HIgh Performance Standards Performance Standards and Accountability Zone Zone and Accountability Low High Amy Edmonson Standards/Accountability Roger Heuser 42 What can leaders do? ▪ Frame the work as a ‘learning problem.” ▪ Set expectations about failure, uncertainty, and interdependence to clarify the need for voice. ▪ Identify what’s at stake, why it matters, and for whom. ▪ Ask good questions. ▪ Model intense listening. ▪ Provide guidelines for discussion. ▪ Express appreciation. ▪ Orient toward continuously learning from feedback. Amy C. Edmondson, The Fearless Organization: Creating Psychological Safety in the Workplace for Learning, Innovation, and Growth. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2019. Roger Heuser 43 Team Development SESSION TWO Roger Heuser 44 Roger Heuser 45 Overcoming the 5 Dysfunctions of a Team A team is a relatively small number of people ( anywhere between 3 to 12) who share common goals as well as the rewards and responsibilities for achieving them. Team members readily set aside their individual or personal needs for the greater good of the group.” (Lencioni, 2005) Roger Heuser 46 5 Level Pyramid Roger Heuser 47 Stage 1 Dysfunction: Absence of Trust Members of great teams trust on another on a fundamental, emotional level, and they are comfortable being vulnerable with each other about their weaknesses, mistakes, fears, and behaviors. They get to the point where they can be completely open with one another, without filters. Roger Heuser 48 Stage 2 Dysfunction : Fear of Conflict Teams that trust one another are not afraid to engage in passionate dialogue around the issues and decision that are key to the organization’s success. They do not hesitate to disagree with, challenges, and question on another, all in the spirit of finding the best solution, discovering the truth, and making great decisions. Roger Heuser 49 Stage 3 Dysfunction : Lack of Commitment Teams that engage in unfiltered conflict are able to achieve genuine buy-in around important decisions, even when various members of the team initially disagree. That’s because they ensure that all opinions and ideas are put in the table and considered, giving confidence to team members that no stone has been left unturned. Roger Heuser 50 Stage 4 Dysfunction : Avoidance of Accountability Teams that commit to decision and standards of performance do not hesitate to hold one another accountable for adhering to those decisions and standards. What is more, they don’t rely on the team leaders as the primary source of accountability, they go direct to their peers. Roger Heuser 51 Stage 5 Dysfunction : Inattention to Results Teams that trust one another, engage in healthy conflict, commit to decisions, and hold one another accountable are very likely to set aside their individual needs and agendas and focus almost exclusively on what is best for the team. They do not give in to the temptation to place their department, career, aspirations, or ego-driven status ahead of the collective results that define team success. Roger Heuser 52 STAGES OF TEAM DEVELOPMENT (Bruce Tuckman) Roger Heuser 53 As a team develops maturity and ability, relationships establish, and the leader changes leadership style. Beginning with a directing style, moving through coaching, then participating, finishing by delegating and almost being detached. At this point the team may produce a successor leader, and the previous leader can move on to develop a new team. Roger Heuser 54 Roger Heuser 55 Stage 1: Forming – Leader Directs High dependence on leader for guidance and direction. Little agreement on team aims other than received from leader. Individual roles and responsibilities are unclear. Leader must be prepared to answer lots of questions about the team's purpose, objectives and external relationships. Processes are often ignored. Members test tolerance of system and leader. Roger Heuser 56 Stage 2: Storming – Leader Coaches Decisions don't come easily within group. Team members vie for position as they attempt to establish themselves in relation to other team members and the leader, who might receive challenges from team members. Clarity of purpose increases but plenty of uncertainties persist. Cliques and factions form and there may be power struggles. The team needs to be focused on its goals to avoid becoming distracted by relationships and emotional issues. Compromises may be required to enable progress. Roger Heuser 57 Stage 3: Norming – Leader Facilitates and Enables Agreement and consensus largely forms among the team, who respond well to facilitation by leader. Roles and responsibilities are clear and accepted. Big decisions are made by group agreement. Smaller decisions may be delegated to individuals or small teams within group. Commitment and unity is strong. The team may engage in fun and social activities. The team discusses and develops its processes and working style. There is general respect for the leader and some of leadership is more shared by the team. Roger Heuser 58 Stage 4: Performing – Leader Delegates and Oversees The team is more strategically aware; the team knows clearly why it is doing what it is doing. The team has a shared vision and is able to stand on its own feet with no interference or participation from the leader. There is a focus on over-achieving goals, and the team makes most of the decisions against criteria agreed with the leader. The team has a high degree of autonomy. Disagreements occur but now they are resolved within the team positively, and necessary changes to processes and structure are made by the team. The team is able to work towards achieving the goal, and also to attend to relationship, style and process issues along the way. Team members look after each other. The team requires delegated tasks and projects from the leader. The team does not need to be instructed or assisted. Team members might ask for assistance from the leader with personal and interpersonal development. Roger Heuser 59 Stage 5: Adjourning – Leader Recontracts Adjourning sometimes known as Mourning or Deforming is the break-up of the group Hopefully when the task is completed successfully, its purpose fulfilled; everyone can move on to new things, feeling good about what's been achieved. If this is not the case then it will be important to revert back to earlier stages as the team disbands or reforms Recognition of and sensitivity to people's vulnerabilities is helpful, particularly if members of the group have been closely bonded and feel a sense of insecurity or threat from this change. It will be critical to honour an ending and celebrate new beginnings Roger Heuser 60 SITUATIONAL LEADERSHIP THEORY -- Adaption (Paul Hersey & Kenneth Blanchard) Roger Heuser 61 Situational Leadership Styles Well intentioned team members need orientation, direction, clarification Team Readiness/Maturity D4 D3 D2 D1 HIGH MODERATE/HIGH LOW/SOME LOW Competence Competence Competence Competence High VAIRABLE LOW High Commitment Commitment Commitment Commitment Roger Heuser 62 Cited in Peter Northouse, Leadership: Theory & Practice Roger Heuser 63 Cited in Peter Northouse, Leadership: Theory & Practice Roger Heuser 64 Break Out Sessions Personal journaling for 2-3 minutes – jot down some thoughts about the following questions: WHAT? (stands out for me? What interests me?) SO WHAT? (are the implications of the key points to what you are doing?) NOW WHAT? (may you consider doing or practicing? … etc) Roger Heuser 65 Roger Heuser 66 Intro - Conflict management SESSION TWO Roger Heuser 67 Abraham, Isaac, Jacob & Sons – Three Conflict Patterns First, a pattern of