Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

# A Well-Played Life: Discernment as the Constitutive Building Block of Selfless Leadership

#### Stephan Joubert

Abstract Selfless leadership is a full-time calling, and a summons to be of service to others. It is a vocation, not as a position of power or an opportunity for selfenhancement. Selfless leaders know that discernment is not just another useful tool in the ever-expanding leadership toolkit to make their organisations more profitable, streamlined, or desirable. It is a gift, but also a learned ability to think, desire, know, feel, choose and do what is right for the present moment, and to influence future circumstances for the welfare and common good of others. Discernment is a habitual ability to read "the signs of the times" wisely and to act thereupon with clarity, wisdom and soberness. At the same time selfless leaders deliberately choose to focus on the potential, abilities, strengths and gifts of people in their organisation and on how to harness them to the best of their abilities, as well as to the advantage of their organisation. Just as any editor would ensure that an author produces the best possible manuscript by assisting him/her through all the phases of writing and rewriting, selfless leaders assist those within their spheres of leadership to become the best authors of their own and their organisation's stories. Their fine-tuned ability to discern the right paths to follow in planned and unplanned ways create safe spaces for good decisions, relational growth, creativity, the right kind of profitability, and healthy relationships.

# 1 Shifting to Interactive, Process-Oriented Forms of Leadership

In the previous century, those taken-for-granted assumptions regarding leadership such as that leaders should always be put on the centre stage, or that leadership is a function of a position are challenged from various angles nowadays. There is a clear shift away from the idea that officially appointed leaders are singlehandedly responsible for "engineering" the right working conditions and social environments in

S. Joubert (\*)

Contemporary Ecclesiology, University of the Free State, Bloemfontein, South Africa e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
© The Author(s) 2019

J. (Kobus) Kok, S. C. van den Heuvel (eds.), Leading in a VUCA World, Contributions to Management Science, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98884-9\_9

order to enhance expected outcomes towards leadership as a process. More correctly, relational processes, or series of such interaction processes, which are co-produced by leaders and followers engaged in various relations of "mutuality," have now become prominent (cf. Karp 2013, pp. 17–18; Vlachoutsicos 2011, p. 124).

People can no longer be viewed as "human machines," nor should they be controlled by leaders and/or managers "to perform with the same efficiency and predictability" as machines (Wheatley 2007, p. 19). From this perspective, themes such as social capital, social awareness, as well as emotional and social intelligence have become part and parcel of the vocabulary and the theoretical jargon of new approaches to leadership. Individualised leadership, with a strong emphasis on highquality reciprocal relationships between leaders and followers, is more than ever significant. Within such relationships, leaders, according to Van Dierendonck and Driehuizen (2015, p. 103ff.), should provide their colleagues with a sense of selfworth, whereas the colleagues should reciprocate by providing satisfactory performance and outcomes mutually agreed upon.

Recent transformational approaches to leadership, while sometimes still reflecting persistent undertones of heroism inherent in the classic ideal of that one significant individual leader at the top, have begun to shift their emphasis in the direction of leaders' effects on their followers' organisational commitments (cf. Avolio et al. 2009; Chan and Mak 2014). Nowadays, the focus on subordinates' personal and professional ambitions, as well as their striving for success and achievement, are understood in terms of leaders' sustained efforts at, among others, their followers' "intellectual stimulation, idealized influence, inspirational motivation, and individual consideration" (Holstad et al. 2013, p. 270). Thus, at present, it is all about authentic leadership, ranging from multi-faceted processes of "essentialising" leaders' selves to an emphasis on leaders' "self-awareness, relational transparency, balanced processing of information, and internalized moral perspective" (Alok 2014, p. 268; cf. also Avolio and Gardner 2005). At the same time, the nature and characteristics of followership is more important than ever. In this regard, Kellerman's (2008, p. xxi) influential research on followership as "a relationship between subordinates and superiors and a response of the former to the latter" has been expanded to include the characteristics, predispositions and attitudes of followers, their preferences of leadership styles, and so forth (cf. Alok 2014).

Hogg's (2001, p. 185) assertion that "leaders exist because of followers and followers exist because of leaders" may represent the current emphasis on the symbiotic relationships between followers and leaders as a process of mutual influence. In order to make this transition from old ways of regarding an organisation "as an imposed structure, plan, design, or role" to a new world where organisation "arises from the interactions and needs of individuals who have decided to come together" (Wheatley 2007, p. 26), leaders urgently need new narratives derived from an entirely new understanding of self, others and reality.

# 2 Leadership as a Summons, a Calling

Once you have reached that proverbial fork in the road, there is only one option available, left or right, except if your name is Yogi Berra. This famous American baseball player once remarked: "When you get to a fork in the road, take it!" At least he is right on one crucial point: you have to take some form of action when you have reached a crossroad. The ancient Greeks considered forks in the road so significant that they even had a specific goddess called Hekate who presided over them. Apart from guarding the graves by roadsides and the entrance to Hades (that is, the underworld), Hekate also protected crossroads. Women, in particular, relied on her guidance and wisdom when they reached certain "fork-road" stages in their lives (cf. Agha-Jaffar 2002, p. 77).

Making the right choices at those perilous crossroads in the life of any organisation is what leadership is all about, some would say. The popular leadership guru, John Maxwell, even states that approximately 95% of the decisions CEOs make could also be made by any intelligent high-school graduate. They get paid for the remaining 5%. Those are the tough calls, and the way in which leaders handle them is what separates them from everyone else (cf. http://www.execleadership.com/880/ 3-signs-youre-facing-a-tough-call.html). Still, effective leaders also know that it is not simply about the good choices. Indeed, these do matter, but leadership entails more than choices, positions, titles, power, successful enterprises, or bigger profits. Leadership is also about a "well-played" life (cf. Sweet 2014), one that is lived selflessly to the advantage of others within one's sphere of influence. Leaders who are "summoned to lead and to serve" in this manner do so from the heart, not merely from the mind. They never lead as part of their job description; they do so from their inner conviction.

At its core, leadership is deeply spiritual. Leadership is a full-time calling, a summons to be of service to others. It is a vocation, not a position of power or an opportunity for self-enhancement. A selfless leader's life would be miserable and unfocused if s/he did not respond to, and pursue this lifelong calling to serve. Over against the ambitious, majestic dreams of talented individualistic leaders, selfless leaders do not follow carefully scripted career paths in order to attain financial benefits or personal fame at the expense of others. They follow a lifelong vocation. Rather, their vocation chooses them. They are summoned to lead (cf. Sweet 2004); they are called! In fact, they have no choice in the matter. They know that such a calling of selfless service goes against the grain of the prevailing contemporary business culture, but they have no other option but to cultivate their gift and trained ability of discernment in order to be of service to others in their organisations.

Selfless leadership is not only a platform to help shape, but also a garden to help grow the lives of those within a leader's field of influence (cf. also Davenport 2015). It is an ongoing interactive process of assisting others in crossing those fixed mental and physical boundaries, which their social environments might have established in terms of the rules of business, the nature of competition, the tyranny of everincreasing profits, or the selfishness of winning at all costs. Discernment is a prerequisite to step up to this type of leadership. It also requires a profound shift in understanding what leadership is all about. More to the point, it entails a metanoia of sorts, one that will lead to a lifelong investment in personal character growth and the social upliftment of others.

# 3 The "metanoetic" Nature of Selfless Leadership

Although the Greek term metanoia is mostly used to signify religious conversions, this term means more than a moral repentance, or a revisiting of the pains and wrongdoings of the past. As a matter of fact, metanoia probably never signified a moral turnabout by sinners based on fear of divine punishment, but rather a change of heart and mind, a border-crossing experience that brings one to a fresh understanding of reality (cf. Joubert 2013, p. 122). Through metanoia "one becomes what one is not ... Metanoō, I have had a change of heart, I have been transformed, made into something new ..." (Caputo 1999, p. 213). When using metanoia in terms of Jesus' new understanding of the concept, Moore (2009, p. 37) describes in detail the challenges posed by a metanoetic change of heart and mind: "... one of the most difficult things to do is to change the way you imagine your place in life. Nothing is more challenging. On the other hand, once this takes place, nothing could be more vitalizing. Truly, it's as if you are born a second time. Your eyes open to a different world ... Metanoia comes at a great cost. You are to give up an understanding of life that has been in place for a long time."

Leaders have crossed the divide from old leadership paradigms, where their identity is determined by cultures that are explicitly or implicitly linked to control over others and sometimes even to the reduction of subordinates' "working selves to disposable pieces of furniture" (Harding 2014, p. 409). They are now part of a subversive new reality where selflessness is the norm. This shift requires nothing less than a personal metanoia. No, this shift is not a regression into a weak, laissez-faire form of leadership without any rules or boundaries. To the contrary, selfless leadership is strong and focused. Such leaders deliberately choose to curb their selfish egos, share power and use their influence to the advantage, growth and development of others. As an ongoing process of personal metamorphosis, such a shift of mind and heart facilitates new forms of "complexity leadership, where leaders turn into sages who create fluid new structures to facilitate trusting relationships, and a new culture of respect in which followers/workers/subordinates thrive as they are given permission to work and operate in their respective flow states" (Joubert 2013, p. 218).1

1 "Csíkszentmihályi is well known for his research on flow states, as a reference to any person's deep concentration and complete absorption with an activity at hand. This causes ... the person in flow not only forgets his or her problems, but loses temporarily the awareness of self that in normal life often intrudes in consciousness, and causes psychic energy to be diverted from what needs to be done (Csíkszentmihályi 1988, p. 33). This flow state is an optimal state of intrinsic motivation,

# 4 The Character of Selfless Leaders Is Grown in the Right Fertile Soil

Character is the matrix of internalised beliefs, norms and values that define and direct a person. According to Hauerwas (1983, p. 39), "character is not merely the result of our choices, but rather the form our agency takes through our beliefs and intentions ... character is not a surface manifestation of some deeper reality called the 'self'. We are our character." Elsewhere, Hauerwas (1975, p. 203) mentions that "nothing is more nearly at the 'heart' of who we are than our character. It is our character that determines the primary orientation and direction which we embody through our beliefs and actions."

Character is not innate or automatic, as Brooks (2015) correctly argues. A strong moral character, which flows from a metanoia or a radical change in one's understanding of reality and which is expressed in a life of selfless service, has to be nurtured and cultivated. It has to be grown with both artistry and effort. As the English novelist James A. Froude would say: "You cannot dream yourself into character, you must hammer and forge one for yourself." Character needs the right fertile soil in which to grow. The fertilizers for this soil include:

Selfless leaders do not have big egos to feed or carefully crafted public personas to defend. They pursue a lifelong calling of service. As the philosopher Paul Ricoeur (1969, p. 349) would say: "[B]eyond the desert of criticism they wish to be called again." Such leaders are well aware of the fact that they swam across the river of complexity and self-enhancement only to discover a new route of childlike simplicity on the other side. No, they are not blind to the tough, day-to-day challenges of leadership, or deaf to the questions facing our fast changing global landscape, but they have embraced a second naïveté which allows them to deal with chaos, complexity and change from the fresh perspectives of curiosity and honesty. In this sense, quoting Carattini (2013), "true naïveté can thus describe one who shows absence of artificiality or unaffected simplicity of nature, one who has no hidden agendas or duplicitous motives."

Character should never be confused with talent (that is, the possession of certain repeatable skills). Modern-day society blindly celebrates talent over character. Far too easily talents, masked as so-called "résumé virtues," are sold off to the highest bidders in the corporate world. No wonder organisations are "overcrowded" with

marked by deep concentration, a distorted sense of time, and absorption. The person is fully immersed in what s/he is doing so that temporal concerns such as time, food or even the self are disregarded" (Joubert 2013, pp. 128–129).

many ambitious individuals who know how to climb the corporate ladder en route to formal leadership and managerial positions, but "understaffed" with characterdriven individuals. The latter are passionate about forging a strong moral ethos in any organisation, one that delivers sustainable outputs while also sustaining the personal growth of others. Character-driven people pull organisations through. When wrong decisions are taken and relationships in the workplace suffer, brute talent will never save the day. Character-based leadership is what is called for then ... and always!

