Abstract
Robert K. Greenleaf mentions Exod 18:13–27 several times in his reflection on servant leaders. He suggests that this passage supports a top-down delegation from leadership. The paper revisits this suggestion about Exod 18:13–27 but reads these verses closely in its literary context and in light of the distinction between authority and power. The storyline of Exodus indicates that Moses’ authority is fairly new and has been contested frequently. His emerging authority must relate to authority already established, for example, the authority of the elders. This reading suggests that Moses does not delegate power when appointing judges. Rather, they participate in his emerging authority and this view has implications when reflecting on this passage and what it says about leadership. Perhaps, such a reading of Exodus 18 and its implications are closer to Greenleaf’s ideas than he thought.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
At the end of the Pentateuch Moses is called the servant of the Lord (ebed YHWH; Deut 34:5), which may already challenge Greenleaf’s argument.
- 2.
In addition, Deuteronomy 1’s reference to Exodus 18 (perhaps in combination with Numbers 11) seems to endorse a positive or—at least—a mixed reading of Exodus 18.
- 3.
Their focus also differs from Greenleaf’s concern for serving “other people’s highest priority needs” (Greenleaf 2002, p. 27) when he describes the servant leader (cf. see below).
- 4.
- 5.
Greenleaf’s comment that “This is the earliest statement of the hierarchical principle of organization” is also inappropriate when studying Ancient Near Eastern societies; see for example, Berman’s reflections (2008, pp. 15–49).
- 6.
Alongside, there was an organizational structure to accomplish the building goals.
- 7.
- 8.
- 9.
I quote from the NAB.
- 10.
Cf. Propp (1999, p. 631).
- 11.
Fretheim (1991, p. 197).
- 12.
For example the question whether the text describes Jethro’s conversion (Haarmann 2008, pp. 59–99), the significance of the sacrifice (Dohmen 2015, pp. 424–426; Childs 1974, pp. 328–329, 332–333), the appropriate interpretation of Exod 18:23 (Dohmen 2015, pp. 428–429), the relationship between divine will and human wisdom (Fretheim 1991, pp. 198, 200), or the transitional function of this chapter (Carpenter 1997, p. 106).
- 13.
Jethro does not necessarily offer the sacrifices himself like some commentators assume (pace e.g., Propp 1999, p. 631; Childs 1974, p. 329). Janzen (1997, p. 128) rightly notes that Exod 18:12 does make it explicit. The verb may describe the bringing of the sacrifice to the priest (cf. Lev 12:8; 15:14, 29; Num 19:2). Participation may also be the crucial idea for this question (cf. Albertz 2012, p. 308).
- 14.
Therefore Exod 18:13–27 is hardly concerned with the founding of an institution or with improving an existing one (pace Knierim 1961, p. 149).
- 15.
It is also noteworthy that the idea of accomplishing something together is important from Exod 17:8 to 18:27 (cf. Dohmen 2015, pp. 427–428).
- 16.
There were authorities who dealt with these communal affairs before Moses came to the fore. That is simply the way communities survive. There is some structure whether or not it is obvious.
- 17.
Cf. Kürle (2013, p. 166).
- 18.
Propp (1999, p. 632) rightly notes that “the sense must be ‘over the Israelites’ not ‘over the judges’.”
- 19.
- 20.
“Able men” may “connote warrior, a rich man or a citizen of deserved respect and social influence. While the last dominates here, the judges also require physical stamina and material prosperity” (Propp 1999, p. 632). It may surprise that he does not obviously choose the men from among the elders (cf. Sarna 1991, p. 100). However, the text does not exclude this and the question remains open. Regardless, in choosing men with these abilities it may increase or secure their impartiality if they are not elders; note the Egyptian text quoted by Sarna.
- 21.
Schäfer-Lichtenberger (1985, p. 73) observes correctly that the text does not indicate whether the people may still appeal to Moses directly.
- 22.
A hierarchical organization is built on and preserved by structures of accountability. Nothing like it is indicated (Schäfer-Lichtenberger 1985, p. 72). Without such structures the hierarchy is on paper only (rather sooner than later). In particular, the lines of accountability between various levels of the structures are somewhat stable and traceable. In reading Exodus 18, it is also noteworthy that there is no connection between those responsible for ten, fifty, hundred or thousand; no hierarchy of accountability. It simply describes their area of responsibility. Perhaps there is no reference to accountability because such structures are simply assumed. Or such a reference is deemed unnecessary. It is perhaps helpful to reflect Janzen’s (1997, p. 131) distinction between dominant and nested hierarchies.