lying is evident in all four generations. Fearful, Abraham lies twice about Sarah, denying she is his wife. Rebecca and Isaac’s marriage is also dominated by lies and trickery (Gen. 27). Their son Jacob then increases the level of manipulation by lying consistently to almost everyone with whom he is in relationship. In fact, his very name means “deceiver.” By the fourth generation, ten of Jacob’s sons fake the death of their younger brother, Joseph. A second common pattern is the way at least one parent in each generation has a “favorite” child. Abraham favors Ishmael, but Sarah wants him removed from the family. Isaac favors Esau and wants him to receive the powerful family blessing. Jacob favors Joseph and later Benjamin, the youngest of his twelve sons. A third pattern includes sibling rivalry and relational cutoff between brothers cause tensions that show up through three successive generations. The friction of Ishmael and Isaac eventually leads to them being cut off from one another. (This division and tension continue today in the Middle East tensions between Arabs and Jews.) Esau and Jacob become open enemies once Jacob manipulates Esau’s blessing. Joseph is cut off from his ten older brothers for most of his adult life. The reconciling scene between Joseph and his brothers touches the depths of human betrayal encountering “unjustified” grace. Roger Heuser 68 according to James… 1:2 facing trials of any kind, consider it nothing but joy because… 1:14 tempted by one’s own desire, being lured and enticed by it… 1:19 You must understand this … be quick to listen, slow to speak, slow to anger 1:26 If anyone thinks they are religious , and do not bridle the tongue, their religion is worthless 2:4 Have you not made distinctions among yourselves, and become judges with evil thoughts? 2:9. If you show partiality, you commit sin. 3:2 For all of us make many mistakes 3:8. But no one can tame the tongue – a restless evil, full of deadly poison. 3:5ff Spiritual schizophrenia – “With [the tongue] we bless the Lord and Father, and with it we curse those who are made in the likeness of God. 3:13ff Two kinds of wisdom: gentleness born of wisdom, and bitter envy and selfish ambition and false truth. 4:1ff Where do conflicts come from? 5:16 Healing comes from confession to each another and prayer for one another Christians are often seen as more a mirror of societal dysfunctional conflict rather than providing answers in helping others deal with substantive differences and engage in the deep work of reconciliation when necessary. We know the destructive impact of unhealthy conflict. But, in fact, conflict may also lead to positive outcomes. What we hope to explore are healthy responses to conflict and know when conflict becomes unhealthy. POSITIVE OUTCOMES NEGATIVE OUTCOMES 1.Internal dissatisfaction is brought into 1. Isolation/division: one or more leave the group light with opportunity to address. or are “thrown out.” 2.New group norms and patterns are 2. Retreat: persons are hurt and angry -- may “lay established. low” waiting for a chance to get even. 3.Goals become clear and group is 3. Disintegration: group falls apart. unified. 4. Sniping: group stays together but opposing sides 4.New energy is created for change and fight unfairly -- spread rumors and engage in growth. character assassinations. 5.Boundaries are strengthened between 5. Cold war: both sides fear the strength of the groups. other and separate into isolation or “under the 6.Groups are more aware of their own table” tactics. strengths and weaknesses. 6. Domination: one side realizes it’s stronger than the other and seizes complete control. Roger Heuser 72 Conflict happens... different experiences/perspectives different values/goals/methods people feel strongly about things that are important to them more than one option is legitimate miscommunication -- well-meaning people can misunderstand and be misunderstood culture matters “theology” gets in the way dysfunctional family dynamics play out in organizations Antagonist personalities The Iceberg of Conflict Resolving Conflicts at Work by Kenneth Cloke & Joan Goldsmith Roger Heuser 74 What is conflict? Action of one party produces a Types of conflict: Dimensions of conflict: Intrapersonal Values/Traditions Interpersonal Purpose/Goals Intragroup Methods/Policies Organizational Environmental THREAT THREAT Different kinds of threats... action of Jezebel against Elijah was a threat to physical life of Elijah I Kings 19 the psychological threat of Peter when Christ confronted him Matt 16:21-23; 26:31-35 the threat to the social identity of the Jewish believers in the early congregation which decided to include Gentiles Acts 15 the threat to authority/positional titles of James and John who asked of Jesus to do whatever they wanted Matt 20:20-28 (Also, see Matt 23:13-15) ACTION REACTION of one party against THREAT of one party against another produces a another produces a FIGHT OR FLIGHT: SELF-PROTECTING BEHAVIORS 1. Strike back 2. Leave 3. Shut down 4. Comply SELF-GIVING BEHAVIORS THREAT 1. Seek to understand 2. See if you can articulate their understanding of issues and perhaps what they’re feeling 3. Own your part 4. Monitor your own defensiveness RE-ACTION REACTION that fuels the threat THREAT ”digs in” defensiveness FIGHT OR FLIGHT: SELF-PROTECTING BEHAVIORS 1. Strike back THREAT 2. Leave 3. Shut down 4. Comply 5 Levels & Objectives Of Conflict Players THEAT 5 INTRACTABLE – to destroy ”other” 4 WARFARE – to inflict injury 3 CONTEST – to win 2 DISAGREEMENT – to protect oneself Levels of conflict adapted from Speed Leas, “Moving Your Church Through Conflict” in Heuser/Shawchuck, Leading the Congregation, ch 10 1 PROBLEM – to find mutual solution Roger Heuser 79 RE-ACTION REACTION Openness to resolution or THREAT Openness to resolution or at least slows down conflict at least slows down dynamics conflict dynamics SELF-GIVING BEHAVIORS 1. Seek to understand THREAT of 2. See if you can articulate their understanding issues and perhaps what they’re feeling 3. Own your part 4. Monitor your own defensiveness, shadows, false- self dynamics STAGE 1 Loss of freedom in the Tension relationship Development Changes to end confrontation win-win STAGE 2 win-lose STAGE 5 Increasing Adjustments Role lose-leave Dilemma anxiety/tension compromise “cold war” Conflict Cycle Self-justification Battle lines set - Fault finding in others STAGE 4 STAGE 3 conflict erupts from Injustice Triangling others Confrontation triggering events Collecting Eroding trust and communication Jerry Robinson, Jr. and Roy A. Clifford, Managing Conflict in Community Groups Roger Heuser 81 OPERATIONAL MODEL OF CONFLICT INCOMPATIBLE SELF-GIVING BEHAVIORS 1. Have I listened well – able to state the other party’s values, position and story in a way that they feel understood? goals 2. Am I honest in expressing my own views/feelings with methods … clarity and non-defensiveness? 