# 5 Discernment Flows from the Hearts of Selfless Leaders

Discernment is not simply another useful tool in the ever-expanding toolkit of leaders to make their organisations more profitable, streamlined, or desirable. Discernment is a gift, but also a learned ability to think, desire, know, feel, choose and do what is right for the present moment, and to influence future circumstances for the welfare and common good of others. It is the habitual ability to read "the signs of the times" wisely and to act thereupon with clarity, wisdom and soberness. In the words of Howard (2000, p. 10), "discernment is a noetic verbal noun ... the term nearly always has something to do with 'knowing'. Terms like 'awareness,' 'interpret,' 'examine,' 'recognize,' all give indication of the activity of discernment being cognitional. Whether the individual of community 'mind' is operative, whether the focus is external or internal, discernment itself refers to a distinguishing which is a process/product of cognition—a kind of 'knowing'."

Discernment should not be confused with that never-ending pressure on the shoulders of leaders of "constantly getting it right." It is not so much decisionand-outcome driven, but rather the outflow of a deepened ability to notice and choose what is the right way of being present and being of service to others in the "everydayness of our lives—those very places we often overlook as important for discernment" (Liebert 2008, p. xi). Linear processes of reasoning alone do not suffice in this instance. A constant interplay of heart and mind is what is needed, one that is influenced by a strong awareness of the social, situational, and immediate contexts within which leaders find themselves.

Discernment cannot be switched on or off at will. It is a way of life, fuelled by a personal commitment to pay attention to the needs of others and to facilitate their growth. Selfless leaders are well aware of the interconnectedness of people. Keen observation, creative thinking, practical wisdom, and openness to the input of others are key components in their discernment-driven leadership arsenal. Their interactions and decisions are never pragmatic, but flow from an inner clarity regarding the right routes to be pursued to the advantage of others. Hence, discernment in their presence is an art, but also a learned ability to align their perceptions and decisions with their inner character, which also aligns with the well-being of others. "Discernment discovers what is the reasonable thing to do by engaging not only in the head but also in the heart. In and around the linear flow of discursive reasoning, discernment is an experienced perception involving the back-and-forth, around-andabout movement of intuition, affective sensibility to values, and subtle assessments of the relationships of multiple factors" (Gula 1997, p. 50).

# 6 Character-Based Discernment Translated into the Roles of Sages and Editors

As part of their reading and shaping the culture of their organisations, selfless leaders intuitively know that it is never about individualism versus the group, but about reciprocally facilitating the unique individuality of members of their organisation to give shape to new forms of "belonging." "This is part of the fluid 'leadership dance', or the ability to understand that currently it is about both individuality and the group, about speeding up and slowing down, and solidity and fluidity" (Joubert 2013, p. 130). Selfless leaders have deliberately stepped down as "professional specialists" and "accountants" whose function it is to constantly keep subordinates "accountable." In their new self-understanding as "editors," leaders assist colleagues, subordinates, followers, clients and customers to write (and rewrite!) their own life stories along the lines of selfless service, respect and generosity. Over against dated routes of accountability leadership, where the emphasis is mostly on past performances of subordinates (or the lack thereof!), selfless leaders choose to focus on the potential, abilities, strengths and gifts of people in their organisation and on how to harness them to the best of their abilities, as well as to the advantage of their organisation. Just as any good editor would ensure that an author produces the best possible manuscript by assisting him/her through all the phases of writing and rewriting, selfless leaders assist those within their spheres of leadership to become the best authors of their own and their organisation's stories. During these different phases, the discernment skills of both leaders-as-editors and subordinates-as-authors are sharpened by their interactions and their shared learning experiences.

At the same time, selfless leaders also perceive themselves as sages who are constantly engaged in mastering "the ways and means of planning, managing and understanding a good life" (Baltes and Staudinger 2000, p. 124). Their rich knowledge of what a well-played life in service of others entails, allows them to "deal[ing] successfully and ethically with people, and also with difficult and ambiguous questions" (Baltes and Staudinger 2000, p. 124). They walk their talk by modelling a life of sincerity, respect and generosity. Narcissism, that "inflated sense of selfimportance and grandiosity" (Greaves et al. 2014, p. 341), is never cultivated in their proximity, since they know that it is damaging to personal relationships and the general welfare of others in their organisations. Selfless leaders have sufficient practical wisdom to constantly modify their strategies and plans. They know how to think on their feet and build aeroplanes in mid-air. Uncertainty and chaos do not scare them. As a matter of fact, complexity and ambiguity are conducive to their abilities to discern.

The very nature and practical application of selfless leaders' gifts and fine-tuned abilities to discern flow from their self-understanding as sages and editors. These roles are the formative lenses through which they view reality, approach others, grow relationships, manage day-to-day business, and so forth. Thus, the operational mode of selfless leaders is a route of wisdom and editorship where good decisions and right choices are determined by, and judged on the merits of how any possible course of action, or any business deal for that matter, would assist others within their sphere of influence to be of service to their organisations, and how they could reach their full human potential during the course of such processes.

# 7 Discernment Is Fine-Tuned by a New Sense of "We-ness," or Community

All processes of discernment should be based on, and measured by actions that facilitate the reshaping of the core of any organisation from a "me to we"-based culture. In this instance, personal motives and selfish options are deliberately set aside in favour of mutually benefitting ones as a non-negotiable core value. In this instance, people are never left adrift in a dangerous sea of subjectivity at the mercy of a single leader who controls the direction of their organisation. Good discernment never takes place in social isolation, or within hierarchically structured contexts. In a world where all are constantly threatened with suffocation by an avalanche of information and a never-ending barrage of choices, discerning leaders are definitely not updated versions of the Lone Ranger or Rambo. They are not "one-man" or "one-woman" bands trying to singlehandedly save or advance their organisations. They surround themselves with wise people. More to the point, they passionately embrace the value of community; hence, they constantly forge strong and positive relationships with others. In order to foster such a healthy discernment culture, people on all levels of responsibility in their organisations are treated with the same dignity and respect. In turn, this embodied value translates into others also being entrusted with a distinct awareness of, and a practical responsibility for the growth of a relationship-based culture, as well as for specific outcomes during the course of decision-making processes. Undoubtedly, "the process of discernment is slow and messy. But it is neither arbitrary nor authoritarian. The same cannot be said for all other methods of decision making" (Johnson 1983, p. 33).

Selfless leaders are tasked not only with displaying an awareness of the talents, character, needs and responsibilities of others, but also with facilitating adequate responses thereto by building platforms for them on which to prosper (cf. also Gabriel 2015). In such environments, discernment is not only about discriminating, determining, deciding or distinguishing between right and wrong, yes and no, or between the best possible course of action, as the word would literally imply. Of course, leaders' rational abilities to think matters through and to apply a healthy dose of common sense and sound reason to day-to-day decision-making activities should never be negated. Strategic thinking and good planning are part and parcel of any form of good leadership, but at the same time it must also include a constant willingness and the fine-tuned ability to approach day-to-day challenges from relational angles, which includes constant input from others.

# 8 Generosity as Lens

One of the big mind shifts that selfless leaders have to make, is towards a new understanding of resources and profit as the means with which to serve and not only as treasures to be stockpiled. In other words, generosity is what is called for. Attitudes of "limited good" are never allowed to grow in such contexts. Limited good, as understood by the anthropologist George M. Foster, proposes that all tangible and intangible entities exist in finite quantities. Everything is available in limited amounts or measures, including food, work, property, money, health, and safety to trust and loyalty, although such scarcity is represented "on a continuum in which the poles are 'more limited' and 'less limited'" (Foster 1972, p. 59). "In all limited good contexts, selfless generosity is uncommon, since without reciprocity, any person who takes from others without giving back anything of equal value is considered a thief, and his/her deeds are conceived of as socially destabilising" (Joubert 2013, p. 125–126). However, in selfless leadership contexts, the values of kindness and hospitality are never finite, since numerous stories of service, care, second miles, and so forth disclose the pervasive presence of generosity. Whereas the greedy live by the unspoken rule that for them to have, others should have less, generous people live their lives and do their work in the prosperity of others.

Selfless leaders work constantly at creating a new ethos of generosity in their organisations. They imprint the conviction in others to collectively participate therein, among others by shared affirmations, mutually rewarding interactions, as well as the constant sharing of narratives that reflect the distinct generosity culture of their organisations. Success on their scoreboard is registered in terms of the liberal sharing of resources and knowledge to the benefit of others. In this instance, wealth is measured by the growth in generosity and by a newly found freedom to share and serve responsibly, since this is one of the discernment-based lenses whereby all options are evaluated and all decisions made.

# 9 When Criticism Comes...

As a "me to we"-based process that grows in the fertile soil of mutual respect and generosity, discernment should never be confused with low expectations regarding the output and high quality of the work of others. These values can never be compromised, neither should the route of straightforward honesty be set aside when problems and conflicts arise. The opinions of all matter in selfless leadership environments, but never at the expense of the greater good of the organisation, the well-being of others, or the responsibilities of the leaders themselves. Clashes of opinion, criticism, and conflict will be a daily reality, but when criticism comes, good leaders will know not to count but to weigh it, and to address it directly.

The biggest dangers in any discernment-based culture is that of the so-called "anxious risk-avoiding leader" and those destabilizing "weakest human links" who have forced themselves into becoming the strongest ones actually!  (Friedman 2007, p. 13). Well-differentiated selfless leaders are not autocrats. They have clarity regarding their leadership calling and goals. They do not get lost in the entrapments of various emotional processes that sometimes swirl about in their organisations. As Friedman (2007, p. 18) notes: "A leader must separate his or her own feelings from that of his or her followers while still remaining connected. Vision is basically an emotional rather than a cerebral phenomenon, depending more on a leader's capacity to deal with anxiety than his or her professional training ..." Such leaders accept responsibility for their own emotional well-being, while not allowing the "weakest human links" in their organisations to hold others captive with their own emotional baggage and selfish agendas—all under the guise of consensus or unity. Safety and certainty do not motivate selfless leaders; rather, new ways of thinking and acting hold the key for them. It is not about trying harder, or doing more of the same, but by reframing questions, changing the nature, value and flow of information, and eliminating previous dichotomies. In this process, selfless leaders refuse to facilitate reactivity, blame displacement, or a quick fix mentality to determine outcomes, even if they have to face conflict, unpopularity and outright rejection.

Good leaders are able to separate themselves from surrounding emotional processes, especially from those negative ones when relationships and/or decisionmaking processes are imaginatively gridlocked. They intuitively know that more thinking or talking about problems will not suffice, neither will any naive accommodating of weakest human links. Within such situations, decisiveness, clear boundaries, a raised threshold for criticism, and persistence in the face of inertial resistance help sidestep toxic forms of anxiety, which is systemic in many corporate cultures at present (cf. Friedman 2007, p. 89).

# 10 Fin

Contrary to popular understandings of discernment as decision and action, or at best as a process that must always lead to the correct tangible results, it actually entails a way of life. Discernment is a never-ending relational and rational process. It is always in progress. It is relational motion, as some of the terms associated with discernment, such as "awareness, examination, interpretation, discovery, decision, response, action" would imply. Thus "discernment can be comprehended in toto as a process or act of knowing" (Howard 2000, p. 10), that is, relational insight and knowing. Such leaders constantly embrace their calling of selfless service to others. Their empathetic responsiveness to the feelings, giftedness, abilities and strengths of people does not overrule their abilities to make good decisions and to remain constantly true to their inner selves. Their fine-tuned ability to discern the right paths to follow in planned and unplanned ways create safe spaces and the right contexts for good decisions, relational growth, creativity, the right kind of profitability, and intimate relationships.

