Interview With Dr. Mark L. King: How Leadership and Communication Theories Substantiate Biblical Principles

Excellent leadership and leadership principles originated long before many recognized and practiced theories came into existence. Many leadership and communication principles taught in contemporary times existed centuries ago and are scripturally rooted. The astute Christian leader can refer to these principles that have proven effective. This interview will provide examples to justify this premise. For instance, we will look at delegation, crisis intervention, the application of situational leadership as seen in the development of the disciples, partnering for success, and the benefit of constantly interacting to maintain or enhance another person’s self-esteem. One can view this article as simply excerpts of many lessons from the most reliable source: the Bible. It will benefit the Christian and the non-Christian who agree with the saying attributed to Confucius, “To hear is to forget. To see is to remember. To do is to understand.”

Nancy Ricketts: Dr. King, you have a unique combination of leadership experience—a mixture that includes significant experience in the private sector, academia, and the church. Do you see a connection between those three areas in regard to principles for leadership and communication?

Dr. Mark L. King: Let me start with the premise that theories taught in the private sector and the classrooms of higher institutions, from my perspective and through my theological prism, can be found in the Scriptures. Thus, they genuinely originate from the inspiration of God. “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness” (2 Tim. 3:16, KJV). The principles in Scripture provide for a good living (including leadership and communication matters) without any motive for securing monies for living or establishing fame. Furthermore, regardless of the theorist’s educational background and subject expertise, it is impossible to compete with the knowledge and wisdom of an omniscient God.

NR: Do you mind if we put your premise to the test? In other words, can you support your belief described above with particular examples from Scripture?

MK: I will be glad to provide you with examples. However, first, let me make some observations from my experiences in leadership over the years.

During the 1960s, my early years in the workplace, leadership style was established by the role models in an organization. The leadership and communication styles displayed by the leaders we emulated were copied and motivated by a sense of exhibiting such traits as the impetus for advancement up the cherished “ladder of corporate success.” Even in the late 1980s, when individuals attended formal seminars on interaction management and situational leadership, employees would still display the styles of the leader on-site. Notebooks and notes on top of notes served as nothing more than office décor; they were never used as a reference and often resided in a file cabinet. Things would change with some organizations over time. I will get to that in a minute.

I would be remiss if I did not mention the sociological climate regarding minorities in the workplace. Minorities working in the private sector portrayed their role models’ leadership and communication styles versus those of the church in the workplace. Obviously, and perhaps not intentionally, this had a devastating impact on morale and productivity. It also promoted or created schisms between minority workers in an organization.

Second, some companies embrace values that are not publicized and posted, reflecting (although not referencing) biblical origin. The best example is where leaders are held accountable to such principles throughout the corporation. In such cases, modeling leadership and communication skills take on a new and positive demeanor, achieve significant gains, and generate profit for the organization. I hope you did not mind me taking up some of your time to express these basic views before we proceed.

NR: Not at all! Your elaboration made me more excited about exploring your position as it applies to particular leadership and communication theories. Let’s start with Blanchard’s situational leadership theory (Hersey & Blanchard, 1969). Does your premise still hold up concerning his view?

MK: As I recall in Blanchard’s theory, there are four levels of development: the enthusiastic beginner, the disillusioned learner, the capable but cautious learner, and finally, the self-reliant achiever (Hersey & Blanchard, 1969). In his theory, the support and direction one receives depend on their learning level. Excellent communication skills promote partnering for success with the learner. Another point about situational leadership levels is that they are task-oriented; when one becomes assigned to a new task, that individual starts the development cycle over again. Blanchard’s theories also teach that there is no regression.

Let me corroborate my premise by referring to Jesus training His disciples, especially the twelve who would be named apostles. Jesus was constantly in a train-the-trainer role. The disciples started as enthusiastic; at times, they became disillusioned, but Jesus kept giving them powerful direction and support. At some point, He sent out the Twelve as part of their hands-on training. The disciples were in the capable but cautious stage where they would be responsible for making decisions in carrying out their leadership duties and displaying the appropriate communication style. Jesus trained His disciples for three years, and after He ascended back to heaven, they had to be self-reliant achievers. As with individuals in the secular world who could always contact their trainer for help when faced with a new situation, Jesus left the disciples with a Counselor, the Holy Spirit.

NR: Are churches or secular organizations doing better in advancing effective leadership and communication principles?

MK: I would say that it varies in the private sector. It depends on the leader, still, and the styles they display. I have been the head human resources person for five organizations. Only one took, for example, the situational leadership theory and applied it as a guideline for managerial behavior. Another organization, whose headquarters were in a Far East country embraced principles from their culture. The one thing I experienced in the latter was the absence of walls. Generally, the laws of the land shape an organization’s corporate personality. In some cases, the old culture embellished the Theory X management style.

