Abstract: Christians are not called to build bigger churches. Instead, we are called to be better at being human—in communion with God and one another, as God has intended (2 Cor. 5:18–20). We will build better churches as we seek His kingdom and His righteousness (Matt. 6:33). We cannot divorce the teachings of Jesus from the methods of Jesus and expect the results of Jesus. Therefore, the social change model adds value to transformational leadership development to create a collective impact in our communities as we fulfill God’s missional engagement on earth.
What does it mean to be a Christian leader? What is God asking of us? Throughout Jesus’s ministry, He demonstrated a genuine servanthood approach toward humanity, especially people who were marginalized, disadvantaged, and disenfranchised from society. They were the poor, the sick, the unclean—all outcast as sinful people. Jesus expanded the kingdom of God to places, people, and cultures that some had never considered God to be interested.
This is the reason why ministry begins with who—the God who loves us and those whom God sends us to love (Dean, 2022). Community outreach ministry is not about what and how; it is about seeking His kingdom and righteousness first (Matt. 6:33). Therefore, the fundamental question is this: Are we the people God calls us to be? Are we faithful expressions of the kingdom of God in our homes, neighborhoods, communities, and the world— tangible, recognizable, and visible?
Community outreach ministry is not about building bigger churches; instead, it is about being human—in communion with God and one another, as God intended. As we fulfill God’s missional engagement intentionally, provisionally, and sustainably, the church’s growth will be the byproduct of being faithful to God’s calling—a sign of faithful expression of the kingdom of God. As Ellen White (2003) wrote:
Christ’s method alone will give true success in reaching the people. The Savior mingled with men as one who desired their good. He showed His sympathy for them, ministered to their needs, and won their confidence. Then He bade them, “Follow Me.” (p. 143)
As we follow God’s inspiration and instruction—to minister to their physical, mental, social, and spiritual needs—the good news of salvation and the love of God will be shared through life-on-life evangelism. God requires a total life commitment from those who would be His followers. Christians cannot divorce the teachings of Jesus from the method of Jesus and yet expect the results of Jesus.
The Social Change Model (SCM)
The social change model (SCM) of leadership development (Astin & Astin, 1996) is the critical discipleship development for the church to be a deliberately developmental organization. Judson University professor Keith Krispin, Jr. (2020) asserts, “Though this model does not emerge from a Christian setting, the focus on values, collaboration, common purpose, and citizenship certainly resonate with biblical understandings of Christian community.” Indeed, the social change model approaches leadership as “a purposeful collaborative, values-based process that results in positive social change” (Skendall, 2017). The model was built upon the following assumptions:
- Leadership is socially responsible; it impacts change on behalf of others.
- Leadership is collaborative.
- Leadership is a process, not a position.
- Leadership is inclusive and accessible to all people.
- Leadership is values-based.
- Community involvement and service are powerful vehicles for leadership.
SCM has seven distinctive elements, known as the “seven C’s:”
- Consciousness of self exists when individuals are aware of the beliefs, values, attitudes, and emotions that motivate them to action. This is the key to being able to develop consciousness of others.
- Congruence is demonstrated by thinking, feeling, and behaving with consistency, authenticity, and honesty toward others. Actions are consistent with most deeply held beliefs and convictions. Congruence is interdependent with consciousness of self.
- Commitment is the psychic energy that motivates the individual to serve and that drives the collective effort. It implies passion, intensity, and duration, and it is directed toward both the group activity and its intended outcomes. Commitment requires knowledge of oneself.
- Collaboration means to work with others in a common effort. It constitutes the cornerstone values of the group leadership effort because it empowers self and others through trust. Collaboration views leadership as a group process and encourages the group to transcend individual goals, interests, and behaviors. With collaboration in mind, it is vital that group members explore differences, individual values, ideas, affiliations, visions, and identities.
- Common purpose involves performing that collaborative work with shared aims and values; it facilitates the group’s ability to engage in the collective analysis of issues at hand and the task to be undertaken. Common purpose is best achieved when all members of the group share in the vision and participate actively in articulating the purpose and goals of the activity.
