mary58 Posted September 29, 2011 Report Share Posted September 29, 2011 Q2. (2 Corinthians 1:24) What does it mean to “lord it over” someone? Act as though you are their lord and deserve to be their lord -- someone to whom they would give unquestioning allegiance and obedience. No one but Christ should be anyone's lord, so "lording it over" someone is definitely not in His plan. What is the balance between (1) good, strong leadership, (2) micromanaging, and (3) a complete laissez-faire approach to leadership? However, in earthly leadership positions -- even though we should never consider ourself to be Lord -- there is need for obedience. One who is more experienced and discerning is put in charge of others and those others should honor that position -- but never without question both on moral grounds and on common-sense grounds regarding whatever the enterprise is. The leader needs to -- with God's guidance -- figure out what matters and what does not; and only push the issues that matter. And always with respect for the personhood and honor of the employees (or whoever, depending on the circumstance). Hard to do. And impossible without Christ's guidance. What are the dangers of an authoritative leadership style? Well, really, when authority is properly placed in someone who merits it, the leadership should be "authoritative" -- dealt with confident authority, attentive to individuals, but not wishy-washy. The danger is in when it is either improperly wielded or improperly placed. What are the dangers of a weak leadership style? Nothing gets done, and everyone is uncertain and unhappy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emanuel Posted September 29, 2011 Report Share Posted September 29, 2011 2 Corinthians 1:24 - What does it mean "to lord it over" someone? What is the balance between (1) good, strong leadership (2) micromanaging, and (3) a complete laissez-faire approach to leadership? What are the dangers of an authoritative leadership style? What are the dangers of a weak leadership style? Having the upper hand in any given situation can be very advantageous, but if used in such a manner as to come across with a "Lording it over" attitude it can become destructive. It is obvious that Paul did not want to cause any more further "pain" here to the Church at Corinth but to gently encourage. Good strong leadership should be authoritative but tempered with respect and humbleness and firmness, and to micromanage is akin to sticking on a bandaid plaster, a quick fix, very shallow and will not stand up to scrutiny. As regards to laissez-faire approach, that is like handing over responsibilty and allowing people to make their own descisions and work under their own steam, without proper guidance and direction can only lead to failure. Being over authoritative can lead to resentment and discord yet to be too weak will definately lead to contempt of authority. Emanuel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hanks Posted September 29, 2011 Report Share Posted September 29, 2011 Q2. (2 Corinthians 1:24) What does it mean to “lord it over” someone? What is the balance between (1) good, strong leadership, (2) micromanaging, and (3) a complete laissez-faire approach to leadership? What are the dangers of an authoritative leadership style? What are the dangers of a weak leadership style? To control or domineer that person. We must be careful because an authoritarian style of leadership can produce cooperation but not necessary respect and obedience. Leaders should be examples and not dictators. A good leader walks in front of his flock, not driving them from behind. 1 Peter 5:2-3 sums it up well, “Be shepherds of God's flock that is under your care, serving as overseers - not because you must, but because you are willing, as God wants you to be; not greedy for money, but eager to serve; not lording it over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock”. So, what is required is good, strong leadership and not a weak leadership style where the danger is of wandering and not being goal orientated. Strong leaders are needed also to enforce a good discipline in the church. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Posted September 29, 2011 Report Share Posted September 29, 2011 Q2. (2 Corinthians 1:24) What does it mean to “lord it over” someone? What is the balance between (1) good, strong leadership, (2) micromanaging, and (3) a complete laissez-faire approach to leadership? What are the dangers of an authoritative leadership style? What are the dangers of a weak leadership style? Simply put, to "lord it over" someone to bully or boss them around. A strong leader first of all leads by example and secondly permits those he/she are leading to exercise and develop their abilities. Otherwise, a good strong leader brings out the best in their people. Micromanaging discourages and suppresses the best in those being managed. It kills initiative and imagination. It instills insecurity and develops weak leaders. A complete laissez-faire approach to leadership is leadership without vision or direction. Followers need strong leadership. Not over-bearing leadership; not a micromanager, but a strong, positive leader who leads to the fulfillment of the