What if....loyalty and truth telling go hand in hand?

OK, still on my journey here and enjoying it so much. I appreciated all the input on Groupthink and have found it has been valuable to people in leadership.

This is a long note here because of the subject. I always struggled with "being loyal" and "speaking the truth." I was confused. I am wired for loyalty. But always felt I was being "disloyal" if I expressed an opinion that I knew was contrary to the "flow" of things. That if I expressed an opposite view, it would be viewed as a negative and I would be a disloyal person. I know now, that is not true - and realize that loyalty and truth-telling should go hand in hand.

I have permission to pass this article on to you. I can't say it any better. It is well written. So I am passing the whole thing on you and let him have the credit.


Honoring the Truth-Teller

The Meaning of Truth
The Greek word that is translated truth in the New Testament is a very powerful and meaningful word. It is alethia. The a (alpha) at the beginning of a Greek word often means that it is a negation of the rest of Greek word. For instance, the English word atheist comes from a-theos which means literally no god. In the case of alethia the literal meaning of this word is nothing hidden. This means that the phrase found in Scripture that describes the Holy Spirit as the Spirit of Truth literally would be the Spirit Who allows nothing to be hidden.

Vine’s Dictionary of New Testament Words defines this Greek word that translated a truth as meaning:

The reality lying at the basis of an appearance, the manifested, veritable essence of a matter.

This definition should inform us that the Spirit of Truth is always working to move us as believers beyond the appearance of a person, a matter, or an organization to discover it reality and essence.

Leaders Need Truth in Proportion to Influence
The Bible speaks a great deal about the value of truthfulness in relationships. The subject of reproof in Scripture is a good example of this. Only the fool and the wicked man according to Proverbs cannot hear godly reproof. Reproof is always the truth as someone else sees it. Consider King David’s words about his need for those around him to speak to him truthfully from their perspective:

Let the righteous smite me; it shall be a kindness: and let him reprove me; it shall be excellent oil, which shall not break my head… Psalm 141:5

Our responsibility to hear the truth from individuals around us grows in proportion to the sphere of our influence. The larger the influence, the more we need people around us to speak their perception of the truth to us and the less likely they are to do it. Leaders must teach and emphasize truthfulness or they will more likely get affirmation from their subordinates rather than truthfulness.


Recognizing the Truth in Different Packages
The leader must also recognize when it comes. It seldom will come in a nice package and identify itself as truth. Truth can come to us in the form of the unflattering opinions of others, angry words, criticisms and even slander. The speakers will almost always see themselves as telling the truth. As King David said in the passage above, sometimes the truth-teller will smite us. Nearly all of these kinds of smiting events will have an element of truth that needs to be discerned. The leader who is insecure will not glean the truth about himself and his organization from these uncomfortable truth events and can dishonor the person seeking to tell the truth. Embraced truth will set us free no matter what package it comes in.

Actions and Attitudes Reveal Values
The leader who verbally encourages truthfulness must be prepared to continue his instruction when he actually gets truthful feedback from his subordinates. If the feedback comes in one of these uncomfortable packages, if he is not careful, he may shut down the flow of information to him by his response. If he acts insecure, angry or quietly withdraws from that person, he teaches by his actions that he does not value truthfulness. In other words, value systems are always observable in the behavior of leaders. For instance, if the leader judges the input of the truth-teller by how well he or she offered the input, the leader will receive decreasing truthfulness from those around him. He has taught by his attitudes and behavior that truthfulness is not valued. If individuals around him must earn the right to speak the truth to him by proven loyalty, he is training and producing subordinate leaders that will value loyalty over truth. Leaders who have been trained this way will speak very little truth to him and confuse affirmation with truthful feedback. Neither will they honor the truth-teller when he speaks to them.

Speaking the Truth Wisely
Because the truth is often difficult to hear, it is necessary for those who feel responsibility to speak truth to do it as wisely as possible. Failure to do this insures that we will not spiritually grow up. The Bible connects our spiritual growth with speaking the truth. It tells us that speaking must be out of the motive of love.