- Controversy with civility recognizes two fundamental realities of any creative group effort: differences in viewpoint are inevitable and such differences must be aired openly but with civility. Civility implies respect for others, a willingness to hear each other’s views, and the exercise of restraint in criticizing the views and actions of others. It requires trust among the group members and calls for conflicts to be resolved but also integrated into the common purpose.
- Citizenship is the process whereby the individual and the collaborative group become responsibly connected to the community and the society through the leadership development activity. To be a good citizen is to work for positive change on the behalf of others and the community. The practice of good citizenship should and needs to happen at every level of the model.
According to Astin and Astin (1996):
[A leader is] one who is able to effect positive change for the betterment of others, the community, and society. All people, in other words, are potential leaders. Moreover, the process of leadership cannot be described simply in terms of the behavior of an individual; rather, leadership involves collaborative relationships that lead to collective action grounded in the shared values of people who work together to effect positive change. (p. 16)
Change is the ability to adapt to environments and situations that are constantly evolving while maintaining the core functions of the group; it is the value “hub” that gives meaning to the seven C’s and is the goal of the creative process of leadership—to make a better world and better society for self and others.
The SCM is identified as the most applied leadership theory in the context of collegiate leadership development programs. The SCM approaches leadership as “a purposeful, collaborative, values-based process that results in positive social change” (Komives, Wagner, & Associates, 2009, p. xii) and emphasizes two core principles. First, according to Dugan, Bohle, Woelker, and Cooney (2014), leadership is believed to be inherently tied to social responsibility and is manifested in creating change for the common good. Second, the model is predicated on increasing individuals’ levels of self-knowledge and capacity to work collaboratively with others.
This model is an essential component of personal development in both leader-development and leadership-development. The term “leader development” is directed toward individuals to expand their capacity to be effective in leadership roles and processes (McCauley & Velsor, 2004). The term “leadership development” is “the expansion of the organization’s capacity to enact the basic leadership tasks needed for collective work” (McCauley & Van Velsor, 2004, p. 18).
Leader development is directed toward cultivating the character traits of integrity, determination, transparency, passion, humility, and so forth in an individual. Leadership development expands a leader’s organizational and managerial ability to establish direction, motivate and inspire people, plan, solve problems, budget, organize, etc. We must invest in both leader development and leadership development.
When we develop the first three C’s—consciousness of self, congruence, and commitment—we enhance leader development, which is to expand an individual’s capacity in developing the characteristics of a leader. The next three C’s—collaboration, common purpose, and controversy with civility— enhance leadership development, expanding organizational capacity. This allows the individual to become more influential within an organization (such as a church) and globally, as a citizen of our society.
This SCM is also connected to the four elements of critical consciousness development, presented by Susan Cipolle (2010):
- Self-awareness involves developing a deeper awareness of self. It means clearly understanding your level of privilege, your values, your role in society, and your responsibility to others.
- Awareness of others involves developing a deeper awareness and broader perspective of others. Within a church context, it means that church members are collaborating with different groups with different backgrounds in the community. Members move out of their comfort zones and become aware of injustice and inequity. Instead of conducting inwardly focused events, they begin to explore the opportunities to serve outside the walls of the church. As church members interact with community members, they begin to hear personal stories and community challenges. Ideally, through these interactions, church members begin to see community members as people, precious souls belonging to God, instead of projects or statistics or “fishing pools.” Becoming more aware of others will allow us to become less judgmental and more compassionate toward others. We will break down the wall between the church and the community.
- Awareness of social issues involves developing a deeper awareness and broader perspective of social issues. As the church members inform themselves about social, economic, and political issues, they will begin to question their beliefs and develop solution-focused constructive services and community engagements.
- Ethics of service involves seeing one’s potential to make a change. This is the essence of discipleship, wherein disciples make other disciples through positive service experiences, engaging their feelings of competency and efficacy as difference-makers. Church members who have developed a clear sense of their values are more likely to live in accordance with their beliefs as disciples. Disciples who regard critical consciousness service as a part of their identity are more likely to connect their personal commitment to service with a profession where they can make a social contribution.
Research shows that academic and civic engagement increases when students take leadership in planning and directing service-learning experiences. In addition, when they are given opportunities to voice their opinions and make presentations, students’ public speaking and leadership skills improve as they begin to see their role as change agents (Billig, 2007).
