This act of compromise came from a place of love without loss of identity or values. He wasn’t asking all the brothers to bend to the need of a single brother; he was asking that judgment be set aside so that each may have only what they needed. He was simply acknowledging differences. It seems the divisions of our time have caused us to lose the ability to make room for differences due to strict adherence to laws over compassion—something Jesus often warned the Pharisees against. 

—from St. Anthony Messenger’s “Dialogue over Division“
by Sara P. Marks

While there are different leadership models, a nonprofit organizational consultant shows how Franciscans focus on a method that fosters equality, interaction, and growth among all.

I was 25 years old when I first experienced a form of leadership that differed from traditional top-down authoritarian models. While I did not have language for it until many years later, it was a means of leadership that invited inclusivity, collaboration, and existed outside the box of typical roles—especially in the medieval structure of higher education.

At the time, I was a graduate assistant campus minister at the University of Dayton—a Marianist institution. Marianists, much like the Franciscans, exhibit leadership styles outside hierarchical structures. Marianists joke that it takes so long to come to a decision because leadership exists within a circle where everyone’s voice is heard and decisions come by way of consensus, and it is often unclear who is even in charge as they enter into the decision-making process.

So, when my colleague Clare and I (both twentysomethings early in our ministry careers) disagreed with a decision made by the executive director of campus ministry, we had no qualms about setting up a meeting to respectfully disagree and ask for a reconsideration. The decision was to end a long-standing tradition of hosting an event to thank students for their involvement in campus ministry, a decision made due to lack of attendance in recent years.

We pointed out that year after year the event had become stagnant, yet the student body was changing and growing. They were a new generation of young people who approached life and celebration differently. Having heard us out, the executive director asked Clare and me to create a budget and prepare a presentation for the director’s meeting.

That year, the year-end thank-you to students involved in campus ministry was a wild success. We transformed the day of gratitude from a dinner into an all-day event on the quad, where campus ministers set up games and cornhole boards, engaged in conversation with students, and provided pizza to celebrate the year. This was possible because the executive director was open to listening to a different way, invited others to leadership roles, and shifted from what had always been done.

This experience has deeply shaped my growth over the course of my ministerial career. As I sit today, a PhD candidate working on my dissertation in organizational leadership, I find myself more thoroughly reflecting upon the role of leadership in my own Franciscan tradition.

Elevate Every Voice

It is easy to assume that servant leadership is the model of leadership for faith-based leaders. After all, Jesus knelt down to wash the feet of the disciples saying, “I have given you a model to follow, so that as I have done for you, you should also do” (Jn 13:15). And maybe, for some faith traditions and communities, that model works. I would argue, however, that for Franciscans, the model of servant leadership fails to meet the relational foundation of who we are at our core.

We are one with, not stewards over—something I learned early on from my Marianist brothers and sisters and have lived in my life as a Franciscan. Thus, this concept of leadership that prioritizes the growth and well-being of those being served without regard for the growth and well-being of the leader falls short of the deeper Franciscan call of conversion of heart.

Leadership in the Franciscan world does not happen in the isolation of the boardroom. It happens in the discernment among trusted mentors, colleagues, and even friends. It happens when we go to our constituents and ask for their input and trust in their wisdom or when they come to us to share their perspective.

Unlike many spiritual traditions, Franciscans follow the examples of saints who were not formally educated in the classroom; they were educated on the streets and through experience. This gives us a unique perspective on leadership. It does not minimize formal education, rather it elevates those without formal education to positions of influence, giving credibility to their life experiences.

When a leader leads in such a way as to elevate all their community, a rare thing happens: The leader opens herself or himself up to transformation. It is the quintessential Franciscan experience of going to the margins, beyond the walls, and kissing the leper. We have an abundance of stories from our tradition that teach us time and time again that we are called to a leadership model that demands mutuality, elevating every voice no matter background, education, or even creed as is the case of Francis’ meeting with the sultan. Every relationship carries the possibility of growth, including the relationship of leaders and followers.

Adaptive Leadership

So, servant leadership does not quite capture the depth of conversion that Franciscans claim to live by, as it still perpetuates a top-down model. If servant leadership does not quite encapsulate the essence of Franciscan leadership, then what does? I would propose a consideration of adaptive leadership, a model that first appeared in leadership studies in the mid-1990s, 20 years after the development of the servant leadership model in which faith-based organizations have seemingly become stuck.

