The Leadership Style of JesusSýnishorn

Day 5: Two Kinds of Power

When people think of leadership, they usually think of power. The issue of power applies to leadership in every arena of human endeavor: business, education, church, and home.

Anywhere two or more people gather together to achieve a goal or purpose, power comes into play.

There are essentially two classic leadership models today, and the leadership style of Jesus is unquestionably the minority view. The more commonly accepted leadership model is descended from the writings of Italian politician and humanist philosopher Niccolò Machiavelli (1469–1527). Machiavelli advocated a leadership style based on amorality, deception, power, ego, and personal advantage. By contrast, Jesus of Nazareth taught and modeled a Leadership Style based on morality, truthfulness, servanthood, humility, and meeting the needs of others.

While Jesus did not pursue power at any cost in the way that Machiavelli advocates, he did not condemn the use of power per se. But Jesus differed from the standard secular model of leadership in the way he viewed power.

First, let’s define what we mean by power. In a leadership context, I define power as “the ability to influence, inspire, or induce behavior in others.” In leadership, there are two kinds of power: position power and personal power.

Position power refers to the influence leaders have because of the position they hold in the organization. An employee might not volunteer for a certain task if a coworker asked him to do it. But if his superior—a person with the power of position in the organization—asks him to do it, that employee will probably volunteer in a heartbeat. A powerful position gives one clout to command, motivate, and even intimidate others in the organization.

One of the leadership challenges Jesus faced as he taught and mentored the disciples was teaching them a completely new kind of Leadership, a new kind of Power. They thought his Kingdom would be a worldly kingdom, and his Power would be worldly political power.

In Matthew 20, James and John, along with their mother, take Jesus aside to ask for a favor. Their mother does the talking, asking Jesus to promise he’ll give her boys positions on his right and left hand. In other words, she wanted King Jesus to make her sons the chancellor and prime minister of the Kingdom. James, John, and their mother were thinking about position power. They wanted Jesus to give them the positions so they would have the power.

But as Jesus would later tell Pontius Pilate, his Kingdom was not of this world. His Power was not worldly power, the power of position. So Jesus told this mother and her sons, “You do not know what you are asking. Are you able to drink the cup that I am to drink?”

“We are able,” they replied.

“You will drink my cup,” Jesus said somberly, knowing that James and John would become martyrs for the Christian faith, “but to sit at my right hand and at my left is not mine to grant, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared by my Father.”

The other ten disciples heard about what James and John and their mother had done, trying to jump to the head of the line for high positions in the coming Kingdom. They too were thinking of the Kingdom of Jesus as a worldly kingdom based on worldly position power.

But Jesus rebuked them all, saying, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. It shall not be so among you. But whoever would be great among you must be your servant, and whoever would be first among you must be your slave, even as the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (see Matthew 20:20-28).

This was one of several instances where Jesus had to rebuke the disciples for their worldly, even Machiavellian view of leadership and power. On several occasions, he had to teach them that his Leadership Style is based instead on servanthood.