BY: KEN HOMAN, PhD
Dr. Homan is professor of systematic theology and director of lay formation,
Aquinas Institute of Theology, St. Louis.
Do not cling to events of the past or dwell on what happened long ago;
watch for the new thing I am going to do, it is happening already, can you
not see it?
— Isaiah 43:18-19
'What makes a Catholic hospital Catholic?' a student in my ecclesiology
course recently asked. We were in the middle of a lively conversation about
the catholicity of the church, and the students expanded the conversation to
include two other major institutions that demarcate themselves as Catholic:
health care and education, particularly Catholic higher education. If the church
has identifying marks, my student reasoned, should not other Catholic institutions
have them as well?
What makes an institution Catholic? Who makes an institution Catholic? Clarke
E. Cochran, who has made a lifework of studying Catholic identity, particularly
that of Catholic health care, contends that the aspects most characteristic
of Catholic institutions are their incarnational and sacramental dimensions.1
If this is so, who is responsible for bearing and transmitting these sacramental
and incarnational dimensions? Governance, I suggest, has a substantive role
to play in this respect for Catholic health care organizations. How well equipped
are our boards of trustees to play this role?
It used to be that the ministry of the sponsoring congregation manifested these
sacramental and incarnational aspects. However, that reality has changed with
the reconfiguration of diverse models of sponsorship and the increasing involvement
of laypersons, some of whom may not be Catholic and whose identity is primarily
formed by business values.
Most Catholic hospitals anchor their ministry in 'continuing the healing
mission and ministry of Jesus,' a phrase that is not exclusively Catholic.
Catholic health care typically employs some combination of three strategies
to maintain its Catholic identity.
Sympathetic Administrators One strategy involves hiring administrators
(Catholic or otherwise) who are sympathetic to the charism of the founding congregation
and are respectful toward the tradition of Catholic health care. How theologically
and spiritually fluent should such leaders be? Is it sufficient that a leader
exhibit the operative values attached to the charism, even if he or she cannot
articulate the theology undergirding the charism?
Mission Leader The second strategy designates a mission person who has
some degree of authority concerning charism and catholicity. Of course, this
strategy risks creating a ghetto for mission. A mission person raises the mission-and-identity
question as a matter of duty. He or she becomes the conscience of the organization.
One consequence is that, to the degree the mission person functions as organizational
conscience, others are relieved of this fundamental responsibility.
In-House Formation The third strategy establishes a type of in-house
formation program that fosters foundation and growth in Catholic health care
identity and mission. The person in charge of mission frequently oversees this
in-house formation program.
However, I would like to explore still another way of perpetuating mission:
through governance. How might Catholic health care change if trustees were formed
as leavening leaders?
The Mission of Governance
Sr. Jean deBlois, CSJ, PhD, argues, 'Our capacity to sustain Catholic
health care as a ministry of the Church depends on our realization that all
our activities must flow from the core of who we are, that is, from our spirituality.'2
She goes on to say that, 'as ministry, we must provide witness as well
as service because the call to be MISSION in the world is also the call to build
up the kingdom of God within.'
But much of health care is caught up in the flurry of service delivery. Governance
is uniquely postured to give witness and to establish accountability for witness.
Governance, I suggest, is best positioned to be an agent of witness because
it is not involved in direct health care service.
Governance's task is to hold the common good of mission as a value in
itself and to create a mission 'horizon' toward which policies and
procedures move. Too often, mission and identity are seen as negative boundaries
that the organization must not violate ('That would be contrary to our
mission'). Unfortunately, governance, identity, and sponsorship tend to
be seen as forms of oversight, often expressed by the principle: 'Don't
do anything that will upset the sisters.'
