From Books

Contents 1 Contextual leadership development training for Japanese Christians 1.1 Introduction 1.1.1 Methodological Concerns 1.1.2 Prior Research 1.2 Chapter 1Leadership In Japan 1.2.1 1.1 Positional Models 1.2.1.1 1.1.1 The Agrarian Model 1.2.1.2 1.1.2 The Imperial Model 1.2.2 1.2 Functional Models 1.2.2.1 1.2.1 Nakane’s “weak leaders” 1.2.2.2 1.2.2 sensei-deshi Leadership 1.2.2.3 1.2.3 Symbolic and centralized leadership 1.2.3 1.3 Stylistic Models 1.2.4 1.4 Leadership in changing society 1.2.5 1.5 Areas for further research 1.2.6 1.6 Conclusion 1.3 Chapter 2‘Laity Mobilized’? 1.3.1 2.1 An unmobilized laity 1.3.2 2.2 The New Religions 1.3.3 2.3 Situating church leadership in Japan 1.3.4 2.4 Areas for future research 1.3.5 2.5 Conclusion 1.4 Chapter 3Biblical Leadership 1.4.1 3.1 The Japanese Jesus 1.4.2 3.2 Discipleship, Accountability and Leadership Training 1.4.3 3.3 Transformative and Situational Aspects 1.4.4 3.4 Conclusion 1.5 Chapter 4Conclusion: Teaching Japanese Christian Leadership 1.5.1 4.1 One vector: ‘koans’ 1.5.2 4.2 The generation gap 1.5.3 4.3 Leadership and accountability 1.5.4 4.4 Summary 1.6 Bibliography

[edit] Contextual leadership development training for Japanese Christians

[edit] Introduction

What makes a great leader? What makes a great leader in a church? What makes a great leader in Japan? Are the answers to these three questions the same? Further, to what extent is it possible to use existing patterns of Japanese leadership and ‘baptize’ it to develop authentically Japanese and fully Christian leadership? How should such leadership be developed and what correctives to traditional Japanese patterns need to be applied when leadership development takes place?

These are the questions which concern us in this paper, questions which are of the utmost importance in developing leaders for a church which is widely agreed to be undergoing a ‘leadership crisis[research-paper2.html#fn1x2 ¹]’, and in developing and nurturing Christian leaders to become visible Christian role models in the wider Japanese society.

But our study is of wider implication than the immediate Church family. We believe that the deposit of Church Tradition is a gift to be used to bless the world outside of the church’s doors; Christian leadership principles applied to the Japanese context can offer fresh and transformative ideas to a leadership-hungry business world, which has traditionally been the most difficult segment of Japanese society to impact with the Gospel.

But to ask and answer these questions honestly is to attempt to approach the topic without our Western preconceptions about the purpose, function and nature of successful leadership. Naturally it is impossible to come to the subject tabula rasa, but our investigation must begin with the presupposition that Japanese leadership styles have developed as the most appropriate for Japanese societies, and therefore that a ‘transformed’ version of what is still essentially a Japanese style is appropriate for the church, a ‘transformed’ version of what is still essentially a Japanese society.

[edit] Methodological Concerns

There are two equally persistent and equally distorting trends in both Western and Japanese writing on Japan. The first is the danger of exoticism, of seeing Japan as a wholly Other, romanticized culture. This is generally compounded by taking a relatively static view of Japanese society–typically rooted around the pre-Meiji (1868) era–and neglecting not only changes since the Meiji restoration, but also since the war, and more importantly, the frenetic pace of change in Japanese society in the last ten or twenty years. Edward Said famously refers to this tendency as ‘Orientalism[research-paper3.html#fn2x2 ²].’ The second danger is to take an overly exceptionalist view of Japan, which stresses the unique characteristics of Japan; this is the view of Japan often propounded by Japanese nihonjinron[research-paper4.html#fn3x2 ³] authors:

We must deal with these temptations and tendencies in a combination of ways. In our own research and understanding of the nature of Japanese leadership, we work from the presupposition that Japan is a nation much like any other; that it does naturally have its own distinct culture, but that Japanese people are, underneath, human beings and not an alien species, and that they relate to the same drives and motivations as any other human being. We also need to critically evaluate much of the writing about Japanese leadership in the light of this Orientalism and nihonjinron philosophy.

