Biblical Re-enactment Society: A Case Study In Collaborative Leadership

Four years ago, as students at the Ambassador Bible Center, a fellow named Tyler and I co-write a skit for the Lifenets (www.lifenets.org) Charity Auction called "Biblical Re-Enactment Society." The short work (only about ten pages or so) remains the funniest play, by a fairly substantial margin, in my largely serious body of work. My thoughts were directed to this particular skit by an excellent video I recently watched (on http://abc.ucg.org under "Gaining Godly Wisdom, Building Godly Character"), where I saw a humorous skit called "Real Biblical Heroes" that reminded me of my own collaborative script in its use of biblical stories as the fodder for lighthearted humor about human nature and human experience.

Two thoughts came to mind as I reflected upon the "Biblical Re-Enactment Society" skit. The first was about how much fun it was to work on the script with other people. Usually, when I am writing, I sit alone at a computer and type about some melancholy subject or another, often without trying intentionally to be melancholy. However, in writing collaborative works, without trying the works are usually much more light-hearted and funny, much less overwelmingly serious and dark, and are often much more enjoyable in performance with other people. For whatever reason, collaborating brings out a much happier side of my personality than my usual solo writing works. Perhaps this should be a sign that I should write collaboratively more often, though it has been a very unusual practice for me to do so.

The second thought that came to mind is more extended, and is the subject of this paper at large. In life and in my recreational activities (be they writing or playing roleplaying games and so on), I often have serious difficulties with the way in which other people lead. While some people are comforted by strong leadership, as it reminds them of order, for whatever reason (and there are plenty of reasons), the exercise of a strong arm of leadership tends to be taken as a hostile act of war on my part, with serious consequences for my relationships with said authority figures, as well as those others who support them. It is not enough, though, merely to be in opposition to power. Power, like it or not, is something that has to be dealt with, and someone must possess it and use it. The question is not, therefore, whether there is to be power or not, but how it is to be used correctly.

And, as odd as it may seem, the Biblical Re-Enactment Society project has a fair amount to say about the correct uses of power, and how power becomes almost invisible when it is used in a genuinely collaborative effort of shared ownership. Let me explain, in case this seems a bit too unusual. As the lead writer of the skit, I worked at the beginning with a co-writer whose sense of humor was similar to my own, and we created ten pages of written material that followed a group of young people through two scenes (and one "mother" character at the end of each scene) who were attempting to re-enact the scene where Jesus answers the Sadducees concerning a story about a woman who married seven brothers who each died. Even the forms of death were comical, ranging from being shot with an arrow by Roman auxilleries to being stoned to death with stones, which is quite unusual in my body of work (in which death, usually of a tragic nature, is quite prominent).

At the same time Tyler and I were writing this script, another classmate of mine was working on a script for a skit for the same show, about the Robin Hood cycle of tales. In contrast to the collegial working enviornment of my co-author and I, though, he did not seek the interaction of other people with the script. He had a vision for the script and did not desire anyone else to share ownership in it. Needless to say, this created difficulties with the actors and actresses he wished to fill the roles of Maid Marian, Friar Tuck, Little John, and so on. On the contrary, when our script was handed out to the classmates we wished to take on various roles, several of them made suggestions about how they thought they could change their roles to better suit themselves--including some changes in wording, and the addition, in one case, of some very stellar physical comedy. My co-writer and I had no difficulty with these changes, which made the work an even better one (and certainly gave the other students involved a sense of ownership in the project that made it work much more smoothly).

Without realizing it (as I had never been in a position of authority as profound as directing and producing a skit), I had hit upon a handy technique for collaborative leadership. Since it was a charity show skit, I had no money to offer the students I was directing (nor did I receive any myself). What I could offer, though, was the ability of my fellow students to make their roles their own, and that ownership in the roles, and hence in the work itself, was all that was necessary to make the show a success. The other show never even got performed because no one would agree to work alongside a petty dictator who refused to share "creative control." This was a powerful lesson to me.

Since then, there have been a few, but not many, opportunities for me to be in charge of something, but I have not forgotten the importance of allowing other people to own projects. I know for myself that I like to own the projects I work on with other people, at least owning a part that is important to me. Those that present me with plans fully made and partially implemented who seek my support without seeking my input gain neither, but only gain my opposition. Being so intent on owning projects before I can support them, perhaps my inclination to treat others as I wished to be treated (by allowing them to own a project I had originated) was a more profound lesson in how to lead than I had originally thought.

It is somewhat sad, though, that this experience is rare from what I have seen. Far too often people are in a hurry to get something done and fail to ask other people for input on ways to improve the project or its implementation, and so the projects fail for lack of support from those who are affected by the change. I have seen quite a few such projects fail, either through outright revolt against the change, or through the quiet and effective sabatoge of the change by those who were not consulted before the attempted change. It is a shame they were not so wise as to realize that the desire to create and own is present in all of us, and that it if one desires to succeed, it is far better to be open and collaborative about it than to be secretive and proud about owning something all by one's lonesome. Those who do not share their toys play in the sandbox alone.