The dysfunction of ambiguity

Where there is not a high degree of clarity around who we are and where we are going, it is very difficult to know how to make good decisions (based on what?) or to know how to focus one's efforts. One of the main jobs, if not the most important job of a leader is to bring clarity to those he or she leads on what the organization is all about and how it will function.

Ambiguity is ubiquitous in ministry organizations. Often our mission is so broad that it cannot be quantified and our values so general that they cannot really be used to define who we are and how they impact the day-to-day activities of the ministry. Most ministries have never defined the central ministry focus that they must concentrate on day in and day out if they are going to have maximum impact. And it is rare to find a ministry that has thoughtfully and carefully defined the culture that they are committed to intentionally create for the health of the organization.

Ambiguity around these core issues makes it very difficult to achieve any kind of significant organizational alignment because one does not have anything with which to align. It also means that team members can claim to be in alignment whether or not they are because the alignment mechanism is so loose.

On the other hand, it is deeply refreshing to find organizations that are crystal clear about who they are, where they are going, the central ministry focus they must have, and the culture they are creating. Where you find this clarity, you also find highly motivated and focused team members who, because of the organizational clarity, have great personal clarity as well. Getting to clarity is hard work but it is some of the most important work that leaders will do and it has a huge impact on the organization's ability to see true results.

Lance Armstrong: A lesson in not hiding things

Lance Armstrong was once known for his amazing tenacity in fighting cancer - and it is a fitting legacy. Then he was known for being the cancer survivor who owned the Tour de France, an even more amazing legacy. Now he is faced with knowing that he will be most remembered for cheating and lying about that cheating in order to win. He will be remembered for deception.

It is easy for us to look at others and throw stones. In fact, when the sin of others more egregious than our own, by our standards it makes us feel good in comparison. After all we are not as bad as that person. Unfortunately when I look in the mirror I know that I am as able as Lance to hide, to deceive and to pretend. It is the human condition and its seeds reside in all of  us. I am that man just as he is that man.

I feel bad for Lance and his family. I don't justify what he did but I know that but for the grace of God go I. We often hide little things which can become bigger things as our conscience becomes OK with the little things. Yet, at the root of it, whether we hide small or large, it is our lower sinful nature that drives the hiding.

There is great freedom in living in the light. Being aware of our sinful tendencies and asking the Holy Spirit for help in overcoming them. There is great freedom in acknowledging our dark side when necessary for the freedom of truth rather than the deception of lies. When we do, deception gives way before truth and light and forgiveness. Deception is bondage. Repentance is freedom.

Living in the light starts with the little things and it is the habit of living truthfully in the small things that gives us the ability to do so with the big things. Lance did not start his deception with large things but with small things. We can prevent the progression of a life of deception by living in truth in even the small areas of life. Jesus came to set us free - really free! Let's allow him to do that.

Do core values or guiding principles really matter?

Do core values or guiding principles really matter? They do if we are serious about them because when we carefully craft them, know them, live them and align our ministry decisions to reflect them they form the culture or the DNA of our church or ministry.

I recently came across the core values of a new church plant in Athens, Georgia: Living Hope Church Athens. Reading them I immediately knew what kind of church they aspire to be. It is a DNA that would please Paul who wrote to the Ephesians about what it meant to be a healthy church.

Of course such values mean nothing if not lived out in the day to day life of a church. Knowing the church planter on this one I believe they will be. Does your ministry have a defined set of values that define your culture, that everyone knows, that all are committed to and that guide your decisions?

Our core values

Gospel-centered

We will seek to bring everything back to the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Good News of salvation in Him.

Theological Worship

Our worship will seek to combine biblical truth with the freedom of the Spirit.

Prayer Saturated

As a declaration of dependence on God, we will seek to make prayer the foundation of all we do.

Authentic Relationships

People are encouraged to be transparent about their struggles and victories.

Expository Preaching

Preaching through books of the Bible will be our normal way of teaching.

Discipleship

We will help people progressively grow in their maturity such that they can assist others in doing the same.

Word and Spirit

We want God’s Spirit to be free to move, while filtering everything through the Word of God (i.e. Bible).

Elder Governance

The plurality of godly elders will be the authoritative leaders of the church.

Welcoming

We will be proactive about welcoming people of all ethnicities, social status, church backgrounds, etc.

Church Planting

We will seek to plant many churches out of this church.

Our vision is to be a Word-rooted, Spirit-empowered, and culturally-engaged church that seeks to bring:

·         salvation to the lost,

·         healing to the hurting, and the

·         training of leaders

to help reach the world for Jesus Christ.

Berlin - a city of destiny

I am convinced that God has His hand on Berlin even though it may be the most post-Christian, post-modern and liberal city on the continent of Europe. A city that has been known for much evil is destined, I believe to become known for much good.

Why do I believe this? Because of a group of individuals who have been praying for the city for over ten years and who now make up a coalition called Together for Berlin. Not only are they praying but they are doing. They are networking with all evangelical and missional groups in Berlin: German; ethnic; ministries and mission organizations. 

Members of the coalition are planting churches, networking their ministries, developing ministries to the least of these, migrants and immigrants, and partnering with the social services in the city. Driven by a passion to see the name of Jesus lifted high, become the love of Jesus to those who are needy and see the church expand in this metropolis, they are doing together what none of them could do by themselves.

They want nothing less than to see Jesus transform Berlin. They pray and believe what we recite in the Lord's prayer, "Thy kingdom come, thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven," and they have the audacity to believe that Jesus can and will do this. They are men and women of faith who have a heart much larger than their own ministries and their own neighborhoods. They are praying that a city can be transformed. They have a heart like Jesus.

ReachGlobal is privileged to be a part of this effort. We believe that Jesus can and does transform cities as He did in Ephesus in Acts 19 and 20. The church there impacted the whole of Asia minor, not just a neighborhood. We are together with Together with Berlin. We want to see the reputation of Jesus lifted high and his name become well known in that city.

