Three questions and three disciplines that drive ministry forward

 

Workplaces are designed to keep people busy with activity, but often, that activity does not drive a meaningful missional agenda forward in a disciplined way. There are meetings without clear agendas, decisions that get made and forgotten, leaders who have their own priorities that are not necessarily connected to a larger overreaching goal, and employees who are busy with good things but not aligned and moving in the same direction.

This is especially true in the ministry or non-profit world where the disciplines related to profit are absent. It is easier to get away without discipline, alignment, and focus. Of course, that is not our desire: We desire to be mission-driven and deeply effective, so what is the key to seeing this happen?

Meaningful work, alignment, and focus always start at the organization's top. The senior team has the responsibility to set the organization’s agenda. This is not simply about mission or vision but about annual and quarterly priorities, which will help move the organization's agenda toward that mission and vision. Without this discipline of annual objectives and quarterly goals contributing to that annual objective, there is simply activity without focus.

Leaders drive meaningful agendas and progress by asking three questions and establishing three disciplines. This is both simple and profound.

Question One: What is our picture of our preferred future? Everyone has a mission or vision statement. A picture of the preferred future is a written document of one to three pages that clearly describes the end result of the organization’s work and the practices and culture of the organization itself. To move your organization toward a target, you must define the target. Once written, this picture of your preferred future should be revisited once a year to clarify and make any necessary changes.

The first discipline is writing your picture of the preferred future. Leaders who have not defined in specific terms what their organization or ministry is about do not have a target to hit. They are like Charlie Brown, who never used a target because that way, he could hit it every time. Amusing but not fruitful.

Question Two: Once we have our picture of the preferred future in writing, what are the specific things we are committed to accomplishing this year to best move us toward that preferred future? In the absence of asking that question, many things will happen in the course of the year, but it will not be focused in a laser way on moving toward your goal. Without a target, dozens of small “moves” will not substitute for three to five organization-wide moves toward a specific goal.

Thus, the second discipline is identifying the three to five key initiatives the organization must make in any given year to move toward the preferred future. This is hard strategic work that often does not occur precisely because it is hard and because, with this work, accountability is inherent in making these commitments. This is what separates great leadership from average leadership. It is the discipline of moving the organization toward its preferred future annually with accountability.

Question Three: What are the specific “wins” that every department or leader will accomplish in the next 90 days by quarter? Large wins are made up of smaller wins, and 90-day win cycles keep staff and departments focused on moving the agenda forward. They allow you to break down large goals into bite-size goals that build on one another and make the annual “wins” possible. In this way, every department or leader identifies what they will focus on in the next 90 days. Focus is everything!

So the third discipline is that of running 90-day “win cycles” where the “scorecard” is the 90-day plan. This takes discipline and a regular rhythm of work that is calendared and built into the fabric of the organization's annual, quarterly, and monthly work. While the first few quarters may be hard, the ongoing discipline becomes easier, and the wins make it all worthwhile.

Organizational leadership is always about asking the right questions and living with the right disciplines. These three will move your leadership and your organization’s results to the next level. 

The key to accountability is an open organizational culture

Every leader says they desire a culture of accountability. The proof of their commitment is whether or not they create an open organizational culture. Closed cultures where leaders control information, what can be discussed or are defensive when challenged destroy accountability. Open cultures by definition encourage accountability. 

There is a direct correlation between leaders who create closed cultures and their own ability to violate staff, make questionable decisions, become impervious to input, shut down honest discussion and become domineering in their leadership style. Dysfunctional leaders intuitively or by design can create closed cultures because open cultures allow others to challenge their views or practices. 

Signs of a closed culture:

• There are issues that you know you cannot raise because your leader will become defensive. What this does is shield the leader from criticism or challenge because they keep the discussion from taking place.
• Robust dialogue is discouraged.
• Leadership cannot be challenged.
• Leaders withhold information or share it selectively so that staff never have the full picture of what is going on. The information hub is the leader.
• Often, in a closed culture, those who raise questions or challenge leadership are labeled as dissidents or as uncooperative.
• Financial information is often kept secretive.
• Staff are not empowered to act but need the permission of leadership. 
• There is a high degree of pressure on staff to conform to the party line.