Indeed, there is considerable debate about to what degree Japanese anthropological texts (in particular [#XNakaneSociety Nakane] [#XNakaneSociety 1970])

This debate extends beyond the standard models of Japanese culture, such as the ‘group model’ mentioned above, to encompass many other areas where anthropology is not clearly distinguished from nihonjinron[research-paper7.html#fn6x2 ⁶].

It is beyond the scope of this paper to attempt to resolve these opposing viewpoints; although we must note this debate and the impact it has on our reading of Japanese sociology, we will work from the assumption that the established models are trustworthy, and that if they are stereotypes it is because they contain a grain of truth.

However, we must also take into account the perceived distinctiveness of the Japanese nation, as evidenced by the nihonjinron and the current nationalism in Japanese society. We must therefore endeavour to construct a model of leadership development which completely avoids the appearance of being bata-kusai[research-paper8.html#fn7x2 ⁷], which appeals to Japanese sources and sensibilities as far as possible without compromising its Christian nature.

[edit] Prior Research

There has been very little specific research into the nature, form and function of Japanese leadership; much of the popular and academic work on Japanese business administration focuses more on management techniques and styles than on leadership[research-paper9.html#fn8x2 ⁸], and the sociological literature (particularly [#XNakaneSociety Nakane] [#XNakaneSociety 1970] which, despite the above concerns, remains a foundational text.) concentrates on ‘criteria of group formation’ as part of a more wide-ranging ethnography of Japanese society.

From a Christian perspective, two publications have been particularly invaluable: [#XOgataLeadership Ogata] [#XOgataLeadership 1985] and [#XPeaseLeadership Pease] [#XPeaseLeadership 1989] both concentrate on the question of how to develop an authentically Japanese Christian leadership style. But they are somewhat prejudiced by their association with the Church Growth Movement, and treat leadership is a means toward a single end—the establishment of large churches. The theory runs that if the right kind of leader is in place, the church will grow. We reject this supposition as an expression of ritual magic. Nevertheless, their taxonomies of Japanese leadership styles have been a useful basis for the following chapter.

But as Pease points out,

In particular, there is no current research which avoids approaching the question from a fundamentally Western perspective. Pease may reasonably admit that

but he is still operating from the basis of ‘American church growth concepts.’

Instead, this present research will focus on the possibilities of ‘baptizing’ the existing Japanese leadership models rather than ‘transplanting’ Western models into the church—an activity which has not particularly been meritorious in the past. This is the novelty of this particular research, and this is what makes it exciting to carry out.

[edit] Chapter 1
Leadership In Japan

In this chapter we will analyse the literature on Japanese leadership from a sociological perspective. We will consider three ‘aspects’ of leadership: positional models of leadership will tell us the absolute role that the leader occupies; functional models will consider the relationship between leader and subordinates; and stylistic models will consider how leadership is exercised. There is, of course, a certain amount of overlap between these aspects, but they provide a useful initial set of categories for considering leadership in Japan.

[edit] 1.1 Positional Models

First, we will look at models describing the overall role of the leader. In the literature, we see two distinct themes: what we might call ‘the agrarian model’ and ‘the imperial model’.

[edit] 1.1.1 The Agrarian Model

One often-cited motivation for Japanese leadership is drawn from Japan’s agrarian tradition:

While it is certainly true that Japan’s leaders do display more of a communalistic and self-sacrificial disposition than those of other cultures, a note of caution must be sounded. Sakaiya was prime minister of Japan at the time when the agricultural industry was lobbying the government strongly against the import of foreign rice; their argument was that the collapse of the rice industry would lead to the collapse of cultural values[research-paper13.html#fn2x3 ²], and hence, although the agrarian model is a common metaphor for Japanese society,

That said, the model is not without use as an interpretation of common leadership patterns. The model is characterised by calm consensus-building through the process called nemawashi[research-paper15.html#fn4x3 ⁴]—seeking to ‘get people on board’ by a careful process of persuading each individual stakeholder before making an announcement[research-paper16.html#fn5x3 ⁵].

