The Critical Importance of Leader Credibility
Title: The Critical Importance of Leader Credibility
Category: Pastoral Issues
Subject: Credibility in Ministry
The Critical Importance of Leader Credibility
Thomas Gaines
“Credibility is about how leaders earn the trust and confidence of their constituents. It’s about what people demand of their leaders and the actions a leader must take in order to intensify their constituents’ commitment to a common cause. Make no mistake about it: people have very high expectations of their leaders. Constituents are more demanding and harder to please than ever these days. They are also very disappointed. The heroic leadership myth has been shattered, and cynicism has taken its place.
People still want leadership. They just want leaders who hold on to an ethic of service and are genuinely respectful of the intelligence and contributions of their constituents. They want leaders who will put principles ahead of politics and other people before self-interests.”
In organizations characterized by new leadership at the executive level, earning constituent trust should be a major concern of top-level leadership. For some indeterminable period of time, constituents will quite naturally maintain a vigilant, wait and see attitude concerning the motives and intentions of leaders and if leaders aren’t sensitive to this fact, they easily can contribute to constituent distrust and resultant cynicism.
“Does credibility really make a difference? If employee loyalty and commitment matter, then it obviously does. The credibility of leadership is what determines whether people will want to give a little more of their time, talent, energy, experience, intelligence, creativity, and support. Threat, power, position, and money do not earn commitment; they earn compliance. And compliance produces adequacy, not greatness. Only high credibility earns intense commitment. And commitment will ultimately enable people to regenerate great organizations such as, for example, a great church.”
Increasing cynicism (believing that people are motivated in all their actions only by selfishness; denying the sincerity of people’s motives and actions; sarcastic) is a threat to all contemporary American organizations, perhaps especially within God’s church. Leaders must be cautious to not say things that are not followed by relevant actions. Said another way, leaders had better be very careful to make sure their deeds consistently match their words. As the prominent leadership educator and author Peter Drucker is attributed as having said, “There is little that will cost a leader credibility more than failing to follow through with a declaration or a promise.
“Virtually all cynicism has the same origin and it is depicted in the chart on the next page. It perhaps is useful for a leader, when looking over the chart, to do some self-assessing; e.g. Do I always back my words with relevant actions? Do I sometimes say things I think someone else wants to hear without having a total commitment to follow through? Do I occasionally say things in the heat of excitement that may lead to unrealistic expectations on the part of constituents? Have I ever told subordinate leaders in my organization that I want them to do their jobs and that I will stay out of the way while they do their jobs…and then intervene because I feel I know better how to do something? Think about these questions as you look over the following chart.
Here’s a simplified example of how the “flow” depicted above works:
Step One - We are told or otherwise hear that we are going to begin doing such and such in our church and that “it” will be better than anyone could imagine (Expectation is established)
Step Two - We initiate the “it” and within a short period of time it is generally recognized that “it” is far from better than what we were doing before and/or than what a leader or leaders said would occur (Experience happens)
Step Three - Constituents feel short-changed and/or misled (1) (Experience vs. Expectation Feelings) and in addition to griping or generally being disenchanted, constituent belief and commitment begin to waver (see fourth paragraph on page one again).
“Even if there was no intent to do them wrong, people feel deceived or injured when they have been misled. To lead, not mislead, you must have the knowledge, skills, and abilities to consistently exemplify the values you profess. Leaders should recognize that it is an honorable act to get out of the way and let others take charge when he or she cannot mobilize the motivation, the resources, and the actions to meet the demands of a challenging task. Leaders should make it possible for someone else who has the values, the competence, and the self-confidence to step forward.
“Credibility, like quality and service, is determined by the constituents, so leaders must be able to view themselves as their constituents do – i.e. know thyself. Leaders who are clearly interested in their own agendas, their own advancement, and their own well-being are not willingly followed. Studies from the Center for Creative Leadership have revealed that successful executives can become derailed because of their insensitivity and inability to understand the perspectives of other people. When these leaders really needed the help of others around them, they were left to fend for themselves, ignored, isolated, and on occasion even sabotaged.”
