One of the things that used to frustrate me the most is the number of step-by-step How-to-be a good/great leader literature that circulates out there. And why is it frustrating? because I have never been able to find a step-by-step replicable leadership style, program, or process. This frustration, however, was what motivated me to embark on a journey through as much of the leadership taxonomy I could research. To my surprise, everything I found had to do with examples of great leaders from around the world who apparently had nothing in common. I read from John Maxwell, to Mohandas Ganhdi, to Nelson Mandela, to Steve Jobs, to Mother Teresa, to Bill Gates, and there was no apparent connection on what made them great leaders, or what made their leadership so influential.
Thankfully, I started noticing some trends in great leadership styles. I noticed that each one of the great leaders of the world had the ability to read the signs of their times. How come? I think they had a contextual intelligence that allowed them to see things others couldn’t see. Contextual Intelligence is a competency that allows the individual to integrate concepts of diagnosing his or her context to apply the knowledge they have. In other words, according to Tarun Khanna who writes for the Harvard Business Review, contextual intelligence is “the ability to understand the limits of our knowledge and to adapt that knowledge to an environment different from the one in which it was developed.”
The more I think about contextual intelligence the more I believe it is something we all need, especially if we decide to work with vulnerable and marginalized communities. When we work in communities that have been marked by poverty and violence we need to be aware of the context, cultural beliefs, values, and worldview. If we start with the knowledge we have from our studies in social work, theology, social entrepreneurship, whatever we went to college for and ignore the context, we will be doomed.
Why was I frustrated at the beginning of this article? Because I couldn’t find something replicable in regards of leadership. And, why was that? because there is very little in the leadership taxonomy that can be replicated without any modifications. Leadership is contextual, and a leader’s success is not measured only on his or her knowledge about certain subject, it is measured on how much he or she understands the context and applies the knowledge for the common good. Mandela, Ganhdi, Jobs, and many more were great leaders because they understood their context and applied their knowledge to that context.
The prime example I have experienced happened in the last year and a half. An organization that I love dearly, Young Life, has fallen into the temptation of thinking knowledge is all someone needs to lead. As the regional leadership sent someone from Nicaragua to Guatemala to be the new National Director, Young Life forgot that leadership is contextual. The lack of contextual intelligence while applying new management styles, program design and development, and youth contact work, disregarded relationships and brought the whole organization to the ground. 75% of the staff resigned, 90% of the youth programs and clubs closed, and 80% of the volunteer based was let go without any explanation. If the regional leadership and the new National Director would have been willing to listen, to pay attention to the context, much of this would not have happened.
Now, for all of those out there who want to work with the poor, marginalized, the oppressed: Your knowledge is worthless unless you know the context you are working in, and apply what you know to that context. People who live in hard conditions don’t care about our studies, they care about our capacity to relate to their misfortune and suffering.
theurbanwonderer 