You can see how cultures with the above characteristics shield leaders from accountability. Whenever you limit discussion and dialogue you limit accountability. Closed cultures are unhealthy cultures and usually reflect an unhealthy leader. In contrast to this, consider the signs of an open culture:

• Information is available to all unless by nature it is confidential.
• Finances are transparent.
• Robust dialogue is encouraged: Any issue can be put on the table with the exception of a hidden agenda or a personal attack.
• Leaders are not threatened by questions, ideas, dialogue or differing opinions.
• Key decisions are vetted with stakeholders.
• All staff are treated with dignity and respect. No one gets a pass on treatment of staff that is unprofessional, unkind or disrespectful.
• Staff are encouraged to "think outside the box" in order to better fulfill the mission of the organization.
• Standards of behavior are the same for leaders and staff. 

Open cultures create accountability because questions can be asked, dialogue engaged in and people cannot hide behind a veil of secrecy, control or pressure to keep the party line. The more open the culture the more accountability there is for everyone, not just leaders. Healthy cultures encourage healthy accountability. 

Healthy and accountable cultures are created intentionally. They don't happen by accident.

Unhealthy avoidance techniques

There is a common methodology for avoiding accountability for our shadow side and that is to become a professional critic of others. All of us have encountered these folks at one time or another – or done the same thing ourselves. They are quick to criticize and distrust, are always questioning motives of others (without doing their homework to validate their distrust), love to become enmeshed with others who are also critics (nothing like another critic to verify our version of reality), love to take on the offenses of others (even when they don’t have the facts and it does not pertain to them) and live in a circle of other unhealthy, distrustful, critical individuals. And yes, there are plenty of these in the church and Christian organizations. They will twist motives, conversations or actions to match their view of reality.


What is really going on behind this behavior is often the justification of their own behavior so that in the critical assessment of others they do not need to do critical assessment of their own shadow side. It is frankly a convenient way to ignore personal issues by focusing on the issues of others. Because everyone has a shadow side, it is not hard to pick it out in others and professional critics will quickly tell other their faults but are unaware or unwilling to deal with their own shadow side. Often the glue that holds their friendships together is not a common mission but a common enemy – someone out there that they can focus their unhappiness, anger or personal unresolved issues on – and it is often a leader because they are visible.

Not only are these unhealthy individuals but they form pockets of unhealthy individuals since they find others who will validate their view of reality and can deeply hurt organizations through their closed circle of opinions and criticisms.

All of us have strengths and all of us have liabilities that come with those strengths. There are many ways of coping with our own shadow side. One is to face it and seek to deal with it – and it is a life-long practice. The other is to do what many do and mask it, ignore it, spiritualize it or focus on the shadow side of others rather than their own. People of deep influence never mask or ignore. They realize that they are people who have a lower nature and that the process of spiritual transformation is that of exegeting ourselves so that we bring all of our lives under the Lordship of Christ, especially the shadow side which represents more than anything else the residual of that lower nature.

Often, we resist pressing into our shadow side because we are ashamed that we even struggle with one. This is a misunderstanding of God’s work in our lives. Every one of us is a work in progress, every one of us lives with the liabilities of being human and therefore imperfect and limited in our understanding of ourselves and those around us. Paul understood this when he said in Philippians 3:16, “Let us live up to what we have already attained.” God does not expect perfection, simply obedience to where he has brought us at this point in our lives.

Furthermore, humble individuals are transparent about their strengths and weakness, their areas of struggle and their liabilities. Those who pretend they have it all together fool themselves but not those around them. Our influence is not gained by pretending to be something we are not but by transparency in our walk with God and the issues we face in our lives. People of deep influence don’t hide who they are or the struggles they have. In fact, it is precisely because they are honest about their own struggles that we can identify with them and it is their commitment to live with authenticity that draws us to them.

All of T.J. Addington's books including his latest, Deep Influence,  are available from the author for the lowest prices and a $2.00 per book discount on orders of ten or more.

Five temptations leaders face

Leadership positions are a mixed blessing. For those wired to lead it is a joy to be in one's sweet spot. However, leadership brings with it a set of very real temptations that trip up CEO's, pastors, presidents and ministry leaders. Given these temptations, the first priority of every leader ought to be health: emotional, relational, spiritual, leadership and skill health. In the absence of that kind of care, there is a high likelihood that a leader will suffer one or more of the following temptations.

Isolation
Leaders find themselves in a difficult place. They higher one rises in leadership responsibility the more isolated it feels. Good leaders, while collegial and approachable are not "one of the boys," or "one of the girls." They must push the missional agenda with those they lead and while the culture may well be collegial, they are still the leader and their focus on the missional along with decisions they must make will not always leave them popular.

