Passing It On: Growing Your Future Leaders (35 page)
You will have to seek out someone you believe has great visionary potential, aspirations, or great intellectual capacity.
Once you have identified the person, you might have to woo them. Initiate the discussion. Invite him or her into your office
to explain your desire to mentor, and solicit that individual’s interest. Say to them, “If you are willing to be developed,
I am willing to develop you. I agree to help you. Do you agree to let me?”
People may be surprised when you approach them in this way, but the gesture will show that you care for them. I believe that
very invitation to mentor them, the fact that you reached out, can be the basis of a caring relationship. Once the individual
agrees, then proceed to mentor based on the principles outlined in this book. Eventually that can lead to the kind of “love”
you need in a successor, or at least respect.
Yes, you may be mentoring late in the game, but now is better than never. Advise your superiors that you are mentoring this
person. Now you are opening
up the possibility of succession. If you answer to a board, they will respect you for thinking beyond your time with the
company. The board will also feel secure in knowing that because you are mentoring someone, they will not need to go outside
the organization to recruit a potential successor.
The board might even decide to pay you more for fear that you are planning to leave. The fact that you are being sensitive
to the company’s needs for succession makes you the kind of person they want to keep around for a while. As a manager, you
have a win on all sides. You have someone in training to replace you, you have a board that might feel more committed to you,
and you have an increase in salary. Just one act of demonstrating that you want to mentor can improve your relationship to
the company, as well as your bank account.
If you are not the principal of the organization, you can mentor a successor for your position, but not necessarily for the
whole organization. If you are the principal of the organization, you have more authority over mentoring and succession. Everyone
can mentor someone, however. You do not need to be the president or owner. The minute you have a position of authority, your
first act is to choose someone to mentor.
If possible, choose more than one individual to mentor and make them all aware that everyone will have the opportunity to
advance and grow under the mentoring program. Let them know you are not responsible for the future, nor can you guarantee
any position. You can promise that you will position them for any opportunity that will be available. This reduces the possibility
of jealousy and infighting once your choice is clear.
I mentor hundreds of people from around the world. I also mentor twenty-two people within my organization. One of them is
the one I chose as successor. Because I mentored all of them, none became jealous.
Jesus mentored twelve, but had three who were His favorites. Of course, we do have a record of James and John asking for a
special place, and Jesus had to correct them that everyone has a spot (see Matt. 20:20–23 and Mark 10:40). I think this shows
that His interest in mentoring all twelve of them reduced the tension and the spirit of competition among them.
Put your eyes on one individual who may be a potential successor, but open up mentorship to a broader circle to encourage
development of all the gifts that are under your influence. Encourage those you mentor to mentor. It reduces the spirit of
competition and anxiety when you require persons you are helping to help someone else. You will find that they all will develop
a spirit of care and respect for one another.
The worst mistake a leader can make is to mentor no one, choose no successor, and leave no legacy. The first example of this
in the Scripture is the first created human, Adam. He died without any strong successor. The Bible does not indicate that
he mentored anyone, not even his wife. He was so poor in his mentorship of her that his wife was subject to persuasion by
a satanic force, and it destroyed his whole family. One son killed his own brother. This is the worst form of lack of mentorship.
The next one would be Joshua, who despite having had effective mentoring, appears to have left no strong successor. So Joshua
failed as a leader. After the death of Joshua, the Bible says it happened that the children of Israel asked the Lord, “Who
shall lead us now?”
Judges 1:1
After the death of Joshua, the Israelites asked the L
ORD
, “Who will be the first to go up and fight for us against the Canaanites?”
The book of Joshua mentions no specific person he mentored—no aide to Joshua as he was to Moses. We ended up with a scattering
of people with no organization. Israel never fully recovered.
If we do not mentor, we create chaos. Another example of weak mentoring is Solomon, who did not groom anyone to follow him.
David mentored Solomon, but after Solomon died, the kingdom was divided and destroyed. In the New Testament, the trend continues.
Jesus chose Peter, but Peter failed to appoint someone, so there was chaos. Paul appointed Timothy, but Timothy failed to
appoint someone.
The constant principle flows through history that where there is no mentoring,
there is no successor. Where there is no successor, there is no order. Where there is no order, there is chaos.
Whenever a void occurs in the succession of leadership, scattering and decentralization follow. God has to start all over
again with the next generation, saying essentially, “Let me find someone who understands this.” God has to find someone new
who can start fresh, carry out the obligation to mentor, and choose a successor before time runs out.
Can you accept the challenge to lead as if the future depends on it? Are your successors in place, trained and ready to go?
Then step back, give them full authority, and send them forth to do greater things. Your supervision is no longer needed here,
and you too have better things to do.
You have conveyed your vision, you have produced leaders, and you have given them opportunities to apply their skills to practical
situations, to practice the performance of miracles. Now trust that they will carry out—not necessarily your exact vision
as you would have it—but a vision inspired by, shaped by, and formed from yours. You will have a legacy. This will be the
ultimate test of your leadership. Can your successors perpetuate your purpose, carry on your vision, preserve your legacy,
and go on to do greater things?
When it is time for you to go, you will be able to say, “I have transferred all I have, my grand vision, to my successors.