Based on my observations, many pastors lack exposure to leadership and communication styles. Formal training focusing on theological explanations overshadowed leadership and communication principles. As a pastoral administration class teacher, the text we were assigned placed no primary emphasis on these vital areas of leading people. Of course, I augmented the text.

NR: Can you give me an example related to communication style?

MK: Yes. Let’s go back to Eric Berne’s theory of transactional analysis (Berne, 1958). In his idea, Berne said every individual has three parts to their personality. Unlike Sigmund Freud’s id, ego, and super ego, Berne focused on the parent, adult, and child. Berne pointed out that there would be conflict— an issue, so to speak, when the lines of communication crossed.

Take a supervisor, for example, whose motive is ensuring a task is done correctly. If that supervisor talks down to the adult subordinate as if they were a child and the associate insists on speaking from the adult part of his personality—just communicating facts—there will be visual, actual, or suppressed conflict.

In the training process, in the same type of situation, the supervisor can speak to the subordinate in a parent-to-child way without issue because it is a training mode. Of course, this still requires the supervisor to use the correct tone, pitch, rate of speech, and volume when training the subordinate.

Berne’s theories are not new. Just look at how Jesus used the appropriate choice of speaking to another person’s personality, regardless if they were disciples, disrupting Pharisees, or delegated authority from Rome. If any conflict arose, it was not on the part of Jesus, and I try to mimic, imitate—call it what you want—His style.

NR: What about all the books released regarding ethics in leadership?

MK: That is a simple one. Micah 6:8 says, “He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the Lord require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?” (ESV). Another verse that will help in employee relations and ethics is Matthew 7:12, “Therefore, treat people the same way you want them to treat you, for this is the Law and the Prophets” (NASB). There are other Old Testament and New Testament examples. Let me give you one Old Testament example in Joshua 7:1. There were certain things that the victorious Israelites were banned from taking after defeating Jericho. Achan acted unfaithfully regarding the ban, and the consequence was death.

NR: Now delegation by leaders seems to be something man came up with, and the leadership teachings do not originate in Scripture, do they?

MK: They come from Scripture, dating back to the beginning when man’s job was to cultivate the land. However, the one I like to refer to is when Jethro, Moses’s father-in-law, advised him regarding his failure to delegate. The exact story is found in Exodus 18:13–24:

And it came about the next day, that Moses sat to judge the people, and the people stood before Moses from the morning until the evening. Now when Moses’ father-in-law saw all that he was doing for the people, he said, “What is this thing that you are doing for the people? Why do you alone sit as judge and all the people stand before you from morning until evening?” Moses said to his father-in-law, “Because the people come to me to inquire of God. When they have a dispute, it comes to me, and I judge between someone and his neighbor and make known the statutes of God and His laws.” Moses’ father-in-law then said to him, “The thing that you are doing is not good. You will surely wear out, both yourself and these people who are with you, because the task is too heavy for you; you cannot do it alone. Now listen to me: I will give you counsel, and God be with you. You be the people’s representative before God, and you bring the disputes to God, then admonish them about the statutes and the laws, and make known to them the way in which they are to walk and the work they are to do. Furthermore, you shall select out of all the people able men who fear God, men of truth, those who hate dishonest gain; and you shall place these over them as leaders of thousands, of hundreds, of fifties, and of tens. Let them judge the people at all times; and let it be that they will bring to you every major matter, but they will judge every minor matter themselves. So it will be easier for you, and they will carry the burden with you. If you do this thing and God so commands you, then you will be able to endure, and all these people also will go to places in peace. So Moses listened to his father-in-law and did everything that he had said. (NASB)

This is an effective way of delegating and another example of how effective leadership and communication skills substantiate good contemporary skills about these areas.

NR: I would like to explore a couple more areas regarding leadership and communication. What about interaction management?

MK: Years ago, I attended a week-long training conducted by DDI, Development Dimensions International, in Chicago, Illinois. At that time, they taught three principles of interaction. (Later, they would expand them to five.) The principles were as follows: (1) maintain and enhance self-esteem, (2) listen and respond with empathy, and (3) seek input. Once again, the Scriptures revealed these principles long before their use in modern times. I’ll support my position with another excerpt from Scripture. I came prepared, as you can see, to provide exact wording. The situation is that King Solomon had died, and his son Rehoboam reigned in his place. The passage I will share with you includes the principles I will emphasize. It shows the consequences of not using interaction management skills in leading and communicating with people. In 1 Kings 12:1–17 we read:

Then Rehoboam went to Shechem, because all Israel had come to Shechem to make him king. Now when Jeroboam the son of Nebat heard about this, he was living in Egypt (for he was still in Egypt, where he had fled from the presence of King Solomon). Then they sent word and summoned him, and Jeroboam and all the assembly of Israel came and spoke to Rehoboam, saying, “Your father made our yoke hard; but now, lighten the hard labor imposed by your father and his heavy yoke which he put on us, and we will serve you.” Then he said to them, “Depart for three days, then return to me.” So the people departed.

