Leadership structure

Have you ever found yourself placed in a position of authority, wondering how to best involve the members of your group or organization in the mission you all claim to support? You were elected or appointed to this role, and now you're wondering how you can lead effectively. I found this tension described perfectly in the first chapters of a small book entitled Culture Craft. Targeting those in Christian leadership, the book charts the traditional view of organizational structure in the Western world that has spread across the globe. This is a “top-down” approach, where power, results, and influence are implied, if not actually stated, as fundamental principles of the organizational hierarchy. I began to wonder how this view of the chain of command applied to my country, the United States, as well as to the beleaguered government in Iraq.

James Otis, in his "Rights of the British Colonies Asserted and Proved," comments that, “the end of it [the government] is manifestly the good of the whole.” As such, he goes on to state that a democracy is possibly the best way of ruling with a balance of power. Representation was created as a practical means of carrying out the huge task of making decisions for such a large body of people. It was born out of practicality and provides the model for the “top-down” theory that we discussed earlier.

The country of Iraq brings a whole new course to the dinner table. If, like me, you struggle to identify exactly what is at stake in the current war, you may find "Which Iraq War do you Want to End?" helpful in clarifying your thoughts. In this article, Christopher Hitchens describes the conflicts currently at center stage in the Middle East. He explains that there are really at least three wars being waged: "The first, tragically, is the battle for mastery between Sunni and Shiite. The second is the campaign to isolate and defeat al-Qaida in Mesopotamia. The third is the struggle of Iraq's Kurdish minority to defend and consolidate its regional government in the north. " Faced with three such diverse objectives, the lines have blurred between our starting objective and the seemingly hopeless web that Coalition troops are experiencing today.

The occupation in Iraq started with a noble cause. Again according to James Otis, “Whenever the administrators, in any of those forms [of government], deviate from truth, justice and equity, they verge towards tyranny, and are to be opposed; and if they prove incorrigible, they will be deposed by the people, if the people are not rendered too abject.” I am wondering what the mood and attitude of the Iraqi people really was when we invaded. Were they really too spiritless to stand up for themselves, or did they simply realize just how deeply rooted are the lines of conflict in their country?

As is evidenced in the “Iraq Political Structure Rotting from the Inside and the Outside” report, Malou Innocent relates that backbiting Cabinet members, an ineffective Parliament, and the lack of legitimate use of Iraqi forces point to serious problems of functionality in the current system of government. It will take some additional research and reflection to discover just what type of government, if any, would be able to bridge the gaping holes in this country. In any case, James Otis’ point that, “the inconveniencies, not to say impossibility, attending the consultations and operations of a large body of people have made it necessary to transfer the power of the whole to a few,” is well-illustrated in this case.