expand to the max while keeping all citations and references. Find sources of citations in Havard style at the end: 5.6. Characteristics of Christian Transformational Leadership
In delving into the nuanced understanding of Christian Transformational Leadership, it is imperative to go beyond generic definitions and consider the major features consistently found in various texts. This section aims to extract these commonalities from the literature, amalgamating them into a comprehensive definition.
5.6.1. Christian Essence: Undoubtedly, Christian Transformational Leadership is inherently Christian, and a closer examination is needed to elucidate the specific connotations of “Christian” in this context.
The initial inquiry revolves around whether Christian Transformational Leadership, being inherently Christian, is centered around Christ. To ascertain this, an exploration of the literature was conducted, focusing on whether Jesus Christ is regarded either as the quintessential model of leadership or as the Object of faith (Stortz, 2008:5).
While a considerable body of literature indeed presents Jesus Christ as a model for Christian leadership (Banks and Ledbetter, 2004:111; Barna, 1997:19; Blackaby and Blackaby, 2001; Clinton, 1988:195; Engstrom, 1976:37; Ford, 1993:11; Halcomb, Hamilton, and Malmstadt, 2000:48; Jinkins, 2002:xiii; Wofford, 1999:16) [13], it is crucial to note that this perspective is not universally embraced within the realm of Christian Transformational Leadership. Surprisingly, a substantial portion of the literature does not specifically emphasize Jesus as a model for leadership (Gibbs, 2005; Guder, 1998; Hunter, 2004; Hybels, 2002; Maxwell, 1998; Munroe, 2005; Roxburth and Romanuk, 2006; Sanders, 1994; Stanley, 2003; Stanley and Clinton, 1992; Thomas, 1999; Thrall, McNicol, and McElrath, 1999).
This nuanced exploration unveils the complexity within the Christian Transformational Leadership discourse, where the centrality of Jesus Christ as a leadership model is not universally asserted across the literature. Such divergences highlight the need for a more nuanced understanding of the Christian essence within the broader framework of Transformational Leadership.
Halcomb, Hamilton, and Malmstadt (2000:19) assert that God Himself serves as the exemplar of Christian leadership. My subsequent inquiry aimed to discern if Jesus Christ could be perceived as the focal point of faith for Christian leaders. However, this exploration yielded limited results. Although faith was occasionally depicted as a favorable aspect of Christian leadership (Clinton 1988:117; Sanders 1994:51) and, in a few instances, considered foundational to Christian leadership (Engstrom 1976:118; Banks and Ledbetter 2004:31; Wofford 1999:16), it was by no means a universally prevalent feature of Christian Transformational Leadership.
Despite the variability in the emphasis on faith, all the selected literature unanimously advocated for a Christian approach to leadership (Barna 1997, Cover; Banks and Ledbetter 2004, Cover; Blackaby and Blackaby 2001:xi; Clinton 1988:2; Engstrom 1976:2; Ford 1993, Cover; Gibbs 2005, Cover; Halcomb, Hamilton, and Malmstadt 2000:4; Hunter 2004:Dust Cover; Hybels 2002:11; Sanders 1994, Cover; Wofford 1999, Cover). Moreover, some works were specifically directed towards the Church (Everist and Nessan 2008, Cover; Guder 1998, Cover; Jinkins Scarborough, ‘Christian Transformational Leadership’ 2002, Cover; Roxburgh and Romanuk 2006:Dust Cover; Stanley 2006:ix), while others declared a Christian or Biblical foundation more generally (Thomas 1999:12; Stanley and Clinton 1992:2; Thrall, McNicol, and McElrath 1999:2) or even a Biblical foundation (Maxwell 1998:iii; Wright 2000, Cover).
The sole exception to this trend was Munroe (2005), who, while disavowing a specifically Biblical or Christian commitment, included six pages of Scripture references in his book, predominantly derived from the New Testament (Munroe 2005:290). Despite this deviation, he was deemed a Christian author based on this inclusion.
Therefore, for the purpose of this context, ‘Christian’ is defined as those books that either explicitly declare a Christian or Biblical foundation or are expressly directed to the Church.
In the realm of Christian Transformational Leadership, the centrality of the concept of influence cannot be overstated. As Maxwell (1998:17) boldly asserts, “Leadership is influence—nothing more, nothing less.” Synonyms such as “moving people” (Blackaby and Blackaby 2001:20), “forming people” (Everist and Nessan 2008:1; Guder 1998:183), or having “an effect on outcomes” (Thrall, McNicol, and McElrath 1999:10) are also used in the literature to encapsulate the essence of influence.
Numerous Christian Transformational Leadership authors highlighted in this study underscore the pivotal role of influence in this leadership paradigm (Barna 1997:24; Clinton 1988:101; Engstrom 1976:24; Gibbs 2005:22; Hunter 2004:68; Hybels 2002:127; Munroe 2005:52; Sanders 1994:27; Stanley 2006:139; Thomas 1999:31; Wright 2000:31) (Scarborough, ‘Christian Transformational Leadership’ 73).