What about your city? Are there Christian leaders who have a heart that is larger than their ministry? Larger than their neighborhood? Large enough to reach across denominational lines and focus on what unites us (the Gospel) rather than on what separates us? I await the day when there is a Together for every major city in our world. A coalition of the willing who will pray and unite and work for the transformation of their city.

It is catching on in other cities in Germany. Let's pray that it catches on in thousands of cities around the world.

Understanding your congregation's genetic code

Every congregation has a unique genetic code. It is a complex combination of how the church began, its history, philosophy of ministry, pastors and leaders who have served and are serving, make-up of the congregation ethnically, socially and economically, its record of conflict and results, and a host of other factors.


All of these factors combine to explain why a congregation is what it is and why it operates the way it does. Churches are immensely complex organisms and organizations. The better that leaders understand the genetic code of their church, the better they are able to capitalize on its strengths and deal with its weaknesses.

Here are a number of important questions to explore as you try to understand your congregation's genetic code:

-What do you know about the founding of your church? How do you think the motives and attitudes in the church's founding - positive or negative - affect the church today?

-What was the philosophy of those who started your congregation? Is it the same philosophy the church has today, or has there been a significant shift in mission, vision or ministry philosophy? How did this shift happen?

-When there is conflict between people in the church, how do they handle their disagreements? Would you give your congregation high marks or low marks in the handling of conflict? Do you see patterns here?

-Are you aware of any significant unresolved issues within your congregation that lie beneath the surface? What are these issues, and why do you think they have not been resolved?

-How would you evaluate the unity of your board? Does your leadership board have a history of unity and love, even when faced with differences, or is there a history of conflict and broken relationships?

-If your congregation has faced significant periods of conflict in its past, what do you know about these periods? Is it possible to see trends in either the causes of these conflicts or how the conflict was handled?

-When you consider leadership, now or historically, who in your congregation has the major influence? Does the church board allow any individual (elected leaders or non-elected persons of influence) veto power over decisions of the board or the congregation? How has the power and influence structure of the church changed over the years?

-Think about major changes the congregation has made, whether related to ministry philosophy, location, ministries or staff members. Does the congregation respond to suggested changes easily, with great resistance or somewhere in between?

-Are there any subjects, people or situations related to the ministry of your church that are "off limits" for discussion? If so, why do you think these "elephants in the room" cannot be named.

Healthy characteristics of your congregation should be celebrated and affirmed regularly. We cannot do enough to affirm God's people, as He would, where they are living in His will.

Leaders should specialize in understanding the strengths of their congregations, both so they can affirm them and so they can leverage areas of strength into even greater ministry strength.

Church leadership and trust

Inherent in the American system of government is a basic mistrust of people who hold authority or responsibility. This mistrust runs deep through our psyche as a people. Once, I did a consultation for a church of 2,000 in Madison, Wisconsin that was changing its bylaws. The senior pastor offered some perspective on the culture surrounding his church: "What you have to understand is that in this community, there is huge mistrust of anyone in authority. Everyone here wants to be in on decisions because they don't trust leaders."

Unfortunately, those attitudes often carry over into our churches. But the church is not the local government, and healthy leaders in the church are to be trustworthy and followed. The writer of Hebrews goes so far as to say, "Obey your leaders and submit to their authority. They keep watch over you as men who must give an account. Obey them so that their work will be a joy, not a burden, for that would be of no advantage to you (Hebrews 13:17)."

The New Testament clearly vests the senior leadership of the church with authority and responsibility in the context of a leadership for which they are ultimately accountable to God.

Ironically, when church governance is established as a checks-and-balances system, mistrust is not only built-in but is also actively fostered. The very basis of the governance system of checks and balances implies that we should question and limit one another. When authority is meted out to different groups, in the best-case scenario there is the opportunity for misunderstanding; in the worst-case scenario there is outright conflict. Here, you not only have tollbooths that decisions must pass through, but you also have the added frustration of dealing with mistrusting tollkeepers!

The church needs to see a new renaissance of trust among its people. Trust between paid staff members and boards, between boards and congregations, and between congregations and staff teams. We need to teach our people that trust is a biblical concept unless it has been violated. When violated, we need to work hard to restore it.

A mistrust of each other may reflect our society, but it does not reflect our theology.

Leadership Default

There is a principle about teams and leadership that is often overlooked and frequently violated. Simply stated, the senior team that we serve on is our most important team and is the team of our first allegiance.

For those of us who serve on a team and lead a team this is an important distinction. The senior team I currently serve on is the senior team of a denomination. The team I lead is the senior team of the global ministries of the denomination. Which of these teams demands my highest loyalty? The senior team I serve on or the team I lead?

It is always the senior team that I serve on, which in this case, is the senior denominational team.

Why? Because the global ministry team I lead is under the organizational authority of the senior team I serve on. Thus the senior team requires my highest loyalty. That means that while I lead a team, everything I do with 'my' team is always in alignment with the senior team. I am first a spokesman for the senior team rather than first being an advocate for the team I lead.

Understanding and living out this principle prevents conflicts between the two teams and ensures organizational alignment because my loyalty to the senior team ensures that I lead 'my' team from the perspective of the senior team. In my leadership of the global team, I am first and foremost a spokesperson for the senior denominational team. As such I will never allow the team I lead to develop an 'us/them' mentality with the senior team, nor will I ever criticize the decisions or direction of the senior denominational team (I helped make them).  Remember, I am first and foremost a spokesperson for the senior team on which I serve.