mission, goal, job, etc. Strong leadership develops strong leadership. Weak leadership develops weak leadership and leads nowhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barbara A. Lee Posted September 29, 2011 Report Share Posted September 29, 2011 Q2. (2 Corinthians 1:24) What does it mean to “lord it over” someone? “To lord it over” means to make one feel that you have dominion over them. They must do what you tell them to do, or you will hand out severe punishment… What is the balance between (1) good, strong, leadership, (2) micromanaging, and (3) a complete laissez-faire approach to leadership? The balance in a good, strong leadership lets people know who is in charge, not in a bullish way, but in a good, conscious way; whereas micromanaging is too stong and bullish of a way, and a complete laissez=faire is to weak of a management…. What are the dangers of an authoritative leadership style? The dangers of an “Authoritative” leadership style is that you tend to put yourself above others…You can lose good workers in this kind of leadership… What are the dangers of a weak leadership style? In just the opposite way of “Authoritative” leadership, the weak leadership is one who doesn’t care what happens as long as it doesn’t come back and bite them in the butt. They will lose many workers in this kind of leadership roll also… Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yikesaroo Posted September 30, 2011 Report Share Posted September 30, 2011 Q2. (2 Corinthians 1:24) What does it mean to “lord it over” someone? What is the balance between (1) good, strong leadership, (2) micromanaging, and (3) a complete laissez-faire approach to leadership? What are the dangers of an authoritative leadership style? What are the dangers of a weak leadership style? Simply put, to "lord it over" someone to bully or boss them around. A strong leader first of all leads by example and secondly permits those he/she are leading to exercise and develop their abilities. Otherwise, a good strong leader brings out the best in their people. Micromanaging discourages and suppresses the best in those being managed. It kills initiative and imagination. It instills insecurity and develops weak leaders. A complete laissez-faire approach to leadership is leadership without vision or direction. Followers need strong leadership. Not over-bearing leadership; not a micromanager, but a strong, positive leader who leads to the fulfillment of the mission, goal, job, etc. Strong leadership develops strong leadership. Weak leadership develops weak leadership and leads nowhere. Amen - I agree with your answers and submit as an excellent example, Nehemiah when he was rebuilding the wall at Jerusalem. Nehemiah gives instruction and encouragement to the people. "And I said unto the nobles, and to the rulers, and to the rest of the people, The work is great and large, and we are separated upon the wall, one far from another. In what place therefore ye hear the sound of the trumpet, resort ye thither unto us: our God shall fight for us" (Nehemiah 4:19-20). Nehemiah is there right beside them but not lording over them and/or micromanaging. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ross_laoshi Posted October 1, 2011 Report Share Posted October 1, 2011 Q2. (2 Corinthians 1:24) What does it mean to “lord it over” someone? What is the balance between (1) good, strong leadership, (2) micromanaging, and (3) a complete laissez-faire approach to leadership? What are the dangers of an authoritative leadership style? What are the dangers of a weak leadership style? "Lording it over" people is dominating and controlling them. Good strong leadership is firmly based in Biblical teaching, especially love. Micromanaging is domineering and controlling, whereas a complete laissez-faire approach is almost lacking any sort of true leadership, so the people would be like sheep without a Sheppard. With weak leadership the sheep are not protected or nourished to any great degree, so the congregation will suffer from deception, disunity and will be weak. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blezed Posted October 1, 2011 Report Share Posted October 1, 2011 What does it mean to “lord it over” someone? What is the balance between (1) good, strong leadership, (2) micromanaging, and (3) a complete laissez-faire approach to leadership? What are the dangers of an authoritative leadership style? What are the dangers of a weak leadership style? 1) "Lord it over" someone means being dominate over someone. You feel that you must have control. Making a person feel inferior. 2) Balance between (1) good, strong leadership, (2) micromanaging, and (3) a complete laissez-faire approach to leadership is that they each seek the same goal, but use a different method. 3) Dangers of an authoritative leadership style is that you will have unhappy and fearful followers. You fail to recognize the skills and abilities of others. Evently, you will lose that follower. 