3. Will I ”own” my part that knowingly or unknowingly perceived as contributed to the conflict? ACTIONS THREAT REACTIONS of one party against another because of … TYPES OF CONFLICT SELF-PROTECTING THREATs 1. Intrapersonal 1. Physical BEHAVIORS 2. Interpersonal 2. Psychological 1. Strike back 3. Intergroup/unit 3. Positional 2. Comply/give in 4. Organizational 4. Financial 3. Shut down/shut out 5. Environmental 5. Social identity Roger Heuser 82 Jerry Robinson and Roy Clifford, in Heuser/Shawchuck, Leading the Congregation, ch 10. Break Out Sessions Personal journaling for 2-3 minutes – jot down some thoughts about the following questions: WHAT? (stands out for me? What interests me?) SO WHAT? (are the implications of the key points to what you are doing?) NOW WHAT? (may you consider doing or practicing? … etc) Roger Heuser 83 Roger Heuser 84 so much more than the sum of individual e2ort. Something happens when individuals get together and form a team. What are those dynamics? because there are some teams that drain or energy. It's like oh, I do I have to go to this meeting? Do I have to and then there are some teams that will will have a synergy and there's a creativity. There's a vision that comes and say, wow, um I I wouldn't think of that myself, but it has something happens in the team. So we're gonna see um if we can we if we can obe with with some of what's what's happening in that dynamic. I I kind of like this this uh sentence deﬁnition of leadership. The art of mobilizing others to want to struggle for a shared aspirations. I I really that connects with me. art of mobilizing others. someone's got a mobilized, someone's gotta call things together and that maybe a an individual that's not the positional leader that that mobilizes others. I'll say, hey, we can do this. You don't have to be in the position to mobilize others. But how do we develop in those shared aspirations so that my aspiration ﬁts with the team's aspiration and how does a team aspiration ﬁt with the organization? Now we're talking about alignment, we're talking about health. Health of the le leader, impacts, healthy relationships, and healthy relationships, impact healthy organizations, and we need healthier organizations in a voca environment. Remember the voca environment? So, the power of followership, the power ofowship. I don't know where I got this thing, but so much of the research in leadership as as I said, is is has focused on the leader as an independent variable that impacts change. But now there is also a lot of research being done on followship and um and also teams. So you just look at these photos of teams at work. where would we be without teams, a variety of the teams? who who are making an impact in the world and so the levels of the system of you have the individual, there is the um interpersonal and the interpersonal meaning, there will be conﬂict, there are diads and try as an intergroup and you know, people will gather around the co2ee machine when they take a break from the from the group or from the team, there are groups, and of course, there's also conﬂict in groups, and conﬂict in individuals, and then the organization can be very large complex systems. So when we think about leadership, the leadership is important at all levels of the system, all levels. Some of us are better interpersonally than we are in organizations. Some of us are better at organizational leadership than interpersonal, but that group is that is that in between the stage and in between level, that we need to know something about So, um Peter Block is a organizational developments, um, uh specialist, social fabric is created one room at a time. It is formed from small steps that ask, what do we want to do in this room? and what is the new conversation that we want to occur? If you're if you're if you're leading a team, ask yourself, what do you well want to do this meeting? What's the purpose of this meeting? And what is the conversation we want to have that will make a di2erence in the quality of ministry, the quality of life in the organization, and in the individual lives of the members and in the team. Some community building he he says, we choose the people in the conversation that will produce the accountability to build relatedness, structure belonging, and move the action forward. So we need accountability, we need support. We need to know how do we how do set the table so people feel a sensibly longing and that they're calling and their gifts can be utilized. So um followership, this is a big this is a big topic in the last 15, 20 years. And they play a central role. or will we be without followers? so much emphasis has been in leadership and not much on followership until recently. So, today, researcher view leadership as a shared process, that is to say, leadership consists as we have said that all along of both leaders and followers. You can have leadership without followers. And um numbers are ar' the world needs more courageous followers and less gloriﬁed leaders. I love that. So, as we said the ﬁrst session, that leadership then emerges among their among the relationships between leaders, followers, and a commitment to common purpose and shared values. That's really important to clarify, what is our purpose? Why are we why are we here this this this so what question? And what are our values? So, barara Conterman, who teaches that Harvard has done a lot of research in writing and leadership, she's the one who wrote bad leadership and bad worst leadership and all very many di2erent topics on leadership. And and her her research on followership, she said that there are levels of engagement from isolation, early low level of engagement, bystander. I I'm at the meeting by kind of. I just wanna I wanna observe what's going on. A participant um an activist, these people show up. some people show up but they're not really there. Their bodies are there, but they're not really there. Um, others are really show up and they're activists and then you have the die hard, high level of engagement. But the person who's done a lot of research and followership is I would Challop and and um during World War II, Challop asked, why do people follow toxic leaders like Hitler? And what can be done to prevent this from reoccurring? Um, so he began to study in organizations um, how uh he was gonna become toxic and followers will go along. And he said, uh he thought, you know, we need courageous followers who will stand up to toxic leaders. So that's that's how this got started. And now we can begin to see, well, how how do this make sense and healthy organizations? And where we're not talking about oxic leaders, but we're just talking about leadership in health organizations, what does it mean to be a courageous follow in a healthy organization? So, um instead of instead of following serving the leaders, um it's better for followers together with leaders all to serve the common purpose in the shared value framework. So my motivation if if we were on a team and you and I was a team leader, I wouldn't want your motivation to serve me. I'd want it to be given to the shared purpose we have together as a team and our shared values. So it's the leader and follower with a common purpose. What is our common purpose? So, e2ective leaders are they're cooperative, they're collaborative, they integrate their eago into responsibilities, both leaders and followers of say, I'm this is not ego driven. I don't need this to serve my own sense of worth, rather I am I am sacriﬁcing that for serving the common purpose. That's what we're doing as a team. So a well balanced followers guide me Okay, may, uh guide the strong eagle leader around pitfalls. Now, you have to have trust to do that, but sometimes, uh one of the strengths of a leader, it can be an eagle uh eagle string, gle strong eagles, even though we talked about last week about how the lingus interior life, the shadow work not all leaders doadow work. And so followers can help leaders navigate those pitfalls, and then Karen followers perceive the needs of leader and group and try to form a bridge between them. Now remember, this research is done with um with an organizations where the uh leader was not always a healthy leader. So that's why these are framed this way. So when we think about di2erent of followship