Some leaders push back on this position thinking that it limits their ability to have robust discussion on their team or to deal with issues that affect their team. Not so. The issue is where I deal with the issues. On the senior team, I have all the opportunity in the world to deal with issues that potentially impact my team. But that is the correct place for me to air them. Once I leave that room, I am a spokesperson for any decisions made there. With the team I lead, I have an obligation to explain, support, defend and finesse those decisions so that those I lead can understand and work within the parameters of decisions made above our team. Not do to so is to create deadly divisions within the organization that hurt the organization and its ministry, and negatively impacts its missional effectiveness. If we cannot follow well, we cannot lead well.

Lets apply this to the church. In most churches, the senior pastor is on the leadership board of the church. This would be his or her senior team which would demand their highest loyalty. They would typically then lead a staff team. If they understand this principle, they would never take a position with their staff against direction or policies of the board. To do so is to engage in 'leadership default' with a resulting us/them mentality and to have violated their fist loyalty and responsibility.

At the same time, those staff members who serve on the senior pastor's team must realize that this is their senior team and they cannot allow the teams they lead to be at odds with the senior staff team. As leaders they are always first and foremost spokespersons for that senior staff team rather than being 'advocates' for the team they lead. Not only is this good leadership but it prevents an us/them mentality which is all to common in the church and ministry organizations.

The neglect of this principle causes no end of conflict between boards and senior staff or between senior staff teams and lower level ministry teams in a church or organization. It is an authority issue, an alignment issue and a leadership issue. This does not mean that there is not healthy, robust discussion on any team. What it does mean is that the team leader will not default in his or her leadership by allowing their team to be out of alignment with the senior team they are on (the team above).

Rethinking the relationship between pastors and lay leaders

If you are a pastor you have high expectations placed upon you to preach, to be a great administrator and lead well. That you must lead is usually a non-negotiable. But, let's face it, many of us are not wired very significantly in the leadership area - and that's not what we signed up in ministry to do. Yet in most of our congregations there are highly skilled leaders from the business world who are just waiting to be tapped and their skills used in the ministry arena but they are left on the sidelines or asked to usher or serve in a role that is not in alignment with their significant leadership gifts.

God never asked us to be what we cannot be. All of us are wired and gifted in a few specific areas and everything else is a weakness. Our weaknesses will never be our strengths. We need to bring around us a team of qualified individuals who can play to strengths that we do not have so that we can play to strengths that we do have.

The most untapped resources in our churches are lay leaders who could use their leadership skills in the church, come alongside pastors who may not be wired to lead, and as a team, bring a level of leadership to the congregation that would infuse it with huge energy, creativity and missional impact. When we don't tap into those resources we leave much of that impact unused on the table.

What gets int he way of this happening? First, I think it is our assumption that as the pastor we must be the leader. Why? God gave different gifts and if that is not our primary gift we are fooling ourselves that He thinks we can be the prime mover. Certainly we must be a primary spokesperson for the vision but why would we expect that we must be the primary developers of mission, vision and strategy if that is not our gift? It is theologically contradictory.

Second, I think it is often an ego issue. We look at leaders who pastor large churches and we think we should be able to do that (by the way not all of them are good leaders either). Our ego can get in the way of realizing that their gifts are not our gifts. We forget that the mission and effectiveness of our congregation is more important than our ego and that we need help. Yet, surrounded by people who could help us, we sometimes are reluctant to share the leadership ministry of the church in any substantive way or to seek other's counsel, advice or invite them to help us lead more effectively. One day God might ask us way.

Churches need good leadership. I am an advocate of finding the best-possible people and asking them to serve on the senior leadership board of the church and then to take the best of those leaders and bring them to the table to help craft the most missionally compelling ministry paradigm the church could possibly have. It is not about us - it is about Jesus and His Kingdom and bringing the maximum number of people to Him and deploying them in meaningful ministry so that we reach maturity in Christ (Ephesians 4).

The alternative to this kind of Biblical view of gifts and the humility to admit we need help is found in the ineffectiveness of so many churches today and in ministries that founder. Bill is an example. He is the quintessential shepherd/pastor: high relational skills and great caring skills. His preaching skills were good enough that the church he led grew to about 500. Each time it reached the 500 level it was like it hit a ceiling, would level off for a while, then decrease.

The church was filled with highly trained professionals, many of whom had strong leadership gifts and several of whom led huge organizations. Over time, Bill invited many of these onto the board but once there, they experienced huge frustration because they were not invited to help lead the church in any strategic way. That was Bill's prerogative and he saw himself at their level and could not admit that he needed help (and these were his friends who desperately wanted to help him).

When a crisis developed over the lack of congregational direction and people started to migrate out of the church (lack of missional direction will do that), Bill clung to the belief that he was a leader and could solve the problem. He could not and eventually resigned, bitter and angry, under the pressure of a church leadership crisis. Six months later he found himself another congregation to lead where the scenario played itself out again and two years later was asked to leave over failed leadership.

Bill and the two congregations could have been saved a whole lot of pain if he had admitted that missional and directional leadership were not strong suits and had surrounded himself with willing leaders who would have played to their strengths while he played to his and together led their congregations to places of missional effectiveness. But his ego would not let him do this and the churches suffered because of it. Ultimately it is the kingdom that suffers when we don't engage other highly gifted leaders!

Charting a healthy change process

When you are going to propose major changes to an organization it is important to have a clearly defined process up front that you intend to follow and that will help the organization negotiate the whitewater that will result.

Prepare people for coming changes

People do not like surprises. Once you know that you are going to enter into a process of change, let people know and let them know why. You are not communicating final decisions; you are paving the way for changes that are going to come.

Always tie your process and proposed changes to your mission, guiding principles, central ministry focus or culture.

Remember that people are naturally change resistant. Thus if you are going to bring change you must appeal to values that are a higher value than their resistance to change. The discussion is not fundamentally about structure or programs; it is about mission fulfillment (ROM: return on mission). The more you communicate this, the more people will 'get it.'

One of the gurus on change processes, John Kotter, suggests that in order to get people's attention and convince them of the need for change, you need to "create a crisis." In the absence of a crisis, why change anything?