All quotations are from “Credibility: How Leaders Gain It and Lose It, Why People Demand It;” James M. Kouzes and Barry Z Posner; Jossey-Bass Publishers; San Francisco 1993.
Thomas Gaines
“Credibility is about how leaders earn the trust and confidence of their constituents. It’s about what people demand of their leaders and the actions a leader must take in order to intensify their constituents’ commitment to a common cause. Make no mistake about it: people have very high expectations of their leaders. Constituents are more demanding and harder to please than ever these days. They are also very disappointed. The heroic leadership myth has been shattered, and cynicism has taken its place.
People still want leadership. They just want leaders who hold on to an ethic of service and are genuinely respectful of the intelligence and contributions of their constituents. They want leaders who will put principles ahead of politics and other people before self-interests.”
In organizations characterized by new leadership at the executive level, earning constituent trust should be a major concern of top-level leadership. For some indeterminable period of time, constituents will quite naturally maintain a vigilant, wait and see attitude concerning the motives and intentions of leaders and if leaders aren’t sensitive to this fact, they easily can contribute to constituent distrust and resultant cynicism.
“Does credibility really make a difference? If employee loyalty and commitment matter, then it obviously does. The credibility of leadership is what determines whether people will want to give a little more of their time, talent, energy, experience, intelligence, creativity, and support. Threat, power, position, and money do not earn commitment; they earn compliance. And compliance produces adequacy, not greatness. Only high credibility earns intense commitment. And commitment will ultimately enable people to regenerate great organizations such as, for example, a great church.”
Increasing cynicism (believing that people are motivated in all their actions only by selfishness; denying the sincerity of people’s motives and actions; sarcastic) is a threat to all contemporary American organizations, perhaps especially within God’s church. Leaders must be cautious to not say things that are not followed by relevant actions. Said another way, leaders had better be very careful to make sure their deeds consistently match their words. As the prominent leadership educator and author Peter Drucker is attributed as having said, “There is little that will cost a leader credibility more than failing to follow through with a declaration or a promise.
“Virtually all cynicism has the same origin and it is depicted in the chart on the next page. It perhaps is useful for a leader, when looking over the chart, to do some self-assessing; e.g. Do I always back my words with relevant actions? Do I sometimes say things I think someone else wants to hear without having a total commitment to follow through? Do I occasionally say things in the heat of excitement that may lead to unrealistic expectations on the part of constituents? Have I ever told subordinate leaders in my organization that I want them to do their jobs and that I will stay out of the way while they do their jobs…and then intervene because I feel I know better how to do something? Think about these questions as you look over the following chart.
Here’s a simplified example of how the “flow” depicted above works:
Step One - We are told or otherwise hear that we are going to begin doing such and such in our church and that “it” will be better than anyone could imagine (Expectation is established)
Step Two - We initiate the “it” and within a short period of time it is generally recognized that “it” is far from better than what we were doing before and/or than what a leader or leaders said would occur (Experience happens)
Step Three - Constituents feel short-changed and/or misled (1) (Experience vs. Expectation Feelings) and in addition to griping or generally being disenchanted, constituent belief and commitment begin to waver (see fourth paragraph on page one again).
“Even if there was no intent to do them wrong, people feel deceived or injured when they have been misled. To lead, not mislead, you must have the knowledge, skills, and abilities to consistently exemplify the values you profess. Leaders should recognize that it is an honorable act to get out of the way and let others take charge when he or she cannot mobilize the motivation, the resources, and the actions to meet the demands of a challenging task. Leaders should make it possible for someone else who has the values, the competence, and the self-confidence to step forward.
“Credibility, like quality and service, is determined by the constituents, so leaders must be able to view themselves as their constituents do – i.e. know thyself. Leaders who are clearly interested in their own agendas, their own advancement, and their own well-being are not willingly followed. Studies from the Center for Creative Leadership have revealed that successful executives can become derailed because of their insensitivity and inability to understand the perspectives of other people. When these leaders really needed the help of others around them, they were left to fend for themselves, ignored, isolated, and on occasion even sabotaged.”
All quotations are from “Credibility: How Leaders Gain It and Lose It, Why People Demand It;” James M. Kouzes and Barry Z Posner; Jossey-Bass Publishers; San Francisco 1993.