Similarly, Reischauer supports the ‘agrarian model’ as an explanation of Japanese leadership behaviour:

However, as in all consensus-based leadership, the role of the leader is not diminished—it is still the leader’s responsibility to produce the ideas on which everyone is expected to agree, and the leader now requires a different set of political skills in acquiring such consensus.

[edit] 1.1.2 The Imperial Model

In direct contrast to the agrarian model, there is what may be called the imperial model. Prior to the Second World War, the emperor provided strong, authoritarian leadership—or at least, such leadership was exercised in his name—in accordance with hierarchical, neo-Confucian principles, and, the argument runs, such leadership is still a fundamental feature of Japanese society today.

In the imperial model, status is ascribed rather than attained; leaders do not become leaders because of their ability, but achieve ability because they are leaders[research-paper19.html#fn8x3 ⁸]. However, as we will see in the next section, the role accorded to the leader in imperial model does not always find itself worked out in what might be called authoritarian rule.

[edit] 1.2 Functional Models

With our two overarching models in place, let us now turn to the detail of the leader’s activities; that is, how the leaders do their jobs.

[edit] 1.2.1 Nakane’s “weak leaders”

Chie Nakane’s theory of Japan as a ‘vertical society[research-paper20.html#fn9x3 ⁹]’ posits that members of a Japanese group have, on the whole, no independent relationship with each other but are all ‘rooted’ in their vertical relationship with their oya-bun[research-paper21.html#fn10x3 ¹⁰]. The consequence of such a ‘rooting’ is that the leader is not an external influence upon their group, but is an inseparable part of it. Indeed, the leader is expected to merge their identity with that of the group[research-paper22.html#fn11x3 ¹¹] and cannot avoid but develop emotional and personal ties to their ko-bun[research-paper23.html#fn12x3 ¹²] subordinates, particularly over an immediate small group.

These ties produce the phenomenon of amae[research-paper24.html#fn13x3 ¹³], which Trompenaars describes as follows:

These ties of amae form a natural ‘braking’ mechanism on the authoritarian influence of the leader, checking the abuse of power through a sense of emotional responsibility, while engendering continued respect from subordinate to leader[research-paper26.html#fn15x3 ¹⁵].

Hence when Nakane declares that ‘Japanese soil cannot grow a charismatic leader[research-paper27.html#fn16x3 ¹⁶],’ she is not, as some have suggested, making a negative statement, but a positive one. She is essentially stipulating that within a culture oriented around personal and emotional ties, a dominating leader is undesirable. The effect of charisma is limited to the immediate personal relations, rather than influence directed towards the organisation at large.

Additionally, as we shall see, changes in society mean that the traditional quality of onjImage:Research-paper1x.png-shugi[research-paper28.html#fn17x3 ¹⁷] is becoming more and more negatively nuanced; as time progresses, paternalistic leaders will be seen as interfering meddlers rather than concerned father-figures.

[edit] 1.2.2 sensei-deshi Leadership

As well as the concept of amae, another of the principle relationships in Japanese culture is between sensei, the teacher/authority figure, and deshi, the pupil. The influence that a sensei has over their deshi extends not only in the attributed relationship but in the frame relationship[research-paper29.html#fn18x3 ¹⁸]. For instance, a university professor may continue to be a source of advice and inspiration for his students long after graduation; it is not uncommon for senior politicians, for instance, to follow the directions of their sensei when entering government[research-paper30.html#fn19x3 ¹⁹].

The sensei-deshi model is at its most developed in the iemoto system; professional disciplines which require close participation between sensei and sensei, such as the arts, the theatre, the martial arts, craftsmanship, go and shogi, organise themselves in explicitly familial (ie) schools, the head of the school being called the iemoto. The role of iemoto is hereditary, passed either by direct descent or adoption; the new iemoto often inherits the name of their predecessor[research-paper31.html#fn20x3 ²⁰]. The iemoto system propagates and reinforces the hierarchical authoritarian structure of leadership within a discipline and Nakane argues[research-paper32.html#fn21x3 ²¹] that echoes of the system are evident throughout professional and academic society.

[edit] 1.2.3 Symbolic and centralized leadership

While the sensei-deshi model works well for relatively flat hierarchies and small groups, leaders of larger organisations often seek to exercise influence more widely than their immediate group of kohai.