In ministry organizations, the "crisis" is that the lack of change will compromise (or is already compromising) our ability to do what Christ has called us to do. The result of change will be greater return on mission. Again, it is all about mission.

Recruit a guiding coalition

In any key change you are going to make, you want to have a guiding coalition of individuals who are on board and will publicly and privately support the process. This certainly should include all board members and key ministry staff members. (If you have board members or staff members who are not publicly supportive, you have other issues to deal with).

This should also include other people of positive influence in your organization - those who can help the early or late majority who may not understand the need for change. This is not about a lobbying exercise but recognition that people influence people and that within every organization there are key influencers. If these key influencers understand where you are going and the reasons for it, they become voices of reason and encouragement to the rest of the organization on the merits of moving forward. If you find that your key influencers are opposed, you may want to do more homework and groundwork before you move forward. After all, wise leaders are not going to propose something that they think will not have the support it needs to succeed.

A best practice is that before you propose major change, know that it is going to succeed to the best of your ability. You can test the waters by sounding out those who you need to be in the guiding coalition to influence others.

Provide ways for those in your organization to have input.
The higher the stakes in proposed changes, the more critical it is that you provide forums for members of the organization to ask questions and provide suggestions. The more open that leaders are perceived to be, the more likely the organization will be supportive of the process and outcome.

At this stage, proposed changes are seen to be in 'wet cement.' There may well be feedback or suggestions that would cause leaders to tweak or modify certain proposals before the cement hardens. This also allows those who will be affected by the change to speak into the process although they are not the prime movers in the process.

In the process...over-communicate with the organization.Possibly the greatest failure of leaders in a change process is the failure to adequately communicate with their organizations. This does not usually happen intentionally. Leaders already know what is going on and assume others do as well. In addition, once they have communicated, they feel that the job is done. This underestimates, however, the number of times necessary to communicate to a group before a message is heard. When there is not adequate communication, leaders are seen as aloof, arrogant, unaccountable, power hungry - all of which are probably far from the truth.

Trust is gained by leaders, in large part, by three simple disciplines: being missional, communicating well and listening.

Do everything you can to keep anxiety and conflict over possible changes low

As we have noted, anxiety over change often brings out the worst in people - much like weddings and funerals do within family systems. Leaders have a lot invested in major proposals they make and it is normal for them to become defensive when people push back hard or even attack. Whenever anxiety is present in a family system - and organizations are family systems - one of the jobs of leaders is to lower anxiety wherever possible. A key to this is a non-defensive attitude when challenged. If one responds low key and gently to emotional attacks, the level of conflict is usually lowered.

Do not neglect a prayer strategy for change initiatives

Our battle is not against "flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms (Ephesians 6:12)." If you are proposing change or a ministry initiative because it will give you a greater return on mission, know that the evil one will oppose you at whatever level he needs to, to keep it from being successful. The bolder your plans, the bolder his response.

And if Satan can bring division in the process, or encourage bad attitudes or sinful junk to surface, he will. Why? Because your changes will make your ministry more effective. Sorry, but he doesn't want that to happen.

Relax, persevere and lead boldly

Change is not about us. Ministry advances are not about us. God has called us to lead boldly, and even more so when leading is not easy. Leaders need to be wise, to respect process and people, and to trust God for the outcome. What will surprise us more often than not is that when we do this right, the vast majority of those we lead will respond positively - even when they are not innovators or early adapters. Why? Because they have the same desire to see Christ honored and His kingdom expanded as we do.

Pursuing wise men and women

Real wisdom is in short supply today. Too few people think deeply and equally few people have so saturated their thinking in Biblical paradigms that wisdom emerges from their lives. When you find a wise person, that individual is a treasure. When we are able to provide wisdom to others we become a treasure and gift to them.

Biblical wisdom is first of all grounded in "the fear of the Lord." It is an acknowledgement that God is above all and that the wise individual takes God into account in all of their thinking, actions, strategies and decisions. For the wise individual, God and the things that matter to God are central to everything!

That means that wisdom is not simply pragmatism. A course of action can be pragmatic but not take into account God's view of the matter. God's perspective, whether practical or pragmatic is central to a wise individual.

Wisdom is also the ability to understand a situation and know how to respond in a way that would please God, demonstrate mercy, fairness and righteousness, and accomplish what God has given us to accomplish.

Wise people are able to take complex issues and many moving parts and find a solution while keeping God's perspective or character in the center of the equation. That is a gift indeed.

Not all of us are given that gift but all of us have access to people who God has gifted in that way. Where you find them, get to know them, dialogue with them, ask them questions and look for their perspective. They will in turn ask you questions that will help focus the issues on what is most important and help you get to a wise solution.

Who are the wise people in your life? Do you spend enough time with them? I have a handful of wise people around me and they are a huge gift.

Finding the perfect chair

I have a fondness for comfortable leather chairs. In fact, I recently spent several months looking for the perfect leather chair for my home study. In the process I sat in many chairs in many stores, looking for the one that fit me the best. From that chair I can comfortably write this blog post.

Finding that perfect chair is a lot like finding the perfect work spot where our work responsibilities are uniquely designed to fit our passions, our skill sets and our sweet spot (those areas where we have great skill and strength). If you sit in a chair like that in your work you are a lucky individual indeed and it often does not take place until our forties and fifties when we understand ourselves more fully and have a team around us that makes it possible for various members to play to their strengths and thus, we to ours.

Our sweet spot is where we are most effective, where we are energized and where the responsibilities of our jobs are in line with our unique gifting and wiring. For me that means a job that allows me to architect the vision of an organization, mentor key leaders of the ministry, resource the ministry financially and otherwise and write. If I can spend a minimum of 60% of my time in those areas and better yet 80% of my time in those areas, I will be happy, challenged and effective. That is my perfect chair.

