Six steps that church boards can take to address issues that threaten the health of their church.

It happens way too often, especially in the not-for-profit arena and especially on church boards. Obvious issues within the ministry are ignored, minimized or allowed to fester because the board is unwilling to confront a senior leader, or a powerful individual in the church who is creating issues or a staff culture that is toxic. 

It is not that the issue is hard to see. In fact, in many cases, congregants see the issue clearly and in many cases leave the church. Yet on the board, there is reluctance to even name and discuss the issue. It is a classic case of burying one's head in the sand and pretending that the issue is not there or will go away by itself. If we ignore it, maybe it will dissapear. In fact, what usually happens is that the issue gets worse, not better. 

The negligence of church boards is at the root of many toxic church cultures. They did not create the toxicity but knowing that it it there they have done nothing to deal with it.

This week I spoke with an individual who had a concern around some issues in his church that could literally blow the church apart. He is on the board but the board does not want to deal with the issues. I asked if there were congregants who were aware of the situation and he said yes. So it is an "open secret" I said and he said yes. It is also the kind of issue that if it became more public could create a great deal of legitimate concern. Yet the board is dragging its feet and has not made it a priority. As I listened I thought to myself, "This is not going to end well."

In another church I am familiar with, there has been a great deal of toxicity on the staff - the result of a senior pastor who can be described as narcisistic, abusive toward staff, prone to outbursts of anger and attack, causing both elders to resign as well as key staff. Even though the board was fully appraised of the issues, it took them over two years to deal with the toxic pastor and they have never sought to make things right with the individuals the pastor hurt, alienated, had their reputations damaged by him even as he polished his own reputation with spin and subtrafuge. 

The board knew but chose to do nothing for two years while staff were being hurt and the bodies on the side of the road proliferated. Even when key staff appealed to the board there was absolute silence - no response. In one case a staff member recorded her last meeting with the pastor who berated her causing her to walk out of the meeting and out of the church never to return. Even when the recording became known, there was no interest on the part of the board to listen to it. When she wrote a painful letter to the board about her experience, there was no response. Not even a call to the former staff member. 

As I read the New Testament I see that boards (elders) have six responsibilities Biblically. First to ensure that the congregation is taught well. Second, to keep the spiritual temperature of the church high. Third, to ensure that the congregation is led well and missionally, Fourth to protect the flock from the wolves of aggregious unrepentant sin, division and heresy. Fifth, to ensure that the flock is cared for. And, sixth, to ensure that people are developed, empowered and released into meaningful ministry. Certainly, the kinds of behaviors I have enumerated here violate number two, three, and five. My book, High Impact Church Boards enumerates these responsibilities. 

Too many boards are wrapped up in doing all the wrong things. Policies and procedures while ignoring toxic behaviors, conflict, people who are being abused and hurt, leaders who are not leading, and the absence of spiritual ferver in the church.

I am convinced that many boards are utterly untaught in the Biblical responsibilities of elders (regardless of the name of the senior leadership group in your polity). The result is a great deal of damage to the church as unadressed issues continue to grow until they blow up and in some cases destroy the church altogether. It is as if these boards have never had a serious discussion about the clear passages in the New Testament that speak to their role. There is no excuse for this. It is Biblical ignorance of the highest order. 

There are many very public examples of large churches who chose to ignore known issues until the issues literally blew the church up with broken bodies left all over the map.

I believe that boards ought to have a standing agreement that when there are credible issues that arise within their church that they will do these six things.

One, they will have a full discussion so that whatever the issues are they have been verbalized and everyone is aware of the situation.

Two, they ask the question as to what follow up is needed and who will be responsible for that follow up. This includes regular updates to the board until the issues are resolved. That follow up should include candid converstation with those who may know something or asking uncomfortable questions that will help them understand the truth.

Three, they ask the question as to their responsibility as church leaders in this situation. They put their responsibility front and center rather than evading their own responsibility. They measure their responsibility against the six responsibilities of leaders enumerated above from the Scriptures. 