dimensions, you can see in this grid, that there's a high support low support, high challenge and low challenge. So the high support and low challenge, followers support get the work done and launch challenge leader. I'll just implement whatever is necessary. the low support and low challenge well, not gonna ﬁre me. So I'll just I'll just do the bare minimum. It's not very challenging and um it's not a big deal to me. It's not really my commitment, so I'll just I just do enough to get by. The individualist speaks up less and less leader know where they stand. So this is low support, but high challenge. um you know, I in facly meetings, you can always tell there are certain packing members who are going to speak up and always be challenging, um the probes, for example. And uh I just know, when they're when a woman speaks her mind as as has taken very di2erently than if if a man does. And that that again, that follows up with some that gender material. The partner is high challenge and high support, so the followers take responsibility for themselves and the leaders support the leader, but is willing to challenge when necessary. So, e2ective followers self manage, they think for themselves the exercise control can work without supervision. There's a whole theory in organizations years ago, or I don't know how many years ago, decades ago, called theory ex in theory Y. Theory X leadership would say, you can't trust people. They're not motivated, you have to wash them all the time, because they're just not motivated. Theory why would say, people are self motivated and so they don't require strict supervision. Now we know that that some do and some don't, but um the assumption here is that is that oh, I got Siri hear my in my hey. Um, but how do you feel the motivation leaders as so really important assumption? They build their competence, master job skills, their credible, ethical, and courageous. Courage is not absence of fear, but courage is what we need in the face of fear, what we need in the face of fear. So, birashri, who is written a lot about power dynamics, as curiosity is better than judgment, compassion and respect are better than disdain, seeing is better than blindness. We must pay attention to nurture the social fabric of our teams and our organizations, relationships, Jesus knew that relationships were key to implement his mission on earth, the kingdom of God, relationships were so important. He formed community is the ﬁrst thing he did. form and community and mission came out of that that community that he formed. Paul's, uh, his entrepreneurial leadership cross missional boundaries of identity. But if you read look at every epistle that Paul wrote the beginning and end of his letters are ﬁlled with pet compassion and love and respect, he will list the names, he will list them by name of his his bonds of a2ection for them. So community building provides a shift in in our mental models, how we think, how we frame reality, how we pay attention, uh our motivation. I'd rather be I'd rather belong to a group that is as a sense of community and just come and have no relationships with anyone. That's one thing that Gail and I have discovered about the city harvest is that um the people we meet are so willing to extend themselves to us and form a relationship we feel we have friends at sea harvest. It's it's a strong relational, close knit community where you feel you are welcomed. You are welcomed. And as you know, so much of Singapore is is the cable. It's it's eating. And so we feel welcome in this table of fellowship. It's a powerful, it's a powerful dynamic. um so in the conversations we have when we would actually create future realities. And that's why it's really important in groups to to to think through how what are the what are the questions we bring to the table because the agenda we have will actually create future realities? So there are some questions with little power. Peter Block says, how do we get people to show up? How do we get people who have more responsibility? How do we get people to come on board? Well, here are some questions that might probe some deeper conversations. What if we ask each other, what is it about being on this team that gives you the deepest joy? Or if you say, what what could we do of this team that would give you the deepest? Maybe people don't have the deepestroy, so then you follow up with what would it take for you to feel fully accepted and satisﬁed in being on the team? What makes you most proud to be und this team or what would it takeed to be most proud of? What impact do you hope this team will have on others on the in on the entire organization, on our community? Sometimes teams can get so growned, but we have to always keep in mind what's the impact of this team uh whatever level we're in the organization, it may be that we need an impact on a particular department or a particular area, but on the organization as a whole, and then how is that impacted the entire community? What are the desires gives you hold that have not been fully brought into the world? What gifts do you have that are not fully expressed that you hope that we would acknowledge in and you could share to make us more e2ective and more healthy. um, how have you thought about the price for winter pay to be an actual member of this team? uh, what's the risk? acriﬁce you're willing to take? I know that many of you are sacriﬁcing to be involved in ministries that you you are involved with. What have I done to contribute to the very thing I complained about? to change? That's a pretty good question. Oh, I have to ask that myself when I complain about something happened at the university. uh, look at this one. What is the story about this community that you hear yourself most often tell it? the one that you are wedded to and even intur identity from. Wow. uh, you can almost predict what people will talk about when you get together with them informally, when they talk about the organization. and um so, what's that story? What is that? How can we change that story this if it's a negative story? If it's deep pleading story. So, e2ective leaders no group dynamics and um there are the content and process and then a group. I you you may know some of this that you've taken classes in social psychology or looking at group work, but just a review, maybe for some of you, maybe for others, it's new. But there's the what, you know, what's our agenda, what's our purpose, what's the goal, what's the problem being discussed? And the how, um the morale um the emotional atmosphere What are the implicit rules like, um, you don't don't bring up certain issues? Do you don't question the leader or you don't um, you know, you just listen that is that the implicit rule? Or is there a implicit rule that says everyone's voice is important here? Um, can you talk about any of the struggles? Can you talk about uh the competition or the cooperation going on? So there's a content on the process. This is another way of saying the same thing, past process, the task process or actions taken to get a job done, is the accomplishing the work to a grow up, so dividing up the group problem solving, brainstorming in decision making, processes, um how do we test for agreement, testing reality um the maintenance process, then maintenance simply means, how do you how would you maintain the um your your car? You want to take it in to the shop to get to get it to make sure it's running well. And that's what can maintenance me. How do do we run do we run a group well? Are we functioning together well as a group? Participation in are some people more