But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ… Ephesians 4:15

That means that the truth-teller must have sincere concern for the person and organization that he is speaking to. This is where truth telling becomes an expression of love. In the military, the value system of officers say that they should speak the truth to their commanders. However, there is also a value that says loyalty to the leader means that you speak to him in a way that does not embarrass the leader or damage his reputation within the military organization. Normally, that means that confrontational truth is spoken in private and with proper military courtesy. Conversely, the commander has the responsibility to hear the truth no matter how poorly it was spoken by the subordinate. This requires him to be secure in himself and to earnestly desire the truth from his subordinates. The reaction of the commander to the subordinate’s truth-telling will teach the subordinate whether or not he can continue to speak the truth to this particular commander. The same thing is truth in the Church and all organizations. Leaders must love the truth, even when it smites them, and appreciates the truth-teller if they want all their subordinates to continue keeping them properly informed.

Leaders of local churches and all organizations of the Church must allow subordinates the right to speak the truth as they see it. They must maintain a value system that honors the person seeking to tell the truth. They must not see truth-telling as disloyal behavior. Failure to do this will produce serious hidden problems within the organizations of the Church and make the truthful person an outcast. This cannot be what the Spirit of Truth, the Spirit who allows nothing to be hidden, desires in the churches and organizations of the Kingdom of God.

Values Produce Predictable Behavior
Prior to 1993, I was an active duty Army Chaplain. During that season of my life, I taught leadership skills to officers and non-commissioned officers in leadership retreats as a part of my ministry. I often used management games to teach these leaders about leadership. In one management game called “Powerplay”, a scenario is created where these leaders were arbitrarily divided into groups by virtue of winning in a trading scenario. The winning group is then given authority over the other groups. The winning group is given the right to make the rules for future trading and to dictate these rules to the other groups. Without exception, the group that has the authority always begins to make rules to keep its authority and to benefit it as a group in trading. Given enough time the winning group will begin to clearly abuse the other groups. This group will justify its behavior on the basis of winning the earlier portion of the game and by virtue of having the authority.

Reactions of Different Abused Groups
In those retreats where non-commissioned officers (sergeants) were involved, the sergeants would allow themselves to be abused. Their overriding value was loyalty to the authority no matter what transpired or how unfairly they were treated. They were unhappy and grumbled among themselves during the abuse but did not do anything productive to deal with it. They offered no feedback, no confrontation, and no truth from their perspective to the abusive group of sergeants. This was characteristic of nearly all the sergeants that I played this game with. This revealed that their values were highly loyal but truthfulness was weak as a value. (Of course, there were a few exceptional sergeants that would have been better officers by nature.)

The reactions of the officers in the officer leadership retreats were entirely different. As the group of officers who abused them became more abusive, the officers became increasingly active and alert to their responsibility to deal with the unfair situation. They offered feedback that was largely ignored. They devised strikes; in other words, they withdrew and would not cooperate with the abusive authority. They often tried to continue to confront the abusive group. They tried to negotiate a more just situation. In nearly all cases, the group in authority would become increasingly authoritarian and created more rules strictly for their own benefit and to keep the rebels in line. The abusive group would often say that the other officer groups were not playing fair when they rebelled, withdrew or failed to cooperate. In other words, the group with the authority became blind to their abuse and blamed the abused groups for withdrawing and not wanting to play the game anymore.

Not Valuing Truth Results in Blindness
Blindness is characteristic of organizations and leaders that do not value truthfulness in their relationships. This is because truth-telling has been stifled in a loyalty-based organizations or individuals. Because there is no honest feedback, they will often be blind to their abusive behavior and honestly wonder why others are reacting. There will be no one to tell them that it is wrong to shift blame for difficulties in the relationships to the victims of their abusive behavior.

