“Den dubbla ansvarslinjen”. En studie om Svenska kyrkans komplexa ledningsstruktur och organisation

Abstract

This study aims to contribute to an increased understanding of the complex organizational structure of the Church of Sweden by analyzing the interactions between the various actors within its system of decision-making and responsibility. This has been accomplished partly by examining the central concepts of managing and leading, which constitute fundamental components of the Church of Sweden’s management and leadership structure. Furthermore, the study has sought to explore whether challenges in this interaction can be understood as stemming from the fact that the actors responsible for governing and leading the Church operate from two distinct lines of authority: the religious line and the democratic line. The study is grounded in theories from the organizational field, primarily neo-institutional theory, in combination with leadership theories, to enable an in-depth analysis of the empirical material. The empirical data consist of fourteen qualitative, semi-structured interviews with individuals who all possess extensive experience of decision-making and responsibility within the Church of Sweden. The findings indicate that most of the challenges that arise, both in interactions between the vicar and the board and in relation to concepts of managing and leading, can largely be attributed to deficiencies in communication and an insufficient understanding of one’s role within the organization. At a fundamental level, governing is primarily associated with goal-setting, overall direction, and budgetary work, whereas leading mainly involves communication with the work group regarding assigned tasks, followed by the delegation of responsibilities. Finally, the analysis also identifies additional factors that may influence the interaction, such as recruitment processes, which often blur the distinction between governing and leading, as well as variations in the competence of elected representatives. However, these factors are not in themselves considered decisive for whether the interaction functions effectively; rather, they appear to be secondary in relation to the importance of clear role understanding and effective communication.