If mission were articulated as a positive horizon, governance's
role would be different. As a positive horizon, mission would serve a higher,
transcendent purpose that prompts and invites others to share in the higher
purpose of Catholic health care, witnessing to the love and the healing presence
of God, while delivering excellent services. Trustees would be, not watchdogs,
but leaven, animating the culture of Catholic health care.3 They would
then remind Catholic health care of its sense of purpose and help keep the ministry
focused on its fundamental, orienting values.4 In a negative-boundary model,
governance functions as a shepherd who seeks the safety and survival of the
flock; the shepherd trains the flock to go where the shepherd wants the flock
to go. Leavening governance, on the other hand, remembers that the ultimate
task of health care ministry is to witness to and to serve the realm of God.
Leavening governance would be open to discerning new ministry.
Formation for Governance
Forming trustees theologically, spiritually, and developmentally is fundamental
if they are to be equipped to accomplish this leavening function. Many board
members are professionals; they have been formed in the name of and in service
to their particular professions.5 If professional people are formed to convey
their professional identity, should not governance leaders be formed for their
understanding of and participation in continuing the healing mission and ministry
of Jesus? Taking responsibility for governance in Catholic health care requires
the trustee to undergo theological formation so that he or she can participate
in the discourse of Catholic health care. He or she should undergo spiritual
formation to participate in the witness of Catholic health care as it journeys
toward the realm of God.
Two major challenges facing Catholic health care are changes in its understanding
of sponsorship and the theological and spiritual formation of its lay leaders.
These challenges come together as religious congregations strive to foster continuing
leadership in the ministry and, in communion with the laity, discern new and
important ways of continuing the healing mission of Jesus in a pluralistic context.
Catholic health care today has new opportunities for exploring the charism of
the laity, which is rooted in baptism and lived in witness and service to the
One writer has claimed that the greatest crisis facing religiously founded
Catholic institutions today is the decline of professed religious and their
concomitantly diminished ability to continue their charism in the world.6 Most
Catholic health care leaders today are not professed religious. As laypeople,
they have not shared a common formation in the sponsoring congregation's
vocation, charism, and perspective on health care. Lay leaders often locate
their identities differently than do religious, which naturally alters their
priorities and purpose. Lay leaders and trustees, some of whom are not Catholic
(and may not even be Christian), bring to the institutions they serve their
own sense of professional vocation and identity.7 A leader or trustee who has
not undergone deep theological and spiritual formation may be tempted to focus
on developing his or her skill sets exclusively, ignoring the need for formation,
above all virtue and character formation.
In attempting to meet these challenges, contemporary Catholic health care bases
its identity on four factors:
- The historical religious identity and mission of the health care facility
or system, continuing under a predominantly lay staff and board of trustees
- The professionalism of the staff
- Identity and mission, rooted in and flowing from baptism
- The goals of Catholic health care and the articulation of those goals in
a pluralistic world
In this confluence of factors, one factor will be dominant because it is the
one in which we have placed most of our identity and resources. It is where
we find most of our meaning and where we derive our sense of purpose for what
we do: vocation.
That to which we give the highest priority becomes the norm for our health
care activities. The questions, 'What is my identity?' and 'What
do I profess, and why?' flow from and form how we 'vision' and
'revision' our vocational identities, from which our health care purposes
develop. The question for Catholic health care is not only what is its
mission but also, perhaps more forcefully, for whom is its mission and
why. What is the ministry's vocation? Is its primary mission in
service of the Roman Catholic tradition? Is Catholic health care's mission
to serve its own ends and its continuation in history? Is it for a people of
a particular region? Is its mission focused on particular populations, such
as the poor, the wealthy, the blue-collar mainstream, and the marginalized?
One immediate consequence of this train of thought is the realization that we
need to shift the conversation from what and whom to why.
Why is our mission? The 'why' of mission has been woefully underaddressed.
Shifting to the why of mission challenges us to go back to basics and examine
anew the foundation of identity and mission, vocation. Reflection on vocation
is a fundamental revisioning process that prophetically invites us to contemplate
and articulate the relationship between our proximate mission (the focus of
which is the recent past through the present to the near future) and our ultimate
mission (which focuses on being cocreators of the Realm of God). Shifting to
the 'why' of mission challenges Catholic health care's various
constituencies to reflect on how they are formed and transformed by such foundational
values and virtues as maintaining baptismal identity, protecting and enhancing
the dignity of the human person, promoting human flourishing, restoring members
to the community, and caring for the vulnerable members of the community (particularly
the poor and the marginalized).
