Rating: 
(Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 2014)
175 pgs
I like Joseph Stowell and his writing. I also consume leadership books. So I looked forward to devouring this one. As usual, he offered some helpful insights, especially into the Scriptures. However, I felt somewhat disappointed by this effort.
Stowell introduces the book by saying, “This book is about the challenge of ‘me’ in leadership” (13). He goes on to explain, “If, however, you have come to realize that the kind of person you are and how you navigate your leadership is at the core of your effectiveness, then join me as one who is passionate about leading the right way for maximum outcomes by getting ‘me’ in sync with the counterintuitive, countercultural ways of the world’s most unlikely leader, Jesus Christ” (13-14). So far I am with Stowell. He is correct in assessing that the greatest hindrance to effective leadership is most often ourselves and our unwillingness to address personal issues that hold us back.
Stowell claims he does not seek to denigrate those who merely lead for the purpose of achieving outcomes (14), though he does do that. Rather, he says he wants to make “character-driven leadership an intriguing, compelling and biblically necessary option” (14).
Stowell posits that there are two primary forms of leadership. These are Outcome-driven leaders and character-driven leaders (15). Interestingly, he suggests that instinctively we tend to gravitate toward achieving results. Yet, he confesses, “I came to realize long ago that given my fallenness, my first instincts are most likely wrong” (17). I realize what he means here, but I would also suggest that, for those filled by the Holy Spirit, their initial instinct may actually be correct. Interestingly, it is our residual, worldly thinking that can try and “talk us out of” what we sense the Holy Spirit is urging us to do!
I have two primary issues with Stowell’s presentation in this book. The first is his stark contrast between outcome-driven, and character-driven leadership. Stowell claims that outcome-driven leaders “primary focus is on motivating others to achieve great organizational outcomes” (24). Character-driven leaders, he argues, “whose exemplary lives influence and empower those within the sphere of their authority to achieve great outcomes personally, spiritually, communally, and organizationally” (24). Stowell goes on to state that a key choice leaders must make is “whether or not you believe that character counts. That if given the choice, character trumps outcomes” (25).
Stowell claims; “Warning! If you believe leadership is ultimately measured by how well you can deliver the goods, then in the end you will fail in your calling as a leader” (27). My fundamental problem with Stowell’s presentation is that he sets up a false dichotomy. He presents the issue as if the only two choices leaders make are to either be driven by character or outcomes. I believe this is a false scenario. Of course leaders are driven by outcomes. That is why they are enlisted to lead in the first place. When you hire a seminary president, you do so because there are certain results you want, and need, for him to achieve. If he fails to accomplish what you hired him to do, he has failed, regardless of how nice a fellow he was.
Stowell has mistakenly compared ends with a means. The end is not godly character; it is results. Organizations do not enlist you to be their leader so you can have a godly character. They enlist you to achieve certain results. I have known some of the godliest men you could ever hope to meet who served as pastors. Their integrity, love for God, and holy lives were above reproach. But they were mediocre leaders at best. Their churches remained small. They achieved little. They failed to raise up leaders around them. Everyone admired their character but suffered under their leadership.
The truth is, Christian leaders are called to live holy lives, just as are Christian followers. Jesus set a high standard for all of His followers. It is also true that leading with the character of Jesus is good for business. Stowell writes as if he has discovered a fresh insight into leadership, as if it is a new insight that character matters in leadership. He asks: “Does anyone seem to care about the internal dynamics of leadership?” (37). The fact is that even secular leadership authors have long recognized the importance of “internal” issues. Jim Collins in his seminal book, Good to Great, identified humility as a key trait of Level Five leaders. This is nothing new.
The truth is, the success of leaders is not ultimately based on their character, but by their results. If a woman is hired to lead a church youth group. It matters not if she was godly, if a year later attendance has plummeted, several teenage girls have become pregnant out of wedlock and several others have begun using drugs. Regardless of the woman’s character, you would replace her with someone who could achieve better results.