controlling or so the handout shows more speciﬁc ways in which this group process is played out. um and this is the the uh handout And so you may have some questions about this. um, I'll be looking at those in the and I shortly. So the content is above the iceberg, to see that. um, and all these other process issues are below this surface. So the leader, the leader has to discern and know when do you bring the under the surface issues to a table so that the group can deal with them and become more e2ective? If you keep all of these below the surface, then you'll have um you have these dynamics that can be passive aggressive, um they can impede the health and the growth and the e2ectiveness of a team. So the leader has to know when do I deal with these as a group and when do I deal with these one on one? So it may be that that I need to talk to someone individually so that they don't lose face in a group. um, so that might be necessary to talk to them in individually. Maybe the group can get to a level of trust so that we can bring those out in the group and the group then becomes healthy to um to gild with them. Let me are we going to break out sessions, let me bring up some of these questions here. We progress in our career ministry the styleation required from us evolves. How can we adapt e2ectively while being aware of our constraints and how do we recognize when the demands of an ex level make see our natural inclinations? So um how can we adapt e2ectively so adapting means that we understand the dynamics. So that's why we're we're looking at this leadership at the di2erent levels, the I have to understand my interior dynamics. ﬁrst, what's going on inside of me? Um, what are my strengths, the best use of cell? What are what triggers me? and where where am I reactive and I ﬁnd myself, uh becoming defensive? That's really important to understand those dynamics, so that we can be aware of him. and remember we talked about how the brain functions, um, we need that regulating part of our brain to be an operation so that we don't just react, but we question our reconstructing of reality havingon e2ectively and responsibly. um how do we know that mans of the next leveline our natural inclinations? Well, you get you get feedback from others when um things are not going well or right. And if you're not if you're not sure about that feedback, you could, by the way, um you can ﬁnd out through body language, or you can just ask, and you can ask the group, how are um how are we are we doing an addressing this issue? Let's say you're trying to get more volunteers. say, how are we doing with this? Are we are we on the right track? Do we need to make any changes? And so if you if you're open and you establish that kind of trusty relationship with others and be open to their feedback, that'll give you that'll give you the feedback so that you can then respond and make the uh adjustments accordingly. You can also interview people at di2erent levels. So, you can ﬁnd out, what are the demands at this if it's the next level and you're if you if you're being asked to move to that level, talk to people who are there and say, hey, how's it what's it like to be at this level? I've never I'm I've been asked to go here, but I'm I'm not sure what it all involves and tell me about. Tell me your story. Um, the responsibility of good followers is speak truth to power, but one is under the leadership of a dominant domineering personality. How does one has a bollower learned to exercise? This responsibility? Well, maintain the peace of yourization and where the favor of the leadership. Wow, that's a mouthful, isn't it? Hm. It's hard to speak truth to power without trust. trust, So trust is that an e2ective communication is the ingredient, and this is cultural, too. How do you bring up thorny, sticky issues and with others and usually are dominating personality is can be very insecure. So they need a2irmation to establish that trust, but that may take a may take a long time. um it may just take a long time. Um eventually, um if you if you if you spin time and relationship by listening, listening is one of the uh and most important uh skills in developing trust and then you may bring up issues by asking questions, for example, rather than being too direct, but that's um that is a skill that needs to be navigated with discernment with discernment. Uh, we need the balance between giving space for the person to all to own self and doing things on yourself. them. Yeah, it's it's we have to work these out on our s on our own, don't we? We have to discern um to know I think I think one of the since we're talking about group process, one of the ways to give space for others in ourselves is when you really talk about di2erent kinds of meetings, when you give people some space in a meeting itself, and then write down some things, if they write down in their journal or a pad of paper, a question you might have, and then also, you might if uh divide the team into groups where they can talk about what theyve written down. That's giving them space. It's also building community, and then those groups can report back to the total group wealthy disgusted. a little bit what we're doing here, but this is a this is like 200 is his soul our so many to work through that. But if his if he had a group of say, seven to 12 people, you can easily do buy them into groups of two or three or three or four, and then um they can discuss and they come report back to the group, get some group dynamic that'll give energy, that'll give energy. If you if you have more than if you have more than three, uh, then you may have uh uh groups within those groups forming. So that's gotta be done with some discernment. So let's go into let's go into groups and talk about what what is uh what stands out, what interests mean? uh sold what? What are the implications or the key points now what are you consider doing or practicing? So, take a couple of minutes, jot down your response to these questions. and then we'll go into breakout rooms... People wouldn't were a questioner before you go into. I mean balance being a courageous follower and to practice what the Bible teaches to submit to our leaders, even when they we may not agree with them. as submissions is really important. We could be courageous and submissive at the same time. You can deﬁnitely be courageous and submissive at the same time. So, um yeah. Okay, let's go to break our rooms. Hello, hello everyone. I hope you guys are well. Singing., I think you are trying to settle in. Um okay, the ﬁrst session of the um the ﬁrst part, I can I can show I take a very ﬁrst um for tonight for the ﬁrst part. um I think one thing that interests me like more like for my career that like how it was is there not for me part of shit like um I would ask myself like how the teams aspirations, I think in my and how would my aspirations that I think in the Latine as well. So I think like that also gives them a sense of like uh impotence like in the team and it does of like ministry, right? I think what stood up for me is really like, well of conversations that we want to have that were made, a di2erence in a life of others. So, for me that I really think about, like our fellowship that the tiny forilities is that you know that we always say some sometimes we come earlier, that before presenthip starts right, we always have like this one you'll get like, where we ﬁnd something to talk about, like how would that um few me needs like reading the yeah. I think um these are some of things that stood up for me and like I want to be more thational in my conversations