When less than 60% of our time is spent in areas of our sweet spot (which means that we are not that effective at them and that they drain rather than energize us) we will find ourselves fatigued and not very satisfied. If we agree that God wired us in a certain way, it then becomes imperative that we do what we can to spend as much of our time in the zone where he wired us rather than trying to do (not very effectively) those things we were not wired to do.

We usually start out our work careers doing many thing. Over the years we recognize that out of those many things we actually are best at a few things (none of us are great at more than two or three things). So our challenge is to figure out a way to get seated in a chair that has us doing primarily those things that we are really good at doing.

Some suggestions on getting there:

1. Talk to your supervisor or board about how you are wired and where you are most effective and satisfied and ask if you can dialogue about a restructuring of your job so that you are able to spend 60 to 80 percent of your time in those areas
2. If you are a ministry leader, intentionally build a staff or team around you that allows you to play to your strengths and offload to other gifted people those things they do well but you don't do well.
3. Be willing to give up things that you feel are obligations but not in your sweet spot and allow others to take them on. The fewer things we do that are focused in our sweet spots, the more effective we are.
4. Build a culture in your organization that says, to the very best of our ability we get people into their sweet spot even if it means that we annually look at job responsibilities and how we can best configure our staff for maximum effectiveness and job satisfaction. The book, Leading From The Sandbox can be of help to you in this.
5. Don't be satisfied with a chair that does not fit you. When you are uncomfortable you won't be happy or effective. If you cannot redefine within your organization you may need to look for a chair in another. Your legacy (what you leave behind) is dependent on it.

It takes time to find the perfect work chair but if you can and when you do you begin to live in the flow of everything God made you to be and it is a wonderful experience.

Investing in your staff

One of the highest callings in Christian leadership is to be in a position where one must discern the character, gifts, skills and abilities of others and direct them to a meaningful, purposeful, and fulfilling ministry. God’s call in our life is always to be in a context where we can grow in him and effectively serve him, using the gifts and talents that he has given us to serve his Kingdom communities (the Church) and be a witness to his compassion and love.

Therefore, one of the most important tasks of a leader is discerning proper placement for the service of those they lead. (I Corinthians 12). And then to mentor, develop and coach them in that spot.

Many leaders do not understand either the priority or the value of making a significant investment in their staff. From a priority standpoint, the better one's staff, and the better they are positioned for success and the better they are developed and empowered, the more missional success your ministry will achieve. Because ministry happens through people, the larger your ministry the less it will be directly impacted by you and the more it will be impacted by others. Therefore your investment in others becomes one of your most critical tasks.

From a value standpoint, staff who are invested in to help them grow, develop and work from their strengths, not only become better but they become deeply loyal to your organization.

As I have reflected on the senior level leaders in our organization who oversee many others it is my conviction that at least 25% of their time must be spent in the development, coaching, mentoring and placement of people so that they reach their full potential.

I believe that senior pastors have the same obligation with their staff, leaders and volunteers. The best ministries are those that have a huge commitment to develop and release their staff in line with the gifting God has given them.

The largest inhibitor to this practice is that many of us did not go into ministry to develop others but to do ministry ourselves. Thus as our leadership position grows or our ministry grows we continue to do ministry rather than making the fundamental shift to a leadership role of developing our staff for their maximum success - and therefore for your maximum success!

Take a look at your calendar and ask the question, in the course of my month, how much time do I spend in the mentoring, developing and coaching of those who report to me or to my larger staff (if some report to you through others). Many of us would find that we spend very little time in that arena yet it is one of the most important things we should be doing. How are you doing?

Growing our wisdom one decision at a time

There is much written in Scripture about wisdom. We all want it, all believe we have it and certainly don't like the alternative - being a fool. The thing about wisdom is that like a tree it grows slowly, one ring at a time, one layer at a time, one decision at a time and it is the accumulative layers of right thinking and right decisions and right priorities and right behaviors that build true wisdom.

Wisdom starts with "The Fear of the Lord." There is a lot wrapped up in that simple statement but fundamentally it is the acknowledgement that God's ways for our lives are the right ways even though we are constantly challenged by our selfish hearts, the media and our society that there are "better" ways than His ways. Or to put it another way, His ways are great, as long as they don't get in the way of My ways! When they do, well, lets say it is negotiable.

Those who grow little rings of wisdom have made the decision that His ways are indeed the right ways and they consciously and intentionally align their lives to be in sync with his ways. Wisdom, then is not just how we think, it is directly connected to the life choices we make and our obedience to God. It is not just about wise decisions, but about wise living.

Wisdom is also about what we choose not to do. Proverbs is a book that contrasts two types of people. The wise and the fool! Fools choose certain paths and the wise other paths. For instance, fools do not listen to other wise people. Fools, act on their own without consulting God or others. Fools are not discerning about their advisers or actions. It is an interesting exercise to look at the ways of the fool and the ways of the wise. Avoiding the practices of the former and committing to the practices of the latter are the way of wisdom.

Wisdom then is also about discernment: the discernment to avoid certain behaviors, decisions, actions and people, and the discernment to choose certain behaviors, decisions, actions and people. Fools lack discernment while the wise specialize in discernment.

Wise people are not born that way. They have chosen to grow it one decision, one action, one behavior and one discerning choice at a time until the cumulative effect is to default to a wise and Godly choice over a foolish and selfish choice. Like the rings of a tree, it is one season at a time that eventually shows its unique and faithful character, ring after ring after ring.

It does not happen by accident! It is a choice we make. Each time we have a choice.

Embracing the discipline of thinking deeply

Good leaders are good thinkers. They have embraced the "discipline" of thinking - and it is a discipline that can be learned, sharpened and honed with time and practice.

There are others who have ambition but not the will to think deeply. Instead of thinking deeply they copy ideas of others and apply them to their ministry, hoping for the same results. Usually they don't get the same results because they did not understand the underpinnings of the strategy that came from deep strategic thought.