This is where governance plays a central role, for trustees are in a position
to see more of the terrain than others can. Governance must be formed in the
'why' of mission if it is to be an effective force in the culture
of Catholic health care. The 'why' of mission is the transcendent
purpose, the greater good of God's love and God's healing presence
that motivates and amplifies Catholic health care culture. When trustees fail
to understand the why of mission — their institutions' greater and more
durable good — lesser and more proximate goods will drive the engine of Catholic
Catholic health care has thus far exercised good stewardship by working with
religious and congregational leadership to develop lay leaders who, having been
formed theologically and spiritually, will advance the ministry.8 Catholic health
care systems have developed lay leaders who continue to bring moral and theological
voices to the conversation and, at the same time, serve with professional acumen
in a pluralistic context.9 For the most part, these activities have been focused
on administrators and managers; few have been intended for trustees.* Governance
is an area in dramatic need of development and formation, so that those who
exercise it will more fully understand, appreciate, and advocate the theological
heritage, the centrality of spirituality, the foundational values, and the generous
ecumenism of Catholic health care. In this sense, governance is leadership,
and leadership stands in need of formation. The type of theological and spiritual
formation proposed here is reflective of the board and trustee development work
of Katherine Tyler Scott. Scott advocates 'depth education' that leads
board members to actively appreciate and understand the organization's
fundamental beliefs, values, and culture.10
* St. Joseph Health System, Orange, CA, and Ascension Health,
St. Louis, have in-house formation programs. More fully developed is the master's
of arts in health care program administered by Aquinas Institute of Theology,
There are two general approaches to the leadership challenge in Catholic health
care: the 'critical mass' approach and the leavening approach. At
one time, critical mass signified the presence of professed religious in Catholic
health care. Because the number of professed religious in the ministry has dwindled,
this form of critical mass no longer exists. Critical mass was intended to put
enough Catholics in key leadership positions to perpetuate Catholic identity
and mission. Having a significant number of Catholics among an institution's
leaders would, it was hoped, ensure that the institution's policies and
procedures were Catholic as well.
Critical mass dynamics are not to be ignored. As one researcher has shown,
a critical mass of Catholic personnel does indeed promote an institution's
religious character.11 A critical mass, however, cannot be about
numbers alone. It does not necessarily follow that, just because an institution
includes a number of Catholics, it also will have a culture rooted in the spirit
of Catholicism and policies and procedures consonant with Catholic theology.
Roger Finke, an eminent sociologist of religion, endorses the need for a critical
mass, but adds that how well the critical mass anchors itself in core teachings
and adapts these teachings to new cultures and contexts is also vital.12
Religious groups that can articulate and hold true to their core teachings in
innovative responses to new cultures and contexts will sustain themselves and
grow. Religious groups and institutions that overly accommodate to changing
cultures and contexts compromise their core teachings and are diminished and
die off in time. Finke's insights reflect those seen in recent corporate
analyses. In Built to Last: Successful Habits of Visionary Companies,
for example, James Collins and Jerry Porras describe three interactive factors
that influence the life and adaptability of corporate culture more significantly
than sheer numbers:
- Core values with sufficient power and richness to both drive and temper
- A purpose beyond profits
- A dedicated workforce13
The critical mass model too often depends on serendipity. The 'leavening
model,' in contrast, builds in complementarity with the critical mass model.
The leavening model is intentional in its theological foundations and in equipping
leaders with the theological and spiritual knowledge and resources, as well
as the skills, to lead and suffuse Catholic health care organizations — and
their partners — with core values and behaviors that reflect Catholic identity
in dialogue in a complex, pluralistic world. Because leaders in a leavening
model work out of various areas in the organization, ministry is not reserved
to, or pigeonholed in, mission and ministry.