that yeah, as I learn about this. Yeah, so that's for me. There's anyone I was like to list. Bye bye-bye And anyway I think the book that though is quite interesting. I currently just Yeah, anybody anybody can go no sequence of other. Yeah, maybe Joey, I in because I was what I wanted to share because I think the one thing that uh prov talk about, right? um that I thought would be a take away was that the conversations we have in small groups create future realities. It's so nice we forget that even better we are followers or whether we are leaders, or whether we are managers, right? You the way you interact with people, whether at or even doing fellowships, it really does makes a di2erence. And you can actually set the tone for how people respond regardless. So I mean, you can have you can have a boss that is I don't know, super dominant and ﬁerce, right, or a bit more shouting kind or whatsoever, right? But yeah, at the same time, your the way that you respond and the way that you talk can make a di2erence, I guess to the rest of the team members, yeah. And then in in fellowship, you know, your conversations that sometimes, you know, like I I would ask myself, like, okay, if I if I'm having a meeting, it' would be, what kind of conversations do we want to have? What kind of questions do we want to think about? So it kind of set against at the porn right for how the conversation should be with that, whether is it in the hospital mind that it want to be what kind of so. So I was I was just reminded of what the Bible says, and the Bible talks about how death in life and the half of the time. And those those who love it well it is fruits. So if we will be just a little bit more intentional and a little bit more in the way we talk in the way we speak and how we say, it will really make a big di2erence. And we love it, it will eat these food that. Yeah. so so funny, yeah. That's true, and I think more also say like how how unif for some people, like, if let's say like, I mean in the window this type of behavior or something, right for some, some people we can we have to speak to them by individually, and then for some, like, you know, if there in the the group is much trainer, then we can speak to them, like, in a group, right? So you so like see like a setting of the group as so yeah. So, that's in good. And anyone else?, of course.. I'm just thinking about, uh, I was hope I wasn't push share anything. It was just that I was what came to my mind was was so ti together with my last week, um fostel true self thing. And then the point about and John let your hair down and then I think so after that a be intentional I being intention known in like of this relationships and with your all of your team and or even having conversations with intentionally, you know, just thinking to it. they like because it's super in trouble with you know I think we kind of did someone asked about you in trouble but then how you is And then I think just to how about having personas and I think it's really very important and have a functionalas, you know, when you are here, you it is where as a leader. And it'll be another set thing is all over. So I think um things just, I mean, I don't have answers with it's just picking o2 my brain and why I was just thinking as part of a showing that how um I think you can once even though he had certain preferences, don't prefer to just keep quiet. I mean example, but say maybe not so comfortable with sharing talking up in a group. ﬁnd our own way as a leader or. Yeah, and um to still be able to kind of be e2ective and e2icient by not, yeah, I think I really use it as all in di2erent ways. So I mean, I don't know how it's gonna work, but so there's also opportunity you are now got to let us draw in di2erent areas to spell, yeah, so we may in trouble and may have a preference this, but then, sometimes it's also something ourselves to God doing that in the work, so that when the time comes and we need to, then it was fear that was holding back. This is anxiety was in the pre site, self init just holding the back. But then at the anyway, God began to do that in our work, then we began to be able to some function in the di2erent roles, no matter what our personality or prefnces may be. It just said. Oh, you see so beautifully, yeah. I think a lot of people that I know who are in leadership, like they can be in trouble that was, but it's just step up, you know, and they when they need to and like church, you know something are like stage front and sudden issues are and and really all contribute in di2erent ways and that look, I was stage right? Weoice supplies and that God is cost is very true. Yeah. But there's a really good thought. Anyone written the book before. It's like ﬁrst time like seeing this movie so. Anybody else would likelle or has like any thoughts. But didn't know it was I about the impact people was India always learned how the user all by means to hear either, what it means to have good leadership skills. But you never really thought about how to do it because I take all over how to actually support your well. I mean in the market are very well. It's always or whatever your boss as you do, you do and more yeah but I do less really put now. I think has the profation four points. Yeah I think is it's quite interesting on what the four points are, know how to self manage and think for yourselves, do what we also provision, uh strong commitment to organizational goals, biting, there is a peline e2ective all over where you can work with solution but also not all over the when you were young, you always like a there as you go out like in or girl or by some might to be. Carage is not access of clear that courage is what we look in the face of your. Maybe the e2ective leaders and also e2ective for those just thought about, but the question comes to us. courages, although it just well of wor but also submission to aut And I' about.. I just thought that it's a very ﬁne line little more on how to other balance both. I think maybe for this it's like, you can still be some estive, you can still be a g good for, but that doesn't stop us from um articulating what we really inﬂu, maybe put for a team on organizization is it's like it's just that when we give it back, when we give our obedience, uh it doesn't always means that it will be agreed. And that is the humility for us to accept. Right? Because we are of it in the instance, we are full. So I guess we can still say by the end of the day, um eat the direction of the team leader or, you know, of all the team, they prefer another direction, and that's still ﬁne. We can still follow through and do our best for that decision. That was me. So I think for team dynamics, uh is really about a team. It's not about an individual glory or individual opinion... Hello. I was just thinking about how about that, uh asked like the tem a bit then he said that your price even pays of the is you. So I just, you know, sometimes about because I think that like, because he does that in like for seriﬁced into like, likeriﬁce like, you, you know there Well, yeah, there is a deeper night, yeah, I thought I still. group was like station have a good great.. Do you think of opening Welcome back. Oh, you got one minute. listen to this question. Hyro and psychology, there is a this area called dark triad, cyclop psychopathy, um metroilion, uh macabilias inism, narcissism. early in the morning for me. What is your view of the dark triad and how should we respond as Christians? uh it's important to always pray for others. I know that should be something expect that answer for when you pray for