4) Dangers of a weak leadership style is the inability to accomplish your goal. The followers will lose respect for their leaders. Others will be discouraged. No delegation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delivered Posted October 1, 2011 Report Share Posted October 1, 2011 Q2. (2 Corinthians 1:24) What does it mean to "lord it over" someone? To "lord it over" someone is acting like a dictator, demanding that they do as you say; this is not displaying the seal of the Holy Spirit. What is the balance between (1) good, strong leadership, (2) micromanaging, and (3) a complete laissez-faire approach to leadership? I believe the balance of good leadership between the three is understanding that those who are sealed with the Holy Spirit are enabled to excel on their own, good leadership teaches what must be done in order for them to excel, allowing each person to grow and excel on their own, through the leadership of the Holy Spirit; Strong leadership understands that by pushing others around will only hurt their faith and confidence in the Lord, and could even frustrate them, thinking they cannot run the race, as they try to live up to the demands of "man". Paul was a good leader, he understood his authority was to teach the truth and when necessary to remind them of the areas that they must correct, he knew it was not his responsibility to order it be done, Paul understood that for us to excel, we must do it, it is through our free will, will we follow after the Holy Spirits lead? A good disciple will, for we have been given the earnest, the guarantee of the Spirit in our hearts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedInkWarrior Posted October 2, 2011 Report Share Posted October 2, 2011 To "Lord it over" someone, in my opinion means to have authority over with conviction. What is the balance between good strong leadership, micromanaging and a complete "laissez-faire approach to leadership? The balance is to make sure that you do not over emphasize one over the other. To make it where "encouragement" through hard work is needed. Encouragement brings people to be positive about themselves too. The laissez faire approach comes right after where hard work has been commended. ) What are the dangers of authoritative leadership style? "Walking on eggshells" is an unhealthy approach for anyone under the influence of that type of authority. You either have them fear you or hate you. What are the dangers of a weak leadership style? Less commitment from the people under that authority. Less or no respect and not taken seriously. Progress is nullified with lack of influence and consequences by both parties. The recipients of weak leadership will be lost. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruceerobert Posted October 2, 2011 Report Share Posted October 2, 2011 The meaning of "lord it over" in my own opinion is to take advantage of someone. I may force my cousin to do something that he does not want to do. Maybe his wife is telling him to do something for her, but I am forcing or lord it over to him to go with me to do whatever I want him to do. What is the balance between good strong leadership, micromanaging and a complete "laissez-faire approach to leadership? What I observe in our UCCP churches here in Pohnpei is that sometimes leadership is good and sometimes it is bad based on whomever is leading as Chairman of the congregation. Based on how they were raised up, some of the leaders may take advance of those in the lower positions. The leadership style they use might be just "take and take" leadership style, but not everyone work toward a common goal. What are the dangers of authoritative leadership style? Authoritative leadership is not a good thing to do in a church since it can really effect your relationship with your church people, but that is how some people do leadership especially here at the UCCP church. When you are given or elected to this position, the power make those leaders forgot that they were being elected or appointed to lead the people. What are the dangers of a weak leadership style? Weak leadership style may effect your relationship with church members in the matter that you would let people go about their own ideas in how to run the church. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guitar Jim Posted October 3, 2011 Report Share Posted October 3, 2011 Q2. (2 Corinthians 1:24) What does it mean to “lord it over” someone? To assume total authority over someone without regard to their feelings and without allowing any input of objections. What is the balance between (1) good, strong leadership, (2) micromanaging, and (3) a complete laissez-faire approach to leadership? Strength must be balanced with fairness and gentleness. I'm not talking about an iron fist in a velvet glove either. A strong leader should also be considerate of the feelings and aspirations of the people he's leading. Micromanaging won't work if the person being managed feels they can do some of the thinking for themselves. They don't need you to tell them to breathe in and breathe out. A laissez-faire approach will often give people too much space to wander away from what's right and get involved in things that may be detrimental to the Church. I think the ideal balance should be hands on/hands off. Give people responsibilities according to their ability and be involved in how they're going about their responsibilities without breathing down their necks. When things do go astray be gentle in how you correct them but firm in what you expect of them. Give them room to move within the Scriptural authority you have over them. What are the dangers of an authoritative leadership style? You could become something of a dictator. Delegation is often the key. Once you do delegate jobs to people, don't do their jobs for them. What are the dangers of a weak leadership style? You could end up with no leadership at all. Being indecisive is sending the wrong message to the church members that they can walk all over you. A strong church member with powerful ambitions will end up controlling you. Letting people get away with un-Christian behavior because you're too weak to pull the offending person into line will open the floodgates to an anything goes church. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
haar Posted October 3, 2011 Report Share Posted October 3, 2011 Q2. (2 Corinthians 1:24) What does it mean to “lord it over” someone? What is the balance between (1) good, strong leadership, (2) micromanaging, and (3) a complete laissez-faire approach to leadership? What are the dangers of an authoritative leadership style? What are the dangers of a weak leadership style? To "lord it over" some one is to exert excessive authority, to make or force someone do what is intended to be done Christlike leadership is leadership that is the best. It is leadership where the leade leads, guides, serves by seeking to give rather than to take/ receive. It is leadership that is firm but yet gentle and humble. It is leadership by example. Authoritative leadership can lead to rebellion and may not achieve the desired intension for which it is intended for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
l.a. Posted October 3, 2011 Report Share Posted October 3, 2011 Lord it over - to me, this expression means that one holds over your head that they are in control. They have the authority to say what is right and wrong. Micromanaging is a practice of looking over someone's shoulder to make sure that they do their job to expectation. This practice can be demeaning to the 'good worker' who can resent that someone feels that you would not do your job with excellence unless they are standing over you. If you have a worker that isn't working to expectations, micromanaging can give you insight as to how to direct the worker to improve. Laisse faire leaders want to give everyone what they want. They are easy going. The problem is that the work itself usually has gaping holes and objectives are compromized to please everyone. The dangers of arthoritarian leadership is tyranny. Those in complete authority do not have to take other views in consideration. They may flex their authority to achieve their own objective. We have seen too often how this type of leadership leads to mistreatment of others. Weak leadership tends to water down goals and procedures to accomodate the requests of the workers. This is really no leadership at all. This compromises the intergrity of the mission at hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LifeCoachMack Posted October 3, 2011 Report Share Posted October 3, 2011 Q2. (2 Corinthians 1:24 - Not that we lord it over your faith, but we work with you for your joy, for you stand firm in your faith.) What does it mean to lord it over someone? It means that you do not honor that of God in that other person. Jesus was (and is) the Lord, and yet he invited (not forced) the disciples to follow him. The Lord himself did not lord it over his followers, why should we? Invitation is much more powerful than coercion. What is the balance between (1) good, strong leadership =the first responsibility of a leader is to define reality, the last is to say thank-you, and in between to become a debtor and a servant (by Max DePree) (2) micromanaging =assuming you have good, competent people, micromanaging shows a possible lack of trust and inability to delegate effectively (3) a complete laissez-faire =this "hands off" style works very well with leading professional people who know what to do, but it can be disastrous in leading people who don't know what to do and need help or mentoring What are the dangers of an authoritative leadership style? =Mutiny and desertion of your followers. You also lose the full buy-in, wisdom and participation of the followers. A great leader knows when to be a follower. What are the dangers of a weak leadership style? =A weak leadership style is not leadership. Without a vision, people are unrestrained. I believe our challenge is to lead ourselves in a Godly manner. Programs can be very good, and also very distracting from our callings. We can no longer simply trust others or our company or our church to hand us all the programs. I sense God calling us into undiscovered opportunities and needs for ministry, and this can be scary and challenging to our faith. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tammie7 Posted October 4, 2011 Report Share Posted October 4, 2011 The meaning to be lord over all is to be an expert and to be over the very small things. The balance betweengood leader and lord over all is a good leader hears the people but he also hear what God is tell him to do and how to do it.To mircomanage is to manage very closely even the small detail, and to lassez-faire to let the people do as they please. The danger of a authoritative leadership is that the person leading the people may be more of a expert and not hearing his followers.The danger of a weak leader is the people have noone that they can really depend on, because they know that the leader id weak. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bless Posted October 4, 2011 Report Share Posted October 4, 2011 Q2. (2 Corinthians 1:24) What does it mean to “lord it over” someone? What is the balance between (1) good, strong leadership, (2) micromanaging, and (3) a complete laissez-faire approach to leadership? What are the dangers of an authoritative leadership style? What are the dangers of a weak leadership style? I think to "Lord it over" is like a parent with a small child. In the beginning what the parent says goes, because the child does not have any wisdom to make the right decision, in that sense lording would not be a bad thing. But the "Loading" that is refered to in 2 Cor. is like the "loading that was done in the old testament "1 King" by Ahab and Jezebel it my way or death or for us today I guess someone would call it and argonant leader ship, his or her ship because I know more than you. What is the balance between good and strong leadership? - One where you can communicated with you followers in a repectfully way. Not being high minded, but humble. But also not being jelly back, a sweet balance between leadership and servantitude. Only brought about through the obedient following of the Holy Spirit -Mark 10:42. The child has become a teenager now,communication will be the key to lead them into adult hood.God is that way with us Micromanaging-I believe if you are going to do that, then whatever it is should be done by you. Because all your time is gone by watchingevery movement of someone else. Even Nehemiah didn't micromange and they had a huge building project. laissez-faire- this approach says you do your thing and I will do mine. Its almost the same thing as when people say you shouldn't judge. No accountability is being called for. As a laissez-faire leader no truth of the gospel would ever come out, it would be a tickling of ears, no sound doctrine. Authoritative- you may eventually go over the edge. I believe Saul had an authoritative style until he meet King Jesus. Then he learn a lesson on how to balance the gift and use that style for the Glory of God Weak leadership - where as an authoritative leader you run over anyone who gets in your way, a weak leader allow the opposit to happen to him. That where the members start running the church, instead of the Pastor or even more so God. That will be a dead church, because either we wont let the Holy Spirit in or we will let Him in and forget that He is a gentle spirit I don't know if this is right, but I used it as a self examination Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raph Posted October 4, 2011 Report Share Posted October 4, 2011 Q2. (2 Corinthians 1:24) What does it mean to “lord it over” someone? To "lord it over" someone means to control that person; to make that person do what you want, no matter what. What is the balance between (1) good, strong leadership, (2) micromanaging, and (3) a complete laissez-faire approach to leadership? To be a successful leader you should be firm but fair; thus a good and strong one. Such type of leadership may include micromanaging as micromanging alone will not lead to sucess as such a leader will concetrate on minor, simple issues and leave the important, challenging ones. it is however not good at all to be a laissez-faire leader as this will lead to being a "controlled leader"; leading to please surbodinates even if in a wrong way. What are the dangers of an authoritative leadership style? The dangers of an authoritative leadership style are that, sometimes can lead you in imposing issues upon those who you are leading and consequently they will not show support wholeheartedly and this can lead to failure in achieving your goals. What are the dangers of a weak leadership style? The dangers of a weak leadership style are that, the ones you are leading will control you and you will not be able to control them when they are going astray. This will lead to total failure in achieving your goals as a leader. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patco Posted October 8, 2011 Report Share Posted October 8, 2011 What does it mean to “lord it over” someone? To be as though one were their lord, and they were our servants What is the balance between (1) good, strong leadership, (2) micromanaging, and (3) a complete laissez-faire approach to leadership? It depends on the situation. One has to be present, but not overly authoritative. Love is the key to help you being present, strong and courageous (cf. Joshua 1 and last chapters of Deut.), appoint godly leaders under you to help you as Moses was adviced to do, finally encourage and help everybody find their place. What are the dangers of an authoritative leadership style? It may discourage people from getting involved and telling you where you may be wrong... you may just fill a role but lose relationships as a person ... and it may lead you to fail to listen. What are the dangers of