Four, they commit to doing the right thing even when it is hard, inconvenient or uncomfortable. It takes courage to be a church leader and if one is unwilling to do the above, they should not serve in leadership.

Five, where the board cannot decide what to do they agree that they will seek outside counsel from individuals who are wise, who are not personally impacted and who can give unbiased counsel. 

Six, they will not leave known issues unadressed. Period. 

Any board that is unwilling to take these six steps ought to reconsider their leadership in light of their Biblical mandate. 

The frustration many experience in serving on a church board - and how to solve it

 

Straight up, let me say that I believe in a plurality of leadership for the church. It is how God designed it, and when it functions well, it is a beautiful thing. However, having been a pastor, church leader, board member, and consultant to church boards for over 30 years, I know they can be deeply frustrating. Most of that frustration is self-imposed in that we don't pay attention to some fundamental principles that, if followed, would move the experience of many from deeply frustrating to deeply satisfying. 

What are those fundamentals?

1. Guard the gate to who gets on the board! Get the wrong people, and you sabotage the board. The most powerful group in the church, bar none, are those who make leadership board selections. Healthy boards always insert themselves into that process to ensure the wrong people don't get on. Three to six years with the wrong individuals is deadly to boards. Be smart in how you choose leaders.

2. Understand your role. Boards are responsible for ensuring that the congregation is taught, protected, led, empowered and, released, cared for and that the spiritual temperature in the congregation is kept high. Many boards don't even have a job description, let alone focus on the right things. A focus on the wrong things hurts the board and the church. My book, High Impact Church Boards can be a help.

3. Spend quality time in prayer together. Most boards don't! They get so caught up in the minutia of details (that someone else could do) that they don't have time to pray, think, study the word together, and seek the counsel of the Lord of the church they serve as undershepherds. When business and administration crowd out prayer, it is a sign that the board is moving in a dangerous direction.

4. Use an agenda and allow the chair to prioritize what is important and what is not. Not all rocks are big rocks. Some are pebbles and sand that someone else should deal with. Leaders deal with big rocks and delegate everything that can and should be delegated. Many leaders serve their "time" and then retire from church boards precisely because they don't focus on what is important, and as leaders, they want to do that.

5. Always operate with a board covenant that spells out how members relate to one another, make decisions, and handle conflict and members' expectations - including how to handle recalcitrant board members. Boards operate without such a covenant at their own risk.

6. Lead boldly and help the congregation become the people God wants them to be. Timid leadership in the church in epidemic! And deeply sad. One of the reasons many congregations have so little spiritual influence beyond the edges of their parking lot goes right back to the timid leadership of their leaders. Remember, we lead on behalf of Jesus. 

7. When there are elephants in the room, name them and deal with them honestly and sensitively. Too many church boards ignore the true issues of the church because we don't want to offend anyone. The irony is that we all know they exist and need to be dealt with, so we might as well name them because once named, they are no longer elephants but simply issues to be dealt with.

8. Evaluate how you are doing as a board. Here are 15 simple questions that will tell you a great deal about the health of your board. Have your board spend ten minutes answering the questions, and you will have some fodder for discussion that can help you improve your board, its leadership, and your experience. 

9. When you need to change direction or deal with known issues, don't try to tweak your way out of a crisis. Tweaks don't work in a crisis. Change does, with candid communication with the congregation. 

10. Be candid with the congregation. Spin in the church is ubiquitous, creating disillusionment with leadership and the church itself. Don't contribute to that disillusionment.

Effective boards are a joy to serve on. Ineffective boards are a major frustration. Which one do you have?

Best Practice Board Behaviors

 We give each other grace

Boards debate ideas and options and must deal with difficult decisions. Without grace toward one another and each other's viewpoints, conflict can create animosity and relational issues. Grace allows us to wade in and speak truthfully in a context of peace.

We speak the truth as we understand it

Unless we share what is actually on our minds, issues cannot be properly discussed, and options are left unaddressed. Too many board members are unwilling to speak candidly in meetings and end up talking about the issues elsewhere or living with frustration. Grace allows candid dialogue. We are responsible for sharing the truth as we understand it.

