Surviving Leadership, Part 2

So my previous post on leadership and Survivor brings me to my next thought: Team James versus Team Tom.

On the Heroes team is James, a young African American from the South with a perfectly muscled male figure a little bit of an attitude; and Tom, an upper middle-aged Caucasian fire fighter from New York who comes across as being a little on the arrogant side.

Now both of these guys were exemplary in character and were great players of the game the first times around- Tom even won.

But this season, with too many cooks in the kitchen, their true colors are showing through a little too much. And because both of the guys are leaders of some sort in their own right, they’re butting heads and have polarized the team into two sides: Team James and Team Tom.

James’ style this time around portrays authenticity. He is ‘real’ with everyone on his team and is not affraid to share his true feelings and emotions with them. Often in leadership, this is a great value to show. But James gets offended easily and airs a little too much of his dirty laundry which ruffles his teammates’ feathers- especially Tom’s.

Tom, on the other hand, has a different approach. He is a type-A personality who wants to let everyone know that he’s in charge. If he has an opposing opinion about a circumstance happening in his team, he let’s everyone know and tries to bully his other teammates into agreeing with him. When someone doesn’t agree with him, even after the bullying, he foolishly acts arrogantly and childishly torwards them- eventually writing them off and treating them as enemies (i.e. James).

Both guys come across as being decent guys, especially after watching them the first time around, and especially Tom. But when pit into a group of leaders chaos ensued.

I don’t really have a statement to make, but a question. Whose team are you on? Tom’s or James’? What leadership style works best? Open, authentic, and wearing your emotions on your sleeve? Or bold, aggressive, and bossy?

Realistically, I don’t think either is better than the other. Both philosophies are flawed. I think that a leader needs to display a little of
James (authenticity) and a little of Tom (boldness). But mainly a leader needs humility, wisdom, a good work ethic, and the ability to come before God and ask for direction and help in what he is lacking.

One Responseto “Surviving Leadership, Part 2”

1. Ken says:

   March 15, 2010 at 7:08 am

   From a church perspective I would suggest the best answer would be to look at the New Testament to see how the word leader is used to see if leadership as depicted on Survivor is to be applied in the same way to a church setting.
   Hebrew: “Remember your leaders, those who have spoken God’s word to you. Think about the impact of their lives, and imitate their faith.”
   Most times in NT scripture I see leadership directly connected to, or defined, as the leaders demonstration of faith (in Christ) how they live their lives before the people, as opposed to following task or agreement in activities. I see this in the way Jesus set His life towards the Father as an example to His disciples and also the apostle Paul setting his own life of faith before Timothy as an example from which to lead. I often see leadership as less about achievements with the body as much as agreement with God among and with the people. Just a thought.
   Good blogs Anthony