Leavening leadership formation brings a distinct perspective to governance
formation. A leavening leadership model departs from the strict oversight model
of governance, in which tension (if not near hostility concerning 'meddlesome
boards') exists between governance and management. Leavening leadership
reimagines the board-management relationships so that governance, rightly formed
theologically and spiritually, serves as part of Catholic health care's
Governance becomes an asset when it is formed theologically and spiritually.
With other leaders, it creates a partnership that animates culture and calls
the whole to deeper purpose as a culture of the whole.14 As such, formed governance
becomes part of the collaborative core that leavens the internal culture of
Catholic health care. Additionally, given their roles in multiple publics, trustees
leaven the external culture.15 Governance participates in these internal and
external leavening activities in the degree that it is equipped to do so.
Governance as Leavening Leadership
I suggest that Catholic health care begin to view trustees as leaven, especially
vis-à-vis executive leadership. In baking, leaven suffuses dough and
causes it to rise. In organizational life, it is the element that catalyzes
other elements, causing the whole organization to rise. Leaders cannot help
their organizations to rise through simple acts of will. Reflecting what has
been called a 'relational model of leadership,'16 leavening leadership
amplifies the idea that leaders are part of a greater whole and that the whole
is transformed in communion. The whole, moreover, is at any given moment in
time part of ever-enlargening interwoven partial wholes:
- The whole of governance leadership is part of the whole of the system.
- The whole of the system intersects with the whole of the various entities.
- The whole of the entity intersects with the whole of other departments in
that same entity.
- At the same time these units, departments, entities, and system are part
of the whole of a larger community.
Leavening leaders recognize these 'partial wholes'17 and will develop
the vision and skills to bring the individual chemistries of the partial wholes
together for the common good. Governance, in collaboration with senior leadership,
has the perspective needed to see the whole, but it always must strive to see
things in light of the common good.
The common good is the unifying framework through which the interrelationships
of the diverse elements of Catholic health care should be viewed. It is the
framework for developing transformational strategies that can enlarge both personal
and social goods in these interconnected communities. The social ethics understanding
of the common good is a time-honored rubric for understanding persons and communities
in relationship.* The concept of the common good evokes a principled vision
of relationship. The common good serves as a lens through which one can see
whether relationships are just or unjust. Finally, the notion of the common
good emphasizes the dignity of the human person and encourages the creation
of societal conditions that allow the person to flourish in community. In general,
the social ethics understanding of the common good seeks to:
- Enhance and protect human dignity
- Promote human flourishing
- Restore members to the community and care for its vulnerable members, thereby
reflecting the power of solidarity
- Underscore the social good
- Create conditions in which people can participate in decision making, particularly
when they are most directly affected by those decisions, thereby reflecting
the principle of subsidiarity
- Emphasize people's role as citizens, thereby encouraging them to resist
the temptations of vested self-interest
- Shape an awareness of the person's capacity to have an impact on his
or her society
* Problems arise, of course, when a community tries to determine
which goods it holds in common and which cannot be held in common.
Given this understanding of the common good, we can suggest some forms of leadership
for governance. At a minimum, leadership theories concerning governance in Catholic
health care should seek to protect the common good.
Theories of Leadership
Definitions of leadership are abundant.18 'Leadership'
is a term that flirts with banality because it is used in so many ways. Here
I want to focus on representative theories of leadership and critique their
compatibility with the theologies that underscore governance leadership in Catholic
health care.19 Most theories of leadership arise out of business and industry
and are driven by particular sets of values, each of which encourages identification
with that set. One should analyze these theories with a critical theological
eye to see how applicable they might be to the theological domain. For example,
in a profound article on leadership, Fr. James Heft, SM, argues that Stephen
Covey's understanding of leadership is incongruous with Catholic theology.20
Those who are interested in forming governance leadership will find especially
fruitful two books I have already cited: Ronald A. Heifetz's Leadership
without Easy Answers and Susan R. Komives, Nance Lucas, and Timothy R. McMahon's
Exploring Leadership: For College Students Who Want to Make a Difference.