For example, to implement the critical consciousness of SCM, Susan Cipolle (2010) suggests the following questions be discussed when we are volunteering at a homeless shelter:
- Knowledge: What were your first impressions of the shelter?
- Comprehension: How was this shelter similar to or different from what you expected?
- Analysis: What parts of the experience have been most challenging to you?
- Synthesis: What have you personally learned about yourself from this service?
- Evaluation: What ideas do you have to help the situation of homelessness?
Why is all this necessary? Because the missional church movement is about deliberately becoming developmental organizations—developing and equipping disciples who will make disciples of others. Robert Kegan and Lisa Lahey (2016) say, “Research shows that the single biggest cause of work burnout is not work overload but working too long without experiencing your own personal development” (p. 2). If there is no personal development or no personal growth opportunity, people will leave the organization. The church is also challenged with its expectation, as Reggie McNeal (2009), says:
A growing number of people are leaving the institutional church for a new reason. They are not leaving because they have lost faith. They are leaving the church to preserve their faith. They contend that the church no longer contributes to their spiritual development. (p. 4)
Kegan and Lahey (2016) suggest that for successful organizational growth, three states of personal development mind-sets are required: (a) socialized mind, (b) self-authorizing mind, and (c) self-transforming mind.
- The socialized mind: The leaders develop team players and faithful followers, align with people, seek direction, and build relationships.
- The self-authoring mind: The leaders focus on an agenda, learn to lead, develop their own compass, develop their own frame of work, focus on problem-solving, and are independent.
- The self-transforming mind: Leaders become meta-leaders: leaders of leaders who mobilize people and organizations to collaborate in times of crisis. A leader who leads to learn will develop multiple frame of work, and instead of problem-solving they will invest their time in problem-finding. It takes eight to ten years of journey to grow a leadership.
The church must become a deliberately development organization in which we equip and educate disciples through intentional, provisional, and sustainable discipleship and personal development. We must create a culture and environment where individuals could learn to improve their self-efficacy as difference-makers for the kingdom of God. When the church and community members collaboratively engage in meaningful critical consciousness service-learning and social change, we can connect people socially and spiritually inside and outside the ecclesiastical organizations.
Kegan and Lahey (2016) write about the follower-leader organization (FLO) model. FLO involves four key roles: captain, coach, right hand, and left hand. Heading up a cultural initiative is the role of the captain. At the heart of FLO’s design is the role of the coach, which is filled by the person who most recently captained the same initiative. Above all else, her job is to coach the captain in leadership and provide feedback that will help the captain develop his backhand. The right hand is the team member who works closely with the captain, knowing that she will someday soon take over as the next captain when the roles rotate. Finally, the left hand is another team member who can contribute to the success of the initiative and is next in line to succeed the right hand.
FLO’s ultimate goal is to enhance the abilities of leaders at both the individual and organizational levels. The FLO model could be significantly effective in a flat-circle organization rather than a hierarchical one. A value-driven organization is one in which each individual focuses on their collective and individual passion, competencies, and spiritual gifts, rather than departmental infrastructure with position authority, which focuses on personal accomplishment and management of the program.
Robert Katz (2009) identifies three categories of the taxonomy of critical leadership skills that all participants of a FLO organization will understand and develop: technical, interpersonal, and conceptual skills.
- Technical skills: Know the methods, processes, procedures, and techniques for conducting a specialized activity and possess the ability to use tools and equipment relevant to that activity. Technical skills are primarily the ability to accomplish tasks, utilize personnel and resources effectively, and maintain order and reliable processes of operation. The leader should know as much about the technical aspects of their responsibilities as possible. Perhaps the most important aspects of technical leadership skills are making decisions and managing information. A good knowledge base about your organization’s aspects is necessary to assess each situation and help guide your team to the best outcomes.
- Interpersonal skills: Recognize human behavior and interpersonal processes and be able to understand the feelings, attitudes, and motives of others from what they say and do. Communicate clearly and effectively and establish effective and cooperative relationships. Interpersonal skills involve the ability to develop positive relationships. It’s about leading people. This includes improving relationships between yourself as the leader and those you work with and facilitating relationships between your volunteers. The focus should be on increasing cooperation and teamwork and building organizational identity and pride. Relationship skills are critical to the success of organizational growth. It is important that a leader understand how and why people behave the way they do—and then implement positive motivational methods to guide them in the mission.
