Growing good leadership

Dermot Parsons outlines how good leadership must have servant-heartedness at its core.

When people think of health and social care, they think about ‘too much management red tape’ and the need to give control to professionals. In our Social Witness department, despite management arrangements, significant reform was needed. When change is needed, it is not more management, but leadership that is required.

The idea of ‘leadership’ can conjure up a misleading image – a strong and charismatic leader, setting out an exciting and inspiring vision for the future, motivating others through his or her powerful oratory. I think we have all seen this kind of leader at work, and sometimes this approach works for a while. To sustain this approach is a great pressure on the leader themselves, and it does little to build sustainable leadership in a management team.

Management courses and literature offer many other models that promise transformation, including democratic, autocratic, laissez-faire and ethical leadership approaches. The more experienced leader may take elements of all these models and use them in a ‘blended’ style. In our work in the Church, though, the question must be asked: “Where is Christ in these models?” In the Council for Social Witness (CSW), our mission statement is “People Matter to God”. For this to be lived out, we would do well to follow Christ’s leadership. In John 10:11, this is described simply as, “I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep.” Much is implicit in this statement, including the wide range of potentially catastrophic situations in which the sheep can find themselves, but most clearly the wonderful statement of sacrificial love and care persistently shown by the shepherd.

This thinking has led us in CSW to work within the model of servant leadership – an approach that asks hard questions of us as senior managers. Firstly, are we truly committed to nurturing and serving those we manage? If not, there is the risk that we are more like “hired hands” (John 10:12–13) and will not continue to support our service teams when times are challenging. Secondly, are we prepared to set aside the trappings and behaviours often associated with senior posts – and commit ourselves to a servant approach to those who work with us? These are continual challenges that we address when we meet as a team, in prayer or in practical work. In taking this approach, we are conscious of the teaching in 2 Corinthians 9–10: “Therefore I will boast all the more gladly of my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may rest upon me. For the sake of Christ, then, I am content with weaknesses, insults, hardships, persecutions, and calamities. For when I am weak, then I am strong.”

We make sure that we listen to the needs of others… and that we have the courage to address difficult matters.

The servant leadership model seems to be somewhat in vogue at the moment in corporate management; not explicitly Christian-based, but like so many approaches in the world, it cannot help but contain an echo of the servant approach of Christ. In our work, we have identified a number of key distinctive elements to take forward in CSW:

Humility. As a priority, we make sure that those who work in our services, whether in care or management roles, have what they need to deliver care safely and with compassion. Jonathan Edwards wrote: “Humility tends to prevent an ostentatious behaviour… [for a humble person] it is a small thing with him what men think of him.” This needs to be true of us.

Integrity. We make sure that we communicate openly and honestly, that we listen to the needs of others, that we follow through when we undertake tasks, and that we have the courage to address difficult matters.

Leading by example. In our behaviour with each other, with service users and staff, and with professionals involved with our services, we must reflect how we believe people should be treated.

Care for people. Matthew 25:34 onwards sets out numerous examples of the call for people to show care for others. For us, this includes how we treat each other, how we work with our staff and the prime need to ensure that our services reflect our focus on the individual needs of each unique individual whom we support.

Stewardship. CSW employs over 400 staff and it includes what is effectively an £11m turnover business. We need to look after these resources. We need to make sure that buildings are regularly maintained and decorated, that staff are properly supported and trained and, critically, that we secure enough income to make sure that our services are sustainable into the future.

We must listen carefully to avoid making arrogant decisions based on our professional knowledge alone.

Correction and learning. No matter how careful we are, we will make errors. We can expect that our staff team will also make errors, and so we need to both be open to listen to others so we can learn, but also prepared to share learning with others in a way that they can hear. Listening. CSW services are operated to meet the needs of others in society, staffed by an experienced team. We have all brought very different experiences to our management group, are challenged to serve, and are committed to regular prayer. We must listen carefully to avoid making arrogant decisions based on our professional knowledge alone.

Aware of self and others. These notions are closely linked, but we need to recognise each other’s uniqueness and our connection if we are to be effective. The illustration of the parts of the human body in 1 Corinthians 12:18–20 applies: “But as it is, God arranged the members in the body, each one of them, as he chose. If all were a single member, where would the body be? As it is, there are many parts, yet one body.”