The means of good leadership is a good character, but the measurement of successful leadership centers on results. Interestingly, Stowell tries to make his case by arguing that Steve Jobs led at times without strong character (25). But I found his argument counterproductive to his argument. It is well known that Jobs was not a Christian and at times he struggled both with his temper and the truth. However, Stowell might be better served to use a different example to bolster his case than a man who ultimately built the most valuable company in the world! I suspect there would be other shareholders who would be quick to hire a flawed leader like jobs if he could build them a company worth as much as Apple! Clearly it is not acceptable to treat people like Jobs did, but at the end of the day, he built a valuable, and enduring company, and he was generally forgiven his human frailties in the process.
I also found that in this book, Stowell at times did not handle Scripture as carefully as I would have expected. For example, he uses Jesus’ parable of the talents to argue that character is what matters most (27). But the reality is that the two servants were called “good and faithful”, not because of their character, but because of their results. They doubled the assets their master entrusted to them. That is what generated their praise and reward. Likewise Stowell claims: “I am still in the hunt to find a passage that affirms outcomes regardless of character” (28). One passage that immediately comes to my mind is that of the unjust steward in Luke 16. This man was accused of wasting the goods of his master and was alerted that he would soon be dismissed from his position. The man realized he could not do manual labor and would be hard pressed to find another job. So he quickly called in his master’s debtors and wickedly slashed their debts, thus ingratiating himself to them. Clearly this man lacked character and honesty and was self-serving. Yet Jesus concluded: “So the master commended the unjust steward because he had acted shrewdly. For the sons of this world are more shrewd in their generation than the sons of light. And I say to you, make friends for yourselves by unrighteous mammon than when you fail, they may receive you into an everlasting home” (Luke 16:8-9).
Obviously Jesus is not commending unethical behavior, yet I think Stowell overstates his case to argue that the Bible diminishes those who are focused on achieving results.
I also felt that at times Stowell overstated his case. For example, he states: “A leader who has chosen to lead by character motivates a community of followers who gladly embrace the mission of the enterprise and who are happily motivated to deliver quality outcomes” (29). This sounded too rose-colored for me! “happily” and “gladly” sound a bit too overgeneralized. The fact is that you can lead with integrity and get fired by those who do no respect you as a leader. At times Stowell seems to paint a picture that if you just lead like Jesus, your people will gladly follow you. The truth is, people crucified Jesus when He acted like Jesus!
Of character-driven leaders, Stowell also claims: “They rejoice in giving credit to others and glory to God” (34). Again, this seems to be painting a rose-colored picture of character-driven leaders. He also says, “They use difficulty to look for signs of productive reproof so that they might repent and lead more effectively in the future” (34). No doubt they should do this, and no doubt some do. But clearly this is an over-generalization.
Stowell claims that “meekness would be a liability in most leadership profiles” (49). Yet clearly humility is something that even secular companies and leadership authors often promote these days.
Stowell also claims: “Leaders who self-identify as leaders get annoyed when people don’t treat them as such. Annoyed when people criticize and don’t honor them with respect” (58). Again, this is an over-generalization. I personally do not think it is wrong to see yourself as a leader if that is indeed what God has made and called you to be. It’s called self-awareness. To say that people who recognize they are leaders always get annoyed with people who don’t treat them as such is a gross overstatement. Certainly some people do that. But I fundamentally disagree with Stowell’s argument that it is wrong to see yourself as a leader. Certainly if you take matters into your own hands, like Moses did in Egypt, you may well find yourself a fugitive in a wilderness, but it is not wrong to see yourself as God has made you.
Stowell also claims: “Why do leaders fail? I have rarely seen a leader fail because they are not gifted to lead” (59). Clearly Stowell walks in different circles than I do! I have indeed seen people make classic leadership mistakes that cost them their position.
Stowell does make some interesting points. His discussion of leaders as shepherds is helpful (95). He also states: “When we lead as an act of love to Jesus, leadership becomes an act of worship” (166).
I understand the fundamental point that Stowell was trying to make. His focus on character is certainly not misguided. However, his pitting character against results is. God certainly does care about how something is done. One way can glorify Him while another approach can dishonor Him. That is true. But at the end of the day, leaders strive for results. Without them, you may be a nice person but you are not a successful leader.
by Richard Blackaby