Visionary Leaders

Consensus Leadership has been around for awhile. Some say it's on its way out while others think it is here to stay. I think it is one of those things that sounds good but give me a visionary leader any day.

My problem with consensus leadership is that the destination of your organization is limited to the experiences of a majority, or at least a healthy portion, of its members. On the other hand, a visionary leader can take an organization to a place beyond the wildest dreams of its members. She really leads rather than just facilitates.

The reason a visionary leader can do that is because that is exactly what she is tasked to do. She is supposed to spend time exploring possibilities outside of the institution's environment. It is impossible to do that with a large number of people. Sure the leader still has to sell that dream and win support for it, but that is an entirely different matter.

I think consensus leadership is especially bad for churches and I think it explains why churches tend to change so slowly. Most ideas come from what was done in the past or what Uncle Fred's church is doing. It is just too hard to build consensus about something that no one has ever seen before. It takes a visionary leader to get you there.

Consensus leadership, despite what proponents say to the contrary, also reinforces a "keep everyone happy at all cost" attitude. If you disagree with the consensus you are supposed to agree to go along with the consensus for a given period of time to see if it works. The understanding is that you'll be a good soldier and when the consensus idea doesn't work they'll come back to revisit your idea. In church that usually means you have someone doing their best to make sure the consensus idea fails so they are forced to go back to their idea.

The problem with a visionary leader is that her idea is scary, risky, uncomfortable and maybe downright dangerous. But hey, might as well go out with a bang, don't you think?