There are whole books on group dynamics, how to structure a group, decision-making, etc. But, I wanted to address a particular style of decision-making and leadership in a heathen context.

LOYALTY, COLLECTIVE LUCK, AND TRIBES

We've discussed in the past, how much one determined heathen can accomplish, if he is willing to stay focused, work hard, and make things happen. One heathen can spark the formation of a kindred. One heathen can gather together a heathen community. Teach a class on Asatru. Write books. Set an example. Shape the world, essentially.

And that is just one determined heathen.

If you have two heathens, who like each other, trust each other, and are completely willing to work together and show absolute loyalty to each other, this absolutely becomes more than the sum of their two parts of the equation. Two heathens willing to face anything together, can accomplish almost anything. They drive each other forward. They inspire each other. They offer each other support in all things, and it multiplies the effect of them imposing their Will upon the world.

Two loyal heathens mingle and share Wyrd. They begin to build collective Orlog...and collective Luck. And it improves what they can accomplish together...and even individually in their own lives.

Imagine the power of having three heathens...four heathens...eight heathens...bound together by heartfelt oaths. Completely loyal to one another. Combining and multiplying their Luck, through working together and supporting each other in all things. Willing to brainstorm together, work together, and work towards a collective goal or goals. Imagine what that sort of group can accomplish.

This is why Jotun's Bane Kindred believes that local kindreds and tribes are the future of heathenry.

Not heathen "clubs," meeting in basements one a month, where the people never really know full loyalty or bonds to one another.

Not heathen e-lists, where the people know each other as "pixels on a screen," and they constantly bicker over small details and never truly know each other.

Not National Organizations, where people pay $25 a year for a membership card, and there are only occasional gatherings attended by a small percentage of the membership.

The future of heathenry rests on the success of small oathed tribes and communities...essentially chosen extended familes, where the best interests of family and community come before all else.

DECISION-MAKING WITHIN A TRIBE

There are various forms of decision-making within a group, or in our case a tribe:

OPTION 1 - A group could have one or two strong members that make most of the decisions, and then the rest of the tribe is meant to follow the course of action set by the one or two assertive members. This form of decision-making has its strengths. It can be fairly focused, organized, and decision-making is normally very quick. After all, there is not much discussion needed in this form of decision-making. One or two people make a decision, let the other members of the group know about it, and the decision-making is done.

But there are great flaws to this form of decision-making. Since there is very little in the form of discussions or input, you do not draw on the knowledge, ideas, and intelligence of all the members of the group. The largest problem with this form of decision-making, is that those not in on the decision-making (everyone except the one or two strong decision-makers) have no investment in the decisions being made. They may or may not agree with those decisions. This leads to members of the group not fully agreeing with or supporting the decisions being made, and this can lead to rebellion or dissatisfaction within the group. At the very least, it diminishes the impact of having a group of heathens working together towards something in which they all believe.

OPTION 2 - Another form of decision-making, is compromise and majority rule. Essentially, this form of decision-making involves discussion of decisions to be made, and when there are disagreements, members of the group attempt to reach a compromise position that a majority of the group will support. This form of decision-making, does at least involve every member of the group in discussions of the decisions to be made. It is not quite as fast as Option #1, because of this. And, at least this form of decision making does result in a course of action that a majority of the group will support.

But there are flaws here as well. At times, in order to build majority support for a decision, compromise is used as a tool. If there are 3 minority positions, 2 of those positions may join their ideas in order to impose a majority over the remaining minority. This can lead to a decision, that literally NO ONE in the group fully supports. And one of the major flaws with this form of decision-making, is the fact that there is almost always a minority of people in the group that end up having little or no input in the course of action decided upon. This can also lead to rebellion or dissatisfaction within the group. And this option can also diminish the impact of having a group of heathens working together towards something in which they all believe.

OPTION 3 - A third form of decision-making, and one that Jotun's Bane Kindred follows, is decision-making by consensus. Essentially, before a decision is made on an important matter, everyone in the group must support that decision. Every single member of the group.