- 23.
Cf. Albertz (2012, p. 310).
- 24.
Cf. Greenleaf’s (2003a, p. 44) comment: “The very essence of leadership, going out ahead to show the way, derives from more than usual openness to inspiration, to insight. Why would anybody accept the leadership of another except that the other sees more clearly where it is best to go? … The leader has to initiate, push, provide the ideas and the structure, and take the risk of failure along with the chance of success.”
- 25.
- 26.
The problem does not seem to be solved (yet). Numbers 11 probably indicates the need for a divine authorization for implementing the idea of participation (cf. Ber 2008, p. 168). However, this question and a reading of Numbers 11 deserve a study in its own right.
- 27.
Note Elmore’s (2010, p. 194) interesting comments on an old-standing truth: “We influence all around us.”
- 28.
This novel helped Greenleaf by finding the words to express his ideas (Greenleaf 2002, pp. 21–22).
- 29.
It seems to me that Greenleaf would argue for attitude and not only because of his emphasis on servant-leaders. Rather, in his essays he frequently emphasizes the need to listen. In addition, he stresses intuition and the necessity of refraining from the operative dynamics of management. Both aspects tend to support the focus on attitude.
- 30.
It is part of the very nature of shaping or creating a culture that it takes time, grows deep and blossoms with deep roots even when the shaping dynamic is diminished or lost. Leadership casts a long shadow, one way or the other. Therefore evaluating leadership only makes sense in the long run. Short-term evaluation addresses the results of long-standing dynamics and their encounter with the new leadership but can hardly evaluate the new leadership.
- 31.
In an ideal world, or in theory, both are equally important. The main difference is that one is more obvious than the other. To say it more precisely, the truth that leadership shapes the culture of an organization is most often more obvious to the majority of the people than the reverse.
- 32.
For example, see Albrecht and Hurrelmann (2014, pp. 45–84).
- 33.
Cf. Elmore’s (2010, pp. 203–206) suggestions for accompanying this generation.
- 34.
It is noteworthy that there is no narrative in the Hebrew Bible which contests the authority of elders. It is simply a given. In contrast, the authority of kings, priests or prophets is contested, even though not always and not constantly.
- 35.
Most likely, there is no need to create and nurture a culture of delegation. It may simply be an anthropological tendency by default. After all, the powerful leader cannot do everything alone. Sooner rather than later delegation is not only an option, it is a necessity. However, creating and nurturing a culture of participation requires intentionality, effort and stamina.
References
Albertz, Rainer 2012, Exodus 1–18, ZBK, Theologischer Verlag, Zürich.
Albrecht, Erik and Klaus Hurrelmann 2014, Die heimlichen Revolutionäre. Wie die Generation Y unsere Welt verändert, Beltz, Weinheim.
Ber, Viktor 2008, ‘Moses and Jethro. Harmony and Conflict in the Interpretation of Exodus 18’, Communio Viatorum: A Theological Journal, vol. 50, pp. 147–170.
Berman, Joshua A 2008, Created Equal. How the Bible Broke with Ancient Political Thought, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Carpenter, Eugene E 1997, ‘Exodus 18: Its Structure, Style, Motifs and Functions in the Book of Exodus’, in Eugene E Carpenter (ed.), A Biblical Itinerary: In Search of Method, Form and Content, JSOTSup 240, Sheffield Academic Press, Sheffield, pp. 91–108.
Cassuto, Umberto 1967, A Commentary on the Book of Exodus, Magnes Press, Jerusalem.
Coats, George W 1988, Moses. Heroic Man, Man of God, JSOTSup 57, Sheffield Academic Press, Sheffield.
Childs, Brevard S 1974, The Book of Exodus. A Critical Theological Commentary, OTL, Westminster John Knox Press, Louisville.
Crüsemann, Frank 1992, Die Tora: Theologie und Sozialgeschichte des alttestamentlichen Gesetzes, Kaiser, München.