We show patience toward one another especially when we disagree

Disagreements are inevitable on a board. In fact, if there was no disagreement, a board would not be necessary. It is in the confluence of opinions, options and ideas that the best decisions are made. But getting to those great ideas requires patience with one another.

We listen carefully

The best board members are those who listen carefully and thoughtfully to others. Wisdom cannot be mined without careful listening and evaluation. The best board members are those who thoughtfully listen. When they speak others tend to listen.

We meet without a personal agenda

Boards exist for the good of the organization and its mission. Decisions are not about us or getting our way. It is what is best for the organization and its mission. Board members who must have their own way hurt the work of the board and often the organization itself.

We take a humble posture

Humility is at the heart of all good leadership. Our leadership is not about us and we do not possess all wisdom. The best leadership comes from humble leaders and board members who believe that the best decisions are corporately made. Humble board members learn at each meeting. Prideful members are simply focused on their own agenda.

We engage in robust dialogue without hidden agendas or personal attacks

Robust dialogue is the coinage of good boards. The ability to speak truth, disagree, talk through issues and even be emotional or passionate about an issue. This is healthy with two caveats: No personal attacks - it is not about people but about the mission; and no hidden agendas but only honest dialogue.

If you want to know the health or dishealth of your church board, pay attention to the quality of relationships

 

One of the key indicators of a board health the quality of relationships between board members. As you read this list of poor interpersonal relationships, ask yourself if any of them apply to your church board. If yes, it is imperative that you find a way to resolve the issues because these never just stay on the board but spill out onto the congregation as a whole. Ask me, I have worked with many such situations.

• Poor interpersonal relationships between members (whether a few or many)
• Factions on a board that are unable to come to consensus
• Unresolved conflict and an inability to resolve that conflict because board members will not submit to one another
• The pastor is seen as an employee of the board rather than as a full member of the board. When a pastor is treated like an employee you have set yourself up for factions, us them and poor relationships
• The inability to deal with certain subjects because one or more board members block the discussion
• There is a powerbroker on the board who uses their influence to get their way and refuses to be accountable to the board as a whole
• A significant amount of directional clarity. It is hard to get clarity when any of the above behaviors are present
• There are personal agendas or hidden agendas that one can sense but are not named
• A lack of concern for one another
• The Fruit of the Spirit is not evident in relationships and discussions
• Board members make up their own rules and operate independently even though that violates basic board practices
• You cannot hold a board member who is causing issues on the board because either the board will not hold them accountable or they refuse to be accountable 

Recently, in a discussion with a friend about issues like this on a board they serve on, I said, "your church is at significant risk and if the board cannot get their act together I would resign rather than be complicit in a leadership situation that your board cannot or will not deal with.

What is interesting to me is that in many churches where such behavior resides at the board level, they insist that the same behavior cannot be resident in the congregation as a whole and even use church discipline to enforce their way. How can a board that cannot police itself have the conviction that they can enforce right conduct in a congregation? What right does a board have to tell a congregant to humbly submit to their will when the board cannot submit to the will of the board? It is hypocrisy, and it is sinful and it will hurt the very people that they are charged with protecting.

Sometimes the congregation needs to be protected from the very board that is charged with guiding them.

These are spiritual issues and they demand reformation. There is no Church called TOV when these behaviors are present. TOV or goodness, starts with the leaders of a church. Many people and many congregations have been hurt when the board itself becomes the largest violator of TOV or goodness. Unfortunately it is not a rare occurrence. 

Here is an interesting question to consider. If the average parishioner knew what transpired in your board room, would they be motivated to stay or leave? To love Jesus more or less? To be confident in the leadership or less? 

You can fool a congregation for a time, but not forever. I plead with any who are in this situation to get help for your board.

