For lack of guidance a nation falls, but many advisors make victory sure (Proverbs 11:14).

In the United States (my native culture), phrases like "take-charge personality" and "visionary leadership" and "getting things done" are viewed in a very positive light.  Leadership is generally considered a desirable thing; Americans are implicitly taught to aspire to positions of influence and accomplishment.  It may be acknowledged that the role of a leader can be a lonely one, but it's a noble one.  Americans love leadership.

In the Netherlands (my adopted culture), however, the Dutch style of making decisions and executing outcomes stands in marked contrast.  Many of the aforementioned leadership qualities that are widely prized by Americans are widely despised by the Dutch.  Numerous popular sayings decry the person who thrusts himself forward into leadership.  "Tall trees catch a lot of wind," they say, and "The tallest grain of wheat is the one that gets hacked off first."  Anyone who expresses a "take charge personality" or a disproportionate value on "getting things done" is viewed with suspicion.  Instead of the strong executive leader, Dutch people value a broad-based consensus approach to making decisions and taking action.  They call it the Polder Model -- presumably named after the development of the polders (land reclaimed from the sea by a complex system of dikes, drainage canals, and windmill-powered pumps), developing new territory governed not by feudalism but by republican ideals of consensus and teamwork.  In the Polder Model, everyone has an equal say.  No one individual's opinion is more important than another's.  Decisions are made by deliberate discussions among a broad network of people involved.  And until a consensus can be reached, discussion continue.  To an American, it can feel like pointless bureaucracy and agonizingly endless dialogue... But to a Dutch person, it's just due diligence.

While the Bible is largely silent about political models or decision-making structures, I've come to see that one could certainly make a biblical case for some version of the Polder Model -- Proverbs 11:14 being one particularly relevant case in point.

In our church (initially started by a largely American team, in the capital city of the Netherlands), we have applied the wisdom of Proverbs 11:14 and the Polder Model by chartering a group from within our congregation that effectively fills the role of Deacons within our churches (1 Timothy 3:8-13) -- except that we call them our Servant Leadership Council (“Servant Leader” is basically a transliteration of the Greek word “diakonos,” which means servant, or minister).  In the way that we've chosen to implement the New Testament framework for servant leaders, the criteria for involvement is based on the character qualities listed in the New Testament:  i.e. Full of the Holy Spirit and wisdom (Acts 6:3), actively serving within in the church (Acts 6:1-7), generally respected within the church (1 Timothy 3:8, 11), distinguished by their character and integrity (1 Timothy 3:8,11-12), in agreement with the church’s statement of faith (1 Timothy 3:9), and having been tested over time (1 Timothy 3:10, 13).  And although the practical tasks of the Servant Leadership Council varies from season to season, one of the most important functions of the Servant Leadership Council is to make decisions for the church regarding church structure, strategy, financial management, vision, direction, doctrine, teaching, and general oversight of the church's ministry.

Although we still recognize the need for appointing qualified pastoral leadership (as described in New Testament sections on elders / pastors / overseers), we've decided for our particular context that it's vitally important to create a plurality of men and women who can (and must) speak into issues at hand.  Even though it sounds crazy on some levels, we actually believe that any significant decision in the aforementioned areas of responsibility need to be made by the pastoral leadership team working together with the Servant Leadership Council, by way of the Holy Spirit creating consensus and unanimity before moving forward (Ephesians 4:2-16).  That's right:  unanimity (as unthinkable as that might be in some church contexts!).  Now, our belief is that unanimity does not always mean everyone seeing exactly the same on every issue; but it does mean one person (or one group of persons) consciously and willingly yielding their position to another person (or group of persons) and moving forward with a spirit of unity and like-mindedness.  The unanimity requirement, in effect, leaves the elders / pastors / overseers / pastoral leadership team in a situation where they cannot abdicate their responsibility or spiritual authority (since any decision cannot go forward without their willingness), but as we were establishing our leadership structure here in the Netherlands -- in the birthplace of the Polder Model -- we really felt that it's best for the church and for the pastoral leadership team themselves to bring other people into this circle of leadership.

This way, we can have a more well-rounded perspective in making decisions.  We can distribute the leadership load in a way that will make long-term growth and multiplication more sustainable (not always requiring full-time, international staff).  And we can, hopefully, raise up new leaders and new elders in the process (there's nothing like actual leadership to help others grow into leadership).  Although we've certainly had our frustrations along the way, I'd have to say that this modified ecclesiastical version of the Polder Model has worked surprisingly well -- better than I might have naturally suspected, as an American steeped in that particular leadership culture.  I'm not convinced that the Polder Model is the best form of leadership for every context -- but I can confidently say that "For lack of guidance a nation falls, but many advisors make victory sure."