Leaders who are promoted from within their organization quickly realize that the relationships they had with their peers have changed. It must if one is going to lead well.

Isolation, however, is a trap because we were not made to live in isolation. Isolation breeds loneliness and loneliness breeds unhealthy habits and addictions in a desire to fill that hole of loneliness. Leaders must face that temptation squarely and intentionally foster deep, meaningful relationships with peers at their level and friendships outside their organization. Isolation is dangerous so there needs to be a strategy to counter it.

Feeding a dark side
As noted above, feeding a dark side is often the result of isolation. Long hours, loneliness, constant travel, lack of genuine friendships all leave one vulnerable to unhealthy addictions: pornography, affairs, gambling, drugs, alcohol or other risky behaviors. The unconscious justification is "I need an outlet to my hectic leadership responsibilities."

Isolation and dark sides go together. Wise leaders have a deliberate strategy for avoiding isolation and the development of healthy habits that minimize the need to feed the dark side - which is simply a way to fill some emotional, spiritual or relational hole.

Running on empty
Many leaders have bought the lie that in order for them to lead well they need to be constantly on the move, running from one important meeting to another, one city or country to another. One cannot run a sprint twenty hours a day, day after day, and not pay the price.

God did not design us to run on empty. It can feel good - after all I am so important that I have this incredibly busy schedule - my input is needed all over the place: balderdash! Busyness may feed our self importance but it is not a necessity of leadership. Wise leaders set a livable pace, building in relational time, think time, rest time, and they say no to tons of good things in order to say yes to the most important things. Run on empty long enough and your leadership will be compromised

Taking short cuts
It is amazing how many leaders run aground on the shoals of ethical issues. After all, I work so hard, I give so much of myself to the organization, I am owed something too! Above all, leaders must model the highest ethical behavior and go the extra mile to avoid any appearance of ethical short cuts.

Arrogance
Arrogance is both the end result of the first four temptations and feeds them further. Arrogance is an attitude that the rules don't belong to me, I am the one with the needed wisdom, as the leader, I am different, and this ministry or company revolves around me.

Many leaders fall to this temptation. In the end it severely compromises their ability to lead because those around them will not give themselves to an arrogant leader - if they have other options.

Leadership is a high calling and for those who lead well a most satisfying job. But we will only be good leaders to the extent that we are healthy leaders. Healthy leaders live lives of significant discipline with a great deal of self knowledge because leadership 101 is avoiding the five temptations that will unravel my leadership!

Three transgressions of local church staff that hurt ministry effectiveness

I call them transgressions because they have spiritual impact and leave a great deal of spiritual opportunity on the table. These three transgressions include one transgression of omission and two of commission  Bear with me.

Transgression One: Lack of significant clarity in the local church as to what the church is about, where it is headed, what its non-negotiables are and what it is committed to achieving. 

I work with many churches who cannot define ministry clarity. It is a sin of omission that significantly impacts the spiritual effectiveness of the congregation. In the absence of maximum clarity every leader and team define their own clarity which is a recipe for confusion and competition. Eventually that lack of clarity creates silos, competing directions, and the proliferation of ministries which may or may not be effective. In the absence of clarity one does not know what is truly effective or whether or not we have achieved what we need to achieve. Lack of clarity is a sin of omission and it is endemic in the church.

Transgression Two: Lack of alignment around clarity. Church staff members can often be an independent lot who drive their own agendas and build their teams and ministries around their agendas. Don't get me wrong. It does not mean that they are not after good things. What I am saying is that many staff leaders are not committed to a common clarity and vision of the church but rather their own. This is a sin of commission.

No organization can maximize its impact unless its leaders are willing to get on the same page and work toward common goals. This means that we give up a certain amount of autonomy for the sake of a common strategic direction, mutual cooperation and a deep concern for the whole rather than a concern for our slice of the pie. Not committing ourselves to alignment with the whole is a sin of commission. It is a choice we make that hurts the whole and therefore our missional effectiveness. Thus it matters - a lot.

Transgression Three: Lack of accountability for results based on the missional clarity. Unless we can clearly show that our ministries are achieving results based on the ministry clarity of the church, we have no way of knowing whether we are being successful or not - which is why ministries are rarely ever cancelled but drift on and on whether they are delivering on the promise or not. 

Too many churches look like the Winchester House in San Jose, CA (Google it) with ministry built upon ministry with no common blueprint and no common direction. And, with each leader defending their piece of the turf and their section of the pie. It is why Patrick Lencioni's book, Silos, Politics and Turfwars has sold so many copies both in the ministry and secular world. In the ministry world it is a sad commentary on our lack of common vision, purpose and direction.