# Bibliography

Agha-Jaffar T (2002) Demeter and Persephone: lessons from a myth. McFarland, London

Johnson LT (1983) Scripture and discernment: decision-making in the church. Abingdon, Nashville

Joubert SJ (2013) Not by order, nor by dialogue: the metanoetic presence of the Kingdom of God in a fluid new world and church. Acta Theol 33(1):114–134

Karp T (2013) Studying subtle acts of leadership. Leadership 9(1):3–22

Moore T (2009) Writing in the sand: Jesus and the soul of the Gospels. Hay House, Carlsbad

Ricoeur P (1969) The symbolism of evil (trans: Buchanan E). Beacon, Boston

Sweet L (2004) Summoned to lead. Zondervan, Grand Rapids

Stephan Joubert is an Extraordinary Professor of Contemporary Ecclesiology at The University of the Free State, South Africa, as well as a Research Fellow at Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. At the same time he is the editor of ekerk, a large cyberchurch that sends out more than 2.5 million emails to subscribers annually, a church consultant, speaker and author of more than Christian books, three international academic books, and close to 50 academic articles in various journals and books. He has a daily column in Beeld, the largest Afrikaans newspaper, as well as monthly columns in two South African magazines.

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

# Discerning Spirituality for Missional Leaders

#### C. J. P. (Nelus) Niemandt

Abstract The concept of missional church represents a confluence of ideas on spirituality, discernment and leadership. The very idea of participating in the missio Dei implies a spiritual journey and underlying spirituality, and discernment is widely described as the "first step in mission." The missional church recognises the importance of leadership to envision, shape, and facilitate missional transformation. This chapter acknowledges the urgency and importance of discourses on spirituality and discernment, because of the context of the church finding itself in a complex world. The church is a complex system and finds itself in a dynamic reality where the dynamism also entails complexity—to the extent that Friedman (Thank you for being late: An optimist's guide to thriving in the age of accelerations. Allen Lane, London, 2016) typifies our age as the "age of accelerations." The research will introduce the idea of missional leadership and its relevance in the light of the renewed attention to concepts of missional church in South Africa, in many other contexts, and in ecumenical organisations. Defining missional leadership as the Spirit-led transformation of people and institutions by means of meaningful relations to participate in God's mission, the chapter will attend to an appropriate understanding of spirituality. This will be against the background of a shift of spiritual formation from knowing and believing, to hungering and thirsting. In the final section, discernment will be described as entering into a trialogue: the discerning interaction between church, culture, and biblical narrative—to seek, discover, understand, and share in what the Holy Spirit is involved in the close-tothe-ground particulars of the church's engagement in, with, against, and for the world.

C. J. P. (Nelus) Niemandt (\*)

Department Religion Studies, Faculty of Theology, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
# 1 Introduction

We live in complex times, in an age of acceleration. Friedman (2016, pp. 26–27) coined the concept of the "age of accelerations" to describe the rapid acceleration in globalisation where the flow of information and knowledge leads to a hyperconnected world; where the acceleration in climate change leads to biodiversity loss and the restructuring of mother nature; and the acceleration in computing power and smart technology to seamless complexity. These accelerations combine to form the "Great Acceleration," transforming almost every single aspect of modern life. This is a time where institutions that survived for ages are under pressure, and where even resilient institutions such as churches and universities face unprecedented challenges. It is not only a question of an increase in the rate of change, but an issue of dislocation because the rate of change exceeds the ability of mankind to adapt to change. Friedman argues that the world is not just rapidly changing. Societal structures are failing to keep pace with the rate of change, and the world is starting to operate differently (Friedman 2016, p. 28).

Although Friedman writes from a particular Western and developmental perspective, recent contributions on super-diversity1 (Vertovec 2016) affirm the complexity of society, more so in South Africa. South Africa is indeed a country of complex diversity: it has 11 official languages; a multitude of ethnic groups; widely diverging histories; all major religions are present; it experienced various phases of colonialisation and decolonialisation; it hosts many formal and informal economic approaches; many stories compete for attention.

Friedman's approach provides an entry point to engage with the complexities of South Africa, especially in terms of leadership studies: "A shifting world opens a new leadership challenge" (Terry 2001, p. 143). The age of accelerations challenges leaders in all facets of society and raises important questions on core competencies of leaders, such as discernment, the ability to formulate appropriate mission, vision and forming teams that are able to transform institutions and communities. The age of accelerations demands a new wisdom culture (vis a vis the focus on leadership skills) and more than "outside the box" thinking—but "thinking without a box" (Friedman 2016, p. 14). It demands a discerning spirituality from missional leaders.

This research focuses on leadership in the church and, more specifically, missional leadership. It is certainly limited by the scope of a single chapter and the fact that the researcher represents a particular facet of the complex denominational and religious landscape in South Africa, but attempts to contribute a perspective that can enhance the ability of the system to adapt to the changing context that equips leaders to act with more agility. This is typically the task of missional leaders, and a discerning spirituality will equip and assist missional leadership in this journey.

1 Super-diversity is a term denoting a transformation of population patterns, especially arising from shifts in global mobility. Around the world over the past three decades, there have been increasing movements of people from more varied national, ethnic, linguistic and religious backgrounds.

Missional leadership recognises the fact that big systems, such as denominations, have "traders" and "gatekeepers" that determine the flow of ideas, the pace of transformation and orientation on the identity of systems. The life and actions of a complex system such as denominations are influenced by the relationship between traders and gatekeepers. Gatekeepers are the guardians of the status quo. They must ensure stability, fidelity and control. Their mission is to slow the pace of change and to bring stability to the system by leaning back into the past. Yes, any system needs a focus on the past, but then in a particular way with the aim to build on the best in the history of the system (such as is being prepared with Appreciative Inquiry [AI]). The gatekeeping function is appropriate in an age of accelerations, to preserve that of the past worthy of taking into the future (Terry 2001, p. 73). It is to drive forward but keeping an eye on the rear viewmirror. Leadership is rooted in the wisdom of the past: "You live in the present from the past forward" (Sweet 2004, p. 138).

The art of leadership is not to focus on the rear-view-mirror but to journey into the future. Leadership wisdom includes matching the best of knowledge and experience to the current reality and accelerations (see Terry 2001, p. 407). Leadership in an age of accelerations needs the posture of traders. Traders are at the forefront of change. They are the "innovators" and "early adopters" in the system (Keifert 2006, p. 55). Traders ring in changes and introduce new grammar, ideas, and innovation. Traders try to direct accelerations and incorporate a culture that embraces change. Friedman (2016, p. 306) makes a compelling case for what I label as traders, when he says that the most resilient countries and systems are those that are able to absorb many alien influences and incorporate them into the system while maintaining overall stability.

Missionaries are typical traders. They are focused on finding creative solutions and prone to be caught up in a mission to expend their talents for a self-transcending cause—they are people convinced that God has entrusted creation to human beings not merely as caretakers of a past condition but as co-creators with a God of the future (Haight 2014, p. 55).

The church, and especially denominations, find themselves in the midst of the age of accelerations and serve as a case study of the interaction between leadership, discernment and spirituality. The church needs missional leaders able to apply the wisdom of traders on the journey into an unsure and undefined future.

# 2 Focus on Missional Church

The concept of missional church is particularly relevant due to the renewed attention it receives in many contexts, including South Africa, and in important ecumenical organisations. The concept of missional church is also perhaps the best expression of ecclesiology to address the contextual challenges posed by the age of acceleration, especially since ideas such as contextualisation, welcoming the stranger, and faithful presence in the midst of chaos, are part and parcel of the missional church.

A number of South African churches made important policy decisions to facilitate the transformation towards missional church—to name but a few:

The issue has received significant attention in ecumenical meetings since 2010:

2 The Kerkorde states: "2. Levend uit Gods genade in Jezus Christus vervult de kerk de opdracht van haar Heer om het Woord te horen en te verkondigen. 3. Betrokken in Gods toewending tot de wereld, belijdt de kerk in gehoorzaamheid aan de Heilige Schrift als enige bron en norm van de kerkelijke verkondiging en dienst, de drie-enige God, Vader, Zoon en Heilige Geest."

3 The CRC states: "Our congregations will flow like streams into their communities. We will meet our neighbors at community events and gathering places, listening to each other, learning from each other, and serving each other. By our presence we will become channels for the love of Christ and the Holy Spirit's life-giving transformation."

4 This includes spiritual formation to be more like Jesus in loving God and neighbours, and making the world a better place.

The missional identity and engagement of the churches and of our communion is the raison d'être (reason for being) of WCRC, is essential to its Reformed identity, and therefore, must be reflected in its structures, use of resources and programmatic actions (WCRC 2010, p. 164).

It is clear that the idea of missional church has captured the imagination of a significant, if not critical, amount of South African mainline denominations and local congregations. The missional church sees itself within God's mission (the missio Dei), and seeks "to re-enter [the world] as a missionary presence...living adventurously as a subversive movement, realising afresh its total reliance on the Lord" (Gibbs 2000, p. 51). Missional ecclesiology builds on the missio Dei, the active presence of the Triune God in his creation and the life-changing invitation to participate in this mission of God. N'kwim Bibi-Bikan (2016, p. 2) applies this to the church in Africa as well when he states that the mission of the church in Africa should be the mission of God in Africa. It is important to understand to focus on God's mission: "Mission is the result of God's initiative, rooted in God's purposes to restore and heal creation and to call people into a reconciled covenantal relationship with God" (Hesselgrave and Stetzer 2010, p. 24).

The concept of missional church does not only raise interest due to the ecumenical and denominational focus it receives, but also because it represents a confluence of ideas on spirituality, discernment and leadership. The very idea of participating in the missio Dei implies a spiritual journey and underlying spirituality, and discernment which is widely described as the "first step in mission." A missional church is a community of followers called by the Spirit on a journey of discernment. The active presence of the Triune God in his creation presupposes discernment as the way to understand where God is working so that God's people can join in with the Spirit and participate in God's mission. The missional church recognises the importance of leadership to envision, shape and facilitate missional transformation. To be transformed and to nurture a transforming presence in communities and the world at large requires a new kind a leader.

# 3 Context of Acceleration and Complexity

Discourses on spirituality and discernment are important because the church finds itself in a complex world. This is also and perhaps particularly true of the church in South Africa. The church is a complex system. Whether one refers to local congregations or huge denominational structures—they are all complex systems, and complexity theory provides interesting answers to new questions and challenges that churches face. More than that—the church finds itself in a dynamic reality where the dynamism also entails complexity. Some of the characteristics mentioned by Friedman seems to be quite evident in the South African landscape, such as the acceleration of globalisation, climate change, connectivity and interdependence (Friedman 2016, pp. 26–27).

Complexity enhances acceleration, and acceleration feeds complexity. The interplay between complexity and acceleration results in a situation described by Friedman (2016, p. 91) as a situation where complexity became, "fast, free, easy for you, and invisible." Computing power, increased connectivity and powerful programmes are changing the world and the way society operates: "It is making the world not just flat but fast. Fast is a natural evolution of putting all this technology together and then diffusing it everywhere" (Friedman 2016, p. 93).

The combination of acceleration and complexity creates a totally new context for the church. The importance of contextualisation in mission has been underscored by Bosch in his argument that contextualisation is an affirmation that God has turned towards the world, and that the world is a constitutive element in our understanding of mission (Bosch 1991, p. 426). This shows the importance of the context of acceleration and complexity for the church. Mission as praxis is about concrete transformation; it is specifically about transformative encounters: amongst people, and between the living God and his people (Kritzinger and Saayman 2011, pp. 49–52). This necessitates a new understanding of contextualisation. Friedman (2016, p. 312) pleads for an openness of cultures to adapt when faced with big changes in the environment. Deep contextualisation,5 an expansion of contextualisation, might assist in this process. Mission as deep contextualisation will attempt to proclaim the gospel and actualise the good news in the particular circumstances brought about by globalisation and a shifting understanding of history, including "deep history" (Gregersen 2013, pp. 370, 376) and the age of accelerations. Deep contextualisation assists with the re-orientation of the history of mission on a deeper understanding of history. It also embraces the complexity and rapid evolution of society and the existence of vast ungoverned spaces in cyberspace.

# 4 Missional Leadership

What kind of leadership will assist the (missional) church on the journey of deep contextualisation in the context of acceleration and complexity? Perhaps the discussion on leadership must start with an introduction of Scharmer's (2009, loc. 356) definition of leadership—he describes leaders as "all people who engage in creating change or shaping their future, regardless of their formal positions in institutional structures." This can be expanded with the insight that the role of the leader is, "to help people face reality and to mobilize them to make change" (Heifetz n.d.). Leadership gives direction and cohesion to a group of people or an organisation (Noordt et al. 2008, p. 285). Direction implies change and transformation, a movement or journey to new places or experiences.