Build a team. We need to move from recognising our mutual contribution to strengthening the bonds between team members with different skills to achieve the common purpose.

Accountability. There is a risk that in a senior team, managers fail to see that they are accountable through formal structures (in our case, the Council and its committees) but also to those we lead – if we acknowledge the call to serve, we are also accountable to those we should serve. If we make the commitment to ‘shepherd’ our flock, we are accountable to them to live that out – it is not an option for us to do the equivalent of fleeing when the wolf comes.

Share the vision: Proverbs 29:18 states: “Where there is no prophetic vision the people cast off restraint, but blessed is he who keeps the law.” We need to uphold the vision that we have, based on prayerfully seeking God’s will, and be confident to share it with all of our team. How can we expect that our staff team will work in the way we hope if we do not boldly share our vision with them?

Courage. This is the final part of servant leadership in CSW. There are several key reasons why courage sits in servant leadership. Firstly, we see the values of the world around us. Our senior team members work in similar roles to regional managers of care groups, and they have seen and heard the discussions about the status trappings common with senior posts. Instead, they have courage to recognise the nature of their roles to simply serve in our services. It takes courage to stand out from the crowd and display faith-based humility. Secondly, we live in times where some external professionals can be challenging with our senior team. Again, it takes courage to respond in ways that reflect servant hearts and for colleagues to be humble rather than push back. Finally, an approach reflecting servant leadership will take time to deliver results. Rapid responses have become the norm, so relying on patience, investing time and effort in people, is quite challenging to others. Some will question why we avoid shortcuts, why we shun highly directive approaches, and it does take courage to be different. The answer, I believe, is in the love of Christ. He shows limitless love and patience in his care for us –surely, we must show even the faintest shadow of this towards those we work with.

In our social care work, there are a number of practical steps that we have taken to support our staff team strongly. These have included: making sure that each service manager has a monthly supervision session that addresses their support and development needs, along with following up on work objectives; our senior team becoming more visible in services, which is certainly easier now pandemic restrictions have gone; encouraging service managers to share good practice examples at our monthly management meetings, and with each other outside meetings; and starting to work in a trauma-informed way that takes account of the adverse experiences that many people have had prior to working for CSW.

There is a risk that in a senior team, managers fail to see that they are accountable through formal structures… but also to those we lead…

Managers and staff have identified training gaps, some relating to skills needed to work with service users with complex needs. Some gaps also relate to teambuilding and management skills. It is perfectly reasonable for our staff to need additional skills in these areas and, working with external facilitators, we have started to provide additional training to help the team feel confident in key work areas. We have found team members responsive to the new opportunities they have – we are fortunate to have such an able and well-motivated team in CSW.

Just as the shepherd meets the practical needs of the sheep, we are simply providing the team with the essentials they need to do their jobs. Already, as we actively take on this approach, we can see that people are starting to feel valued, and truly cared for. There is a huge staff shortage in social care and we hope that our staff team will start to see, and talk about, the benefits of working for PCI.

I have worked in a number of different management and leadership models over the years, many of which were apparently outcome focused and closely aligned to business needs. Often, I have found that the models that exist in organisational cultures are characterised by internal factions, staff turnover and wasteful activities resulting from personal ambition. In my early years in management, I was taken by the idea of management and leadership as a fairly scientific activity and had optimism that particular theories would bring benefit in the long term. Looking back, I believe that it is fully understandable that managers become more flexible and adopt a more eclectic approach to leadership. Personally, I wonder: is a mix

There is and match approach strong in itself, or is it an acknowledgement that perhaps no theory will truly fit what is needed to work with the complexities of broken people in fallen societies?

The servant leadership approach has value for us in CSW. So, is this an approach that is only suitable for working in the Church in the area of social witness? I would suggest not – the authenticity and depth of Christ’s care for others is surely something that should be a guide for those in leadership in any setting. Jesus himself set out a simple illustration of how the necessary care and guidance could be given to the flock, but it is a profound illustration with more insight into human need and behaviour than any management model.

Dermot Parsons is PCI’s Secretary to the Council for Social Witness.