Dohmen, Christoph 2015, Exodus 1–18, HThKAT, Herder, Freiburg.
Elmore, Tim 2010, Generation iY. Our Last Chance to Save Their Future, Poet Gardener Publishing, Atlanta.
French, John R P and Bertram H Raven. 1959. The Bases of Social Power in Dorwin Cartwright (ed.), Studies in Social Power, Institute for Social Research, Ann Arbor/MI, pp. 150–167.
Fretheim, Terence E 1991, Exodus, Interpretation, John Know Press, Louisville.
Greenleaf, Robert K 1977, ‘The Institution as Servant’, in Larry C Spears (ed.), Servant Leadership. A Journey into the Nature of Legitimate Power and Greatness. Essays by Robert K. Greenleaf, Paulist Press, New York/Mahwah, pp. 62–103.
Greenleaf, Robert K 2002, ‘The Servant as Leader’, in Larry C Spears (ed.), Servant Leadership. A Journey into the Nature of Legitimate Power and Greatness, Paulist Press, New York/Mahwah, pp. 21–61.
Greenleaf, Robert K 2003a, ‘The Servant as Leader (original 1970 edition)’, in Hamilton Beazley, Julie Beggs, and Larry C Spears (eds.), The Servant-Leader Within. A Transformative Path. Robert K. Greenleaf, Paulist Press, New York/Mahwah, pp. 29–74.
Greenleaf, Robert K 2003b, ‘Teacher as Servant’, in Hamilton Beazley, Julie Beggs, and Larry C Spears (eds.), The Servant-Leader Within. A Transformative Path. Robert K. Greenleaf, Paulist Press, New York/Mahwah, pp. 75–239.
Haarmann, Volker 2008, JHWH-Verehrer der Völker. Die Hinwendung von Nichtisraeliten zum Gott Israels in alttestamentlichen Überlieferungen, AThANT, Theologischer Verlag, Zürich.
Janzen, J Gerald 1997, Exodus, Westminster John Knox Press, Louisville.
Kessler, Rainer 2008, Sozialgeschichte des alten Israel. Eine Einführung, 2nd ed., Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt.
Knierim, Rolf 1961, ‘Exodus 18 und die Neuordnung der mosaischen Gerichtsbarkeit’, ZAW, vol. 73, pp. 146–171.
Kürle, Stefan 2013, The Appeal of Exodus. The Characters God, Moses and Israel in the Rhetoric of the Book of Exodus, PBM, Paternoster, Milton Keynes.
McBride, S Dean Jr 1990, ‘Transcendent Authority. The Role of Moses in Old Testament Traditions’, Interpretation: A Journal of Bible and Theology, vol. 44, pp. 229–239.
Neu, Rainer 1992, Von der Anarchie zum Staat. Entwicklungsgeschichte ISRAELS vom Nomadentum zur Monarchie im Spiegel der Ethnosoziologie, Neukirchener Verlag, Neukirchen-Vluyn.
Propp, William H C 1999, Exodus 1–18. A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, AB, New York, Doubleday.
Raven, Bertram H 1992, ‘A Power/Interaction Model of Interpersonal Influence: French and Raven Thirty Years Later,’ Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, vol. 7, 2, pp. 217–244.
Sarna, Nahum M 1991, Exodus. The Traditional Hebrew Text with the New JPS Translation, JPS, Philadelphia.
Schäfer-Lichtenberger, Christa 1985, ‘Exodus 18 – Zur Begründung königlicher Gerichtsbarkeit in Israel-Juda’, Dielheimer Blätter zum Alten Testament und seiner Rezeption in der Alten Kirche, vol. 21, pp. 61–85.
Schäfer-Lichtenberger, Christa 1990, ‘Göttliche und menschliche Autorität im Deuteronomium’, in C H W Brekelmans and J Lust (eds.), Pentateuchal and Deuteronomistic Studies. Papers Read at the XIIIth IOSOT Congress Leuven 1989, BEThL 94, Leuven University Press, Leuven, pp. 125–142.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Wenzel, H. (2019). Reading Exodus 18 and Robert Greenleaf. In: Bouckaert, L., van den Heuvel, S. (eds) Servant Leadership, Social Entrepreneurship and the Will to Serve. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-29936-1_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-29936-1_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-29935-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-29936-1
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)