The Primal Architecture of Leadership: From Darwinian Drives to Pauline Communities

While leadership as an academic discipline has recently expanded into a vast, multi-disciplinary research field, its core remains an “intrinsic social phenomenon” occurring at every level of human interaction. To understand leadership today, we must recognize that it is not a series of disconnected paradigm shifts, but a continuous, cumulative thread of human understanding.

The Darwinian Foundation of Influence

To account for why leadership appears as a stable, global, and diachronic phenomenon, researchers Paul R. Lawrence and Michael Pirson¹Lawrence, P. R., & Pirson, M. (2015). Economistic and Humanistic Narratives: A Darwinian Evolutionary Exploration. proposed an analysis rooted in evolutionary biology. They suggest that as the human species evolved, four fundamental drives combined to form the leadership phenomena we recognize today:

• The Drive to Acquire: The appropriation of power and the pursuit of objectives for the sake of the leader and the collective.
• The Drive to Defend: The establishment of group boundaries and the protection of the community’s integrity.
• The Drive to Bond: The cultivation of deep interpersonal relationships and filial connections.
• The Drive to Comprehend: The pursuit of superior knowledge or expertise that provides the group with sense-making and direction.

The Pauline Nexus: A Scriptural Mapping

The nexus between these enduring evolutionary concepts and the leadership of the Apostle Paul offers a profound point of investigation. Paul’s leadership behaviour can be mapped directly onto the Lawrence and Pirson Darwinian framework through his own epistolary record:

• Acquisition (The Missionary Drive): Paul’s activity is defined by a desire to “win more of them… for the sake of the gospel” ²1 Cor 9:19-23.
• Defense (The Communal Boundary): His drive to defend the theological integrity of the group is most evident in his sharp rebuke of the Galatians ³Gal 1:6-9.
• Bonding (The Filial Connection): Paul expresses the drive to bond through fraternal appeals and deep affection in his correspondence with the Thessalonians ⁴1 Thess 2:7-8 and the Philippians ⁵Phil 1:7-8.
• Comprehension (The Intellectual Edge): The desire to possess knowledge beyond that of the followers is central to his role as a teacher of “mysteries” ⁶2 Cor 2:14-17. Indeed, the complexity of his drive to comprehend is even noted by his contemporaries as “hard to understand” ⁷2 Pet 3:15b-16.

The Corporate Application: Paul as a Leadership Archetype

This correlation indicates that the Apostle’s behaviour is not merely a relic of religious history but is stable diachronically. This is a logical point of investigation given the increasing frequency with which the business and corporate world utilizes the dynamics of Pauline leadership to illustrate modern behaviour.

Modern organizational science often highlights Paul as a master of the “Mythopoetic” act—the ability to weave narrative and meaning into a collective identity. For the corporate leader, Paul provides a blueprint for how a leader influences followers through a combination of these four primal drives to achieve a “common purpose” ⁸Carton, A. M. (2022). Leadership as a process of influence. Organizational Sciences Review.. In this context, the study of Paul is not merely theological; it is a study of the fundamental mechanics of human cooperation.

A Methodological Distinction: Sociology vs. Theology

It is essential to clarify the scope of this investigation. By identifying the commonalities between modern corporate dynamics and the leadership of the Apostle Paul, we are employing a sociological and evolutionary lens rather than a strictly theological one. This approach prioritizes the mechanics of human influence and group formation—the “how” of leadership—over the spiritual or dogmatic “why.”

To the theologian or the historian of the Patristic era, this intersection may initially feel jarring. Traditional ecclesiology often relies on the wisdom of the Early Church Fathers to defend the “uniqueness” of the Church against the perceived intrusion of secular or “corporate” management models. From that perspective, applying a Darwinian framework to an Apostle might seem like a reductionist move.

However, this analysis does not seek to displace theological reflection. Instead, it operates on a different “track.” While theology explores the divine inspiration and sacramental nature of the Pauline mission, sociology explores the human hardware through which that mission was delivered. Recognizing that Paul utilized the primal drives of Homo sapiens to build community does not diminish his message; rather, it highlights his mastery of the human condition.