This can take time. It can take a lot of patience and long discussions. But the benefit of this form of decision-making, is that once a decision has been made...every single member of the group has had input into the decision, and every single member of the group supports the course of action that has been decided upon. In addition, the decisions are naturally better...because they include the vision, ideas, knowledge, and intelligence of all of the groups members. The act of reaching consensus within a group, forces everyone to examine and test their own ideas...and to reconsider them in light of what other group members are bringing to the table.

This is an incredibly strong form of decision-making, and it fully supports the impact of having a group of heathens working together towards something in which they all believe.

LEADERSHIP BY CONSENSUS

There are different kinds of leaders, and there are many tools that a leader can use to exercise his leadership. But I believe the most successful leaders lead by consensus. A successful leader is a consensus-builder among his people.

A leader could dictate decisions (Option #1), but this has all the flaws mentioned under this form of decision-making. A leader could push for compromise and build majorities (Option #2), but this has all the flaws mentioned under this form of decision-making. But if a leader knows his group well, is able to listen to them, and help them combine their collective ideas, knowledge, insights, and intelligence into a consensus that all within the group can support...then that leader will have a very successful group.

Some see leadership as exercising "power," or in commanding men to do their bidding. But this can only take a leader and his group so far. And at some point, he is likely to face dissatisfaction and rebellion among portions of this group. But leadership by command and through the use of "power" should be reserved for times of dire need, when a decision is needed immediately. There is a place and time for this sort of exercise of "power" by a leader, but even in those cases...the leader should know his group well enough to make a decision that is both in the best interests of his group, and that will be supported by his people.

Over time, the relationship between a leader and his people develops into a relationship of mutual trust. The leader knows the consensus of the group, without necessarily even needing to consult with them. This is especially try of day-to-day decisions...minor decisions...or decisions that are similar to decisions the group has made in the past.

But on important issues...ones with a long-lasting impact on the direction of the group, the group's resources, or what the group will be working towards in the future...consensus building is the strongest form of leadership.

Again, some may see leadership by consensus as a sign of weakness, or a lack of leadership. But those that feel this way, fail to understand that there is absolutely no lack of leadership in this model. If decisions need to be made on the spot, the leader will make those decisions...and make them well. But whenever possible, a good leader-by-consensus anticipates problems and upcoming decisions, and builds consensus on these problems and decisions prior to them becoming "emergency" decisions.

Leadership by consensus-building, also reflects the reciprocal relationship between a leader and his people. A leader without people, is not a leader. And a people without a leader, can accomplish very little. They are both important parts of any successful group.

EGIL'S SAGA

I recently read Egil's Saga, and I was surprised by the number of times that very strong leaders were described going to their men, and building a consensus among them for a certain course of action. Prior to raids, before supporting someone in a war, etc...leaders within Egil's Saga are described going to their men, proposing the course of action, explaining the hardships, promising rewards, and then moving forward with the consensus of their men.

The idea of leadership by consensus-building, is not some new-age, psycho-babble method of leadership. When consensus-building is possible, it is an age-old form of leadership that works. And in Egil's Saga, it is most often used when a leader is wanting to take his men on a raid or mission that they might not normally be expected to perform. By building that consensus, the heathen leader is able to accomplish extraordinary things...with the full support of his men.

THINKING IN A TRIBAL FASHION

I think we still have a lot to learn and discover about existing as a tribe. We're working hard on this, and we'll have much to say about it in the future.

Suffice it to say, that a loose group of individuals, with their own selfish interests in mind, will have difficulty working within a consensus model of decision-making or leadership. When egos rule, and people are looking out for themselves, rather than the the tribe...they fail to see the value of reaching consensus. They want to "win the argument," rather than finding an answer better than any one individual's approach to the decision.

If we are to build successful tribes, and benefit from the incredible power of collective Orlog and combined Luck, then we need to rediscover our tribal ways...and put them to work in our modern world.

Mark