The authors of both books recognize the need not only to clarify the values
operative in leadership but also to develop social values consciously. Both
attend to the character and role of power, particularly as it is expressed in
collaborative terms. In both cases, the approaches to leadership and leadership
formation seek the common good.
Heifetz, who is considered a leading leadership theorist, characterizes leadership
as drawing forth talent from within the community in the service of a common
goal as the community seeks to face its problems.21 Heifetz is most interested
in viewing leadership in terms of what he calls 'adaptive work.' 'Adaptive
work,' he writes, 'consists of the learning required to address conflicts
in the values people hold, or to diminish the gap between the values people
stand for and the reality they face. Adaptive work requires a change in values,
beliefs, or behavior. The exposure and orchestration of conflict — internal
contradictions — within individuals and constituencies provide the leverage
for mobilizing people to learn new ways.22
Heifetz has developed a model of leadership that, rather than striving to bring
everyone to agreement, is based on the idea that 'the inclusion of competing
value perspectives may be essential to adaptive success.'23 According to
Heifetz, adaptive work creates 'a guide to goal formation and strategy'
that articulates the values the goal represents and tests 'the goal's
ability to mobilize people to face, rather than avoid, tough realities and conflicts.
The hardest and most valuable task of leadership may be advancing goals and
designing strategies that promote adaptive work'24
For example, a gap frequently exists between the ideal values a community espouses
and the actual or operative values that it lives. The ideal values arise from
the community's aspirations whereas actual values are driven by perceived
pragmatic realities, often perceived realities involving the marketplace. This
gap represents an adaptive challenge that can lead to conflict and distress.
Trustees who are trying to consider the common good would find valuable Heifetz's
understanding of adaptive work and the role of conflict. Trustees often find
it difficult to articulate the common good, not to speak of the specific goods
that constitute the common good. Competing visions, values, and interests sometimes
derail pursuit of the common good. Heifetz's model attends to these dynamics.
Governance would be enriched if it were informed both by Heifetz's approach
and a theological understanding of prudence, one in which prudence exercises
justice for the common good.25
The theory of leadership developed by Komives and her colleagues is especially
apropos in this connection.26 The authors define leadership as 'a relational
process of people together attempting to accomplish change or make a difference
to benefit the common good.'27 Is this not the very task of governance
as we have described it?
'Relational leadership' is the goal here. Relational leaders place
a premium on being inclusive, empowering, purposeful, ethical, and process-oriented
while acting as responsible citizens in community. Relational models of leadership
differ from those involving 'positional leadership.' Positional leaders
exercise leadership as a function of their position of authority. They hold
formal leadership roles, believe that values should not drive leadership, and
make clear distinctions between leaders and followers.28 Unlike positional leadership,
which focuses on the immediate situation, relational leadership is long-range,
aiming at effecting positive change on behalf of others and society. Komives
and her colleagues recognize leadership as a collective effort. Leadership 'involves
collaborative relationships that lead to collective action grounded in the shared
values of people who work together to effect positive change.'29
Any model of leadership that focuses on effecting social change must attend
to the values found at the core of that model. Relational leadership asks, 'What
values form, invite, guide, foster, and foment social change?' Trustees
who are theologically equipped and spiritually formed will be prepared to ask
these questions, both as critique and as witness in Catholic health care. Relational,
social-change models of leadership must attend to larger societal values, as
well as to the personal values of the participants. Komives and her colleagues'
understanding of relational leadership is thoroughly congruent with Catholic
understanding of the common good.
Their formulation is consonant with an articulation of an incarnational sacramental
theology. An incarnational perspective is based in the incarnation of Jesus
as fully and completely human. Created in the image and likeness of God, people
have fundamental dignity and worth. They have fundamental dignity and worth
simply because they are, not because of who they are or what they have done.
An incarnational understanding calls for the active respect of self and others.
People should act in such a way that they serve to enhance and protect fundamental
human dignity and worth. They should not act in ways that deny, diminish, or
distort fundamental human dignity and worth.