Adaptive leadership theory was developed by Ronald A. Heifetz and first presented in his 1994 book, Leadership Without Easy Answers. The theory focuses on adaptive change of the whole in place of the authoritative leadership of a single person. It also makes a clear distinction between challenges requiring a technical solution and those requiring an adaptive one.

For example, a technical challenge requires technical expertise such as finding an operational solution to a technology need. The email server no longer meets the needs of an organization, so technical experts research, evaluate, and implement a new system.

However, an adaptative challenge—such as creating greater employee engagement around the mission of an organization—can only be solved by mobilizing the community and working collectively to create change that continues to be rooted in the organization’s mission and values.

At the heart of this theory Heifetz holds that leadership is not a role but an activity that encourages change across the entire organization—including self, community, and society. Because this leadership is a communal endeavor that involves change across all the players, it is an ideal leadership theory to consider for our Franciscan tradition.

Francis’ Example

There is a particular story in The Mirror of Perfection (written by Francis’ trusted companion, Brother Leo) that provides a clear understanding of how adaptive leadership unfolds in the Franciscan way of life. The story tells of a brother crying out in the middle of the night, “I’m dying! I’m dying!” When Francis awakes and asks who is yelling and why, the brother responds, “I’m dying of hunger.” The meager meals shared by the brothers were not enough to sustain him. And so, Francis wakes all the brothers to sit at meal together so the single brother would not feel less than for his needs.

However, the story does not end there. Francis explains to the brothers that excessive abstinence is just as harmful as excessive eating, and eating this midnight snack was a communal sharing to not let the single brother feel embarrassed. Going forward, he tells them, “Let each one provide his body with what it needs as our poverty will allow.” In other words, Francis removes himself from the authoritative role, inviting each brother to evaluate his need and act accordingly. One may easily, but wrongfully, conclude this is relativistic, when in reality, Francis has grounded the individual’s decision in the values of the community—that of living within the means of their poverty based on discernment rather than governing statutes.

In the Franciscan world, there are no black-and-white, hard-and-fast rules. Rather, right and wrong are dictated in relationship, community, and discernment. Even Francis himself lived deeply within the gray that demands contemplation that leads to action.

Though Francis greatly desired to retreat to the caves and live his days out as a hermit, he did not make the decision in isolation of his community. He invited Sylvester and Clare to pray with him to discern whether God was calling him to the life of a hermit or to a life of continued preaching in the world. When Sylvester and Clare’s discernment produced the same answer—that Francis was called to be in the world—Francis found a way to adapt. He spent time in the caves at Mt. Alverna for his solitude but continued to preach and live his life for others throughout the Umbrian Valley.

Other Adaptive Leaders

Francis is not the only Franciscan who teaches us something of adaptive leadership. When Clare faced the authority of the Church, which insisted she become abbess of the Poor Ladies of Assisi, she redefined what it meant to be an abbess. She knelt down and washed their feet. This returns us to the question of servant leadership. Do Clare’s actions fall in the realm of servant leadership or adaptive leadership?

Servant leadership theory focuses on the actions and traits of a leader and prioritizes the needs of the people she serves. A surface level understanding of Clare’s actions would certainly lead us to embrace the servant leadership model. However, if we look at her life as a whole, not as isolated actions, we begin to see Clare as a spiritual guide who lifts up the voices of others.

In her letters to Agnes of Prague, it is clear that Clare is providing Agnes with the spiritual support to take on her own leadership role. Clare is not serving in the traditional sense of servant leadership that would prioritize Agnes’ needs; she is sharing her own wisdom in a way that calls Agnes to action. “What you hold, may you always hold. What you do, may you always do and never abandon.” Clare’s focus and trust in Agnes as a leader is evident.

It is not just Francis and Clare who give us these models, but many of the early lay penitents also displayed leadership skills that met the needs of the times and went beyond leadership as a form of service. Many such women are discussed in the book Women of the Streets: Early Franciscan Women and their Mendicant Vocation, by Darleen Pryds, PhD. It is through this book and her personal sharing with me that I learned about Margaret of Cortona.

Margaret was no stranger to traumatic loss, having lost her mother early in her life and then her common-law husband, who was left in a ditch to die. Having never legally married him, Margaret is depicted in many pious biographies as a sinful woman. Due to the social norms of the time, she became disenfranchised from society with his death.