The more leadership responsibility one has the more one needs to set aside for thinking - away from distractions, email, and interruptions. Where you have other deeply insightful and strategic people on staff you will want to engage them in dialogue on critical issues you face. Some think best in solitude, some think best in dialogue. Either way, the intellectual capital of others plays a major role in coming to the best solutions.

As an organizational leader, I allocate about 25% of my time for thinking, analysis, considering options and dialoguing with other key individuals. Most people gravitate toward action. Leaders activate but only after a lot of deep thinking.

Leaders also practice "grey thought." Thinking grey is the ability to evaluate and consider many different options - some of them contradictory - without coming to a conclusion until one needs to. Here is an irony. Great leaders put off making decisions as long as they can so that they can do all the grey thinking possible. That way when they come to a conclusion, they have considered as many of the ramifications as possible and have a much higher wisdom and success ratio than those who make quick decisions.

Distractions are the greatest threat to deep thinking. Twitter, facebook, CNN, Fox, Sirius, the pace of life, and the obligations we have all rob us of think time. They are good if used well and unhelpful if not. Those who run too fast - even with great success - often crash. They lose their bearings that could have been saved if they had taken the time to consider and think about their ministry and their personal life. This is why my study is a haven for me, it is a place to stay grounded, think deeply and avoid distractions.

Our own spiritual development is integrally tied to the discipline of thinking. One of the reasons for the shallow discipleship of our world today is that we don't take the time to consider the implications of what God says in his word. Reading his word or listening to a message is easy. Making thoughtful application of that word to our lives is far more complex and difficult.

Those who display Biblical wisdom are people who think deeply rather than shallowly and often rather than seldom.

Essential Leadership Commitments

Those who lead others take on special responsibilities...and must hold themselves to the standards that they ask of those they lead. That is not always easy and it takes a humble vigilance because none of us do these things perfectly. But the "commitments" of leaders ought to be the norm not the exception.


Leaders keep their commitments
Our word is our bond and leaders model what it means to keep their commitments. Sometimes this means that we will not commit to something we don't know that we can deliver on. But once we have committed we do all that we can to deliver on that promise. When we don't deliver we devalue those to whom we have made a promise and we communicate that good intentions are what counts, not delivery on our promises.

Leaders model relational health
It is easy for relationships to go sideways or south. Leaders do all that they can to prevent that from happening and when it does to seek to right it. They don't hold grudges, they keep short accounts, they don't shy away from addressing relational issues and they do all that they can to live at peace with all men - as the Apostle Paul admonished. What they never do is nothing - when relationships have soured.

Leaders keep a missional focus
Ultimately our leadership is not about us but about the mission we believe in - and which our team is committed to. Many others will be distracted from missional focus by all the activity of work but leaders remain focused on the mission so that they can keep their team focused on the mission. Mission leaks easily. Leaders don't let that happen for them or for their team.

Leaders pay attention to their spiritual health
Leaders heed the admonishment of Proverbs 4:23, "Above all else, guard your heart, for it is the wellspring of life." Before all else, the condition of our hearts matter for from our hearts flow all that we are, our motives, attitudes, behaviors, words, relationships and love for the God we serve. Leaders always have time for God, for the word, for prayer and for quiet meditation. They nourish their hearts so that in the heat of leadership what emerges is what God would want to emerge.

Leaders always have a learning posture
Leaders are sure about a few things but they are always learning on the vast majority of things. A leader who knows the answer to everything is a leader only in his or her own mind! Leaders are always questioning, always learning, always thinking grey, always looking for better ways, always open to ideas and suggestions. In the end they must forge a direction with and for their team but they are by nature humble learners and always growing.

Leaders don't ask of others what they are unwilling to do themselves.
We lead by example not by edict. Before we can ask others to certain commitments they must see those commitments in us. Our asking comes out of our own commitments that are plain to all and therefore have credibility in their own right. The commander who will not lead his troops into battle is not fit to be a commander because he will not take the risk he is asking his troops to take.

Leaders care about results not just activity
Leaders are not fooled by activity nor do they allow activity of their team to pass for results. Rather they have clearly defined objectives and they are always looking for and pushing for measurable results. They help focus their teams on those particular activities that are most likely going to result in missional results.

Leaders are approachable
Leaders do not put themselves on a pedestal nor do they allow others to do so. If they want team members to be approachable, they must be approachable as well. Unapproachable leaders are really unaccountable leaders because people do not feel that they can talk to them or be heard by them. As a result they don't receive the honest feedback that every individual needs in their lives and work.

Leaders display personal humility
Leadership is a trust that we hold for a time in order to accomplish a God honoring mission. We are stewards of our leadership responsibility and we are servants of those we lead, empowering them to become all that they can be and developing them to become all that they can become. Leadership is not about us, it is about helping all of us accomplish our mission for the cause of Christ.

Many will lead some will lead well. Those who do, understand and live by the commitments of leaders.

What is your passion quotient?

What are you passionate about? Really passionate! What is it that makes you want to get out of bed in the morning and tackle the day? What is it that you want to give your life to? What activity or work gives you the greatest joy in life? Real joy!

What we are passionate about is most likely closely tied to the work that God created us to accomplish. Passion and our "sweet spot" are closely linked. And our area of passion is most likely where we are most effective.

It is possible over time to drift out of our area of passion into all kinds of work that may be important but which do not align with our passion. That drift slowly drains our energy and compromises our effectiveness. Most importantly, it moves us away from the spot that God created us for and the place that brings our hearts the greatest joy.

Thoughtful individuals are always asking the question: how do I organize life so that I stay in my areas of greatest strength and how do I help my staff do the same? Sure there are responsibilities that we must do even though they are not our favorite things. But, if we are not playing to our strengths and passions 60 - 80% of the time we will suffer from diminished energy and vision.