The value of truth is what keeps a local church or any organization from becoming like a cult. Honoring the truth-teller is a characteristic of godly relationships. Dishonoring the truth-teller is a characteristic of cults. Cultic behavior, which always includes blindness, will result from an overemphasis of loyalty above the truth. Leaders must understand that their own desire for loyalty may overcome truthfulness in their subordinates. They must actively cultivate truthfulness along with loyalty in their subordinates.

Different Values and Expectations
This game also revealed that different kinds of people have different values and expectations. Commissioned officers are taught in the military that proper submission means that they will speak to the superior officer with courage and candor (truthfulness) about organizational problems. Officers who will not confront their commander when necessary are poor excuses for leaders. Commanders who will not hear the honest, truthful input of their subordinates without penalty are poor commanders.

The officer type of leader expects to be treated well by other leaders. He expects his input to be valued and genuinely considered. When the behavior of an organization and its primary leaders do not match the officer type leader’s values, he will withdraw or try negotiation. If the negotiation fails, he will leave the organization and move on, similar to an officer resigning his commission. The officer type of leader will want to fix the organization’s larger problems and will not ordinarily be silent about them. If the organizational values lean too far to loyalty and not enough on truthfulness, this type of leader will often be seen as not being a team player and be penalized by being privately labeled as such. As a result the organization may lose this valuable leader as he discovers the truth of how the organization actually sees him.

The sergeant type of leader will remain loyal to a fault. He will adjust to the problems and not necessary ever speak truthfully to the organization. There is nothing wrong with this type of person; in fact, they are greatly needed in all organizations. However, in unhealthy organizations, the sergeant type of leader is valued above the officer type of leader. The officer type of person can help an organization to deal with its problems and therefore grow. If an organization creates an atmosphere for genuine honesty and truthfulness, it will attract many of the officer types of persons and will be able to keep them. It will not lose its sergeant types either. In fact, the sergeant type of leader will be much happier since problems will be dealt with. Loyal and truthful leaders will ensure that the Church will be prepared to meet the One who declared Himself to be the way, the truth, and the life.

When Loyalty Overcomes Truthfulness
Loyalty and truthfulness are two covenant values that must be held in tension against one another. Loyalty binds us together. The truth sets us free. If one value is emphasized over the other, then serious problems develop and both values will become distorted. If loyalty is overemphasized, then only affirmation will be given and heard as feedback. If truth-telling is practiced without love and without loyalty, it does not build but tears down. If truthfulness is considered a fundamental component of loyalty, then the organization will be built on integrity. If loyalty is considered a fundamental component of truthfulness, then the organization will have true unity.

Often in an organization, whether it is the local church, a business, a denomination, or a fellowship of churches, loyalty becomes an overriding value and begins to overcome truthfulness. This is often revealed in private words, actions and attitudes rather than the official position of the organization. The leaders of an organization may say that they value truthfulness but reveal in their actions that this is not really so. There are several predictable results when this happens:

Truth-Tellers are Unappreciated
Individuals who strongly value honesty and truthfulness are unappreciated, and often rejected as disloyal. Some people are particularly oriented to truthfulness and may be seen as not being team players by those who highly value loyalty. This may create a value conflict in the organization between the truth-tellers and those who highly prize loyalty. The loyalty value normally wins over truthfulness in these kinds of situations because those in authority will often value loyalty over truthfulness.
When the loyalty value wins over truth, it often takes the form of a suppression of free expression, particularly dissent. This does not make the elements of truth in dissent go away; truth will surface again and again in different, even more destructive forms, until it is dealt with properly. This is precisely why political tyrants are unable to completely silence free expression and why they feel the need to silence it. The truth will find a way to express itself simply because it is the truth and God stands behind it.

Unintentional Training of Subordinates
Every time loyalty wins over truthfulness, loyal individuals are unintentionally trained by the leadership to hide the truth or to put an organizational spin on it. Truthful individuals are trained that they are not really welcome. Perceptions are created that success and promotion in the organization comes by telling the leadership what they want to hear rather than the truth. Loyal yes men can seem to become valued over those who have strong individual integrity and truthfulness.