She and her son were taken in by a group of women who supported her and trained her as a midwife, in what is believed to have been a Franciscan environment. Through her ministry as a midwife, women began asking her to baptize their babies. This may be due to a dire need for Baptism in a time when a priest would not have been present at the birth and too far to arrive in time.

This was not innovative; Margaret was simply serving humbly in a common ministry of the day. I present Margaret of Cortona as an adaptive leader because of the mutuality in giving and receiving hospitality. The care and presence she offered women could be viewed as a response to the experience she had when she was taken in by the group of women after the death of her partner.

The Franciscan Charism

It would be false to assume that leaders who serve are by default servant leaders; service can manifest in many ways. For us Franciscans, service is most certainly an aspect of our leadership, but it is not the totality or even the core of it. For Franciscans, conversion of heart is always at the center of all our actions. If our leadership does not transform ourselves along with our community, then we are not being true to the movement.

For many early Franciscans, their service was not the focus of their actions—as servant leadership would dictate; rather, the interaction between brother and sister was the clear and primary focus. And that is ultimately the distinction I am attempting to make between servant leadership and adaptive leadership.

It is also vital to understand that every leadership theory has its place; this article is not about whether servant leadership or adaptive leadership is better than the other. It is, however, trying to deepen our understanding of why we serve in the Franciscan tradition, to gain a deeper appreciation of our unique charism.

As always, the heart of it all is mutuality in relationship with all of creation as brother and sister, which is never hierarchical, even if from the standpoint of servant. No, for Franciscans we embrace the unknown and choose to learn with those we serve, which calls us distinctively to become adaptive leaders—who lead from the stance of community, in relation to all.

As we enter this controversial presidential election year, I am reminded of election night in 2012. I was in my second year of novitiate with the Sisters of St. Francis of Philadelphia and attending a formation event that brought together Franciscans in initial formation in our Franciscan family. Tensions were high that Election Day: Mitt Romney was the Republican candidate, and Barack Obama was the incumbent. Though it may be difficult to remember now, this election divided our country. 

Franciscans are unique when it comes to such moments of division—we span the spectrum of labels. Whether you name it conservative, liberal, or something else altogether, Franciscans come as a hodgepodge of eclectic characters across the political continuum. As election results were reported that November evening in 2012, we sat together, both parties in the same space. There was excitement, empathy, sadness, and support all mixed together in a room that could easily be divided. We spent the rest of the week praying, eating, sharing, and having fun together. We were simply together. 

‘Mirror of Perfection’ 

This witness provides our country with a concrete example of what life could be if we chose dialogue over division. I do not pretend that real problems do not exist, nor do I believe the separation and division are unwarranted, but I do believe that with no cross-conversation, community is not possible. 

Pope Francis, in an address in 2014, spoke of unity by saying, “It means knowing how to listen, to accept differences, and having the freedom to think differently and express oneself with complete respect toward the other, who is my brother or sister.” 

Our own Franciscan tradition speaks deeply to the idea of unity through community. In St. Francis of Assisi, the Mirror of Perfection, written by Brother Leo, we are told the story of Francis waking up the brothers in the middle of the night to sit for a meal with one brother who cried out in hunger. Francis made it abundantly clear that it was “great necessity and charity [that] compelled” him to do what he did “out of love for [their] brother.” Francis went on to say, “Let each one provide his body with what it needs as our poverty will allow.” 

This act of compromise came from a place of love without loss of identity or values. He wasn’t asking all the brothers to bend to the need of a single brother; he was asking that judgment be set aside so that each may have only what they needed. He was simply acknowledging differences. It seems the divisions of our time have caused us to lose the ability to make room for differences due to strict adherence to laws over compassion—something Jesus often warned the Pharisees against. 

Collaboration, Dialogue, Transformation 

So, yes, I believe the Franciscan charism can save the world, but only if we act authentically from that call to community and wrestle with the challenges that come with it. Many members of our Franciscan family are already doing this work, but it needs to be shared widely. 

The Franciscan Federation, of which I am the executive director, has been engaged in a multiyear transformation process to broaden the membership beyond the sisters and brothers to include Franciscan organizations and all who identify as Franciscan. I am deeply aware of the challenges and communication needed to do such transformative work within a single organization. It will take all of us to transform the world.