In the Japanese context this is often effected through creating a dedicated management staff and a separation between management and subordinates. It is the responsibility of the management to communicate the ideas of the leadership to the subordinates and ensure their implementation. Within this basic architecture, the range of power of the leader forms a continuum, between being a symbolic figure in the agrarian tradition whose role

and to being a more autocratic figure combining both symbolic and actual power[research-paper34.html#fn23x3 ²³].

[edit] 1.3 Stylistic Models

The final dimension along which we will examine Japanese leadership patterns is that of the transformational-transactional continuum[research-paper35.html#fn24x3 ²⁴].

On the whole, Japanese leadership can be characterised by a much more transformational dynamic than that of the West; a Japanese leader is interested in his subordinates primarily and the task in hand only secondarily. [#XNakaneSociety Nakane] [#XNakaneSociety 1970] calls this dynamic ‘super-subordination’:

[#XTrompenaarsCulture Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner] [#XTrompenaarsCulture 1997] also concurs with a widely transformational understanding of the exercise of leadership in Japan[research-paper37.html#fn26x3 ²⁶], as does [#XOgataLeadership Ogata] [#XOgataLeadership 1985][research-paper38.html#fn27x3 ²⁷], although this is not to say that Japanese leaders are entirely relationship-oriented to the detriment of task-orientation. Indeed, a study of Japanese leaders showed that ‘the most effective leaders are those who score high on both task-oriented and socio-emotional measures of leadership[research-paper39.html#fn28x3 ²⁸].’

On the other hand, Burns’ definition goes further than simple relationship-orientation; a truly transformational leader is one who inspires and enables his subordinates:

It is this dimension which is less developed in the Japanese context.

[edit] 1.4 Leadership in changing society

The danger of constructing complex models of Japanese society is that the society is dynamic. After the Second World War, globalisation and Westernisation have affected the society at an ever-accelerating pace, and our thinking must reflect this.

As part of the perplexing great reversal process inherent in globalisation, ‘Oriental’ ideas are being imported into Western nations, and Western ideas are now forming part of the Japanese consciousness: lifetime employment, the bastion of the Japanese social order, is now a thing of the past[research-paper41.html#fn30x3 ³⁰], and more emphasis is placed on individual career paths and family life, while the postmodern West is beginning to search for diffuse and personal leadership figures. This change in Japan is, predictably, having an effect on leadership models:

Hence, generational differences will play a part in determining appropriate leadership styles[research-paper43.html#fn32x3 ³²]. For the purposes of our investigation, the important point is that we must not dismiss Western models of leadership in the Japanese context; they may well be precisely what will be imported and adopted by the Japanese themselves in the near future.

[edit] 1.5 Areas for further research

As well as the sociological literature we have considered, folk stories and hero literature can provide clues to the cultural values which are prized and passed on through the society. Surprisingly, however, when we examine Japanese folk heroes, we see an almost uniform pattern.

While the general tendency in Japan is to suppress and even repress individualism—there is a proverb deru kugi wa utareru, ‘The nail that sticks out gets hammered down’[research-paper44.html#fn33x3 ³³]—the folk heroes of the culture are those who take a daring, individual stand, and draw a team around them through their charisma and personal exploits. Examining this topic in depth is beyond the scope of this paper, but examples include the monk Ikkyu, the ninjas, MitImage:Research-paper2x.png KImage:Research-paper3x.pngmon, Kuranosuke, Prince Shotoku, and, in contemporary society, figures like the baseballer Ichiro[research-paper45.html#fn34x3 ³⁴].

It seems from these cultural carriers that ‘sticking out’ is actually encouraged, assuming that one is actually successful; perhaps the motivating factor behind the repression of individualism is the fear of failure.

[edit] 1.6 Conclusion

We have found that there is not necessarily one “Japanese” leadership style, but within the culture, a number of styles of leadership are evidenced. We found two major styles, which appear to be contradictory; in later chapters we will be showing how the agrarian and the imperial model of leadership can be seen as two sides of the same coin.

Leadership can be analysed in a number of ways, and we have looked at the exercise of leadership and its resulting interpersonal relations in the Japanese context.

[edit] Chapter 2
‘Laity Mobilized’?

