Faithful Leadership Essay

LEAD810 Faithful Leadership Essay:

Team Leadership in Nehemiah

Willis C. Kierce

Eastern University

LEAD810: Faithful Leadership Essay

Team Leadership in Nehemiah

Sent by Persian king Artaxerxes to oversee the rebuilding of Jerusalem’s walls in approximately 445 B.C. (Johnson, 2010; Willette, 2014), Nehemiah presents a compelling model for modern project management (Johnson 2010). This essay seeks to provide an overview of the manner and methodology by which Nehemiah faithfully executed his assigned task with emphasis upon its implications for the character of contemporary leadership. We will specifically analyze Nehemiah’s expertise in mobilizing and motivating a force of citizen workers to accomplish a monumental feat even by today’s standards of restoring 45 sections of Jerusalem’s walls in only 52 days (Nehemiah 6:15; Rata, 2005) despite considerable opposition to his leadership (Macariello, 2003). We will compare the design and implementation of Nehemiah’s strategic plan to modern management literature, observing the historical narrative in light of team leadership theory (Edmondson, 2012; Hickman, 2002; Northouse, 2010; Solansky, 2008), especially in high-risk contexts (Heldel & Antonsen, 2014). The author will conclude the essay by applying its content to a personal assessment of his own team-based leadership approach.

Historical and Biblical Context of Nehemiah

        As cupbearer to King Artaxerxes I (Nehemiah 1:11), Nehemiah occupied a prominent position of trust in the Persian government (Johnson, 2010), which was headquartered at Susa in modern day Iran (Willette, 2014). Involving more than tasting and serving wine at the king’s table, the cupbearer’s role was a tactical one, providing for Artaxerxes’ overall security in the manner similar to the United States Secret Service today (Johnson, 2010).

        Upon receiving word from his brother that despite the completed rebuilding of the Jewish Temple in 515 B.C., the walls of the city remained in disrepair and provided an eminent security threat (Johnson, 2010; Macariello, 2003), Nehemiah experienced deep personal distress and a desire to assist the people of Israel (Nehemiah 1). He reached out to God in prayer that he might find favor with King Artaxerxes in order to assist Jerusalem’s exiles (Macariello, 2003; Nehemiah 1:5-11). This is especially significant given that Artaxerxes had previously decreed the cessation of rebuilding efforts in Jerusalem (Ezra 4:21; Rata, 2005).

A testament to Nehemiah’s character and his good standing with the king, which will be addressed in more detail below, Nehemiah is sent to govern Judah with responsibility to oversee the wall reconstruction and restoration of Jerusalem’s security (Macariello, 2003). In doing so, Nehemiah initiated a series of strategic steps that resulted in rapid recruitment of local volunteers (Willette, 2014) and detailed division and delegation of tasks (Macariello, 2003; Nehemiah 3:1-32), maintaining focus while managing opposition from external threats – Sanballat, governor of Samaria, and Tobiah, the Ammonite official, whose armies were set to advance against the project (Macariello, 2003; Nehemiah 4-5; Willette, 2014).

Internally, Nehemiah and a faithful scribe named Ezra, who had arrived in Jerusalem with a similar heart for restoration (Johnson, 2010), challenged the rulers and nobles over their rebellion to God and outlined steps for repentance (Rata, 2005), resulting in national revival and the reinstatement of God’s laws as central to Israel’s worship (Ezra 8; Nehemiah 9; Willette, 2014; Venter, 2009). The expediency of project completion and efficacy of Nehemiah’s oversight points to both the grace and guidance of God and Nehemiah’s exceptional leadership skills (Rata, 2005).

The Character of Nehemiah’s Leadership

        Character is a critical question in leadership studies (Kouzes & Posner, 2007). To what extent should the personal character of a leader be distinguished from role leadership characteristics? A recent symposium on the work of Burns (1978), attended by the author, suggested that a leader’s personal character is less important than the leader’s ability to motivate individuals to transcend self-interest for the sake of a transformative organizational mission. It may be assumed that this question would be considered differently in secular and sacred settings of leadership and it remains a matter of debate for leadership theorists. Therefore, some qualities of Nehemiah’s character may not be transferable beyond the realm of spiritual leadership, though Macariello (2003) suggested that character traits inevitably emerge in a leader’s behavior. In this section, we will discuss several dimensions of a leader’s character as exemplified by Nehemiah. The reader should consider their application to his or her own context of experience.

        First and foremost, Nehemiah was a person whose life was “bathed in prayer” (Rata, 2005, p. 20). Upon receiving news of trouble in Jerusalem and before approaching King Artaxerxes, Nehemiah reached out to “the god of heaven” (Nehemiah 1:4, New International Version) in humble confession of sin and offered a passionate appeal for assistance on behalf of his people. Never self-sufficient, prayer for Nehemiah was a first call and not a last resort. At every point of decision or crisis throughout the biblical narrative, Nehemiah is found in prayer (1:4-10; 2:4-5; 4:4-5; 5:19; 6:9-14; 13:14-31). Prayer was a strategic exercise for Nehemiah and not an excuse for inactivity. For instance, facing opposition from Sanballat and Tobiah, prayer for God’s intervention was exercised as “the highest form of retaliation” (Macariello, 2003, p. 404-405). And following a season of fasting and prayer, when Nehemiah approached the king about the restoration project in Jerusalem, the cupbearer presented a well-developed plan to Artaxerxes (Nehemiah 2:6-8).

        Second, Nehemiah exhibited a strong sense of calling to his task (Nehemiah 2:12; 7:5) that translated into personal empathy for the people he served (Nehemiah 1:4). He viewed his leadership role from two critical perspectives. Nehemiah was passionate in pursuing the procedural goal of rebuilding the walls, but he never lost sight of the ultimate mission of restoring the people’s broken relationship to God. The faithful leader therefore both sees the need at hand, developing a strategic approach to its resolution, and feels the context in which the need arises (Rata, 2005), allowing him or her to be fully present with those being served (Nehemiah 4:21-23). Consequently, Nehemiah integrated the right means with the right motives in his approach to leadership (Macariello, 2003).