I a recently heard Dr. Doug Christensen discussing the
relationship between the leaders of an organization and its membership. He described the ideal relationship as a “covenant, not a contract.”
I had never thought of framing the relationship in that manner, but it works - quite well. When a relationship is framed in terms of a contract, then several associated words/phrases come to mind:
I had never thought of framing the relationship in that manner, but it works - quite well. When a relationship is framed in terms of a contract, then several associated words/phrases come to mind:
- legally binding
- expectations
- requirements
- obligation
- enforceability
- arrangement
I suppose all those words are important in assuring that an organization is positioning itself to pursue its stated goals; however, they all seem rather legalistic and compliance-driven. External rewards and punishments seem to be the motivators.
Covenant has a very different ring to it. Words/phrases I associate with covenant are:
- sacred bond
- investment
- collective endeavor
- affiliation
- pledge
- commitment
I think Dr. Christensen has a good point. The best organizations (the kind I want to be a part of) are the ones that are built on the solid foundation of mutual respect, the pursuit of worthy goals that go beyond making a profit or simply doing some job, and the synergy that springs from a collective commitment to achieving those worthy goals.
Collaboration and enthusiastic participation
OR
legalistic and compliance-premised?
Hmmm...
Covenant. The word implies an intrinsically motivated investment of body, mind, AND spirit. There seems to be a holiness that undergirds such a partnership.
Yes, COVENANT for me please.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.