Clarity is Job One in any governance system

 

Ask any board or staff member in a church or non-profit and you will get the same answer to this question: What is the number one frustration you face in your leadership role. The answers will often be these:

• We don't have clarity on who is responsible for what
• We experience frustration or conflict regarding roles and responsibilities
• We often feel disempowered by those who think they have the responsibility to make decisions we think we should be able to make
• We don't feel empowered in our role
• If only the board (or staff) would stay out of our way
• Because no one is clearly responsible we don't know who to hold responsible
• Lack of clarity is causing confusion at best and conflict at worst

All of these have one thing in common. That commonality is clarity. Clarity in roles, responsibilities, intended results and the freedom to act within boundaries without the permission of others.

I am currently working with a congregation that is in a process to clarity their governance structure. They interviewed a number of other congregations about their process of governance and the one thing that consistently came back to them was this. Have maximum clarity around roles, responsibilities and outcomes. Without clarity there is no accountability. Without clarity people are not empowered to act. Without clarity there is at best confusion and at worst, conflict.

Every governance system must define the roles and responsibilities of four parties: The congregation, the senior board, the staff and ministry teams. The clearer you are, the more empowerment there is and the more accountability there will be. The foggier you are the less empowerment you will have and there will be little to no accountability.

My observation is that many governance systems are designed deliberately to create fog rather than clarity because with clarity people can act in their sphere of influence. In such churches, you will notice that they hit a ceiling and never exceed that ceiling because clarity of roles and responsibilities is critical to growth. In their lack of clarity they unwittingly limit their growth and effectiveness.  Lack of clarity has a built in ceiling to growth and effectiveness. 

Without clarity you cannot have alignment. Without alignment you cannot move in the same direction. And, without clarity and alignment, you cannot achieve results that are consistent with your clarity. Something to think about.

If you want more help in getting to clarity, my books High Impact Church Boards and Leading From the Sandbox can point you in the right direction. Remember, clarity is always Job One.

The dangers of "representative" church leadership

It sounds like a good idea. The church has six or seven major ministries so why not have the leader of each of those ministries on the church leadership team - whether it is a council or board of elders or some other name. After all, we don't want any of these ministries not represented at the leadership level!

What sounds like a good idea can actually be a bad idea and in this case cause negative consequences that can linger for years. Let me explain.

Let's start with the mission and vision thing. In representative church government there are by definition multiple missions and visions - each ministry has one. It is challenging enough to drive one central mission in any church and to stay focused on that. It is impossible to focus on multiple missions and visions. What you end up with is an incoherent mission that is being pulled in various directions as each leader and team seek to exert their authority and advocate for their piece of the pie. 

Healthy and effective churches have one central mission that every ministry contributes to. In representative governance the situation is reversed as the church is to serve multiple missions. In healthy church governance the leadership group puts the mission of the church first, sees the whole rather than the parts and makes decisions that are best for the church as a whole.

There are politics in the church just as there are in other organizations. Representative governance will by its very nature become political. If you doubt this, try to change your governance to a healthier paradigm and you face the difficulty of trying to convince those who represent a ministry, have power in their sphere to give that power and fiefdom up. 

I was asked to meet with the leaders of a church in the Midwest who had this kind of a system. They called because the pastor and several leaders of the church were experiencing huge frustration in getting decisions made and moving the church to a healthier place. The church was stuck in a rut and getting anything done was frustrating.

In or conversation two things became clear. No one thought the current system worked well and no one was willing to give up their respective authority in their area to make it work better. Even though they would have denied it, this was church politics and personal power at its worst - but not uncommon.

In representative government:

• There is not a true central missional focus
• Decisions are hard to make because they need to be negotiated with too many parties
• Politics and turf wars are built into the system
• The health of the church as a whole suffers
• Pastors cannot lead as there are multiple leaders doing their own thing
• Meetings are long and unproductive
• No one truly gets served well in the end
• Your best volunteers see the above and often opt out after experiencing the system that provides inertia rather than progress.

I am available to meet with church boards and dialogue with them on the challenges they face and possible solutions. With zoom technology, this can be done easily at low cost to you. If interested, you may contact me at tjaddington@gmail.com.

High Impact Church Boards and Leading From The Sandbox are both back in print

I am pleased to announce that High Impact Church Boards and Leading From the Sandbox are back in print and available. 