Signs of drift from our sweet spot include boredom, restlessness, irritability, lack of energy and the absence of the joy that once drove us. Those symptoms are often indicators from our creator that we have moved away from the place He uniquely created us for.

Many choose to ignore those indicators and settle in for the duration in a place where they are not passionate - but "safe." Those who care most deeply about finishing well and making the most of the opportunity God has given never settle for "safe" or "security" but keep pressing back into the place where God created them to be.

That may mean a different job. It may mean re-negotiating your present responsibilities. It may mean a pay decrease in order to live in our sweet spot. It could mean retooling for a different occupation. It may mean greater discipline in determining one's priorities and activities.

One cannot read the gospels and not be impressed by the passion of Jesus to fulfill His father's will for his life. Paul exudes passion in each of his epistles for the work God gave him. Can you say you have that kind of passion for the work God gave you? If not, what do you need to do to rekindle that passion because our effectiveness is directly linked to our passion. The worst thing we can do is settle for less than God created us to be.

What is your passion quotient?

Six elements of successful organizational change

Many attempts at organizational change are not successful. Often they flounder because they lack one of six fundamental elements for change to be successful. If any one of these are missing, the change process is compromised.

Conviction
Major change will not happen unless leaders have an absolute and unshakable conviction that it must happen. Usually this revolves around the need for the organization to re-envision for its next run, to adapt to changing opportunities or to address a specific threat. The conviction comes from the belief that if the organization does not change it will be in trouble. Many leaders understand the need for change but lack a compelling conviction that they must help the organization move through it. It is easier to ignore the need than to address it.

Without a bedrock conviction of the need for change, it will get derailed by doubts, anxiety and push back from resistors. Conviction brings the peace of mind in moments of doubt that you are on the right track and that this needs to be done.

Courage
If change were easy it would be common. It is not either easy or common. Suggesting that major change must take place takes a great amount of courage on the part of leaders. They know that if they are rebuffed or if the change is not successful, their own job is in jeopardy. Change takes the organization through some whitewater and uncertainty and it takes courage on the part of leaders to be willing to enter those white waters.

Risk
Change means that old methodologies and ways of thinking are jettisoned for new. Often those new ways and thinking are untried and therefore there is a certain amount of calculated risk involved. Good leaders have through through the risks and unintended consequences but there is still risk. The willingness to take the necessary risks requires the conviction and courage already noted.

Process
Because change is unsettling to most people the way in which it is approached is just as important as the change itself. People need to understand the why and the how and what the future looks like and while there is white water in the process there should not be chaos. Change is a process of thinking differently and acting differently and that takes time to assimilate. 

Unmanaged change, or change that lacks proper process will likely fail because the very staff who need to live out the change are not given the time to assimilate the change. Never underestimate the need for process. If there ever is a time it is when the organization is going through change. Much of the process is a continual dialogue with leaders and staff about what you are doing, why your are doing it and how it is going for them.

New Practices
The best way to assimilate change is to commit to new practices. Change is theoretical until you actually put it into practice. Not only that, but actually doing something new channels anxiety among staff about change into productive energy and as they try out new practices they don't seem as threatening as they did when it was theory. As those new practices are being tried out, leaders should be in active dialogue with staff as to how it is going, what their frustrations are and encouraging them to keep pushing into the new. Because practices are driven by habits it will take a great deal of time for new habits to be formed - for organizations it can take years.

Resolve
People and organizations naturally seek the familiar and comfortable and thus even with new practices being tried there will be a pull back to the old ways of doing and thinking. Some of this is natural as habits are hard to break. Some of this will come from resistors who just don't want to change. This is where the organization needs to feel the resolve of its leaders that the change is going to happen, that there is no going back and that no matter what pressure is brought to bear organically or from individuals that the organization is going to push forward into a new future.

It takes a unique leader to drive organizational change and successfully see it through. These six elements are fundamental to a successful change process.

Ezra's and Nehemiah's: We need one another

A common theme I hear from highly qualified business people and other professionals today is "Why won't the church let me use my gifts in its ministry?" Many feel marginalized and underutilized. Some feel like they are not wanted at all on the ministry side.

Not that they are not allowed to minister. Ministry folks are often glad to let professional folks minister in ministry slots they have created that they need to be filled. That is not what these professionals are asking. They want to be able to use the skills God has given them in ministry - not filling slots the church has created!

Many ministry professionals lack experience and gifting in leadership, business, strategy and management. They don't like to admit it but it is true.

Many professionals lack experience in preaching, teaching, counseling or theological intricacies.

Perhaps given those facts, we need each other! Playing to each other's strengths and complementing one another. Actually making room for each other and not being threatened by one another.

Ezra was a spiritual leader and a good one. He was terrible as a leader or administrator! So God provided Nehemiah who did not pretend to be a priest, but who had amazing administrative and leadership gifts and who got done in a short time what Ezra could not get done in years. They needed each other, they played to their strengths and the people were stronger for it.

Ezra was a priest. Nehemiah was an executive of the king. Ezra's and Nehemiah's need each other. Too often they have not found a way to work well with each other. The church is the purview of the Ezra's and the world of the Nehemiah's.

We need the Ezra's and Nehemiah's in our churches to appreciate one another, trust one another and allow one another to play to the strengths God has given. Our congregations might, like the people of Israel in Nehemiah actually be better off because of it.

Supervisors and staff: Maintaining appropriate boundaries

Leaders have an interesting dilemma when it comes to how close or distant they are socially from those they lead. It is often something that they don't think much about but it has important ramifications for how they relate to others.

There is a difference in the relationship between peers and those one leads. This is obvious when a leader is promoted from within and goes from peer to supervisor. Everyone knows that something has changed and that the relationship is different.

It is different because now one who was a peer is leading those he or she was a peer with. Now instead of relating as peers, they are asking hard questions and holding others accountable for results. Often the transition is not easy. I remember one such transition myself where I was now supervising former peers and some of them never adjusted to it.

