On Becoming a Leader--Warren Bennis Why Follow A Leader?: 2. Congruity

Warren Bennis, in his book, On Becoming a Leader, identifies four ingredients leaders have that generate and sustain trust in followers.  They are:

1.  Constancy, 2. Congruity, 3. Reliability and 4. Integrity.  In the previous post we looked at constancy.

2. Congruity  If constancy can be likened to a horizontal line, congruity would be the vertical line.  Whereas constancy implies a steadiness over time, congruity goes deep into the core soul of the person. 

Congruity is the match or alignment between our being and our doing.  Most people think good thoughts and want to do the right thing.  Fewer are able to consistently live out their intentions.  Those who do have congruity.  Why is that important for those who follow?  Bennis says, "Leaders walk their talk.  In true leaders, there is no gap between the theories they espouse and the life they practice."  At a basic level we follow people who make us feel safe.

Does congruity produce constancy or is it the other way around?   Do they come as a package?  Or, are they mutually independent?  The answer is probably, "yes."  What we do know is if constancy and congruity are both present, good leadership happens.  I've seen good, decent, solid-to-the-core people who, for a variety of reasons, were incapable of leading a team  forward (creating a desire and intention to follow) through the good and bad times because you never quite knew how they would act when push came to shove.  I've also experienced good people who were also cowards.  They also had a problem with congruity.  No doubt they genuinely wanted to do the good.  It's just they did a poor job of consistently living out their beliefs under easy circumstances and were even more inconsistent in times of tension and stress. 

If it gives us any comfort even the Apostle Paul struggled with congruity.  And he was courageous enough to display his struggle so we can indentify with him. (Romans 7:7-25)  I saw this when I came upon the horrible head-on crash in December, 2008.  As we were futilely trying to put out the car fire with two trapped inside, to tend to the injured, and frantically trying to find anyone with blankets or fire extinguishers, I still can see people in cars on cell phones telling someone how horrible this accident was--people who may have had a congruity problem.

I've been in other situations where the leader was constant--constantly duplicitous and incompetent.  They wanted to do right and to follow through on convictions, but you never knew what they would do from one situation to another and from one day to another.  As a follower, the first order of the day was to check leader's mood to see what kind of decisions were best sought that day.  For me, I'd rather serve a Patton-type autocrat who I could trust and believe in than a wishy-washy, temperamental, blowing in the wind nice person. 

When it comes to merging constancy and congruity, it seems what we begin to see in a leader is a person who has a steady temper(ment) and a deep awareness of doing right(eous) at all times.

The person who personifies the integration of constancy and congruity for me is Paul--the same person who struggled with it.  From the moment on the road to Damascus to his last days in prison, his actions and his attitude never varied much.  His actions as described through the eyes and pen of Doctor Luke were consistent with the admonitions he gave, for example, to Timothy and Titus.

But Paul wasn't perfect.  He too struggled with hypocracy and inconsistency (opposites of congruity and constancy) but he worked at and overcame his struggle with the help of the Holy Spirit.  Isn't that a part of what transformation is all about?

In 2 Timothy Paul admonishes his mentoree Timothy, "Yet I am not ashamed because I know whom I have believed, and am convinced that he is able to guard what I have entrusted to him for that day.  What you have heard from me, keep as the pattern of sound teaching, with faith and love in Christ Jesus.  Guard the good deposit that was entrusted to you--guard it with the help of the Holy Spirit who lives in us."  (2 Timothy 1:12b-14)  That speaks to Paul's congruity. 

In Acts 28:29 Luke records Paul's words to the Jewish leaders of Rome, "Therefore, I want you to know that God's salvation has been sent to the Gentiles, and they will listen!"  Luke's last words on the life of Paul follow in verses 30 and 31.  "For two whole  years Paul stayed there in his own rented house and welcomed all who came to see him.  Boldly and without hindrance he preached the kingdom of God and taught about the Lord Jesus Christ."  That speaks to Paul's constancy.  Whether it was on the ship in the storm (Acts 27:13-26), speaking before Peter and the leaders of the new church in Jerusalem (Acts 15), addressing the Greek scholars in Athens, toiling as a tent maker in Ephesus for three years with Priscilla, Aquila and Apollos or planting a church in Corinth, Paul's inner core, his soul (congruity) and his resulting witness over time (constancy), was in excellent alignment.

Dictionaries in defining congruity put an emphasis on agreement.  Agreement certainly is a part of congruity but, for me, congruity conveys more of a sense of fusion than merely agreement.  Agreement of walk and talk are critical.  But a fusion means the soul, the talk and the walk are no longer separable; they have become one. 

Question for Reflection:  What gives you confidence you are displaying congruity to those in your care?  At your next staff/team meeting why don't you ask them to give you some examples?

Comments

[Ron Kuest]

Bob: Everything changes and everything stays the same. Sad but true.

[Bob Kuest]

Just rewriting chapter two of Uncommon Leadership and was reminded why Congruity and Continuity are a problem. We will continue to have these problems when men like Machiavelli are still studied as having something important to say to leaders.

"I shall be so bold as to assert this: that having [good character qualities] and practicing them at all times is harmful: and appearing to have them is useful; for instance, to seem merciful, faithful, humane, forthright, religious, and to be so; but [the leader’s] mind should be disposed in such a way that should it become necessary not to be so, he will be able and know how to change to the contrary. And it is essential to understand this: that a [leader], and especially a new [leader], cannot observe all those things by which men are considered good" (Niccolo di Bernardo Machiavelli, “The Prince” in The Portable Machiavelli, translated and edited Peter Bondanella and Mark Musa (New York: Penguin Books, Viking Penguin Inc., 1979), 135.).

[Ron Kuest]

It's rewarding and/or satisfying to see when some one gets what you're trying to say and reflects it back in their own words. Thanks. I think, Randy, what you are describing is a lack of either clarity or alignment with vision and mission. The challenge is to first, recognize the dissonance, which you have done. The harder part is finding alignment. Ignorance is always more blissful and more dangerous.

[Randy Burtis]

Constancy and congruity are probably pretty inseparable, but I see many leaders (sometimes myself) in the position of trying to be constant in the way they approach leadership and problem solving and failing, because there was not a clear congruent picture of what they were trying to accomplish or what their vision was. It is easy to get promoted into a position that has goals that are not near to your heart. Hard to be constant if you are trying to go in a direction that you don't clearly understand yourself.