a weak leadership style? When the situation gets hard, you need to know where to look at. And the one(s) in leadership must be able to take hard decisions, to have faith in the Lord as Joshua and Caleb who saw the good things in the promise land while others were making the heart of the people melt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Travis63 Posted October 10, 2011 Report Share Posted October 10, 2011 Q2. (2 Corinthians 1:24) What does it mean to “lord it over” someone? (KJV) Not that we have dominion over your faith; (YLT) not that we are lords over your faith, Paul is simply acknowledging that no one has authority to control a person's belief, to include himself although he is an apostle, nor his fellow laborers. Although Paul and those in authority have the authority to command obedience and to influence belief truly they could not make them believe, just as a person cannot make someone love them. Paul nor any man cannot give or produce in man's heart faith in Christ; this faith is the gift of God; of which Christ is not only the object, but the author; it is obtain and maintained by, of and through the operation of the Spirit. Paul here employs / appeals to reason, he as well within this verse shares his reasoning, ("for by faith you stand", " for it is by faith that you stand "). He would not attempt to lord it authority over their faith; or to exercise dominion over them. They were to believe not so much in Paul or his fellow laborers but in God, in the Gospel. Paul gave them under authority what he was authorized to give in doing so they were to receive the Gospel as coming from Him, and ye stand in and by that faith. Thus far they had stood by faith and with applied reason they could continue to stand. To lord it over someone in my opinion is to abuse or misuse an authoritative position or power of authority. To ensure that those subordinate understand you have authority / power over them and that they have no say in the decision making. What is the balance between (1) good, strong leadership, (2) micromanaging, and (3) a complete laissez-faire approach to leadership? The perimeters placed on this question makes it challenging to answer, it is unfortunate that we all can be GREAT arm chair quarterbacks. Although any response will be an opinion, my opinion is that the style for the moment which allows the most productive and effective results. I am not suggestion that the person of charge oscillate or vacillate each time they have to make a decision. What I am suggesting is that the person of charge learn to know those whom are under their chare. Some people require less guidance, some require more, some require less hand on, some require less. We all learn in one or three manner, seeing, hearing, doing (some with a combination). Just as we all potentially learn differently we all receive things differently. I have some friends who are very detailed and therefore required great details, on the other hand I have some require little instruction, they feel insulted if you give great detail or aided instruction. Sometimes a leader needs to be authoritative and sometimes they need to be persuasive, the two depends on the situation, circumstances just as much as it does the individual(s). What are the dangers of an authoritative leadership style? The dangers are too many to account for, especially because many do not like being told what to do. Often leadership styles reflect the character of the leader, however sometime it is reflective of the group (the composition of the group and the length of time the group has been together). Having said that, there are sometimes when it would warrant a leader to inflect an authoritative style. Which of the 3 styles of leadership mentioned in these set of questions is right? Has to be dependent on the leaders personality and ability, the current situation (of the group) and the task required. A good leader uses all three styles, depending on what forces (factors = time, level of relationship, intelligence, task at hand, results desired, past results, etc..) are involved between the followers, the leader, and the situation. Although good leaders use all three styles, with one of them normally dominant, extremes in either can be detrimental, bad leaders tend to stick with one style. What are the dangers of a weak leadership style? Some believe the latter mentioned laissez-faireto be a form of weak leadership. However I would beg to differ, in my last sales like position Coaching was strongly encouraged. In this style, the leader allows the follower / employees to make the decisions. However, the leader is still responsible for the decisions that are made and the outcome. This is used when followers / employees are able to analyze the situation and determine what needs to be done and how to do it. This is not a style to use so that you can blame others when things go wrong, rather this is a style to be used when you fully trust and confidence in the people in the leaders charge. One should not be afraid to use this style, however if when used it should be done wisely! Each of the leadership styles mentioned in this lesson has advantages and dangers (disadvantages) The dangers of weak leadership are too many to list. As it relates to Christians being lead the greatest danger is that it gives the devil a foothold. If the leader is not in the Will of God as they lead they can influence to people to as well be out of God's Will. Neither will be salt, light nor a witness that will be pleasing to God. Weak leadership can affect ability, effectiveness, belief etc... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Jerry Posted October 11, 2011 Report Share Posted October 11, 2011 To me “lords it over” someone means that you have something against them and in order to control them you will use that against them. The balance between good, strong leadership, micromanaging, and a complete laissez-faire is that a good strong leader doesn’t get into nitty gritty of a person life but he is still able to control the situation. But the dangers of a weak leadership style are that everything goes into chaos and you lose you leadership capabilities. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aussie girl Posted October 17, 2011 Report Share Posted October 17, 2011 To “lord it over” someone is to act as thought you know best (even if you do), telling the other how they should do everything. It has the effect of making the other feel incompetent and small, afraid to speak up, to be themselves or take action on their own initiative as they may fail or be criticised. It discourages and fuels resentment. In contrast, weak leadership fails to set a direction for united purpose and action, and fails to build a strong team working together and respecting each other and each other’s contribution. Weak leadership makes it hard to achieve goals as clarity and motivation grow dim. People get disgruntled and team work goes out the window. Good leadership lets everyone know that they are a valuable part of the team, and helps each to work together as a team. Good leadership encourages, seeks to build up the other and their skills, listens, is willing to “let go” some ideas, however good they may seem to be, and allows the other to take some initiative. Good leadership looks for the ideas and attributes in the other that can be developed and encouraged. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antzilla Posted October 19, 2011 Report Share Posted October 19, 2011 To lord it over is to take complete control over a person and force your will upon them. A good leader must be able to delegate responsibility and support good of the cause and not get caught up in trying to control outcomes. If one is too authoritative this style of leadership will not gain the support of the people. This style will force people into an undesirable position. If one is too weak the people under this leadership will be lost and susceptible to undo hardships. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trusting God Posted October 31, 2011 Report Share Posted October 31, 2011 Q2. (2 Corinthians 1:24) What does it mean to “lord it over” someone? “Lord it over” someone means to act like a person is a master, to behave as if you are better than someone else and have the right to tell them what to do, or a person is trying accrue personal power. What is the balance between (1) good, strong leadership, (2) micromanaging, and (3) a complete laissez-faire approach to leadership? The difference between good, strong leadership, micromanaging, and a complete laissez-faire approach to leadership is that a good, strong leadership approach to leadership is not controlling, and is a hands-on person. This leader has a balanced leadership style. A micromanager tends to control a person or situation by paying extreme attention to small details, whereas a complete laissez-faire approach to leadership tends to lenient, laid back, and do not get involved in other people’s activities or behavior. What are the dangers of an authoritative leadership style? The danger of an authoritative leadership style is that it leaves those the leaders are managing with no choices. What are the dangers of a weak leadership style? The danger of a weak leadership style is that there is no clear organizational mission, vision, or strategy. A leader who micromanage can have a weak leadership style, because they are too controlling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wifee Posted May 2, 2012 Report Share Posted May 2, 2012 A)Lording it over someone would treating people as inferior, preaching to people about faith and what it means without engaging with them,listening and talking with them about their joys and struggles, and helping them to look grow in their faith. B)1/ indicates decisive teaching and direction,not avoiding addressing areas that need correction 2/responding to specific needs and 3/relaxed style with no specific path and direction leads to mismanagement,disorderly conduct. I think a good balance is a servant hearted leadership with clear direction repecting individuals, encouraging gifts, growth, to help each reach full potential.. c)Dangers of authoritative leadership is forcing people to do things,people feel hurt, may resist or give up. D)Dangers of weak style- people are unclear of bouaris direction to follow,and unsure of foundations of faith,mission to share Jesus with others. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.