The relationality model of Komives and her colleagues, which is compatible
with a theology of the Trinity (in which the persons of the Trinity are each
unique and distinct but fully in relationship with each other), emphasizes living
with committed fidelity and integrity in the midst of multiple relationships.
The theological focus for Catholic governance is on living with responsibility
in relation to God, self, others, and the larger community. One lives in critical
awareness of his or her multiple relationships. The accent is not on the independent,
individual self, as in popular culture. Rather, it is on the social self who
lives in community. The decisions one makes and the actions one takes grow out
of the experience of community and affect the community. The moral stance is
to live with committed, faithful response to the good of self, neighbor, community,
and, ultimately, God in relationship.
The virtues that these writers prize in leaders (being inclusive, empowering,
purposeful, ethical, and process-oriented while acting as responsible citizens
in community) lend themselves particularly well to the understanding of the
common good I have been discussing here. These virtues are, moreover, sufficiently
elastic to be applied with integrity to most theologies of governance leadership
while making accommodation for specifics of mission and identity in particular
Ready for Prophetic Witness
With its focus on the common good, the relational model of leadership is particularly
suited to Catholic health care. The model allows governance leaders to address
theological realities without necessarily using explicit theological language.
If trustees were to couple the ideas of Komives and her colleagues with Heifetz's
ideas, they would be theologically informed in a way that enabled them to address
the adaptive work evidenced in the dynamic tensions involving the reality of
the marketplace, on one-hand, and the incarnational and sacramental realities
that shore up Catholic health care, on the other. Theological formation would
give trustees the grammar necessary for participation in the discourse of Catholic
health ministry. Spiritual formation would equip them for prophetic witness
intramurally and extramurally.
Lay leaders need theological education and spiritual formation in order to:
- Know, understand, and appreciate the faith and theological heritage of the
Roman Catholic tradition
- Understand and appreciate the theological foundations of Catholic health
care as a continuing ministry that participates in the healing mission of
Jesus in the modern world
- Articulate to multiple publics the core beliefs and practices of the Roman
Catholic tradition as they relate to health care
- Respond to the call of Gaudium et Spes, from Vatican Council II,
to be ecumenically aware and equipped to carry out dialogues with the world
and its other great faith traditions.
- Clarke E. Cochran, 'Another Identity Crisis: Catholic Hospitals Face
Hard Choices,' Commonweal, February 25, 2000, pp. 12-16.
- Jean deBlois, 'The Mission Imperative: Our Foundation and Market Advantage,'
Health Progress, March-April 1997, pp. 24-27.
- See Gerald A. Arbuckle, Healthcare Ministry: Refounding the Mission in
Tumultuous Times, Liturgical Press, Collegeville, MN, 2000. Fr. Arbuckle's
book is conceptually rich on Catholic health care culture.
- Ronald A. Heifetz, Leadership without Easy Answers, Belknap Press,
Cambridge, MA, 1994. Heifetz defines sense of purpose as 'the capacity
to find values that make risk taking meaningful' (p. 274).
- Gilbert Rendle, 'Reclaiming Professional Jurisdiction: The Re-Emergence
of the Theological Task of Ministry,' Theology Today, vol. 59,
no. 3, 2002, pp. 408-420. See also S.M. Homan, M.R. Domahidy, J.F. Gilsinan,
et al., 'Formation for Love and Justice in Graduate and Professional
Education,' Current Issues in Catholic Higher Education, vol.
23, 2003, pp. 55-71.
- Maryanne Stevens, 'Revitalizing Charisms Inspiring Religious Life,'
Review for Religious, vol. 53, no. 6, 1994, pp. 847-859.
- 'Lay Leaders of Catholic Colleges and Universities,' CARA Report,
Fall 2003, p. 6. See also Melanie Morey and Dennis Holtschneider, 'Keeping
the Faith on Campus,' Commonweal, April 1, 2001, pp. 20-23; and
Melanie Morey, 'The Way We Are: The Present Relationship of Religious
Congregations of Women to the Colleges They Founded,' in Cynthia Russett
and Tracy Schier, eds., Catholic Women's Colleges in America,
Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, 2002, pp. 277-324.