And King Rehoboam consulted with the elders who had served his father Solomon while he was still alive, saying, “How do you advise me to answer this people?” Then they spoke to him, saying, “If you will be a servant to this people today, and will serve them and grant them their request, and speak pleasant words to them, then they will be your servants always.” But he ignored the advice of the elders which they had given him, and consulted with the young men who had grown up with him and served him. He said to them, “What advice do you give, so that we may answer this people who have spoken to me, saying, ‘Lighten the yoke which your father put on us’?” And the young men who had grown up with him spoke to him, saying, “This is what you should say to this people who spoke to you, saying: ‘Your father made our yoke heavy, now you make it lighter for us!’ You should speak this way to them: ‘My little finger is thicker than my father’s waist! Now then, my father loaded you with a heavy yoke; yet I will add to your yoke. My father disciplined you with whips, but I will discipline you with scorpions!’”

Then Jeroboam and all the people came to Rehoboam on the third day, just as the king had directed, saying, “Return to me on the third day.” And the king answered the people harshly, for he ignored the advice of the elders which they had given him, and he spoke to them according to the advice of the young men, saying, “My father made your yoke heavy, but I will add to your yoke; my father disciplined you with whips, but I will discipline you with scorpions!” So the king did not listen to the people; because it was a turn of events from the Lord, in order to establish His word which the Lord spoke through Ahijah the Shilonite to Jeroboam the son of Nebat.

When all Israel saw that the king had not listened to them, the people replied to the king, saying, “What share do we have in David? We have no inheritance in the son of Jesse; To your tents, Israel! Now look after your own house, David!” So Israel went away to their tents. But as for the sons of Israel who lived in the cities of Judah, Rehoboam reigned over them. (NASB)

Rehoboam should have listened to the people and upheld their self-esteem instead of making threats to bring them down to avoid a divided kingdom. After seeking their input, he could have brought their loyalty and support in leading the people. Rehoboam could have avoided turnover, the cost of replacing workers, and workplace disruptions had he applied the critical interaction principles.

NR: Can you share your thoughts on servant leadership?

MK: That’s an excellent question on which to close. Scripture substantiates servant leadership, as it originates in Scripture. Let me once again support my answer to your question with Scriptures.

Supporting Scripture #1:

It is not this way among you, but whoever wants to become prominent among you shall be your servant, and whoever desires to be first among you shall be your slave; just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life as a ransom for many. (Matt. 20: 26–28, NASB)

Supporting Scripture #2:

Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, who, as He already existed in the form of God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but emptied Himself by taking the form of a bond-servant and being born in the likeness of men. And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death: death on a cross. (Phil. 2:5–8)

You know, I just thought of one more example worth mentioning. As it relates to serving others, this includes the development of others too. Notice that when Jesus called His first disciples, Peter and Andrew, He used these words, “Come ye after me, and I will make you to become fishers of men” (Mark 1:17, KJV).

Let me ask you a question to close out this interview: Are you convinced that my premise is correct? Furthermore, do you see how the various leadership and communication principles discussed substantiate biblical principles? Did it pique your interest in seeing what else the Scriptures have to teach us about leadership and communication?

NR: I whole-heartedly believe the theories discussed substantiate biblical principles because, in the Scriptures, one can find the answer to any question. I think secular pressures such as greed and fame are the source of bad leadership and communication in businesses today. Virtuous behavior is lacking, and Christians must lead the charge to bring kindness, empathy, ethics, and courage to the forefront of leadership and communication styles.

Dr. Mark L. King is the founding senior pastor at Salt of the Earth Church. He is a retired human resource executive and a former adjunct faculty member at Indiana University Purdue University at Indianapolis.

Nancy Ricketts is a doctor of business administration candidate at Indiana Wesleyan University. She is also an adjunct faculty member at Indiana University Purdue University at Indianapolis.

References

Berne, E. (1958). Transactional analysis: A new and effective method of group therapy. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 12(4), 735–743.

Hersey, P. & Blanchard, K. H. (1969). Life cycle theory of leadership. Training and Development Journal, 23(5), 26–34.