The majority of these authors emphasize the one-way flow of influence from a leader to followers (Clinton 1988:178; Everist and Nessan 2008:55; Hunter 2004:31; Maxwell 1998:56; Sanders 1994:27; Stanley 2006:139; Thomas 1999:138; Wright 2000:13) (Scarborough, ‘Christian Transformational Leadership’ 73). However, a few scholars acknowledge the reciprocal nature of influence, recognizing the impact of followers on the leader (Banks and Ledbetter 2004:127; Gibbs 2005:22).
In the context of Christian Transformational Leadership, the foundations predominantly align with Burns (1978:20). The crux of this leadership style revolves around the concept of influence, a term integral to the derivation of the label ‘transformational.’ Influence, in this context, is viewed as a potent force capable of reshaping individuals’ motives as they strive toward a shared goal. This stands in sharp contrast to alternative means of goal attainment, such as manipulation (Everist and Nessan 2008:207; Ford 1991:43; Hunter 2004:108, 187; Munroe 2005:43; Thrall, McNicol, and McElrath 1999:21), coercion (Everist and Nessan 2008:207; Hunter 2004:53), command (Halcomb, Hamilton, and Malmstadt 2000:219), or transaction (Banks and Ledbetter 2004:51).
The crux of ‘influence’ in Christian Transformational Leadership lies in its transformative impact on individuals’ motivations, prompting them to pursue goals through internal transformation. Christian Transformational leaders, as indicated by Wofford (1999:17), possess the ability to ‘change attitudes,’ not only influencing the subjects of discourse but also shaping dreams (Ford 1991:15). On occasions, these leaders aspire to go beyond mere attitudinal shifts, seeking to effect comprehensive transformations at both the individual and community levels (Jinkins 2002:xii). Thus, the essence of this leadership style hinges on the transformative power of influence, steering followers toward a higher, purpose-driven collective vision.
In the realm of Christian Transformational Leadership, the importance of persuasiveness is consistently underscored as a crucial element for effective influence (Gibbs 2005:21; Munroe 2005:76; Sanders 1994:27). Distinct from mere influence, which focuses on the method of leadership, persuasiveness places emphasis on the leader’s capacity to guide and motivate others, steering them toward uncharted territories (Gibbs 2005:21; Thomas 1999:146; Engstrom 1976:64). This quality is often equated with charisma, described as the power to persuade (Everist and Nessan 2008:56; Gibbs 2005:39; Wofford 1999:27). The four aspects associated with persuasiveness, as noted in secular Transformational Leadership literature, include idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration (Sosik 2006:18; Yukl 1999:2), collectively referred to as ‘charisma’ (Bass and Riggio 2006:25).
While the specifics of these aspects are not the primary focus here, it is essential to recognize that persuasiveness is a recurring theme in Christian Transformational Leadership literature. Various authors in this study consistently advocate for persuasiveness as a vital trait of the Christian Transformational leader (Barna 1997:23; Banks and Ledbetter 2004:40; Blackaby and Blackaby 2001:17; Clinton 1988:14; Engstrom 1976:64; Ford 1993:25; Halcomb, Hamilton, and Malmstadt 2000:51; Hunter 2004:185; Maxwell 1998:162; Sanders 1994:73; Stanley 2006:118; Stanley and Clinton 1992:145; Wright 2000:18). The capacity to persuade, motivate, and guide others emerges as a consistent and fundamental theme in the discourse on Christian Transformational Leadership.
In order to exert effective influence, a robust strategy is imperative. This strategic approach seeks optimal methods to implement a course of action successfully. As noted by Maxwell (1998:203), a leader must employ the right actions at the right time to ensure success. Sanders (1994:113) emphasizes the necessity for leaders to utilize tactics that lead to success. Thomas (1999:31) underscores the importance of crucial skills such as timing, creativity, and discipline.
Stanley (2003:79) contends that a sound strategy is fundamental for every effective leader, equating it to the approach taken by a skilled coach in a game. Various authors on Christian Transformational Leadership consistently stress the significance of strategy (Barna 1997:25; Banks Ledbetter 2004:133; Blackaby and Blackaby 2001:70; Clinton 1988:88; Everist and Nessan 2008:101; Ford 1993, Cover; Gibbs 2005:99; Guder 1998:201; Halcomb, Hamilton, and Malmstadt 2000:130; Hybels 2002:55; Munroe 2005:243; Thrall, McNicol, and McElrath 1999:181; Wofford 1999:89; Wright 2000:71).
In essence, strategy serves as the backbone for effective leadership, guiding actions and decisions towards successful outcomes. The consensus among Christian Transformational Leadership authors underscores the pivotal role of a well-thought-out strategy in achieving impactful leadership results.