Good to Great: Survivor, part 2

I am convinced, based on my highly scientific analysis of society, via a few seasons of the Survivor reality TV show, that as a culture we are looking for leadership.  But, we want that leadership to be charismatic, dynamic, heroic, and not too dogmatic.  If one is a good leader, but not a great leader, based on the unwritten code of others, they will be pushed aside in a heartbeat.  Being good, but not great, is actually worse than not ascribing to leadership at all.

Interestingly, in his book, Good to Great, Jim Collins explains how leaders who match the description above, charismatic, attractive, and charming, are not the ones who lead their organizations to greatness.  They are not the Level 5 leaders who have taken their companies from being merely good to world-class greatness.  In other words, charisma is not enough – and in fact, according to Collins’ research, charisma is often a detriment to greatness.

I horrifically watched that episode of Survivor, as Hunter Ellis, the former Navy fighter-pilot, who should have been the perfect leader for his tribe, instead was seen as a threat and voted off the island. They could have kept him around for awhile longer to learn and benefit from his skills, but instead, they were so threatened, they got rid of him as soon as they were able.  I would love to talk with him someday, for I’m sure this was a rare occurrence for him.  In fact, I’m willing to stick my neck out and say this was most likely a devastating event for him.  Shining stars are not used to falling to earth.

When I first saw that episode of Survivor, I was pastoring a small, rural, conservative church church in SW Wyoming.  I was amazed at how striking the similarities were. From the very beginning, I was a fish out of water.  It was neither fun nor was it fulfilling - which for many men, are one in the same.  It was obvious that we were outsiders and it would take far longer than a few years to be considered a part of the “family.”  But the problem was, we all knew that our tenure wouldn’t be for more than a couple of years.  It was difficult to envision any good coming out of this experience.

(At our last assignment, a couple who had been attending for eight years told us they still felt like they were the “new” couple. That is very telling of small-town mindsets.)

This small church was made up of a few families – most had held positions of influence and responsibility in the church for decades.  Few had more than a high school education and most worked, or had worked, blue-collar jobs.  This isn’t to say they are bad people.  Indeed no – we made some good friends there.  However, we weren’t a good fit.  We had different histories, different goals, and pursued life with different skill-sets and world-views.

Like I mentioned in a previous post, I’m not a fan of hazing.  I never really understood why my employer insisted on sending the “new-guy” to the worst locations.  If that new-guy is in his, or her, 20s, is still charting their future course, and needs some real-world experience, that may be somewhat different.  But why would you take a second-career person in their 40s, who has already proven their abilities, knows who they are and what life’s purpose is, and treat them like a twenty-year old newbie?  It doesn’t make sense.  In fact, I once heard it said that they send all the new guys to Wyoming – they figure if they can make it there, they can make it anywhere.  That is hazing.

We served in SW Wyoming for 15 looooooooong months.  As I’ve said before, it nearly killed them, and it nearly killed us.  Again, not because they were bad people or we were bad leaders, but because it wasn’t a good fit.  During that 15 months, we saw a doubling of church attendance, the mid-week service exploded in size and scope, and the baptismal tank was used for the first time in almost a decade.  The problems is, the stakeholders of this church, the informal patriarchal system that existed, were not looking for change.  They liked things the way they were – thank you very much!

It is a disservice to everyone involved, to take an urban-bred couple with post-grad education and big dreams for the church and their future, and put them into a small church that is content with the status quo. The church just wanted maintenance, or to hold onto the past, and The Wife and I just wanted to be used to lead the church into the future.  That isn’t to say that we all didn’t learn something – in fact, I learned some valuable lessons – but at what cost.  It remains my opinion that this continues to be a mismanagement of resources.

Do I still have much to learn?  Of course! Will I continue to make mistakes?  Unfortunately, yes.  But I would like to learn, grow, and make mistakes within the company of people who see themselves as innovative partners and value risk-taking and mistake-making – these are precious parts of the learning experience. Often, the mistakes of others are our best opportunity to learn life’s lessons.  If we vote those people off the island, we may miss the opportunities to learn those lessons.

However one looks at it, we are glad to have been voted off the island.  We were asked to lead a group that didn’t want to be led, and we didn’t fit their preconceived notions of what they wanted.  Nonetheless, it has been a painful journey.

The system will continue to receive exactly what it is designed to get.  Until change agents are desired, sought after, and encouraged, change will not occur rapid enough to keep up with the changes in society and culture.  This will continue to leave the church in a constant state of disrepair and brokenness – always playing catch-up, but never being within reach of true relevancy.  This makes me feel sad – and I believe the church is the ultimate loser in this game.

We came to set people free, but the fact of the matter is, some just aren’t ready to be unplugged from the Matrix. (Check out this film analysis of the Matrix trilogy)

“You have to understand, most of these people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inured, so hopelessly dependent on the system, that they will fight to protect it.”

So what’s next, where do those of us who seeking God, but have given up on the church, go for spiritual nourishment?

Epilogue:

Recently my Dad was telling us about an experience he had while staying with his cousin in an assisted-living center.  Fresh from surgery, and struggling with some personal issues, he asked my Dad to spend a few days with him.  After getting permission to bring his dog, my Dad agreed.  But it wasn’t a good experience.  The room was too hot, my Dad had to sleep on an air mattress on the floor, the food was bad, and some other issues.

Coming home a day early, my Dad was eating dinner with us, telling us about this bad experience.  Jennifer asked him why he came home a day early.  Apparently some people had complained about his dog, so they asked him to leave.  To my Dad, this only compounded the bad experience and made him more angry.  But my Beautiful Wife, ever astute, noticed this was a blessing in disguise.

“So it was a good thing that they asked you to leave!” She noticed.

“Why?” My Dad wondered.

“Because you hated it there!“

She was right!  Of course.  But I immediately saw the similarities in our recent ordeal.  I’m not a quitter, and I wasn’t going to leave – mainly because I believed we were led to be at our last church.  But it was certainly challenging, wasn’t fun, and was very hard on my family.  Like prisoners freed, we are glad to be set free of that responsibility.

Save