- Conceptual skills: These involve the general analytical ability to think logically, formulate concepts, and make the connection between ideas and concepts. Leaders should consistently think of themselves as teaching leaders, which of course means that they are also learning leaders. This includes the ability to generate creative ideas and solutions for problems. In addition, conceptual leadership includes the ability to analyze programs, predict problems or changes that may be necessary, and recognize opportunities.
In the beginning of your ministry, you must demonstrate your technical skill set. People need to know you have what it takes to lead the ministry. That’s why having a transitional leadership every year isn’t effective; it takes times to develop a skill set. As you grow within that structure, whether in three or five years, you need to invest more time in a conceptual skill set—not just doing the job but figuring out how to enhance the ministry. Through this FLO model journey, we develop a leadership team, which is a critical component that must be implemented effectively for the long-term committed intentional missional church movement.
However, because we utilize the industrial leadership model and the transactional leadership development theory, based on departmental function, we transact the leader in the short term. One of the church’s first and foremost essential functions is to equip and develop disciples who will make more disciples. Thus, the current church ministry infrastructure is not set up to support and enhance leadership or discipleship development, which requires a long-term commitment to mentoring and the coaching ecosystem.
The ecclesiastical body of the church has adopted the industrial leadership model, which is hierarchical and departmental. As the industrial age sustains its development using a hierarchical, bureaucratic organizational structure, its structure is functional, and each entity’s role and responsibilities are clearly defined. Nevertheless, members of industrial organizations can become territorial, departmentalize their specific roles and responsibilities, and compartmentalize functions within their infrastructure. The church has developed a compartmentalized cultural environment, and it ended up creating organizational silos, organizational fragmentation, and a displacement culture within the church body.
The church must transition from industrial leadership to the post-industrial leadership development and social change model to engage in leadership and discipleship development. We are living in the post-industry, post-modernism, post-Christendom era. Leadership is not based on transaction but transformation. We need to nurture people to work together for the next three to five years as a team. The church must transition from a departmental structure to core value-driven ministry networks.
Author Laurie Jones (1996) emphasizes the importance of mentoring and coaching as one of the key attributes of a leader, and nowhere is it more powerful than when applied to and on behalf of another human being. As the Scripture implies, Jesus’s ability to build connections with people led to relationships rooted in love and trust. His ability to do this was remarkable because individual diversity can be one of the biggest challenges that any leader may encounter. Each individual has his or her own way of learning, adapting, processing, and applying new ideas and information. Therefore, leaders need to acquire skills that help individuals adapt to new learning strategies. Leaders must intentionally focus on learning how others process ideas, their values, strengths, and weakness, and their challenges and opportunities. Understanding these components will nurture trusting relationships between leaders and those they lead and will make them more effective teachers and mentors.
Jesus Christ mentored disciples to become change agents to influence others and the world. Therefore, behavioral change is the core of the matter in mentoring. Behavioral change happens mostly by interacting honestly and speaking to people’s hearts. Mentoring is not about giving people an analysis of their behavior—it is meant to help them to see the truth. In order for individual and community development to succeed, it is necessary to influence people’s behavior. Therefore, mentoring could require leaders to improve their skills—not so much technical skills that develop a methodology but focusing on educational and structural aspects of understanding a person’s problems and circumstances. Supporting and analyzing a situation to recognize the diversified angles of view is one of mentors’ most important leadership characteristics.
Timothy was a follower and was mentored by Paul (2 Tim. 3:10–17). Their interaction offers possible applications of follower-leader development. Malakyan (2014) identifies the leader-follower trade approach, which encourages a non-static relationship; leadership and followership functions and roles may be traded or exchanged by the positional leaders and followers in different situations or organizational settings, leading to mutual respect, empowerment, and effectiveness.