others. We're gonna get it to some of this and the next time we meet. but uh, sometimes we have we need to set boundaries. We need to be we need to be clear on where we are and where the other person is that we can set boundaries and still be civil, still be civil to others, but there are professional antagonists that will get into um and in the next session and next week, or the next time you meet. um I've met some of these people, by the way. and uh and they can they can overwhelm you, but we'll talk more about that. Okay, it's time for a break. We'll see you in 10 minutes. Um I'm I I I wish we could just sit down in a room and talk about your experience of being on a team what what is is your deﬁnition of a high performance team was challenging about being on a team, about leading a team? These are are always at the forefront when we think of leadership in organizations and uh teamwork. So if uh the deﬁnition um these Casabach and Smith team as a small number of people with complimentary skills who are committed to a common purpose, set of performance goals and approach for which they hold themselves mutually accountable. that that deﬁnition has changed over the years where it used to be as uh we've shared accountability to a leader, but a a leader is maturing when their accountable to not just to the leader, but to one another to one another a high performing team e2ectively makes communicates in a way that raises morale and alignment, engages with all a team key stakeholder groups in a way that rules performance and provides constant learning development for all its members in the collective team. So this that stakeholders group. So for example, if you're in children's ministry, you're you're you're working with children or say teacher you a teacher in the public school or whatever, the main client would be the children, but stakeholders also include parents. Stakeholders also include other people who are really committed and interested and connected to that ministry so that there are variety of stakeholders in all teams, youth ministry, the same thing. So the relational context of being un team is the individual, the interpersonal dynamics, theen dynamics, the team tasks, themissionion, the intent, the di2erent stakeholder interfaces, and then the wider systemic um context and that synonym is meaning political, economical, social, technological, legal, and environmental. So you had these di2erent levels of systems that we've been talking about. So if you look at um the continuum of teams, so the operation, you could see sometimes you just tell us what to do. Uh, on the bottom left, you see the leaders in the center and just says, okay. uh we we need some if if you're um if you're a ﬁreﬁghter, um, you need some to tell you where to go, what to do with this particular ﬁghter. or if if uh some some teams demand more task oriented direction of a leader, just tell us what to do. on the top right, you can see that this support more creative or the leader is in the circle, and there's a dynamic interface in communication network. Among all the team members, including the leader, so you can see how there is this continuum from operational, very directive to much more participatory on the top right. and you can begin to say, well, where the teams that I'm on, where would you put that? Is that in probably most of us are teams are in between this. So, safety is a really important part of any team uh performance. Do people feel safe and one of the researchers in this is Amy Edmondson, who's at Harvard, um the the um how how safe do people feel a and kind of speak up with ideas, questions conc concerns or mistakes? which is what some of you have been really asking about. So the psychological safe workplace, the safety is in the group itself rather than just a relationship of speciﬁc individuals. And now, it may be important to increase that relationship of individuals have then contribute to the larger dynamics of the group. But you could what's really important to measure is the psychological safety of the of the group of the working group of a team. And if the work environment is safe for interpersonal risk thinking, feeling able to speak up with ideas, questions or concerns, then psychological safeties present when the colleagues trust respect each other and feel able even obligated to be candid, so inviting honesty, inviting that kind of candid response so um psychological safety is deﬁned as a climate in which people are comfortable expressing and being themselves when people have psychological skate work, they feel comfortable sharing concerns and mistakes without fear of embarrassment or retribution. Gallopol in7 found that only three and ten employees strongly agree with the statement that their penis count at work. Um, as kind of sad, actually, isn't it? Three out of ten, three? So, in 2017, I think it was. Google did this major study at ﬁve year study on teams called Project Aristotle. Why do some Google teams do better than others? What matter is less is who is on the team, what matters most is how the team works together, though if we got into this study, why do why do people withhold? We don't want to look ignorant, so we don't ask the question, we don't wanna look incompetent, so we don't admit weakness are a mistake. We don't want to o2er others ideas or feel intrusive. We don't want to be the negative criticizing a status quo. And the more we we can be pretty good impression management, that is to say, in make the impression that we're involved, but um we're really or really not. So Edmondson's questionnaire was on a 7 point scale and here is one of the questions that are at we're asked. If you make a mistake on this team, it is often held against you. The R means that you would if you're tabulated this, it would be a reverse um and it would be a reverse reverse rating of this. Um members of this team are able to bring up problems and tough issues. So if you strongly agree with this, they you circle a seven on this, then that would be that would mean that there's some psychological safety on this team be up the number one, the R means that the scale of one would be the positive scaling of this in terms of measuring psychological safety. People on this team sometimes reject others for being di2erent. That's another re reverse scaling. It is safe to take a risk on this team. It is di2icult to ask other members of this team for help. No one on this team would deliberately act in the way that undermines my e2orts. So this this scale, by the way, um and working with members of this team, my unique skills and talents are val and utilize um this was translated to German, Spanish, Russian, Japanese, Chinese and Korean, all yielding, very robust research ﬁndings. this was a quantitative uh study, but it was it was uh substantiated with qualitative studies that followed up on this. So we go back to Google psychological safety, feeling, um safety take risks to be vulnerable, dependability, get things done in time, structure and clarity have clear rules, meaning, workers personally important, believe their their work, manners and grace change. Those are really I mean, just think about those key factors to success and begin to think about how do those relate to my experience? But what was important is that Google found that the most important key of all of these is psychological safety. That's the most important key. So how you work that out in your culture in your organization culture is is is maybe di2icult, but um this would be an interesting study to just bring up this particular study as a topic without making any judgments