A Japanese pastor, Rev. Mizumura of Tsuda church in Kagawa prefecture, was asked how he views the church situation in Japan; the explanation he gives is typical of that given by many pastors and missionaries:

What do we mean by authoritarian leadership here, and how has it come about? Kenneth Dale reminds us of the important distinction between authoritative and autocratic leadership:

To put it another way, we could say that the present autocratic leadership of many Japanese churches is due to a combination of the ‘imperial mode’ of Japanese leadership, which normally operates in a hierarchical manner, and a lack of the delegation which such a mode naturally implies.

[edit] 2.1 An unmobilized laity

Part of the reason for this is sociological. The pastor is a full-time employee, and he has the time; the laity typically have full-time jobs themselves and often have time-consuming social commitments—in the usual case, the men with developing their business contacts and the women with children’s schooling—and are therefore happy to leave the work to the ‘professional’.

On the face of it, this is a good argument, and we must question whether or not in these circumstances we actually want lay leadership of churches. Much has been written about the need for lay involvement as the key to growth of Japanese churches (see particularly [#XBraunLaity Braun] [#XBraunLaity 1971]) and we are by no means devoid of suggestions for how this could be achieved, but on the whole such suggestions have amounted to nothing.

[edit] 2.2 The New Religions

However, we do see a pattern of lay involvement reading to religious growth in the New Religions[research-paper48.html#fn3x4 ³], despite the fact that most New Religions also employ full-time clergy. On the other hand, these clergy are more often active at the central (administrative) level rather than the regional level, with local leaders given correspondingly less significance; this is in accordance with Nakane’s leader-and-staff model. This model, seen ‘in many Japanese companies[research-paper49.html#fn4x4 ⁴],’ is applied right down the hierarchy of the religion:

This structure, almost identical to that found in large corporations, is taken to be a ‘natural’ expression of Japanese hierarchy—the ‘vertical society’ beloved of Nakane[research-paper51.html#fn6x4 ⁶].

Additionally, the New Religions are primarily merit-based; entering into leadership and into evangelism is seen as an important part of advancement not just in the religion but in its temporal blessings[research-paper52.html#fn7x4 ⁷]. In our grace-based Christianity, the motivation for lay involvement in evangelism and leadership needs to be made considerably more apparent—and placed in this-worldly terms—before we will see the same levels of involvement as the New Religions.

[edit] 2.3 Situating church leadership in Japan

We can, then, see a pattern of leadership in the mission churches of Japan: churches were established along congregationalist lines, becoming almost exclusively autonomous organisations. The head of each individual organisation was the missionary, who modeled a form of leadership in which all church activity was carried out by the only willing volunteer—himself. When Japanese pastors were raised up, they naturally associated this style of leadership with their own imperial model; similarly without the potential for delegation to other volunteers, the church proceeded with an autocratic but non-hierarchical leadership style.

In the indigenous churches, the situation has been rather different. The MukyImage:Research-paper6x.pngkai movement (‘Non-church’) founded by KanzImage:Research-paper7x.png Uchimura is based around the sensei-deshi model. Uchimura was from the samurai classes and of an academic persuasion, and MukyImage:Research-paper8x.pngkai activity is based around a scholastic framework:

Leadership in the MukyImage:Research-paper9x.pngkai is not externally ascribed, but actually self-ascribed, as one would expect for an iemoto style institution:

This self-certification highlights a more general problem in the exercise of leadership in Japanese churches—the common lack of accountability and oversight. While many Japanese churches do have a functioning rijikai (elders’ board), the temptation is strong for the pastor’s office to develop into the ‘centralized leadership style’ in which

This is particularly a problem as churches wish to grow; as we have seen, the emotional ties to the small group in Japan naturally restricts the autocratic tendencies of the leader, but without such ‘braking’ force, real, independent accountability can be difficult to sustain. Indeed, the average size of a Japanese church—around twenty to thirty members—may be a reflection of the optimum extent of a Japanese leader’s influence over their small group.