The books are available at AddingtonConsulting.org

I am available to meet with church boards and dialogue with them on the challenges they face and possible solutions. With zoom technology, this can be done easily at low cost to you. If interested, you may contact me at tjaddington@gmail.com.

Why congregations distrust their leaders and love to second guess them

I have noticed in my years of consulting with congregations that there one of the common dysfunctions in the church is an underlying distrust of their leaders. 

Sometimes this mistrust manifests itself by those loud voices that love to be heard in congregational meetings where behind the opinions and complaints one can often hear distrust. At other times this mistrust manifests itself in criticisms of leadership and their decisions that is like a low level dissonance that is always present.

Mistrust of leaders is one of the reasons that it can be difficult to convince the right people to serve in church leadership. It is a hard job in the best of circumstances and in the difficult times thankless. When there is mistrust there is no healthy appreciation of the work or challenges that leaders face. 

I am not speaking here of criticism when leaders have done a poor job, have failed to act, don't face up to realities that are evident to others or make foolish decisions. What I am speaking of is the all to often default position of congregations to constantly second guess their leaders and view them through a lens of mistrust. Even here, however, our attitude counts and the words we use do as well.

Where does this come from?

In many cases it is a reflection of our national polity where we are trained to distrust leaders. That is precisely why our government was established with three co-equal branches of government to provide checks and balances against any one branch having too much power. Not a bad idea given the corruption of power in national polity. We learn early not to trust leaders in the political arena. We are jaded by corruption, misuse of power, use of office for personal gain, and personal agendas that are not always good agendas for the population at large. 

But notice the context here. It is a secular context in a fallen world. 

We actually live in two worlds simultaneously. The fallen world and God's Kingdom and in His Kingdom the attitudes and are different than in society. For instance, the Fruit of the Spirit is what should flow from His people. Love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, gentleness and self control are all attitudes and results of living in Christ. 

The same should be true of attitudes of trust for leadership in the church. We ought to start from a place of trust rather than the place of mistrust that is often the case in society at large. Kingdom leaders should act in ways that are trustworthy and Kingdom people should respond in kind. 

The ugliness of attitudes toward leadership that we see in the political arena should not characterize the attitudes toward leadership in the church although it often does. Where it does, we have not done an adequate job of teaching what it means to be God's people living together under Christ and His leadership. 

Furthermore, even when church leaders don't live up to our expectations - how we address those issues matters. When congregational meetings or attitudes reflect anything else than the Fruit of the Spirit we have failed. By that standard, many congregational meetings fail the test. When ungodly attitudes are on full display in a congregation, it says more about the congregation's spiritual condition than it does the decisions of leadership. 

All of this goes to what we teach our congregations about attitudes in the church and God's expectations for our conduct with one another. It would be a powerful moment in any congregational meeting if someone nicely rebuked those whose words and attitudes don't reflect Jesus. We are God's people so it is worth teaching God's people how we ought to live with one another and how we ought to treat those called to the often tough job of church leadership. 

Every church needs a big dream

We talk much of needing clarity in any organization. I write and teach and help organizations find that clarity. But one of the pieces of clarity is a dream - a big dream that captivates, inspires and in some way changes the world for the better. There is something deep within the human heart that desires to make a difference. Give people that opportunity and they will run with you. Too many of our plans and dreams are small and uninspiring. Every organization needs a big dream.

Every church needs a big dream. Something rooted in the Gospel that changes lives and communities and regions of the world. One church I am aware of trained evangelists and pastors in rural India but discovered that their mode of transportation - bikes was terrible. They dreamed of building a bike that would be tough, strong, and navigate bad roads well. Challenging their congregation resulted in $300,000 raised in one day and thousands of bikes are now traversing India for the sake of Jesus. Oh, and they started a company to build the bikes through a 501.C3.

Where there is no dream, there is little incentive for people to invest their lives, finances and energy for something that has eternal value. Too often the local church leaves the big dream to other organizations. The dream to change a child's life fuels Compassion International. The dream to provide clean water fuels part of World Vision's funding efforts, raising massive amounts of money through marathons. These are big and meaningful dreams that change lives.