Maintenance of a False Righteousness
The loyalty-based local church or organization can defend its righteousness at a high cost to the reputation of individuals. Often the organization fails to deal with its failures in a scriptural way. Instead the organization may blame its failures on the person it failed, even unfairly damaging the person’s reputation. The truth is sacrificed to the need of the organization to maintain a false appearance of not making any serious mistakes. Organizational problems are defended when they are brought to light by distorting the truth by putting an organizational spin on it. In contrast, the balancing value of truth persuades all Kingdom organizations to repent, confess their failures, fix their problems and seek forgiveness of the persons that they failed. When failures are handled in a godly way, grace, forgiveness and mercy flow into relationships and healing occurs. When the organization defends its failures at the cost of the reputation of individuals, then it becomes a revolving door type of organization.

Revolving Door Organizations
Weakness in the value of truthfulness produces a revolving door type of organization over a period of time. Individuals come into the organization, then after perceiving the truth, they try to adjust the organization or adjust to the organization. Often after becoming disillusioned by the reality, they leave the organization. Those who do stay long-term within the organization may also prize loyalty above truth. However, because problems are hidden and often neglected, they create hidden turmoil and strife for these people as well. Hidden disunity becomes a way of life for the loyal members of the organization. They tolerate each other for the sake of the organization. Only open conflict is considered disunity after a time.


Key Leaders in Crisis
The revolving door organization becomes a house of cards over a period of time because of hidden problems and disunity. A key leader may have a profound dealing from the Spirit of Truth and wake up to the seriousness of the organization’s hidden problems. This can create a destructive crisis between leaders as a key leader begins to speak the truth in a loyalty-based organization. Truth must be highly valued or the integrity of an organization becomes weakened and cannot maintain its membership. Loyalty alone cannot keep an organization together. Truth will always be necessary for long-term success.

Reputation Saturation Points
The reputation of the organization will begin to suffer to failure to listen to the truth. Many people will come through the revolving door over a period of time. They will know the details of the problems of the organization and the organization’s capacity to hide or to put a spin on them. They may have become embittered by the organization sacrificing their reputations to maintain its own. The organizational growth stops and begins a long and steady decline because of reaching a reputation saturation point with many people speaking badly about the organization’s treatment of individuals and failure to deal with problems. The loyalty-based organization, however, will be blind to the real reasons for its decline. This is because it has few truth-tellers anymore. Its spiritual eyes have been dishonored and are now gone. It will offer alternative explanations and shift the blame once again.

Sincere Relationships in the Church
The concept of sincerity may be the best blend of the values of loyalty and truthfulness. A sincere person is a person who out of loyalty to God and others speaks the truth without mixture. The word sincere comes from the Latin word sincerus. It literally means without wax. This word comes from the time when the Romans were building great buildings using marble columns to support the weight of these monumental buildings. The builders would go to the marble cutters in the quarries and inspect the columns. The cutters would put wax in the cracks of columns to make them deceptively appear to be solid in order to sell them. The builders could only use the sincere columns to build with. The columns that were what they appeared to be, that were actually solid, without wax hiding cracks, were the only thing that would sustain the weight of the building. If a builder built a building using a column that lacked sincerity, the entire building could fall down. The paralles are evident. The Spirit of Truth needs sincere people to build the Church; people that value loyalty and truthfulness in harmony with each other.

With permission from Dr. Roger Sapp

What if....I asked a question? What is Groupthink?

What is Groupthink?

I appreciate the comments that came in this week regarding the above question. And I don't pretend to have all the answers on this. Just passing on some simple ideas and thoughts.... and remember that this involves working with a group of people.

Here is my journey with this word…..A few years ago I was attending a class - we had 25-30 people. Class was new - our fellow students were new to one another. We had subjects to discuss, problems to solve, and this would mean communication.Several weeks of class were pretty quiet as a whole as far as class participation. We had a lot to accomplish and we were stumbling big time.

Then one week we had to tackle another issue as a group and our leader mentioned we had the symptoms of Groupthink… well, I thought that was a positive thing – but learned it was not.