5 For a more comprehensive explanation of deep contextualisation, see Niemandt (2017).

The issue of leadership is of particular importance in the process of transformation to a missional church. The church needs an appropriate missional understanding of leadership, in order to organise and transform the church into missional life, and to participate in the transformation of communities to be able to share life in its fullness (Niemandt 2016a, p. 91). The missional imperative of deep contextualisation adds perspective to the kind of leadership needed—it must guide participants with wisdom to face the deep contextual changes and assist the transformation of the church and membership to embrace and participate in God's presence in an age of complexity and acceleration. Missional leadership is the Spirit-led transformation of people and institutions by means of meaningful relations to participate in God's mission. Missional leadership is a turn towards discernment by God's pilgrim people. As Hendriks (2004, p. 30) puts it: "The solution to faith communities' questions about how to participate in God's missional praxis is a critical, constructive dialogue or correlation between their interpretations of the realities of the global and local context and the faith resources at their disposal."

Leadership includes helping people to adapt to change and changing contexts. The challenge lies in the understanding of change, especially if the nature of change has changed! Friedman (2016, p. 32) argues that the rate of change has accelerated and now exceeds the ability of mankind to adapt to change. "...Our societal structures are failing to keep pace with the rate of change" (Friedman 2016, p. 33). South Africa and the churches in South Africa are not immune to these global changes. But we cannot resist the invitation to be co-creators of the future. The argument by Haight (2014, p. 55) comes to mind when he describes the "Anthropology of Constructive Action":

God has entrusted creation to human beings not merely as caretakers of a past condition but as co-creators with God of the future. This formula corresponds with the recognition that being is not static but in process, and that human beings were created by God not simply to enjoy creation but, as part of the universe, to work with the processes of evolution and to assume responsibility for its historical movement (Haight 2014, p. 55).

The leadership challenge in the age of acceleration is to reimagine and reinvent social technologies. Friedman (2016, p. 200) argues that we will need a better understanding of the way people and society operates, and we will need to find ways to accelerate the adaptability and evolution of institutions (certainly including churches), organisations and society at large. The church as a relational organism is deeply dependant on social technologies and the ability of the members to cope with and flourish in a new era. Mathewes (2015, loc. 1203–1205) argues that churches "...are those institutions that aim to give us a communal and personal, intellectual and affective, structure to help cultivate joy, our cultivation of which is their ultimate purpose."

Missional leadership responds to these challenges by focusing on the Spirit-led transformation of people and institutions by means of meaningful relations to participate in God's mission. It is a kind of leadership that facilitates changes and transformation, more so in the face of complexity and acceleration. Mpinga (2014, p. 184) states that missional leadership will have the responsibility to discern, to disclose, to teach, to expose and to develop missional identity. Cordier and Niemandt (2014), reflecting on research carried out in the South African context, concluded that missional leadership is not in the first place about strategic planning or management, but on cultivating within the missional community the capacities needed for spiritual discernment and formation: "What is needed, is not the training of religious technicians, but the formation of spiritual leaders" (Cordier and Niemandt 2014). Missional leadership requires new capacities and new paradigms.

# 5 Missional Spirituality

Missional leadership can only facilitate transformation and guide church members to a flourishing life in a new age of complexity and acceleration if it is deeply imbedded in a missional spirituality. In this section, the discussion on missional spirituality will, first of all, be achieved from the perspective of broader discourses on spirituality. What does spirituality really mean? Haight (2014, loc. 269–270) defines spirituality as the way persons and groups live their lives with reference to something that they acknowledge as transcendent. He argues that spirituality is a form of behaviour. It consists in the sum total of a person's actions as he or she moves along in life: "... spirituality is intrinsically developmental. Spirituality is a living thing that grows through time and through the life cycle of human experiences" (Haight 2014, loc. 280–281). Heifetz (n.d.) makes a strong case for the need of a sanctuary. He argues that leaders need a sanctuary, a place where they can go to get back in touch with the worth of their life and the worth of their work. This is not necessarily a physical place or an extended sabbatical. Maybe Heifetz refers to a kind of spirituality that will sustain a leader—the formation of habits and the cultivation of spaces where a leader can create daily rhythms or moments that helps leaders to "stay alive."

Terry (2001, p. 383, see also Sweet 2004, p. 110) recognises the importance of spirituality in leadership literature and states that the concept plays a role in many books, even to the extent that it is central to many leadership theories. His argument is even more appropriate in the age of complexity and acceleration:

When we are in the midst of chaos and devastation, the past looks clear and sensible, the future unclear, even senseless. Yearning for order and meaning, we want to know that whatever is worthy of our faith and belief is present to inform, support, sustain, and encourage us (Terry 2001, p. 413).

For him spirituality equals with creating a meaning of life. Spirituality refers to the ultimate values we hold and meanings we make in relation to that which is deemed ultimately important (Terry 2001, p. 385).

The broader description of spirituality created the context for a more focused description of Christian spirituality. Wright (2015, p. 121) argues that Christian spirituality is:

—an awareness of the loving and guiding presence of God, sorrow for sin and gratitude for forgiveness, the possibility and challenge of prayer, a love for God and for our neighbors, the desire for holiness and the hard moral work it requires, the gradual or sudden emergence of particular vocations, a lively hope for God's eventual new creation—is generated by the good news of what has happened in the past and what will happen in the future. All this and much, much more is what is meant by the good news in the present.

Mpinga (2014, p. 197) describes missional spirituality as the Christian way of living derived from the encounter with God in Christ, the fellowship with him, and his mission in the world. Christian spirituality gives a particular content to the transcendent and acknowledges the life-giving presence of the Triune God. The ability to find meaning in life is a gift from the Spirit and ultimate values flow from the ultimate self-revelation of God in Jesus Christ. Haight says:

Every revelation and religion has some medium or set of symbols and practises that define the form and content of its faith. According to this formula, the logic of Christian faith is Christomorphic. This means that, by definition, Christians find their way to God through faith in Jesus of Nazareth, who is acknowledged to be the Messiah or anointed one of God or Christ (Haight 2014, loc. 2138–2141).

Missional leaders are centred in and fuelled by their immersion in the body of Christ. Spiritual leadership involves two aspects closely related to each other: (1) Spiritual discernment—The spiritual leader possesses the ability to discern and to establish spiritual discernment as a practise amongst the leadership team and the congregation; and (2) Faith formation and discipleship—The spiritual leader lives a lifestyle of discipleship and focuses on the spiritual coaching and formation of members within the congregation towards biblical formation and discipleship (see also Cordier and Niemandt 2014).

With this background in mind, the focus now moves to missional spirituality. Mission is to live in the active presence of the Triune God and to participate in this mission of God. Missional spirituality is Trinitarian. Christian leadership finds its deepest ground, orientation, and direction from the God who is worshipped (Niemandt 2016a, p. 93). Missional spirituality is the discovery of God's rhythms, and the ability to align one's life to those rhythms. It is about rhythms of life, or habits, which integrate the sacred and secular. It is to join God's dance of mission (Niemandt 2016a, p. 89). Missional spirituality is imperative during transformation (Helland and Hjalmarson 2011, loc. 107) and thus completely appropriate in the context of an age of complexity and acceleration. For Helland and Hjalmarson (2011, loc. 559, 239) a missional spirituality is a spirituality embodied in daily life that forms and feeds mission. They argue that, "spiritual disciplines will form us, and doing the Father's work in community will feed us" (2011, loc. 239–240). It is about spiritual formation. Formation is an attitude that aligns the church with the kingdom of God, and that forms the basis for a spirituality that changes lives.

This also means a shift of spiritual formation from knowing and believing to hungering and thirsting, because our wants and longings and desires are at the core of our identity, the wellspring from which our actions and behaviour will flow (Smith 2016, loc. 103). Smith (JKA, loc.167) criticises modernism with its intellectualist approach that reduces human beings to mere intellect—one that treats us as if we're only and fundamentally thinking things.  It is a transformation or re-orientation of the heart that happens from the bottom up, through the formation of our habits of desire. We are teleological creatures (Smith 2009b, p. 52), formed by habits that constitute the fulcrum of desire (Smith 2009b, p. 56). We act according to habit or dispositions that are formed in us through practises, routine, and rituals (Smith 2009b, p. 62). Smith (2016, loc. 465) concludes: "Learning to love (God) takes practise."

Ungerer et al. (2013, pp. 48–64)—South African researchers from various disciplines, provide a framework and creative perspective to develop habits for a transformative, missional spirituality. Niemandt (2016a, pp. 85–103) applied the insights of Ungerer et al. (2013) to missional spirituality and practises.

Ungerer et al. (2013) describe the following six virtues, where a virtue is defined as moral excellence, righteousness, and a particularly good (or beneficial) quality. Each of these virtues has a social, or relational dimension, as well as a personal, or emotional dimension. They developed reflective routines (habits) to facilitate inner transformation and personal knowing, and include the art of reflective learning (Ungerer et al. 2013, p. 33).

Niemandt (see 2016a, pp. 94–100) developed missional spiritual practises that relate to each of these virtues. They are summarised for the sake of brevity:

(continued)

It is important to underscore the perspective that a missional spirituality embraces deep contextualisation. It is a spirituality where church, culture and biblical narrative constantly interact and the missional church dwells in the Word and in the culture (world). It is a movement in the power of the Spirit, where listening to the biblical narratives leads the listener closer to God and where the deepening relation with the Triune God leads to a deeper involvement with culture and context. Although transcendence focuses on the ultimate presence of God, God is never present in a way that ignores humanity and context. Courage, justice, temperance and wisdom plays out in real life.

# 6 Discernment

Discernment flows from spirituality and nurtures wisdom—it is about making wise choices. It is one of the most important qualities of leadership and emphasises wisdom and an awareness of that which is deemed ultimately important, and thus God's presence in all of reality. In his argument for the church's mission in Africa, N'Kwim Bibi-Bikan (2016, p. 26) says: "Every local church needs to discern what God wants it to be and to do." Discernment is about entering into the trialogue: the discerning interaction between church, culture and biblical narrative—to seek, discover, understand and share in what the Holy Spirit is up to in the close-to-theground particulars of the church's engagement in, with, against and for the world. Discernment is the first, and most decisive, step on this missional journey. Mission is joining in with the Spirit in the missio Dei. Discernment is the process of being aware of where the Spirit is working. Van Gelder (2007) summarises this discussion as follows:

A missional ecclesiology understands congregations as being the creation of the Spirit. As communities are created by the Spirit, so also congregations seek to be led by the Spirit. They do this by engaging in some form of discernment process in order to understand their purpose (mission), and how they are being called through this purpose to participate in God's mission in the world... (Van Gelder 2007, p. 107).

It is a core practise of Christian leadership and spirituality. Mpinga (2014, p. 85) says the missional church will use discernment in order to find out a way of reaching out to the community in which it is working. It is the art of reading the times and signs—opening yourself up to the context and to God's involvement in the context (Niemandt 2016a, p. 90). Quaker communities can serve as an excellent example of communal missional discernment (see Love and Niemandt 2014).

Discernment involves listening. Sweet (2004, p. 17) argues that leadership is an acoustical art. Heifetz (n.d.): "...leaders must want to listen. Good listening is fuelled by curiosity and empathy: What's really happening here? Can I put myself in someone else's shoes? It's hard to be a great listener if you're not interested in other people." Meylahn (2012, p. 38) says that the church is no longer an institution—created and sustained by the proclamation of a truth, and the correct administration of the sacraments—but a hermeneutical space of listening and discerning. This is especially true of the missional church. Van Gelder and Zscheile (2011, p. 149) makes a strong case that the missional church is, "...a habit of mind and heart, a posture of openness and discernment, and a faithful attentiveness to the Spirit's presence and to the world that God so loves." Cordier and Niemandt (2015) describe the importance of listening in missional congregations as, first, the capacity to listen others into free speech. This refers to the skill of listening to others and articulating the insights. The second is the cultivation and facilitation of discerning processes in the congregation, which include the cultivation of four unique and related listening skills: to listen to God, to listen to the Word, to one another, and to the context (Cordier and Niemandt 2015).