Why should the church not be at the center of big dreams? Where that dream exists there is a vibrancy and opportunity to see the Gospel change lives and communities. Does your congregation have a large compelling dream to bring people together for the sake of being the love and truth of Jesus. 

The local church has massive potential to impact lives, local communities and society but it takes a dream, a vision to see something important happen. To bring people together around the gospel. When that happens we put aside our petty conflicts and politics to focus on Jesus issues and dreams that Jesus inspires.

Five practices of healthy church boards

It is an interesting thing that church boards are quick to evaluate what is happening in the ministry of the church but slow to evaluate themselves. This lack of self evaluation is ironic given the expectation of a healthy staff while they do not apply the same expectations to themselves. I am speaking of how the board deals with one another and the issues they face.

Some of the dysfunctions of church board internal dynamics include:

• An inability to deal with known issues in the church because raising the issues would cause controversy.
• In the interests of "harmony" board members are unable to candidly evaluate their senior leader or other issues in the church.
• Board members have distinct skill sets but are often unwilling or unable to tell a board member that they are "out of their lane" of effectiveness. 
• A lack of periodic discussions as to the overall effectiveness of the board and the contribution that each board member is or is not making.
• Ineffective conflict resolution and unresolved tensions.
• Board members who take disagreement personally and allow their ego to become bruised.
• An unwillingness to submit to the will of the board as a whole.
• A lack of candid, truthful but loving dialogue with one another.
• Passivity toward ministry issues.
• An inability to speak the last 10%.
• Not fully resolving issues because of an avoidance of conflict.

If you have served on a church board for any length of time you undoubtedly could contribute to this list. All of these dysfunctions are avoidable if boards would adopt the following practices.

One: Set aside a board meeting annually or twice a year to specifically ask how the board itself is doing. This might include ways to measure health from board development materials. One set of questions you may find helpful are these 15 questions. White- board areas where the board is doing well. And, where the board has challenges and can become better. For those areas that you need improvement, list concrete steps that will help you improve.

Two: Do not gloss over relational difficulties on the board. Usually where these exist, no-one wants to take the risk of speaking about it. It is often the elephant in the room: We know it exists but don't talk about it. That is a mistake because if a church board cannot biblically resolve conflict one cannot expect the congregation to do so. The health of the board does spill over into the congregation as a whole.

Three: Understand that ego is the enemy to healthy boards. Ego pushes us to want to get our way, to put down others or their ideas, to be slow to resolve conflict (I am right after all) and often those with ego issues work the back room with politics to achieve their goals. Jesus blesses humility but hates pride. Many relational issues are related to pride. 

Four: The better the board, the better their work. Ongoing continuing education in how a healthy board functions is just as important as it is for the staff of the church. Often boards don't do their ongoing learning but the best boards do so on a regular basis.

Five: Learn to evaluate issues in the church honestly. One of the barriers to honest evaluation is that board members don't want to speak ill of anyone. There is a difference, however between speaking ill of a person and honestly evaluating their performance. When we are not honest about what is truly happening, boards do a disservice to the church that they are responsible for leading. Allowing issues to exist without honest discussion contributes to elephants in the room and elephants always hurt a board and a church.

Healthy boards do not just happen. They are crafted through hard work and honest dialogue. 

Need an outside perspective for your board issues? I am available to meet with church boards and dialogue with them on the challenges they face and possible solutions. With zoom technology, this can be done easily at low  cost to you. If interested, you may contact me at tjaddington@gmail.com.

Church boards and their interminable meetings! Eleven tips

One of the most frustrating aspects of church leadership is the tendency of boards to deal with minutia and present-day details rather than the genuinely significant issues that drive the ministry forward. Leadership boards are not supposed to handle all rocks and pebbles, only the big rocks.

Big rocks are values, mission, vision, ministry initiatives, the spiritual leadership of the congregation, policies, and church health. What characterizes the big rocks is that they affect the whole church, have to do with the spiritual health of the organization, and are more related to how we can do ministry more effectively (future-focused) than they are to day-to-day management.