So he helped us understand, we all learned from it and went on to work better as a team. Decision-making can be a very serious issue when it comes to a church, a business, even a family. If the way we reach decisions as a group are not formulated ahead of time – the decision making process can become confusing, high-pressured, stressful, and the bottom line can be - we may not always wind up with the best decision.

PLEASE understand, that I am already assuming our foundation is God’s Word, our hearts are surrendered to being “workers together with Him.” Also, this is in regards to major decision making – perhaps building a new organization, starting huge new programs in a church, making major decisions that will affect a large group of people - fill in the blank.

Groupthink can result in faulty decisions because of several factors. Symptoms of groupthink are:

• Not staying “grounded” in realistic goals and plans. In other words, having great “faith” talk that creates excessive optimism that encourages taking extreme risks. We should always have a dream, always reach for more – but stay grounded into taking those God-given dreams and allowing Him to help us break it into realistic steps and goals as He directs.

• Group rationalization - members discount warnings and do not reconsider anything negative...

• Ends justify the means – moral issues – members believing in the “rightness” of the cause and ignoring that there may be ethical or moral consequences of their decisions. “I know we raised $100,000.00 for the new building, but let’s use that money here instead.”

• Being opposed to listening to “outside views” – in not wanting conflict, or anyone “questioning” upcoming decisions, we view it almost as the enemy and close ourselves off.

• Pressure (said or unsaid) to not express arguments on the view being taken or expressed.

• Illusions of unanimous – because people do not feel free to speak up, question, or express another viewpoint, it is assumed there is “unanimous” approval when there may not be. It is just a perception and not reality.

• Self-appointed watchdogs - members protect the group and the leader from information that is problematic or contradictory to the group’s cohesiveness, view, and/or decisions.

Portions above are from notes by Irving Janis...

Were you ever in a meeting or brainstorming session and there were a couple people you just wanted to kick out of the room because they always had something negative to say? You felt like they always wanted to throw a bucket of cold water on great ideas? Or you made a mental note,” Next meeting? don’t invite that guy…too negative.”

Remedies for Groupthink

Decision experts have determined that groupthink may be prevented by adopting some of the following measures:

• The leader should let all know in the meeting that they need to be as critical as they can while the decision making process is happening. Someone said once, “If the idea is a good idea, it will withstand criticism. Rather we critique ALL options NOW as we make the decision, rather than quickly pressure people for a decision, only for it to end up being a faulty one.

NOTE that it is” while the decision making process is happening” that we want this.

There will need to be a time we make the decision and then commit to that decision – we are all on board.

• The leader should avoid letting others know right away how he or she feels about all the issues – hold that for later – be more of a facilitator.

• One or more experts should be invited to each meeting a various times. The outside experts should be encouraged to challenge views of the members.

• Don’t view those with negative feedback to be the enemy. Could they be there to help bring to light things that have not been thought of? Even though it may appear they are negative, let them have their say without judging.

• The leader should make sure major decisions can have the proper time to have feedback, viewing pros and cons of decisions, etc. When people feel pressured to make a decision, and not given enough information or time to “think it through”, it can be difficult.

• NOTE: Understanding personalities are important. People who are more “A” type personalities want action, decision, snap, snap….let’s go! However, some of their best allies - the ones who will help in the decision making process - can be those with the questions - those with different personalities.

They may appear “slower”, but actually, they are thinkers - they may have thought in 5 seconds of 10 ways why the issue at hand won’t work – but they can help you still get it done and probably get it done better.

I am sure we can all share of times when a good or the best decision was not made. And we had to suffer through the consequences of that. And it may have affected a lot of people. Something that I have to confess to - over the years I have not always allowed, or encouraged a lot of input on certain issues and decisions as a leader…….

I can see now that if I had – I would have saved myself a lot of heartache.

There are many directions to take this subject. I just wanted to keep it simple and share a few things that perhaps can help us as we continue to grow and learn from one another.