or accusations, but say, how can we become how can we increase a psychological safety on our team? How can we increase our dependability, our accountability, um, do we have clear roles and plans and goals? Uh, how how much meaning is there in working on this team? Uh, is our is this team making a di2erence on others in lives, individuals on the organization or in the environment? used to be ways to understand how fruitful are we, how e2ective are we? So here are the um here in the the scale that Google used. So this would be another rating scale that you could think about using with your own team members and see, how do people feel about their prof about the performance so the team by looking at these individual um statements? And which of these do we need to work on? Which of these need to be in need some adjustments or are ourselves as a team? So with with higher psychological safety, they were less likely to leave Google. They stayed on, they were more likely to harness the power of diverse ideas from their teammates. so whose collaboration, um they brought in more revenue and they were rated as e2ective twice as often by Google executives. So the diversity of a team is really important that's been proven to be what you have to work out the di2erences, you have to manage those, but oh, in the end will be far more e2ective than the sum of individual e2orts. So if you look at this matrix, you can see that uh, there's a there's a continuum, the horizontal continuum would be, do we have Low to high standard standards and accountability, and the vertical is low to high psychological safety? So you can see there that the top or the um the Lud in both. So you have a if you have high psychological safety and low standards, it's a comfort zone. It's like, you know, at uh no big deal. um don't have much accountability, the standards are not all that high, and I feel safe, so it's very comfortable. There is a the high accountability and high safety, um is a learning zone. Uh, so we have more to learn. So learning zone, we feel safe, but we can also need to tackle tough problems that do not have easy solutions. The low standards and low psychological safety is the apathy zones like, uh. no big deal. Um, and I don't feel I don't feel safe and there's not much standard or accountability. And here this is the this is the one that's most concerning. when you have high accountability or standards, the standards meaning, boy, these are tough problems for us to deal with, and low psychological safety, it is the anxiety zone and and teams do not work well in highly anxious systems. That's what this is why we need psychological safety with pressing albums that face organizations or that face teams. So um what leaders can do is to frame the work as to say, we're we're here to learn from each other about the issues we are addressing. you know, it could be, for example, that um the p participation and a particular ministry or revenues are folly in the marketplace or whatever whatever the issue is that say it's an issue facing the team is that you begin to frame it as a learning problem. We have to learn from each other, that the wisdom is in the room the leaner does not have to have all the answers to announce it to the group, but to say, let's talk about this can set expectations that um uh this is actually called adaptive work of uh uncertainty that we need each other to address this issue. Um, what's that st stay quiet matters, asking questions, model, listening, active listening, uh, everyone's voice is important. um establish some guidelines for uh disagreements, bringing out the dis ask other what other people are thinking. um so you can frame frame these uh questions to help to create psychological safety. So here is here's one way of looking at all the the di2erent stages of development of a team from the creating stages to the sustaining stages, you know, look at the stages one through four. um why am I here who are you? What are you what are we doing together? What are we supposed to be doing? Uh, how do we make decisions and then implementation? I performance and renewal. So that's that's one way, but this is this is uh I think more accessible. This is Lenioni's work. I don't know if any of you read his um work on teams, the ﬁve dysf functions of a team and then if you want to know how to design a good team meeting, I would get this book death by meeting, and I'm gonna talk a little bit about that at the end. So what what Lind says is that, um there are these ﬁve levels of dysfunction that needs to be addressed. So if we're looking at the bottom, the most one of the most important issues, the foundation is as we've been discussing is the absence of trust. I mean, we have to work through the trust issues, or we'll never really become fully functioning as we should. be. So, this building trust requires vulnerability. how vulnerable can we be with each other? Or are we always hiding behind our social masks? So we need trust in order to develop a healthy conﬂict. So if your conﬂict is your your paying peace at all costs, but healthy conﬂict implies candidate Kennedy dates, or it Kennedy implies uh healthy disagreements with each other, that in the in the conversation of di2erences, emerges something new that has been created that can be very helpful for the team when people disagree and come to come together. We must we must learn to manage our di2erences, manage our di2erences, and a healthy way. The back of commitment, so commitment follows, healthy conﬂict. When we work things out, we we develop a common commitment to each other into the team. avoiding some accountability, um, uh is, you know, that's just the way I work. Well, that's not gonna be helpful for the team to take accountability requires prior commitment. And ﬁnally, the last one is uh focusing on measurable results versus, uh, don't pay attention to the results. Um It's all about me. So in this ﬁrst stage, members of the of a great teams trust on one another, trust one another on on a fundamental emotional level, they're comfortable being vulnerable with each other. um, their weaknesses, their mistakes, their fears, behaviors, and they can get to the point where they're open with each open with each other. That is a highly functioning team that can develop trust with each other, be open being open with one another. on the fear of conﬂict, they trust another one another and and are not afraid to engage in dialogue about the issues and decisions that are key to the organization's success. They don't hesitate to disagreeing with or challenge question one another. Um, in making good decisions. Lack of commitment they're engaged in unﬁltered conﬂict or are able to achieve buy in around important decisions, all questions are put on the table for this, uh they commit themselves to the scannards of performance and wholly one another accountable. They don't rely just on the team leaders. And ﬁnally, they are are give attention. They focus on delivering the measureual give results. So highly these are ﬁve stages of high performance teams. Bruce Tuckman has another model that might make even more sense to you will see, but as a team develops from maturity and ability, the leader changes this leadership style, so, if you look at at the stages of development, the team e2ectiveness when you begin a team, and it starts relatively low. There is there might be a high morale, but they've never worked together. They may not be as e2ective, but you can see that it'll take a dive on the second stage, the third st

Exam Guide Week 3 PDF

Document Details

Tags

Related

Summary

Full Transcript