In terms of listening to God and the Word, many missional communities found the practise of dwelling in the Word very valuable in the process of missional discernment (Nel 2013). Dwelling in the Word is the practise of a repeated communal listening to a passage of Scripture over long periods of time in order to enable a Christian community to undertake its decisions and actions in line with biblical meta-narrative. The aim of dwelling in the Word is to discover the preferred and promised future of God for a specific faith community (see Nel 2013, pp. 1–2).6

Discernment connects leadership, communal life and missional spirituality, especially in the safe space of worship and liturgy. Rossouw (2016, p. 390) talks about liturgical listening. He says it is where the missio Deo and coram Deo meet. Liturgy creates an open, patient, rhythmic approach to discernment. Love and Niemandt (2014, p. 1) refer to the Quaker communities, where discernment is not simply about making decisions or finding your vocation but, at its heart is an act of worship. For them, seeking participation in the Divine life and will is an act of worship. They intentionally make a place for God to be an active participant in the discernment process (Love and Niemandt 2014, p. 7). The liturgy of worship flows into the liturgy of life when a missional community focuses on finding God in the neighbourhood and broader community. Many in the missional church movement calls this dwelling in the world. Dwelling in the world entails a process of dialogue and engagement with the contexts in which the missional community finds itself (see Niemandt 2010, p. 9). The participants ask: "What is God up to?" in their particular contexts.

6 Nel (2013, p. 6) found that dwelling in the Word teaches and confirms the followings skills, attitudes and behaviour:

• Group members practice reaching out and sharing their faith with people they do not necessarily know well (the "reasonably friendly-looking stranger" in the group).

# 7 A Hermeneutic of Love

I agree with Meylahn that the church is a hermeneutical space of listening and discerning. But this underscores the importance of reflecting on the nature of appropriate hermeneutics. Heath (2008) writes, in The mystic way of Evangelism, that the church will have to learn to look differently at the world. We need to look with a hermeneutic of love. A hermeneutic of love brings together the essential characteristics of a missional spirituality as well as a lens for discernment. The argument flows in the same direction in Helland and Hjalmarson's (2011, loc. 524) conviction that Christian spirituality is relational and formed in love. Faithful presence must be shaped by love. Sparks et al. (2014, p. 82) also makes a strong point that God is love, and mission is the loving expression of God being God: "Your longing to be a church comprised of love and faithful presence needs to be the primary motivation for the mission of the church."

When we dwell in culture and the world, as part of deep contextualisation, a hermeneutic of love changes the approach. Heath asks:

What if we looked at our world...'with pity and not with blame'? What if we heard God's call to evangelize out of love instead of fear, hope instead of judgment? What if we saw sin for the complex mixture it is, grounded in wounds and unmet needs? What if we automatically tried to see the 'total fact' of others? In short, what would it mean to read our world with a hermeneutic of love? (Heath 2008, p. 119).

I was surprised to read Friedman's response to the age of complexity and accelerations. He labels this as a time of unprecedented freedom: "Cyberspace is the place we are all connected and no one is in charge" (Friedman 2016, p. 339). Complexity and accelerations create vast new ungoverned spaces with super-empowered individuals. It is a world where a small group of individuals are able to kill, not only another person or thousands of others, but are able to kill everyone. It is a time of daunting freedom and responsibility. Hyper-connectivity and cyberspace changed the perception of freedom. Friedman (2016, p. 339) states that there is no place where you encounter the freedom to choose more than in cyberspace. It is a place where all mankind can be unified and be totally free (Friedman 2016, p. 340). It reminds me of Haight's (2014, loc. 1825) argument that God bestowed on humans freedom and creativity through the mechanism of evolution. Created reality is an open system that includes a vast range of possibilities and unpredictable novelty. This brings mankind before a moral fork of epic proportions—"where one of us could kill all of us and all of us could fix everything if we really decided to do so" (Friedman 2016, p. 342). Friedman's answer to this challenge? He pleads that we need to find a way to get more people to practise the Golden Rule—love your neighbour as you love yourself, or do to others as you would wish them to do to you (Friedman 2016, p. 348). He echoes much of the sentiment of Heath and countless other wise people. To love others constitutes a simple effective moral guide, able to guide us in the most complex situations. It is ever adaptive and applicable to every imaginable situation. Friedman (2016, p. 348) reasons: "When the world is already complex, you don't want to make it more complicated. Make it simple." A hermeneutic of love forms the basis of a missional spirituality and guides discernment in the ever more complex world.

 We need to listen to and discern God's loving presence in the whole of creation and we need to seek "Christ's crucifixion in that context which opens what is for the kingdom still to come" (Meylahn 2012, p. 72). A hermeneutic of love allows deep contextualisation—embracing the age of complexity and acceleration. Niemandt (2016b, p. 6) argues that Christian joy is an embodied awareness of holy presence and extravagant love, and pleads that Christians must become an embodying presence of Christ's love (a contextualisation of God's presence). Love, and not faith, is indeed the final criterion for missional leadership.

# 8 Conclusion

Complexity and the age of accelerations impact on the church, society at large and thus also on leadership. This research focussed on missional leadership, defined as the Spirit-led transformation of people and institutions by means of meaningful relations to participate in God's mission. Missional leadership recognises the fact that big systems have "traders" and "gatekeepers" that determine the flow of ideas, the pace of transformation and orientation on the identity of systems. Gatekeepers are the guardians of the status quo. They must ensure stability, fidelity and control. Leadership in an age of accelerations needs the posture of traders. Traders are at the forefront of change. They are the "innovators" and "early adopters." Missionaries are typical traders, focused on finding creative solutions.

Discernment and spirituality are of the utmost importance, because spiritual leadership involves spiritual discernment and faith formation and discipleship. Missional spirituality is the discovery of God's rhythms, and the ability to align one's life to those rhythms. It is about rhythms of life, or habits, which integrate the sacred and secular. A number of habits for a transformative, missional spirituality were developed. Discernment connects leadership, communal life and missional spirituality, especially in the safe space of worship and liturgy. A hermeneutic of love allows deep contextualisation—embracing the age of complexity and acceleration.

# References

Anglican Church of Southern Africa (nd) Anglicans ablaze. http://www.anglicansablaze.org/aboutus.aspx. Accessed 15 Apr 2017

Bosch DJ (1991) Transforming mission: paradigm shifts in theology of mission. Orbis, Maryknoll

Nelus Niemandt (D.D.) is professor in Missiology and Head of the Department Religion Studies of the Faculty of Theology at the University of Pretoria, South Africa. His D.D. thesis, which he wrote at the University of Pretoria, focused on ethics and multiculturality. He is a rated researcher of the National Research Foundation. He does research on missional church, missional leadership, ecumenism and missional theology. He is the author of two books, numerous chapters in books and more than 50 articles in South African and international peer-reviewed journals. He is the promotor of 16 Ph.D. and supervisor of 45 M-degrees completed under his supervision. He is a member of several national and international academic organisations and research consortia, and vice-editor of Missionalia. Before his tenure as lecturer he ministered in the Weltevreden congregation for 25 years and also served as chaplain in Johannesburg, South Africa.

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

# Challenging the New "One-Dimensional Man": The Protestant Orders of Life as a Critical Nuance to Workplace Spirituality

#### Steven C. van den Heuvel

Abstract While recognizing the increased attention to spirituality in the workplace as being a good development overall, this chapter focuses on some problematic aspects of this new emphasis. In particular, three problems are identified: (1) the danger of instrumentalization and narcissistic misdirection; (2) the adoption of pragmatism in solving conflicts between conflicting spiritualities in the workplace, and (3) the dominance of radical social constructivist approaches, which don't take into consideration the metaphysical claims inherent in many (especially religious) forms of spirituality. Together, these problems amount to a new "one-dimensionality," referring to the famous description of modern society by Herbert Marcuse. In order to address these problems, I make recourse to the Protestant concept of the different orders of life, particularly as developed by the German theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer. In this chapter, I focus on three characteristics of his concept and argue that they can help in addressing the problems with the new emphasis on workplace spirituality that I have identified.

# 1 Introduction: The New Quest for Spirituality in the Workplace

The background to this volume is the enormous increase in the attention being paid to the theme of spirituality in the workplace. This upsurge can be understood in a number of different ways. On the one hand, it can be seen as an expression of the dramatic changes taking place in the nature of work, especially in the West. From the predominantly repetitive and mechanical work in factories during the era of

The original version of this chapter was revised. A correction to this chapter is available at https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98884-9\_13.

S. C. van den Heuvel (\*)

Department of Systematic Theology, Evangelische Theologische Faculteit, Leuven, Belgium

Extraordinary Researcher at the Faculty of Theology, North-West University, Potchefstroom, South Africa e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
industrialization, the West has moved towards a service economy, and is currently moving increasingly towards an information economy. This dynamic has been noted by many researchers. Thomas Friedman, for example, speaks about the current era as being the "age of accelerations" (Friedman 2016).1 Spirituality, as a quest for unity and meaning, can be seen as the desire for an answer in this context of fraction and change. This renewed focus on the individual makes the personal and spiritual wellbeing of the employee vitally important to the competitive success of an organization in a way that has not been widely recognized before (see, for example, Holman et al. 2005). Many studies show how a focus on spirituality is positively correlated with greater worker performance. They demonstrate how workers who score well on the indicators of spiritual wellbeing can deal better with workplace stress and job overload and enjoy more job satisfaction.2

A second reason for the upsurge in spirituality in the workplace is a genuine interest on the part of both employers as well as employees, an interest that goes beyond the instrumental use of spirituality as a way of boosting employee performance. In fact, many people with an interest in spirituality might say that such an instrumental view betrays the very intention with which they seek to develop their spiritual growth—this intention will most often be characterized as genuine, non-instrumental value-directedness. As such, renewed spirituality in the workplace is the expression of an old and profound realization, namely that one's place of work is not just a way of making money to fund a life lived outside of the organization. This latter view can best be understood, in fact, as a result of the mechanization and dehumanization of work in the industrial era. It is conceivable that work loses its meaning for the factory worker who has to perform monotonous tasks over and over again, day in day out. That worker might try to find meaning elsewhere, or, more likely, drown its loss—quite literally—in the café. As mechanical and dehumanizing labor has almost disappeared in the West, it has become possible for the majority of people to once more seek a connection between their work and their spirituality. In that sense the new quest for spirituality is really not that new, to be understood primarily as a reaction, but is rather the re-emergence of an age-old endeavor.

While recognizing the genuine interest in workplace spirituality, in this chapter I nevertheless take a critical distance, discerning several problems with this interest. I will focus on three in particular: (1) the danger of instrumentalization and narcissistic misdirection, (2) the use of pragmatism as a framework for solving conflicts between spiritualities, and (3) the social constructivism inherent in many pleas for workplace spirituality. I then attempt to address these problems by means of the uniquely Lutheran concept of the different orders of life, specifically as set out by the German theologian, Dietrich Bonhoeffer. In particular, I focus on his proposal of the different "mandates," which represents his interpretation of the Lutheran concept of the orders

1 See also the chapter "Discerning Spirituality for Missional Leaders" by Nelus Niemandt in this volume.

2 Some examples are Atlaf and Awan (2011); Marques and Dhiman (2014); Gupta et al. (2014); and Moran (2010). For an overview, see Lambert III (2009).

of life. I will argue that consideration of these mandates can help address the problems identified with contemporary appeals for workplace spirituality. First, the mandates can act as a restraint on attempts to instrumentalize and abuse workplace spirituality. Second, the mandates form an alternative way of appropriating spiritual pluralism. Thirdly and finally, they allow for a constructionist approach to workplace spirituality, while similarly helping to resist radical social constructivism.

# 2 Problems with the Appeal for a "New Spirituality"

The contemporary appeal for spirituality in the workplace is understandable—indeed, for the reasons given above it is almost inevitable that spirituality will end up high on the agenda. Yet while understandable, and mostly commendable, the existence of different motives for this contemporary interest nevertheless also gives rise to difficulties and dangers. In particular, I identify three problems.