[edit] 2.4 Areas for future research

Looking at patterns of leadership in the other indigenous churches, we see a tendency—often seen in the New Religions—of leadership being inherited by the family members of the church’s founder. All Japanese indigenous churches which have passed on leadership from the founder to a successor have shown this pattern[research-paper56.html#fn11x4 ¹¹], and for the New Religions, see Konkyoko[research-paper57.html#fn12x4 ¹²] and Image:Research-paper10x.pngmoto[research-paper58.html#fn13x4 ¹³] as representative examples.

As in the iemoto system, inherited leaders are usually the natural but sometimes the adopted children of their predecessors. As this appears to be a recognisable pattern within Japanese religions, should it be accepted within the Christian church as well, perhaps following the example of priestly families in the Old Testament or family connections in the early church? This of course leads onto questions about the salvation of the family rather than of the individual, but our concern is with the measures required to develop Christian leadership in circumstances of inherited leadership; full discussion is, sadly, beyond the scope of this present paper.

Similarly, more research needs to be carried out into the Catholic and Orthodox churches in Japan, which demonstrate a hierarchical, authoritarian leadership structure, but with clearly distinguished roles between clergy and laity. Both of these factors seem well attuned to Japanese society, and may have accounted for incredible church growth and laity mobilization: the Orthodox church by 1900 ‘had trained 376 Japanese clergy and 25,698 members[research-paper59.html#fn14x4 ¹⁴]’ while ‘there were never more than four foreigners in the work during the entire history of the Orthodox church in Japan[research-paper60.html#fn15x4 ¹⁵].’ A greater understanding of their leadership structures in Japan is needed.

[edit] 2.5 Conclusion

We have found that Japanese church tends to demonstrate autocratic and authoritative leadership, with generally insufficient delegation. Sociologically this can be explained with reference to laymen’s free time and the status distinction between clergy and layman, but this is questionable given the amount of lay involvement in the New Religions.

We further found that the model of leadership passed on from missionaries to Japanese church leaders inadvertently fitted in with existent cultural patterns but did not necessarily model delegation or fully motivate lay participation. Nevertheless, alternative models can be found in the indigenous churches which do draw from Japanese cultural leadership patterns.

Finally, Japanese religious movements, including indigenous churches, as well as other cultural elements, sometimes show patterns of inherited leadership. Further study could determine the appropriateness of inherited leadership in the Christian church and what correctives would need to be applied to these circumstances.

[edit] Chapter 3
Biblical Leadership

We have now come to more of an understanding of the leadership styles and expressions of leadership predominant in Japanese society and in its church. We will now turn our attention to the Bible to determine what we can learn about leadership in these contexts.

[edit] 3.1 The Japanese Jesus

We have previously noted that there are two conflicting but complementary major models describing the Japanese conception of who a leader should be: the leader should be a self-sacrificing figure, leading through gentleness and sensitivity; the leader should also be an imperial figure, the authoritarian head of the hierarchy. How do we fit these two ideas together?

As Christians, we define ourselves as followers of the greatest leader of them all: Jesus Christ, the ultimate example of self-sacrificial leadership[research-paper61.html#fn1x5 ¹] but also the imperial Lord of the universe[research-paper62.html#fn2x5 ²]. He holds together these two contrasting models in perfect harmony; we may present him, therefore, as the fulfillment of the Japanese leadership ideal.

Additionally, the relationship between Jesus and his disciples is a good fit to the functional understanding of vertical relationships in Japanese small groups. The disciples did not unite in their affinity to one another—a tax collector for the Romans and a revolutionary terrorist would not naturally form a working relationship!—but were united through their vertical relationship with him.

[edit] 3.2 Discipleship, Accountability and Leadership Training

Jesus’ relationship with his disciples was, in fact, a prime example of the sensei-deshi relationship detailed in chapter one. Indeed, deshi is often translated as ‘disciple,’ and the word is used for the Twelve in Japanese versions of the Bible.

In the context of such a relationship, Jesus did not merely demonstrate leadership and character development but he openly shared his life with them; he did not, as churches today tend to, separate the disciplines of discipleship, accountability and leadership training; the sensei-deshi relationship covered all these three areas as a seamless gestalt. His leadership training was expressed not merely through formal teaching but through such a holistic relational experience with the disciples.

Naturally such a lifestyle-based, experiential learning experience can only be restricted to a small group of primary people, but this in keeping with the sensei-deshi model; Jesus’ mission largely revolved around infusing his principles and his life into the lives of his close disciples, knowing that they would be the ones to continue the expansion of the proclamation of his message.