- The approach advocated here is similar to that described in Mary Kathryn
Grant and Margaret Mary Kopish, 'Sponsor Leadership Formation,'
Health Progress, July-August 2001, pp. 24-26.
- I don't mean to suggest that the moral and/or theological voice is
the exclusive property of congregational leaders — only that examining
things in a moral or theological light is what congregational leaders are
trained to do. On this point, see Stanley Hauerwas and William H. Willimon,
Resident Aliens: Life in the Christian Colony, Abingdon Press, Nashville,
TN, 1989. Of course, one must take care not to slip into sectarianism, operating
solely out of a narrow theological framework and discounting all other perspectives.
In this connection, see Richard G. Cote, Re-Visioning Mission: The Catholic
Church and Culture in Postmodern America, Paulist Press, Paramus, NJ,
1996. The classic text on this issue is H. Richard Niebuhr, Christ and
Culture, HarperCollins, San Francisco, 1986.
- Katherine Tyler Scott, Creating Caring and Capable Boards: Reclaiming
the Passion for Active Trusteeship, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 2000.
- D. Paul Sullins, 'The Difference Catholic Makes: Catholic Faculty and
Catholic Identity,' Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion,
vol. 43, no. 1, 2004, pp. 83-101.
- Roger Finke, 'Innovative Returns to Tradition: Using Core Teachings
as the Foundation for Innovative Accommodation,' Journal for the Scientific
Study of Religion, vol. 43, no. 1, 2004, p. 1934.
- James Collins and Jerry Porras, Built to Last: Successful Habits of Visionary
Companies, HarperBusiness, San Francisco, 2002.
- Rosabeth Moss Kanter, 'The
Enduring Skills of Change Leaders,' Leader to Leader, Summer
- Kevin D. O'Rourke, 'Catholic Healthcare as ‘Leaven,''
Health Progress, March-April 1997, pp. 34-38, 43. See also Pope Paul
VI, 'Apostolicam Actuositatem,' para.3: 'Since the laity, in
accordance with their state of life, live in the midst of the world and its
concerns, they are called by God to exercise their apostolate in the world
like leaven, with the ardor of the spirit of Christ.'
- See Susan R. Komives, Nance Lucas, and Timothy R. McMahon, Exploring
Leadership: For College Students Who Want to Make a Difference, Jossey-Bass,
San Francisco, 1998, especially pp. 20-23. The authors define leadership as
a 'relational process of people together attempting to accomplish change
or make a difference to benefit the common good' (p. 21). Relational
leadership places a premium on being inclusive, empowering, purposeful, ethical,
and process-oriented while acting as responsible citizens in community.
- 'Partial wholes' is an idea, shared by quantum theory and chaos
theory, signifying the organic, evolutionary nature of organisms. The whole,
because of the interactivity of the parts that constitute it, is always coming
into being. For example, an organization will evolve over time even if its
membership (the whole) remains static, because the lives of individual members
(the partial whole) cannot help but change. See Komives, pp. 51, 73-77.
- Jim Wind, of the Alban Institute, has found more than 130 different definitions
of leadership. See James P. Wind, 'A
Leadership Story,' Congregations, September-October 2001.
- Helen J. Alford and Michael J. Naughton, Managing as if Faith Mattered:
Christian Social Principles in the Modern Organization, University of
Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame, IN, 2001.
- James Heft, 'The Courage to Lead,' Catholic Education,
vol. 7, no. 3, 2004, pp. 294-307.
- Heifetz, p. 15.
- Heifetz, p. 22.
- Heifetz, p. 23.
- Komives, especially pp. 20-23.
- Komives, p. 21.
- Higher Education Research Institute, A Social Change Model of Leadership
Development: Guidebook Version II, University of California at Los Angeles,
no date, p. 4.
- Komives, p. 10.
Copyright © 2004 by the Catholic Health Association of the United States
For reprint permission, contact Betty Crosby or call (314) 253-3477.