# 2.1 The Danger of Instrumentalization and Narcissistic Misdirection

As already suggested, organizations—especially in competitive businesses—may have a less-than-genuine interest in stimulating the spiritual development of their employees. They might be primarily interested in increasing the productivity rates of their employees by paying more attention to workspace spirituality, with the expected benefit of increased resistance to stress and excessive workload, as well as increased creativity and originality. This motive has been explored by Tourish and Pinnington, amongst others, who speak cynically about transformational leadership, corporate cultism, and the spirituality paradigm as being a new "unholy Trinity," whose aim is to create a false sense of consent among workers and to fire them on to work more, and harder (Tourish and Pinnington 2002).

While some degree of commercialization or instrumentalization of spirituality may seem inevitable, it becomes a different story when requirements for spiritual investment are put up front as a precondition for work at the organization; and when, consequently, an employee's spiritual reservoir is tapped by the organization—sometimes until it is empty. There is a certain naïveté about this danger in the writings of some management gurus. Peter Block, for example, expressly asks employees to put themselves in the vulnerable situation of owning the organizational processes in which they are involved, as if they actually did control or own them. He identifies this posture as stewardship (Block 1993). While he clarifies that this attitude isn't one of meekness, but rather of fortitude—he makes approving references to the philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche in this context, for example—it is nevertheless clear that it could expose the employee to considerable stress if they feel responsible for processes that they ultimately don't control.

There is a further danger: passionate calls for spiritual investment in an organization can easily become part of the toolbox of the manipulative and the narcissistic leader. The much-studied example of Steve Jobs is a good example of someone who demanded from his staff a deep personal and spiritual commitment to Apple and to the products the company was developing. While he indeed managed to greatly inspire many employees, getting them to give their best, there was also a very dark side to this management style, one that Walter Isaacson refers to as his "reality distortion field" (Isaacson 2011, passim). While hugely inspiring on the one hand, Jobs was also instrumental in the psychological breakdown of a number of employees, due to his demanding and manipulative leadership style.

Instances such as these point to the potentially very negative consequences of a deep entanglement between the spirituality of employees and that of a company. History provides many disturbing examples of these consequences. Vladimir Tarassenko, for example, points out that in the Soviet Union workers were urged to invest deeply and personally in the state endeavors for which they were enlisted. The rhetoric around such appeals sounded sincere and innocent, but in reality it was a means to overcome any internal resistance the "workers" might have had against the communist imperialism that tried to swallow them up whole (Tarassenko 2006, 2008).3 Similar attempts at overcoming the distinction between personal and organizational spiritual goals were made in Nazi Germany (see Van den Heuvel 2017b).

# 2.2 Pragmatism as the Solution to Conflicting Spiritualities

People differ widely in their definition of spirituality, as well as in the way they practice it. Although in literature much care is taken to distinguish between religion and spirituality (see, for example, Mitroff and Denton 1999; Phipps and Benefiel 2013), in practice there is a large overlap between religious belief and spirituality in the workplace. This case has been made strongly by Douglas Hicks—he argues that religion is wrongfully overlooked in discussions of spirituality in the workplace (Hicks 2003; this point is also made by Zinnbauer and Pargament 2005). This of course raises the question of how to negotiate religious conflict at the workplace. Focusing particularly on this question, Hicks develops his theory of "respectful pluralism." Central to this theory are the concepts of respect and of human dignity. He gives these guidelines a personalist basis—according to him, "[p]ersons simply have dignity and deserve to be accorded respect because they are human" (Hicks 2003, p. 167). The third guiding principle, undergirding those of respect and dignity, is that of equality—according to him, ". . . all human beings possess equal dignity and thus deserve equal respect" (Hicks 2003, p. 167, italics original). Furthermore, Hicks assumes that a certain legal context exists in relation to the workplace.

3 For a fuller engagement, see Kessler (2016) and Van den Heuvel (2017b).

Gotsis and Kortezi, while being sympathetic to Hicks's proposal, note that his proposal for dealing with conflicts over spirituality in the workplace is based on a consequentialist foundation (Gotsis and Kortezi 2008). This is indeed the case: because while Hicks does, in part, include substantive accounts in defense of human dignity, for instance, his framework, as such, is not based on such substantive claims. Instead, it is an open-ended and mostly procedural attempt to reach consensus in conflicts over workplace spirituality. Hicks says: "I offer the framework of respectful pluralism in the hope that some or many readers will find it convincing and that those who disagree will offer a superior approach that addresses the circumstances of the contemporary workplace" (Hicks 2003, p. 166).

Gotsis and Kortezi deem such a consequentialist framework to be insufficient, and in reply they consider alternative foundations to workplace spirituality, making recourse to the other main schools of normative ethics, namely value ethics, deontological ethics, and virtue ethics. According to them, consideration of these other schools results in a richer approach to conflicts between differing spiritualities in the workplace. However, they don't concretize how the alternatives they offer would specifically achieve this enrichment, nor do they outline how potential differences arising from the application of these different approaches should be negotiated.

Furthermore, an important problem with Hicks's proposal, as well as with the response to it by Gotsis and Kortezi, is that the norms for deciding on spiritual practices do not derive from the spiritual journeys themselves, but come "from outside." 4 That is a major stumbling block for working with this approach in a spiritually diverse environment. Even though the approach hinges on the ability of the parties involved in the conflict to recognize their mutual equal dignity, and subsequently, the right of the other to respect, insufficient effort is made to make a case for this attitude that is based on the internal sources of the various spiritualities.

# 2.3 Spirituality: A Social Construct?

Connected to this is a third problem, namely the tendency by social scientists to primarily study spirituality within the framework of social constructivism (just one example is Hyde et al. 2014). Social constructivism as an approach is still in the process of forming, drawing on a number of disciplines, in particular psychology, history, and philosophy. Berger and Luckman's 1966 book The Social Construction of Reality, has been seminal. In it they claim that

There is only human nature in the sense of anthropological constants (. . .) that delimit and permit man's socio-cultural formations. But the specific shape into which this humanness is moulded is determined by those socio-cultural formations and relative to their numerous variations. While it is possible to say that man has a nature, it is more significant to say that

4 In fact, Hicks himself recognizes the problem of such an approach when he critically discusses Rousseau's views on the civil religion. See Hicks (2003, p. 116).

man constructs his own nature, or more simply, that man produces himself (Berger and Luckman 1991 [1966], p. 67).

This approach is a clear break with the view that human and social nature have a metaphysical basis, grounded, for example, in Christian theism. The methodological presuppositions of social constructivism have an immanent basis, which is exemplified in a further definition by Fiona Hibberd, according to whom "social constructivism emphasizes the historicity, the context-dependence, and the socio-linguistically constituted character of all matters involving human activity" (Hibberd 2005, p. viii; quoted in Sremac 2010, p. 10). This approach is suited to explicating many internal spiritual processes, again using psychology, for instance. But the often-unstated presupposition is that these constructions are all there is. As John Swinton and Harriet Mowat note: "The meaning and definition of reality is . . . flexible, and open to negotiation depending on circumstances, perception, knowledge, power, structures and so forth" (Swinton and Mowat 2006, p. 36; quoted in Sremac 2010, p. 10).

This social constructive view on spirituality may resonate with those who accept that their own spirituality is indeed such a conditioned phenomenon.5 Most people, however, especially if they are theistic believers, will have difficulty accepting a social constructivist way of looking at their innermost beliefs and practices. Beyond such personal objections, there are also serious theological objections to be made against a purely social constructionist understanding of spirituality. Mark Wallace, for example, while generally positive about the potential of social constructivism for theology, nevertheless warns that this new school has a certain "tone deafness to the importance of alterity in the formation of self-hood" (Wallace 2002, pp. 108–109, italics original). He continues: "If subjectivity is reducible to culture, is there any place for the sometimes unique and distinctively 'other' voice of 'the good within' to tear apart the fabric of one's social relations in an effort to work out the meaning and truth of one's ownmost, radically individualistic, and oftentimes antisocial sense of the good?" (Wallace 2002, p. 109, italics original).6

It is important to be nuanced here. Steven Engler has pointed out that many studies on the relationship between social constructivism and the study of religion are too superficial, either because they misrepresent social constructivism as necessarily relativistic, or because they take the theory for granted to such an extent that it is no longer deemed necessary to explicate its workings (Engler 2005). When criticizing the dominance of social constructivism, it is especially important to be mindful of that first pitfall of unjustly equating social constructivism with relativism. In this connection, it is imperative to realize that as a working theory in the social sciences, social constructivism deliberately functions etsi Deus non daretur—it is a paradigm to be used in a specific context, without purporting to offer a total explanation of social and human life. As such, it is comparable with the paradigm of homo economicus, for example. Yet it still is the case that often the study of spirituality is in danger of the

5 An example is the neuroscientist and well-known atheist Sam Harris—in his book, Waking Up, he is quite outspoken about his purely pragmatic choice for "stream of consciousness" (Harris 2014). 6 For other criticisms, see for example Glaserfeld (2000).

second pitfall, namely absolutizing the social constructivist paradigm, granting it more explanatory power than it warrants.

# 2.4 Summary: The New "One-Dimensional Man"

Together, a cynical use of calls for spirituality by some leaders who see it as a free (or at least relatively cheap) productivity boost, combined with a primarily utilistic way of dealing with spiritual differences, and underpinned by a radical application of the social constructivist framework, exacerbate the possibility that spirituality contributes to the creation of what Herbert Marcuse in his well-known 1964 book famously calls "the one-dimensional man" (Marcuse 1964). Marcuse claims that through the machinations of rationality and management, modern industrial societies seek to control human beings, especially their freedom, creativity, and initiative. Society, Marcuse says, is obsessed with control, seeking to make life manageable and one-dimensional. At the time, this book reverberated widely in Western societies. Marcuse's argument should now extend to the attention being paid currently to workplace spirituality—the reasons outlined above warrant that a critical "hermeneutics of suspicion" be applied. This is not to negate the importance of spirituality, but it is a recognition that the processes of commodification and control threaten genuine spirituality, as well as the richness and necessary multi-dimensionality of life, precisely by coopting the language of spirituality.

# 3 The Different Spheres of Life: Contributions from a Protestant Concept

In order to assist the related processes of discernment and leadership in this area, I want to help address the problems I have identified with the contemporary focus on spirituality in the workplace. In doing so, I focus on a Protestant theological concept, namely that of the different orders, or spheres of life, specifically as expounded by the German theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer.

Martin Luther's conception of the Stände is an important source of the Protestant concept of the different orders of life. At its core, this doctrine claims that God rules the world through three different orders (Stände). As Luther describes in a key formulation in the 1528 Great Confession Concerning the Holy Supper: "But the holy orders and true religious institutions established by God are these three: the office of priest, the estate of marriage, the civil government" (Luther 1999, p. 364). Going back to older medieval concepts, Luther had already developed this doctrine before his break with Rome,7 and it forms an important cornerstone in his social ethics especially. In particular, it can be seen as a further specification of his important two-kingdom theory (on this, see Schirrmacher et al. 2001). The aim of this concept is to find a middle way between natural and theological ethics, or, in other words, between "the relative autonomy and immanence of Thomistic social ethics, in which nature is elevated and perfected by grace," and "the transcendental philosophical position according to which nature is not elevated but given greater profundity by grace ..." (Bayer 1998, pp. 146–147). Specifically, it allowed Luther to identify three different orders that structured social reality, discerning that each was governed by different laws which must be respected. In identifying these orders, Luther echoes distinctions found in Scripture—simultaneously, his concept echoes the world of the late Middle Ages, with "the estate of priest" encompassing the Church and the religious life, "the civil government" denoting the state, and "the estate of marriage" referring to the concept of oeconomia, which encompasses the often-intertwined spheres of "work" and "family life" (an example would be a farm, where the spheres of family life and work are deeply interwoven).

