Lessons in Servant Leadership – Vow of Stability – Part 2

Part 2 of a 4 part series from Lt. Matt Kosec AMCA Adjunct Partner of Criminal Justice and Public Sector Affairs, from his week of graduate studies in advanced servant leadership in a Benedictine Monastery.

“…the only authority deserving one’s allegiance is that which is freely and knowingly granted by the led to the leader in response to, and in proportion to, the clearly evident servant stature of the leader.”

-Robert K. Greenleaf

Day two of experiential learning at St. Andrew’s Abbey, a Benedictine monastery, has been filled with more discovery of the unique relationship between the individual and community.  It is a rare situation when an individual can successfully live in solitude.  The earliest monks fled the city and lived alone in  caves.  While these conditions would seem to nurture self-discovery, it actually led many of them to “monk-rage,” a condition of insanity.  During my days at this abbey I have not seen monk-rage, although one monk got pretty mad when one of my classmates dropped and broke a ceramic gift.

The Benedictines learned long ago that organizational mission is much easier to accomplish in community.  However, community is not built by merely placing individuals together.  The foundation of Benedictine community is a “vow of stability.”  This is the commitment a monk makes not to God (that would have already been addressed to make it to this stage), but to the community of fellow monks.  It is a commitment that says, “I am staying here until I die, I will not leave when times get tough, I am here for the long term.”  One of the instructors this morning, Michael Carey Ph. D, suggested that relationships are difficult to build if we are constantly worried about the other party leaving or backing out of the agreement.  Thus, when a monk wrongs another they understand that eventually it must be dealt with.  Much to my surprise, yes, monks wrong each other.  While I was expecting a much more gentle explanation, Father Isaac told me this morning, “Monks can be assholes, too.”  Underlying the forgiveness is a trust in the vow to one another.

In my organization, the Carrollton Police Department, officers do not make a lifelong oath to the organization.  They do, however, take an oath in which they commit to protecting the community and making personal sacrifices.  This oath is not unlike the Benedictine vow of stability.  But how does this apply to an organizational sense?  It seems unreasonable for an organization to ask for a lifetime commitment, right?

What I have come to understand is that while an organization cannot ask for a lifetime vow, the leaders of an organization can ask for a here-and-now commitment.  It is not an unreasonable request of employees to be honest, transparent, and committed to the mission of the organization – today.  Good leaders do this, but it is often with mixed results.  Why do employees sometimes fail to fully commit?  I believe it is often because the organization, or the formal leadership of the organization, fails to uphold their part of the vow of stability.  It is unreasonable to ask for such a lofty commitment from an employee when the organization does not proving an equal commitment of stability.

In Saint Benedict’s Rule the Abbot is the highest official of the monastery.  Benedict is clear the Abbot has absolute authority in managing the monastery.  However, he is careful to tell the Abbot this power should be used in moderation and cautiously.  Most importantly, the Abbot is reminded that he is to provide for all of the needs of the monks, leaving them with no unreasonable want.  The logic, according to Benedict, is that if the monks’ needs are met they will be able to focus on the mission of the organization.  Thus, while Benedictine monasticism does require a vow of stability from the monk, the organization also makes a reciprocal and equally important commitment.

To the servant leader this should sound like a familiar concept.  Like the Abbot of the monastery, the servant leader understands that he or she must strive to always help their constituents become, as Greenleaf said, freer, wiser, and more autonomous.  The would-be servant leader who finds themselves as a manger or CEO of a modern organization may not be able to provide for all the wants and needs of their employees.  Shrinking budgets and shareholder expectations often make this impossible.  However, this does not mean the leader cannot make a commitment to the employee to always have them in the forefront of mind.  Vows are built on trust, and trust is earned.  Only then can the leader reasonably expect their constituent to join them in a vow of stability.