I lived up to the mentoring agreement. I have trained them well. It is up to them to run on.” Your segment of the relay race
is over. It is finished.
The Apostle Paul put it this way:
Points to remember:2 Timothy 4:6–7
For I am already being poured out like a drink offering, and the time has come for my departure. I have fought the good fight,
I have finished the race, I have kept the faith.
The greatest obligation of a true leader is to transfer a deposit into the next generation.
The worst mistake a leader can make is to mentor no one, choose no successor, and leave no legacy.
A Word to the Third World
Failure to mentor and produce successors in leadership is greater nowhere than in Third World or developing countries. We
hear daily of government coups, political rivalries, battles over the spoils of power, and the realities of such disgraceful
inhumane acts as ethnic cleansing, culture clashes, and religious wars. Tribal warfare and religious conflicts are pervasive
in these dynamic environments and only add to the fragility of leadership in these emerging nations.
Why is it so difficult for leaders in these postcolonial nations to mentor others and consider the prospect of giving up power
to succeeding leaders? Why is there such a temptation to hold on to power and even to go to extremes in some cases to annihilate
any threat to one’s leadership security? Why are leaders in these nations with such great potential willing to sacrifice and
auction their people’s future for the sake of keeping power? Is the problem psychological, social, economic, political, spiritual,
or ethnic? Perhaps the answer is in the history of these peoples and the world that produced them.
Many social scientists and scholars are baffled over the plight of the leadership challenges in the developing world, and
some have concluded that there must be a social or genetic defect in the psychological development of leaders in these regions.
However, being a product of the social, economic, political, and spiritual history of this context myself, I can appreciate
the unique perspective one gains after experiencing the environment of colonial oppression. The very terminology “Third World”
that is used to describe the millions who live in these postcolonial territories and emerging nations has its detrimental
consequences and renders one psychologically disadvantaged as it relates to a healthy self-concept, high self-esteem, and
strong self-worth.
Industrial states never have properly appreciated colonization’s role in preventing the development of quality leadership
in emerging and developing nations. Many of these industrial nations were the perpetrators of colonization. Colonization was
the extension of the major European kingdoms of France, Portugal, Spain, Belgium, Holland, and Great Britain.
Colonization was mostly motivated by economic and territorial pursuits to exploit agriculture and extract natural resources
as gold, silver, diamonds, other precious stones, oil, and wood. Theses interests led to the establishment of mass farming,
mining, and timbering projects, which in turn led to the slave trade and indentured servitude. This resulted in the movement
of peoples from their homelands, displacement of families, and destruction of historical and social bonds and infrastructures.
These disruptions created grave emotional, social, and psychological disorientation for millions of people.
The reality was systematic oppression of human potential and the eradication of human dignity and self-worth. The system reduced
humans to products, rather than recognizing them as persons. They were considered commodities, rather than creatures made
in the image of God. These make up a large share of the people designated today as “Third World” people.
This historical backdrop provides the reference and context for many of the leaders that oversee the process of the developing
nations. Many of these leaders struggle with fundamental issues that leaders in many industrial nations do not have to confront.
Not only are the leaders challenged, but the people they lead are also. The social, psychological, and economic impact of
colonization on its postcolonial territories is a very important component when considering the challenges related to the
lack of mentoring and succession.
In many ways, colonization remains a reality. It is possible to assess some of the effects, such as lack of self-worth, low
self-esteem, poor self-concept, and loss of a sense of history. These result in psychological disorientation, producing a
sense of self-hatred, distrust, powerlessness, and a spirit of survival of the fittest among the people and the leadership.
One of the greatest tragedies is that the architects of colonization blocked the development of leadership among the peoples
of the colonies. The purpose
of colonization was to subjugate, not to educate, to overpower not to empower. The goals were to produce brainwashed followers,
not leaders; to create servants, not stewards; and to have dependents, not independent thinkers.
When the territories and colonies eventually threw off the yoke of the colonial powers, the governing responsibilities often
fell to unprepared, untrained, unskilled, and inexperienced leaders who were thrown into the seat of power by destiny. The
psychological defects of poor self-concepts, low self-esteem, and lack of self-worth further crippled these leaders. The result
is leaders who struggle not just with political, economic, and social issues in these emerging nations, but with impaired
skills and knowledge.
Perhaps this is what the great king of Israel Solomon meant when he wrote, “Woe to you, O land whose king was a servant [slave]”
(Eccl. 10:16).
In essence, the nation is in danger when the leadership has the mentality of a slave. It is unfair to judge these leaders
by the same standards as those in the industrial nations who have had the advantage of hundreds of years of leadership legacy.
It is my hope that the leaders of emerging nations will overcome the mental and psychological damage of a history of oppression.
If they dedicate themselves to investing in self-development and to freeing the people from the same mental damage that has
held them hostage to their past, they will succeed.
The future of the Third World nations rests in the quality of leaders we identify, cultivate, train, mentor, and empower to
serve their generation with humility and an awareness of their dispensability. May they be the new generation of leaders who
love serving more than being served, empowering more than retaining power, giving authority more than taking authority, and
producing leaders more than maintaining followers. May they be mentored and become mentors.
Part 1: The Principles—Success Is to Perpetuate Purpose for Posterity
1. The Greatest Leadership Obligation Is Preparing Your Replacement