Pebbles and sand are day-to-day management issues, staff management, the development of specific ministry plans or strategies, and details of church life that can be delegated to others. These are important, but they are not the responsibility of the leadership board. 

When boards think of their work, there are always more rocks than they can effectively handle in the time available. But here is the good news. Leadership boards are not supposed to take all stones and pebbles, only the big rocks. The greatest gift to a board is a leader who will differentiate between the rocks, gravel, and sand and plan board meetings around the critical issues that the board is responsible for cutting through the minutia and focusing on the important ones!

Some principles for effective board work include:

Build agendas around significant issues, not small ones.
Some issues are board issues; many issues that come to boards are not. When building agendas for board meetings, it is essential to ask, "Is this a big rock or a small rock? Is this an issue that others can deal with, or does it need to be a discussion of the board?"

Concentrate on direction, spiritual health, and policies - not management.
Boards do not exist to manage but to exercise broad leadership for the congregation. Full-time staff members or volunteers address day-to-day issues of church life - not the board. When management issues arise, before they become board issues, ask, "Is this a management decision? Who should be empowered to deal with these kinds of questions? And do we need to develop a policy so that others can decide in the future?"

Spend more time on future plans than on present issues.
Leadership is about the future and leading your congregation into greater ministry effectiveness. Leaders think ahead of the congregation. Suppose you are spending the majority of your board time on day-to-day issues. In that case, you are probably deep into management rather than directional issues, spiritual health, values, mission, vision, or ministry initiatives. Keep track of the time you spend in a month on current issues compared to future plans and opportunities.

Delegate regularly
Here is a general rule: Don't do as a board what others could do. We give staff members and volunteers far too little credit for what they can do. If an issue arises that others can figure out, either delegate it outright or, if necessary, ask someone to come up with a proposal and bring it back to the board.

Boards don't design, they refine.
Boards don't design proposals but respond and refine them. If an issue needs thought and work, delegate that to those gifted in that area and ask them to bring a recommendation to the board for consideration. Starting from a proposal will save you more time than starting from scratch. Boards are not meant to design but to refine.

Always use a written agenda for board business meetings
Boards use agendas as a tool to prioritize their work. A carefully written agenda provides a road map for board work and requires the discipline to place big rocks first and pebbles later. Agendas are the key to focusing on the important rather than the trivial.

Stay within agreed-upon time parameters.
Church board meetings can proceed endlessly. When you ask leaders to serve, you ask them for their most precious commodity: their time. If your meetings regularly run longer than 2 1/2 hours, you probably need to exercise discipline in the conduct of your meetings or the size of the rocks you are dealing with.

Meet twice a month - once for business and once for prayer.
One of your gatherings should be a business meeting where decisions are made and the church's business can be conducted. With rare exceptions, the company of a church should be able to be done in 12 scheduled meetings per year. Because the spiritual level of the congregation will rarely rise above the level of its leaders, wise leaders invest half of their time in praying for one another and for the church, studying Scripture together, and dreaming about the future. 

Agree on principles of decision-making.
Healthy boards are made up of individuals who can engage in robust dialogue, resulting in creative solutions. Boards often make one of three mistakes: (1) They don't honestly engage in creative conflict due to conflict avoidance; (2) they engage in healthy conflict but don't seem able to resolve that conflict, leading to difficulty in decision-making; or (3) they allow one or two board members to create and perpetuate conflict that holds the rest of the board hostage from moving forward. I recommend the adoption of a board covenant that clarifies how the board will work together.

Communicate board work to your congregation.
The trust of a congregation in its leadership is essential for a healthy church. Too often, the work of a church board is shrouded in secrecy or mystery. While some issues must remain confidential, most work should be regularly communicated to the congregation, especially general directional issues.

Evaluate every board meeting on a one to five scale
At the end of each meeting, take five minutes and have each individual answer three questions. How would they rate the meeting on a scale of one to five, with five being high and one being low? What do they think could have been done better? What was done well? It is a way to continuous improvement of your meetings.

Creating cultures of excellence
AddingtonConsulting.org