Much scholarship surrounds Luther's concept of the three orders of life.8 It is important to stress just how influential the Protestant concept of the different orders of life has become in the social history of the West. As Charles Taylor comments: "What is important for my purpose is this positive side, the affirmation that the fullness of Christian life was to be found within the activities of this life, in one's calling and in marriage and the family. The entire modern development of the affirmation of ordinary life was, I believe, foreshadowed and initiated, in all its facets, in the spirituality of the Reformers" (Taylor 1989, p. 218; quoted in Saarinen 2005, p. 195).9

In this chapter, I would like to focus particularly on how the Protestant concept of the orders of life is developed in the works of the German theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer (1906–1945). While he has become best known for his role in the resistance against the Nazi regime, Bonhoeffer himself looked beyond the context of Nazism, considering the question of how Germany should be rebuilt after the war.

To help answer that question, he wrote his magnus opus, Ethics, which was intended to offer moral blueprints for the post-war society (Bonhoeffer 2005). In various of the Ethics manuscripts, Bonhoeffer makes recourse to the Lutheran concept of the different orders of life, seeking to revive that doctrine.10 In doing so, he suggests an alternative to the word Stände itself, arguing that it has lost its original meaning. In its place, he suggests the word Mandat (mandate). As well as

7 Adam Francisco points out that by 1519 Luther has already discerned three basic orders of ordinary life. See Francisco (2007, p. 134).

8 See, for example, Wingren (2004), Lohse (1995), Duby (1980), and Maurer (1970).

9 On the significance of Luther's concept, see also Montover (2012, p. 113). An example of a thorough contemporary ethical appropriation of Luther's concept of the Stände is Ulrich (2005).

10Especially the manuscripts "Christ, Reality, and Good" (Bonhoeffer 2005, pp. 47–75) and "The Concrete Commandment and the Divine Mandates" (Bonhoeffer 2005, pp. 388–408). For more on Bonhoeffer's interaction with Luther, see DeJonge (2017, esp. pp. 130–131).

the word changing, the concept itself also changes: instead of Luther's three orders, Bonhoeffer proposes four such orders: namely those of work, marriage, government, and church (Bonhoeffer 2005, p. 68). This means that the order of oeconomia is divided into two separate orders: the order of work, and the order of marriage. This change reflects the Industrial Revolution, in which for most people "work" was more distanced from family life—work for the office worker, the factory worker, or the miner was no longer as integral a part of their family lives.11

Like Luther, Bonhoeffer's intention with the concept of the divine mandates is to overcome the tension between living in the kingdom of God and simultaneously living "in the world," or, in Bonhoeffer's language, between the "worldly" and the "spiritual." He stresses that we have to live in both realities in the same time—the mandates are a heuristic tool to structure this living. As he says: "There can be no retreat . . . from a 'worldly' into a 'spiritual' 'realm.' The practice of the Christian life can be learned only under these four mandates of God" (Bonhoeffer 2005, p. 69).

Much critical debate surrounds Bonhoeffer's concept of the divine mandates,12 and it continues to be employed regularly in theological ethics.13 In what follows, I will draw out three particular characteristics of his concept, indicating how they can contribute to solving the problems with the contemporary emphasis on workplace spirituality that have been identified.

# 3.1 The Mandates as a Restraint Against "Overstepping the Limit"

Bonhoeffer's primary intent in developing the concept of the divine mandates is to protect the multicentered character of human and social life. In a key citation, Bonhoeffer asserts that "[o]nly in their being with-one-another [Miteinander], forone-another [Füreinander], and over-against-one-another [Gegeneinander] do the divine mandates of church, marriage and family, culture, and government communicate the commandment of God as it is revealed in Jesus Christ" (Bonhoeffer 2005, p. 393). The direct context of this assertion is the Nazi policy of Gleichschaltung, which attempted to bring all spheres of life into line with the powerful Nazi state. That meant, for example, that children in the Hitlerjugend were encouraged to give their loyalty to the Party first, rather than to their families. But the state also sought to intervene directly in the Church, as well as in other sectors of socio-economic life. Contrary to these developments, Bonhoeffer strongly asserted the relative

11This change is commented on by Ulrich Duchrow, who also notes that apart from that, Bonhoeffer's and Luther's concepts are identical. See Duchrow (1983).

12See, amongst others, the studies of the concept offered by Moltmann (1967), Mayer (1992), and De Lange (1996).

13See Scott (2007); and Van den Heuvel, "Bonhoeffer's Theology of Responsibility and the Social Dimension of Environmental Ethics," in Van den Heuvel (2017a, pp. 207–261).

independence of each mandate, identifying this with God's creational intention of making the world a habitable place.

Although the context is very different, attempts at the instrumentalization of (organizational) spirituality, as well as narcissistic misdirection of this spirituality, can amount to a similar overstepping of the limits between the different spheres of life. In that context, the recognition of different spheres of life can be important in two regards. First, when "work" is concerned, the employee's orientation is not so much on the leader, but on the right ordering of their work—that is to say: to the structure, context, and directionality of that work, in the organization of which he or she is a part. Any organization seeks to attain certain goals, using certain means, within a specific context. Those boundaries are not just important for the essential self-identification of the organization, but also define the specific sphere and form of spirituality within that context. The leader is, in the end, not the only thing that counts, in that particular context, nor is the spiritual fulfilment of the employee—rather, within the specific context of the workplace, the goals, means, and context of the organization play a leading role (see Verkerk 2014).

Secondly, the recognition of the different spheres of life helps with the understanding of any organization—even one as venerable as a church, for example— as just one part of a rich, multidimensional reality; and it invites us not to find just one focal point for our spirituality—be it family, church, or the workplace; each is necessary for a rich, multifaceted spiritual existence. This may seem like stating the obvious, but there is a value in exploring further how the concept of orders can be a newer and better way of uncovering the dangerous and creeping tendencies of one-dimensionality. This leads me to the second contribution that the concept of the divine mandates can make.

# 3.2 The Mandates as a Means to Appropriate Spiritual Pluralism: The Pragmatist Solution Revisited

The grammar of the divine mandates also represents a way of negotiating conflicts between differing spiritualities. I have suggested above that pragmatist attempts, such as Hick's, that try to resolve such conflicts from the outside could be problematic. Bonhoeffer's doctrine of the divine mandates, on the other hand, represents an insider perspective—at least for many Protestant Christians. As I have stated, Bonhoeffer's key assertion about the divine mandates is that they are not to rule over each other. Specifically, this means that the state shouldn't try to dictate to the Church how it should organize itself; it also means that the Church is not to dictate how the economy should be run.

Bonhoeffer recognizes God's design in this system of orders that keep each other in check—he deliberately grounds his proposal in biblical texts (see, for example, Bonhoeffer 2005, p. 69). While one may argue about the solidness of this foundation, or about the definition Bonhoeffer gives to them, his concept—as a further development of Luther's concept—represents an attempt to negotiate the different spheres in life, as well as the tension between the "kingdom of God" and the "kingdom of the world." As a genuine "insider perspective." the doctrine of the divine mandates can help—at least from a Christian perspective—to appropriate differences in the spiritualities expressed in the workplace (on this, see also Kessler 2016).

The attitude to these will still be helpfully described by means of Hick's "respectful pluralism," but rather than being an outsider perspective, the Bonhoefferian concept of the divine mandates offers a more direct way for Christians to embrace this concept—it allows Christians to recognize that not all their deepest faith convictions are communicated in the same way in every sphere of life. The organization for which one works is not the same as one's church—and consequently, one's spirituality is expressed differently there. Not to recognize this can be criticized as trying to shortcut or overcome the world as it is, as happened in the Radical Reformation.

# 3.3 The Mandates as a Middle Way Between Onto-Theology and Radical Social Constructivism

Thirdly, Bonhoeffer's concept of the divine mandates can also assist in, on the one hand, appropriating a constructionist approach to spirituality, while on the other hand resisting its radical interpretation. Bonhoeffer asserts strongly that the different orders of life are not merely social constructs alone, but derive from God, from "above." He states:

By "mandate" we understand the concrete divine commission grounded in the revelation of Christ and the testimony of scripture; it is the authorization and legitimization to declare a particular divine commandment, the conferring of divine authority on an earthly institution. A mandate is to be understood simultaneously as the laying claim to, commandeering of, and formation of a certain earthly domain by the divine command (Bonhoeffer 2005, p. 389).

This assertion of the divine origin of the mandates may seem a blunt refusal of the validity of the whole project of investigating the social constructive dimension of religious beliefs and practices. However, Bonhoeffer doesn't revert to what Wallace calls an indefensible onto-theological conception of social reality "as it is" (Wallace 2002, p. 96). In contrast, Bonhoeffer grounds his concept of the divine orders simultaneously as structures brought about by God's will, as well as in the observation of reality itself.14 In the citation above, the primacy is on the commanding word of God—but at the same time there is a clear relationship between this

14Interestingly, Wallace, to whom I have just referred, recognizes in Bonhoeffer an example of someone whose life and theology pose a challenge to social constructivism. He argues that "[t]he life and work of Dietrich Bonhoeffer is a ... counterexample to the constructionist emphasis on selfhood as a social predicate" (Wallace 2002, p. 109). Further on he explicates: "In fidelity to conscience, one may find oneself running the risk of violating social values and incurring personal guilt in pursuit of the responsible action in service to the neighbor" (Wallace 2002, p. 109).

commandment and what Bonhoeffer calls the "earthly domain"—this means that while God's commandments come firmly "from above," there is a clear relationship with the "below," and the word of God does not function in isolation from that.

This is recognized by Moltmann, who emphasizes that the very nature of the mandates as commandments of the living God opens up the possibility for change within the mandates. As he puts it: "The negative rigidity which has been the object of complaint might be removed by integrating them into the living history of God. And then, finally, we shall see the law in the hand of the Lawgiver and the mandate in the hand of the God who commissions men to his service" (Moltmann 1967, p. 94). This is indeed correct, and it led Bonhoeffer to revise Luther's conception of the Stände, by breaking up the oeconomia into the different mandates of "work" and "family"—it also led him to muse about the possibility of a fifth mandate, in prison.15

Theologically speaking, Bonhoeffer thus occupies a middle position between the radical position of Karl Barth on the one hand, where all the emphasis is on the inbreaking word of God,16 and the reason-based Roman Catholic position on the other hand.17 Yet this middle-position of Bonhoeffer is not to be understood as an attempt to carefully delineate between the "religious" and the "secular," but precisely to overcome such attempts. Bonhoeffer's desire, fleshed out more fully in other manuscripts in his Ethics, is to speak about the world theologically and at the same time from a perspective etsi Deus non daretur, giving both their full due.

This dynamic of giving both perspectives their due can also be fruitful in relation to the question of how a social constructionist approach to spirituality can be appropriated. Adopting Bonhoeffer's "both-and" approach, one can say that spirituality isn't to be purely understood either as "God's work and nothing else," nor simply as a social construct. Rather, it recognizes the dynamic interplay of both elements at once, thus resisting both the negation, as well as the radical application of social constructivism.18

15He does so in a letter to Renate and Eberhard Bethge, dated January 23, 1944 (Bonhoeffer 2010, pp. 264–271). In this letter, Bonhoeffer muses about adding a fifth mandate, namely that of "culture" (Kultur), a realm of freedom. As he puts it: "Someone who doesn't know anything of this sphere of freedom can be a good parent, citizen, and worker, and probably also be a Christian, but whether such a person is a full human being (and thus also a Christian in the fullest sense) is questionable to me" (Bonhoeffer 2010, p. 268).

16See Edward van't Slot, who comments: "... Barth prefers a more 'actualist' or 'eschatological' approach than Bonhoeffer in his ongoing quest for permanence in an ethics of God's commandment" (Van't Slot 2015, p. 206).

17Cf. Brian Brock, who says: "The mandates are thus not properly understood as metaphysical axioms, ethical blueprints, or programs; they are Christologically keyed signposts indicating the features of reality that allow us to encounter Christ" (Brock 2007, p. 90). See also Abromeit (1991, p. 135).

18Bonhoeffer's concept of the divine mandates is not the only way in which Christian thinking can overcome the false juxtaposition of onto-theology and constructionism. Within the tradition of Reformed Philosophy, for example, as developed by Dooyeweerd and others, an alternative has been developed. See Verkerk (2014).