[edit] 3.3 Transformative and Situational Aspects

Current studies on Biblical leadership, and particularly [#XFordTransforming Ford] [#XFordTransforming 1991] associate Jesus’ leadership style with the ‘transformational style[research-paper63.html#fn3x5 ³]’ currently popular in Western management studies and with ‘servant leadership’, developed in [#XGreenleafServant Greenleaf] [#XGreenleafServant 1977].

More recently, postmodern authors have examined Jesus’ ministry through the lens of the situational style[research-paper64.html#fn4x5 ⁴] and the narrative model[research-paper65.html#fn5x5 ⁵].

On the whole we broadly agree with these models, but a note of caution must be sounded. As Ford points out himself, we have a tendency to see in Jesus whatever leadership styles and structures we ourselves espouse, but Jesus does not submit himself to our models[research-paper66.html#fn6x5 ⁶]. A second note of caution needs to be applied to blindly following Jesus’ example, for the simple reason that the church leader is not Jesus and dare not usurp his place. The church leader leads as one under authority. Where Jesus can legitimately say ‘follow me’, the words and the life of a Christian leader must necessarily say ‘follow Him.’

Nevertheless, it is fair to say that Jesus’ behaviour clearly demonstrates leadership principles and leadership development principles which will be applicable and desirable to the Japanese church: particularly, we wish to replicate those elements of inspiring and empowering, of constant personal development through relationship building, and of modelling leadership principles through shared life experiences.

[edit] 3.4 Conclusion

We have presented Jesus as the fulfillment of Japanese leadership ideals; he holds together the tension between the two contrasting ideas at the heart of our understanding of Japanese leadership. By doing so, he also gives us hope that it is possible for our leaders to fulfill those ideas, rather than having to fall into one style or another.

His methods of leadership development, particularly the use of small groups and shared life experiences, also find resonance in one of the key relationships in the Japanese leadership consciousness, that between sensei and his deshi.

Finally we have seen that Jesus’ practice of inspiring and equipping his disciples, in taking their development not as a means to his goal but as his goal, is a practice that we wish to engender in Japanese church leaders as well.

[edit] Chapter 4
Conclusion: Teaching Japanese Christian Leadership

In his paper on leadership development and coaching[research-paper67.html#fn1x6 ¹], Mitsuo Fukuda outlines six principles for a successful leadership development strategy:

To this we can add our own constraints:

1. The leader must become aware of the generational issues in Japanese society and be taught to ‘contextualize’ their leadership style in ways appropriate to each generational situation.
2. The leader must develop their own circles of accountability and must find ways to continue their own discipleship and leadership development as a life-long process.
3. The leader must form small group relationships with his subordinates to disciple them through shared life experiences.

In this concluding chapter, we do not present a ‘packaged’ leadership development model as, as we shall argue, this is antithetical to the style of leadership we wish to develop. Instead we shall examine some proposals for achieving some of these goals.

[edit] 4.1 One vector: ‘koans’

Japan is a nation skilled at adapting and refining. The old economic rallying-cry of wakon yImage:Research-paper11x.pngsai—Japanese spirit applied to Western learning—reflects the ability to ‘contextualize’ a foreign idea. But this adaption process often begins by formalizing and freezing an idea in time. Once the idea is turned into a pattern, that pattern is stamped out again and again without modification. Many Japanese churches today show evidence of meticulously copying and preserving the details of a church model, but missing the living concept at its core.

For this reason, the development of the kind of leadership we are talking about cannot take place within the confines of a structured programme and with the communication of isolated principles, for any set of principles can become formalized and rigid[research-paper69.html#fn3x6 ³]. As we have seen, the hallmark of transformational leadership is that it is continually seeking to redefine and reorient itself to ever-changing situations.

As such, transformational leadership is more of a way of thinking; teaching transformational leadership needs therefore to challenge and confront ways of thinking, much in the same way as the Zen koan strives to ‘break the mind of logic’[research-paper70.html#fn4x6 ⁴].

