A provocative exploration of leadership comes from Wilfred Drath in his book, The Deep Blue
Sea. Dissecting leadership to its basic elements, he identifies leaders' core tasks as "setting direction" (create a vision), "creating commitment" (generate a coalition to actualize the vision) and "facing adaptive challenge" (use a shared mission to deal with change).
In an attempt to uncover the nuances of leadership, Drath presents three different models:
- Personal Dominance – Leadership happens when a leader acts. It is a personal endowment of leaders.
- Interpersonal Influence – Leadership happens when a person influences other more than he or she is influenced. This is a process of negotiating social influence.
- Relational Dialogue – Leadership happens when people make sense together of shared work.
He believes that the first two models are limited and that Relational Dialogue is best equipped to meet the challenges of our time.
Looking at these models through the prism of history, we can understand better. In the context of Jewish history, a leader who exudes "Personal Dominance" can be Moses or King David. A model of "Interpersonal Influence" seems to describe the rabbis of the Talmud who achieve success by having their opinions accepted by the majority.
Looking at these models through the prism of history, we can understand better. In the context of Jewish history, a leader who exudes "Personal Dominance" can be Moses or King David. A model of "Interpersonal Influence" seems to describe the rabbis of the Talmud who achieve success by having their opinions accepted by the majority.
What about Relational Dialogue? Where do we see this approach in Jewish history?
While I am not sure that we have seen this model in the past, it is happening all around us today. For instance, Jewish learning experiences built around chavruta (paired
learning) welcome and encourage dialogue. Independent minyanim also ask
participants not only to define their shared values, but also to take an
active role.
Furthermore, Beth Am Synagogue's (in Baltimore) "613+ Shabbat Dinners" and The Riverway Project of Temple Israel in Boston are using dialogue to create community.
Similar to community organizing, this model constitutes meaning-making in communities of practice. The fundamental tools here are listening and dialogue. Ultimately this approach encourages participants to embrace communal responsibility so that a shared narrative can be actualized and experienced by others.
Furthermore, Beth Am Synagogue's (in Baltimore) "613+ Shabbat Dinners" and The Riverway Project of Temple Israel in Boston are using dialogue to create community.
Similar to community organizing, this model constitutes meaning-making in communities of practice. The fundamental tools here are listening and dialogue. Ultimately this approach encourages participants to embrace communal responsibility so that a shared narrative can be actualized and experienced by others.
Our Sulam Leadership team at United Synagogue has made facilitated dialogue a pillar in all of our offerings because of the impact it has on everyone involved.
In an age of change, I believe that kehillot can benefit deeply from adopting or integrating elements of the Relational Dialogue model. Beyond introductions and ice breakers, this approach can be used to generate conversations about our values and to assess how well we are achieving the community's vision.
One
of the pillars of contemporary adult learning theory is that we learn best when we actively participate in conversations that impact our
lives. To
borrow a phrase from the Khan Academy, Relational Dialogue can
transform a rabbi and educator "from the sage on the stage to the guide
on the side."
Relational Dialogue holds great promise for Jewish leaders to energize their kehillot today, and it may just hold the key to unlocking the kehilla of the future.
Relational Dialogue holds great promise for Jewish leaders to energize their kehillot today, and it may just hold the key to unlocking the kehilla of the future.
No comments:
Post a Comment