# 4 Conclusion

In this chapter I have presented the increasingly loud call for workplace spirituality as a double-edged sword. While recognizing its validity, as well as its promise for the contemporary workplace, I have drawn particular attention to the significant potential risks involved for the employees. Appeals for spiritual investment in the workplace can be used by manipulate and narcissistic leaders. Conflicts between different spiritualities are often superficially resolved, primarily making recourse to pragmatism for a solution. And, furthermore, radical social constructionist interpretations of spirituality do not do justice to the actual experience of (religious) spirituality.

In this context, I have made recourse to the Protestant concept of the different orders of life, as introduced by Luther and particularly as developed by Bonhoeffer. As a general concept, the idea of the different orders corresponds to the foundational human insight that, while we may strive for unity in our lives, in order to live full lives, we also need multidimensionality—we need to live in different "keys," corresponding to different spheres of life.

I have argued that the idea of the different mandates that Bonhoeffer puts forward is helpful with regards to the challenges identified. First, the recognition of the different spheres of life can illuminate attempts to manipulate workers into investing too much of their spirituality in the company—it may also help to deter manipulative and narcissistic leaders from demanding too much of their followers. Second, the mandates provide an answer on to how to deal with differences in spirituality, encountered in the workplace. Rather than accepting a pragmatic solution to these, the concept of the divine mandates provides an insider perspective to the appropriation of these differences, by recognizing the sphere of "work" to be different from that of the "church," thus urging a respect for pluralism that is founded in Christianity itself. Third, the concept of the mandates provides a way of accepting both the claim of deep authenticity of spirituality, as well as social constructivist appropriations of it.

In short, the concept of the different orders of life, as developed by Bonhoeffer, can function as a heuristic tool by means of which to correct some dangers to the current drive for more workplace spirituality. As such, this chapter contributes to the wider goal of this volume to contribute to the tasks of leadership and discernment with regards to the promising upsurge in spirituality.

Acknowledgements I would like to thank the participants in the conference "Leadership, Discernment and Spirituality," as well as two anonymous reviewers, for their comments on an earlier version of this chapter. Furthermore, I would like to thank Kay Caldwell for her help with the language editing of this chapter.

# References

Abromeit HJ (1991) Das Geheimnis Christi: Dietrich Bonhoeffers erfahrungsbezogene Christologie. Neukirchener Beitrage zur Systematischen Theologie 8. Neukirchener, Neukirchen-Vluyn

Atlaf A, Awan MA (2011) Moderating affect of workplace spirituality on the relationship of job overload and job satisfaction. J Bus Ethics 104:93–99

Bayer O (1998) Nature and institution: Luther's doctrine of the three orders. Lutheran Q 12 (2):125–159

Bonhoeffer D (2005) Ethics, Dietrich Bonhoeffer works 6. Green CJ (ed). Fortress, Minneapolis, MN. Translated by Reinhard Krauss, Charles C. West and Douglas W. Stott

Gupta M, Kumar V, Singh M (2014) Creating satisfied employees through workplace spirituality: a study of the private insurance sector in Punjab (India). J Bus Ethics 122(1):79–88

Harris S (2014) Waking up: a guide to spirituality without religion. Simon & Schuster, New York Heuvel SC van den (2017a) Bonhoeffer's Christocentric theology and fundamental debates in

environmental ethics, Princeton theological monograph series 217. Wipf & Stock, Eugene, OR Heuvel SC van den (2017b) The dangers of charismatic leadership: a perspective from the theology

of Dietrich Bonhoeffer. In: van den Heuvel SC, Barentsen J, Lin P (eds) The end of leadership? Christian perspectives on leadership and social ethics 4. Peeters, Leuven, pp 125–139

Hibberd FJ (2005) Unfolding social constructionism. Springer, Dordrecht

Hicks DA (2003) Religion and the workplace: pluralism, spirituality, leadership. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

Holman D, Wall TD, Clegg CW, Sparrow P, Howard A (eds) (2005) The essentials of the new workplace: a guide to the human impact of modern working practices. Wiley, Chichester

Hyde B, Ota C, Yust K-M (2014) The deconstruction and social (re)construction of spirituality. Int J Child Spirituality 19(1):1–3

Isaacson W (2011) Steve Jobs. Simon and Schuster, New York

Wingren G (2004) Luther on vocation. Wipf & Stock, Eugene

Zinnbauer BJ, Pargament KI (2005) Religiousness and spirituality. In: Paloutzian RF, Park CL (eds) Handbook of the psychology of religion and spirituality. Guilford, London, pp 21–42

Steven C. van den Heuvel (Ph.D.) studied Pastoral Ministry at the Christelijke Hogeschool Ede, the Netherlands. He then went on to study theology at the Evangelische Theologische Faculteit (ETF), Leuven (Belgium), receiving his Th.M. in 2010, followed by his Ph.D. in 2015, as part of a joint doctorate with the Theologische Universiteit Kampen, the Netherlands. His dissertation was entitled Bonhoeffer's Christocentric Theology and Fundamental Issues in Environmental Ethics (Wipf and Stock, 2017). He is currently Postdoctoral Researcher in the department of Systematic Theology and Ethics at ETF and Senior Research Fellow of the Institute of Leadership and Social Ethics. Furthermore, he is Extraordinary Researcher at the Faculty of Theology at North-West University, South Africa.

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

# From Spirituality to Responsible Leadership: Ignatian Discernment and Theory-U

Patrick Nullens

Abstract In its desire to build a bridge between self-awareness and morally responsible leadership, this chapter seeks to contribute to the theory of authentic leadership. The central thesis of this chapter is that Ignatian spiritual discernment is a valuable resource for making this connection. Ignatian Spirituality is directed at the world, the world beyond the self and the world beyond our primary experiences. It is inherently aimed at the common good and is therefore an interesting source when contemplating moral leadership. We will discuss the Spiritual Exercises of humility, silence, and detachment, the prevalence of emotions and imagination, ethical evaluation, and journaling and mentoring as means for increasing self-awareness. We will do this in dialogue with the new Theory-U. This, too, is an approach where societal meaning is fundamental and seeks to increase awareness and genuine openness to the future by letting go of the self. This makes for an interesting dialogue, leading to a deeper understanding of spiritual discernment.

# 1 Ignatian Spiritual Discernment and Addressing Our Blind Spot

The volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity (VUCA) we are faced with in today's world demand that we make fast decisions and to get it right. In this highly competitive world, there is no room for trial and error, nor will we get a second chance. In plain language the managerial acronym VUCA means "Hey, it's crazy out there!" (Bennett and Lemoine 2014). It describes the sense that, even with all our technological power, we are not in control and the future is unpredictable. VUCA can also mean: "Hey, it's crazy in my head!" Volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity are not only to be found in the world around us, they also become the

P. Nullens (\*)

Evangelische Theologische Faculteit, Leuven, Belgium

North-West University, Potchefstroom, South Africa e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
storms within us. In this turbulence, we feel a need for a space where time stands still and where we can experience the present. How do we calm our internal storms? How do we make mental space for discernment when it comes to strategic life decisions? The greatest challenge is not the process of quieting our minds and becoming more mindful in body, thinking, and emotions; even more challenging when it comes to leadership is to create a deeper awareness that results in making the right decision to the benefit of others. What we desperately need is a form of authentic leadership, resulting from deeper awareness and from addressing the blind spot, the inner source from which we act (Scharmer 2016, p. 22). Authenticity requires rootedness in ourselves, in our story, and in our faith traditions.

This chapter hopes to contribute to the authentic leadership theory, one of the newest areas of leadership research which makes ethics the center of leadership (Hannah et al. 2011; George et al. 2015).1 According to Avolio, its central premise is "that through increased self-awareness, self-regulation, and positive modeling, authentic leaders foster the development of authenticity in followers. In turn, followers' authenticity contributes to their wellbeing and the attainment of sustainable and veritable performance" (Avolio and Luthans 2005, p. 317). There are many ways to create this bridge between a deeper self-awareness and morally responsible leadership. As one optional pathway, we'll look at the Ignatian model of spiritual discernment. This chapter focusses on the individualistic aspect of Ignatian discernment. The interaction between leadership theory and Ignatian spirituality is of course not new (Moberg and Calkins 2001; Darmanin 2005; Rothausen 2017). There is also an increased interest in different kinds of spiritual discernment. The dialogue between Ignatian and secular forms of discernment, however, does remain largely unexplored (Bouckaert 2017, p. 16). Referring to Ignatius's Spiritual Exercises (Sp.Ex.), Moberg and Calkins have pleaded for more room for reflection, and not just decision making, in the curriculum of business schools . Reflection means bending back on oneself, allowing more space for emotions and the imagination (2001, p. 258).

At the outset of our quest, we'll observe the growing appreciation of spiritual intelligence, spiritual vitality, and workplace spirituality. This new research interest within the social sciences makes way for more spiritual approaches to decision making in leadership. A broad leadership model that can relate easily to this new quest is Theory-U (Scharmer 2016). In the second part of this chapter I will present Theory-U in broad brushstrokes. The chapter pleads for a Christian approach, more specifically the Ignatian way of discernment as it might be helpful for making decisions. This is the central thesis of this chapter, and its main focus. The argument is not theological2 nor apologetic, as if this were the only true and valid model, but

1 Four behavioral components are crucial to this theory: self-awareness, internalized moral perspective, balanced processing, and relational transparency (Northouse 2016, pp. 193–223).

2 In this essay I haven't opted for a critical theological engagement. The publications on this specific topic of comparative spirituality are limited (Richter 1955; Lafontaine 2011). For instance, the comparison between Ignatius and the Calvinist puritan Richard Baxter on meditation is interesting (Hinson 2007). It is a myth that the Jesuits were established to fight the reformation. This was a later development, which occurred after Ignatius (see Maryks 2014). More practically, there are also

rather that it is a reliable method that has been tested over many hundreds of years. Discernment is an implicit part of Christian spirituality—it is clearly present in the writing of St Paul. However, there are relatively few explicit instructions on discernment. By far the most accessible and comprehensive of these systems is that found in the Spiritual Exercises. However, I am aware that some readers might prefer a more generic form of spiritual discernment, not grounded in a particular religious tradition. In my opinion, the main problem here is the common but deceitful disconnection of spirituality and religion that often functions as a secular dogmatic presupposition. It suggests that being rooted in one particular religious tradition, be it Christian, Jewish, or Muslim, diminishes mental openness and our capacity for discernment. In the third paragraph I make a case for the re-connection of faith and spirituality, which have been artificially separated. In the three sections that follow, I try to establish Ignatian discernment as a valid form of Christian discernment in leadership. To a limited extent, I will make some connections with Scharmer's Theory-U. In Theory-U, societal meaning is obviously robust. It is my contention that the theological particularity and Christian character of the Ignatian model does not negate this broader impact. It is the interesting dialogue between the new and the old which leads to a deeper understanding of spiritual discernment as an intrinsic part of authentic leadership.

# 2 Spiritual Intelligence and Discernment

At the beginning of the twenty-first century the spiritual dimension of leadership is widely recognized (Fry 2003; Fry and Nisiewicz 2013; Scharmer 2016; Dhiman 2017). According to some scholars, the successful transformational leadership theory was all too limited to the service of institutional practices and goals and weak in core values and service to the common good (Rothausen 2017, p. 7). In addition to the concept of "emotional intelligence," which came to the fore near the end of the twentieth century (Goleman 2014) and which underpins the transformational leadership theory, the concept of "spiritual intelligence" (SI or SQ) appears on the horizon of our postmodern age (Zohar and Marshall 2001; Wigglesworth 2014; Dhiman 2017). SI is the intelligence of our inner source, our true self, our transcendental capacities. As one might expect, a plethora of definitions circulate. A broad working definition is:

Spiritual intelligence is concerned with the inner life of mind and spirit and its relationship to being in the world. Spiritual intelligence can be defined as the ability to create meaning based on deep understanding of existential questions, and awareness of and the ability to use multiple levels of consciousness in problem solving. (Vaughan 2002, p. 30).