The postindustrial and relational theory or emergent paradigm includes leadership theories clustered around the themes of transformational influence, reciprocal relationships, complexity, and authenticity. Komives, Dugan, Owen, Slack, and Wagner (2011) write,
These theories are often focused on the mutual development of leaders and followers in collaborative processes aimed at change for the common good. The shift to these new ways of conceptualizing leadership is attributed largely to James MacGregor Burns (1978) and his seminal work Leadership, which argued that leadership at its core was a value-based process that had to be focused on both leader and follower development. Burns’ work paved the way for subsequent theorists who acknowledged the incredible complexity of leadership and increasingly emphasized perspectives associated with ethics and social justice. (p. 40)
Conclusion: Intentional Change
Christian transformational leadership development through the social change model is about equipping and developing disciples for the kingdom of God and innovating for love—God’s self-giving love. Its development must be intentional, provisional, and sustainable.
The social change model approaches leadership-followership development as a “purposeful, collaborative, values-based process that results in positive social change” (Komives et al., 2009, xii) and emphasizes two core principles of transformation leadership development. First, leadership is believed to be inherently tied to social responsibility and manifested in creating change for the common good. Second, the model is predicated on increasing individuals’ levels of self-knowledge and capacity (leader development) to work collaboratively with others (leadership development).
The church must become a consciously deliberate developmental organization that equips and educates disciples through intentional and sustainable personal development. We need to create a culture and environment in which individuals learn to improve their self-efficacy as difference-makers for the kingdom of God. When church and community members collaboratively engage in meaningful service-learning and social change, we will connect people physically, mentally, socially, and spiritually both inside and outside of the ecclesiastical organizations.
Transformational Christian leadership development through the social change model should be about first seeking His kingdom and righteousness (Matt. 6:33). Therefore, once again the fundamental question is: Are we the people God calls us to be? Are we faithful, tangible, recognizable, and visible expressions of the kingdom of God in our homes, neighborhoods, communities, and the world? Let us ever remember, ministry begins not with what or how but with who—the God who loves us and those whom He sends us to love.
Sung K. Kwon, PhD, DMin, is an associate professor of leadership at Andrews University’s School of Leadership and is the director of the MA leadership in social innovation program.
References
Astin, H. S., & Astin, A. W. (1996). A social change model of leadership development: Guidebook (Version III). The Regents of The University of California.
Billig, S. H. (2007). Unpacking what works in service-learning. In J. C. Kielsmeier, M. Neal, & N. Schultz, Growing to greatness 2007: The state of service-learning. National Youth Leadership Council.
Cipolle, S. B. (2010). Service-learning and social justice: Engaging students in social change. Rowman & Littlefield.
Dean, K. C. (2022). Innovating for love: Joining God’s expedition through Christian social innovation. Market Square Publishing.
Dugan, J. P., Bohle, C. W., Woelker, L. R., & Cooney, M. A. (2014). The role of social perspective-taking in developing students’ leadership capacities. Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice, 51(1), 1–15.
Jones, L. B. (1996). Jesus, CEO: Using ancient wisdom for visionary leadership. Hyperion.
Katz, R. L. (2009). Skills of an effective administrator. Harvard Business Review Press.
Kegan, R., & Lahey, L. L. (2016). An everyone culture: Becoming a deliberately developmental organization. Harvard Business Review Press.
Krispin, Jr., K. R. (2020). Christian leader development: An outcomes framework.
Christian Education Journal, 17(1), 18–37.
Komives, S. R., Dugan, J. P., Owen, J. E., Slack, C., & Wagner, W. (2011). The handbook for student leadership development. John Wiley & Sons.
Komives, S. R., Wagner, W., & Associates. (2009). Leadership for a better world: Understanding the social change model of leadership development. Jossey-Bass.
Malakyan, P. G. (2014). Followership in leadership studies: A case of leader–follower trade approach. Journal of Leadership Studies, 7(4), 6–22.
McCauley, C. D., & Van Velsor, E. (Eds.). (2004). The center for creative leadership handbook of leadership development. John Wiley & Sons.
Skendall, K. C., Ostick, D. T., Komives, S. R., & Wagner, W. (2017). The social change model: Facilitating leadership development. John Wiley & Sons.
White, E. G. (2003) Ministry of healing. Pacific Press Publishing Association.