The issue of social distance can be framed this way: How close or distant do I position myself as a leader from those I lead, knowing that while we have a collegial relationship it is not by nature a peer relationship?

Some leaders try so hard to be best buds with those they lead that they lose their ability to speak into the lives, ministries, or strategies of their team because that is not the function of being best buds. In other words, in their attempt to be "one of the boys or girls" they lose their ability and authority to lead well. It is a leadership error.

Other leaders are so intent on their leadership role that they become distant and unapproachable from those they lead. Another leadership error because the human element is lost to the leadership role.

Social distance for a leader really depends on the situation. The best leaders are highly personable on a personal level. They care about families and kids and the personal issues of life and easily engage in discussions that deal with the human issues we all face. On that level, the relationship feels like a relationship of peers.

On the other hand, when leading the team, or pressing into a work related issue, they put on the hat of leader and can move into a collegial but clearly a leadership role where they are not afraid to give direct feedback, deal with a difficult issue or press into the work of those they supervise. In this role they are clearly not peers and need to be taken seriously by those they lead.

The most complicated relationships are those where a former peer was also a close friend. Now, there is both a friendship and a supervisory capacity that must be negotiated. In some settings they remain defined by the friendship but in the leadership setting it is the supervisory role that must be realized and acknowledged by both parties.

Wise leaders are both friends and leaders and they understand when it is appropriate for the social distance to be close and when it must be more distant. When social distance is too close it is difficult or impossible to lead. When it is too distant it is difficult to be seen as a leader who cares. Good leaders can and do switch from close to farther depending on the situation. They are collegial and human but also leaders and supervisors. If you are a leader, think about how you negotiate social distance with those you lead.

Leaders can be friends, colleagues and supervisors. They regulate the social distance depending on the situation so that they lead well. But they will never just be "one of the boys or girls."

What our calendars say about us

Whether we are an organizational leader or team member there is a very telling tool about our priorities and what is really important to us. It is not what we say. It is not what we communicate to our teams or one another. It is not the mission or priorities of our organization.

It is our calendar.

Nancy Ortberg in her book, Unleashing the Power of Rubber bands: Lessons in non-linear Leadership writes something that is all too true: "There is often an enormous disconnect between the vision of an organization and the events that make up the daily calendar pages of the organization's leaders."

Don't get me wrong. There is always great activity on a calendar. But the focus of that activity for too many does not match up with the vision or mission of the organization or the stated priorities of leaders (or team members). All of us can easily fall into the trap of mistaking activity for the results we say we are committed to.

I have only five priorities - Key Result Areas (KRA's). The are:

1. Personal development


2. Strategic leadership


3. Strong team


4. Leadership development


5. Mobilizing resources

Those are the big rocks of my work. Given those priorities, the proof of whether those are in reality my priorities is whether my calendar reflects those priorities. Do the majority of my appointments, obligations, and time allocations reflect those five areas, or does my calendar actually reflect a scattered and accidental approach to my work. The calendar tells the story!

If you are committed to a life of intentionality I would challenge you to identify the big rocks of your work and then compare the obligations of your calendar with your priorities. Do they line up? Are you intentional in scheduling your priorities? Can you say no to those things that distract from what you are called to do? Are you willing for your colleagues to see your calendar? Would they say it reflects your big rocks?

Our calendars tell the story of our true priorities. And they are a powerful tool in ensuring that we achieve those priorities when we allocate our limited resource of time according to those things that we know are most important.

I don't have time

Are you ever caught in the trap where you don't have time to do what you need to do? What someone else wants you to do? Something you feel obligated to do? How does it make you feel?

Here is a truth to consider: We all have time to do what is most important to us and we all have time to do what God has called us to do. If we run out of time, it may be that we have things in our schedule that are not really important for us, or we have taken on responsibilities that God did not intend for us to take on! They may be important for someone but not for us.

Those times in my life where I have been harried and hassled are also times when I have not been careful about what I said yes or no too, and times when I had taken on new responsibility without letting go of old responsibility - always a mistake.

When I feel like I don't have time it is really a symptom that I need to more carefully examine the responsibilities and obligations I have and determine where adjustments need to be made so that I have adequate and good time for those things that are most important.

And that in itself takes time, which is why a monthly personal retreat day is so important to me. It gives me time to prioritize, evaluate and find time for those things that are important. And jettison those things that are distractions that take away from what is actually important. It takes time to save time!

I have had periods when I was too busy. I am not impressed with busyness. In fact, I am far more impressed with those who are not too busy to find time for those things that are truly important in their lives - and still have margin. It tells me that they have wisdom. They have thought through their lives so that they have time for what the ought to have time for.

"Father God, help me (and us) to do that."

The advantages of engaging a coach

Many of us would benefit from a formal coaching arrangement from someone who can help us ask the right questions, think strategically and improve our personal effectiveness. I am aware of one large denomination that has every one of their senior executives in such a coaching relationship.

Many executives in the business world do the same thing and pay several thousand dollars a day for day long sessions. The good news is that one can find a coach who can be in touch monthly for an hour or two using the phone or teleconference.

Why consider a coach? We see what we see and know what we know. A coach is not there to tell us what to do but to ask questions that help us think about options we might not think of, to challenge our presuppositions and to help us figure out how to be more effective.

There are trained coaches for pastors and ministry leaders, or one can ask someone who you respect and trust to coach you. It can be formal or informal.

The greatest barrier I find to entering into a coaching relationship is the fear of greater accountability. That is in fact one of the benefits of such a relationship because having that regular conversation with someone who is helping you focus on what is most important and to be disciplined in our use of time fosters accountability. But it is accountability from someone who is in your corner and is there to help you be more effective.

Monthly coaching from someone outside your organization is a great way to help you keep growing personally and become more missional and effective in the process