In both leadership training and in discipleship, this re-training of the mind is best communicated through the use of stories—Jesus used parables precisely for this purpose, and in leadership development literature, the stories are called case studies. Not only do parables provide a shared history, mythology and symbolic framework to bond a team together, but they also provide a living embodiment of a principle without the inflexibility of codification[research-paper71.html#fn5x6 ⁵].

As noted in our introduction, the best source of leadership training koans would be from within the Japanese culture itself. As an example,

Combining this with Paul’s assertion that ‘I die daily[research-paper73.html#fn7x6 ⁷]’, we have a koan which encourages the leader to break out of the moulds and think about how the limitations around them can be changed—an idea which may be accused of being a Western concept—but one which is couched in a Japanese setting, presented with a successful Japanese implementation, and with a Biblical ‘hook’.

The development of such koans could become a useful teaching resource for communicating Biblical leadership principles in a Japanese cultural context.

[edit] 4.2 The generation gap

Mathews’ distinction between three generations active in Japan[research-paper74.html#fn8x6 ⁸] provides a useful framework for the internal contextualization of leadership styles required by the Japanese leader. Just as Japanese people would not relate warmly to American leadership styles, younger Japanese people will no longer relate well to traditionally Japanese emotionally involved leadership. Hence the effective leader will learn a plurality of leadership styles, adapting themselves situationally to the generation they seek to lead in any given task.

This can be described to a Japanese leader as an extension of the principle of nemawashi, which already provides for the concept of individualised attention being required to get everyone on board an idea. The attentive leader will discern whether his subordinate is of an older ‘Eastern-leaning’ generation, a middle-aged ‘Western-leaning’ generation or a younger ‘globalised’ generation, and select hierarchical, performance-directed or postmodern leadership appropriately.

[edit] 4.3 Leadership and accountability

The Japanese leader has arrived: he has status ascribed to him, and he is at the top of his tree. The Christian leader, on the other hand, has not arrived; he is still on a journey. His development, discipleship and training must continue throughout his life[research-paper75.html#fn9x6 ⁹]. If many Japanese pastors do indeed end up producing ‘disciples of the pastor rather than disciples of Christ[research-paper76.html#fn10x6 ¹⁰],’ it may well be because they, not Christ, are seen as head of the hierarchy; it may be because they are not seen as disciples themselves.

What must mark out the Japanese Christian leader is the visible expression that, just like the first disciples, he[research-paper77.html#fn11x6 ¹¹] is himself part of Jesus’ “small group,” with a clearly defined set of peers to whom he is committed through their shared vertical relationship with Jesus. This may take place either within or outside the hierarchical model of a denominational church. It is this “small group” of peer leaders who form his core accountability group and mutual encouragement towards discipleship and personal development. The VIP club movement[research-paper78.html#fn12x6 ¹²] provides an example of such a peer group amongst Japanese Christian businessmen.

At the same time, the church leader must form a small group in the “weak leader” model consisting of himself and his church, with the relationships involved in the group providing him a sphere in which he can share his life with his parishioners and simultaneously be restricted in the exercise of his power. For this reason, we recommend that Japanese churches do not grow beyond their current ‘ceiling’ of twenty or thirty members.

As well as such a group dynamic, a one-to-one mentoring relationship must form the milieu for leadership training. In the sensei-deshi relationship rooted in Japanese culture but modelled Biblically through Jesus’ relationship with his disciples, we have a framework for individualized concern for personal development.

These three sets of relationships should provide the Japanese church leader with the experiences they need to develop their own leadership, their own walk with Christ, and to pass on a model of Christian character to those they directly influence.

[edit] 4.4 Summary

We have looked at the various styles and expressions of leadership in Japanese society as a whole and within the church in Japan; we have also examined some principles of leadership from the praxis of Jesus Christ. In this chapter we have attempted to bring these facets together to create a Japanese Christian leadership style and some principles for its development.

Our major findings have been the influence of the sensei-deshi model of Japanese leadership on Japan and on the church and its reflections in the discipleship activities of Jesus; the need for a small group for accountability and the leader’s continued personal development and discipleship; and the importance of attuning leadership style to bridge the generation gap in the Japanese church. We have also highlighted several areas for further study, and we trust that all these findings will serve to equip the Japanese church in its search for better and mature leadership, to the glory of God..

[edit] Bibliography