If you are on the staff of a church, I would encourage you to ask the question as to whether these three transgressions apply to your staff. If they do, put the issue on the table because none of us want to waste our lives or leave spiritual opportunity on the table.  I know that Jesus does not want us to leave opportunity on the table. 

If you need help in these areas, the book, Leading from the Sandbox can be a practical and valuable resource. Whatever you do, don't settle.

Accountability for missionaries - rethinking the paradigm

It is time to rethink how we hold missionaries our churches support accountable and how we collect that information. What usually happens today is that every church has their own forms that need to be filled out annually creating significant extra and unnecessary work for mission personnel. 

I recently had a senior ReachGlobal leader mention that he was working on an eight page evaluation from one of the churches that supports him. Now consider doing the same for the other nine major supporting churches and you get an idea of what it looks like to satisfy the needs of multiple churches.

Many of the accountability paradigms for missionaries grew up in a day when they worked relatively alone and had little direct supervision from their mission organization. Today for most organizations it looks very different. All personnel, for instance in ReachGlobal operate with annual Key Result Areas, an Annual Ministry Plan that is connected to the team that they work with. In addition, they have a monthly mentoring/coaching meeting with their supervisor and an annual review.

In ReachGobal, for instance, there is actually a higher level of both empowerment and accountability than is found in staffs of many churches. A best practice for mission committees is to find out what the reporting structure is for the mission their missionaries work for and coordinate the information they ask for with what the mission requires so that there are not unnecessary redundancies in reporting that a staff member needs to do.

If mission committees asked for three things – the job description, the annual plan and what was accomplished on that plan they would have a great deal of information. And, it would cut down on the duplication of systems that missionaries must satisfy for multiple churches that support them.

The additional complication with generic forms to be filled out is that it does not take into account the actual job of individual missionaries. The three pieces of information above are what we use to evaluate a staff member so if a church asked for the same three pieces of information it would have more relevant information than they often get without requiring their missionary to do extra and unnecessary work.

13 Leadership secrets from TJ

Clarity
The first job of leaders is to provide maximum clarity to those they lead about what their organization is about and how they will do what they do. The second job of leaders is to ensure that there is alignment around that clarity. The third job of leaders is to ensure that there are results based on that clarity. Leaders are the chief evangelists for the clarity they have defined for the organization.


Simplicity
Ministry is complex. Complexity is confusing. The job of leaders is to simplify complexity. Leaders simplify, simplify and simplify until all important issues can be explained on one sheet of paper.


Altitude
Leaders understand the altitude that they need to fly at in order to lead well and resist the temptation to dip down to fly at an altitude others are supposed to be flying at. Leaders do not disempower others in the organization by dipping down and doing what others are tasked with.


Empowerment
Leaders empower those who work for them within agreed upon boundaries. They neither delegate without accountability or micro manage and second guess. Leaders empower good people and hold them accountable for results.


Team
A group of missionally aligned and healthy individuals working strategically together under good leadership toward common objectives with accountability for results. Leaders build teams carefully and lead them intentionally.

Resolve

Leaders must have the resolve to follow through consistently with the clarity they have established. Clarity means nothing without the consistency of disciplined execution in a same direction. Leaders have staff who learn never to question their resolve.


Trust
Trust is a function of clarity + consistency + fairness + keeping one's word + authenticity + serving those on one's staff. Leaders always keep coinage in their trust account.


Failure
If one never fails one is living and leading too cautiously. Where there is not permission to fail there is no entrepreneurial thinking and where there is no entrepreneurial thinking there is no significant progress. When failure occurs, leaders practice autopsy without blame.


Evaluation
The mantra is plan, do, check, adjust. Leaders evaluate constantly.


Wisdom
Common wisdom is very common and rarely wisdom. Leaders think like contrarians, always asking why and why not? Leaders do not automatically go with the flow. Rather, they question the flow and look for new and better ways to do what they do. Leaders question conventional wisdom frequently.


Change
Tweaking is fear based change and one cannot tweak one's way to a new future. Leaders look for the game changers that change everything. A few truly significant decisions each year are more powerful than many insignificant decisions.


Results
Leaders never mistake activity for results. Everyone is busy but not everyone sees the same results. Leaders distinguish between activity and activity that yields intended results.


Intentionality
Leaders are deeply intentional in how they live and lead. They never settle for accidental living. Leaders know what they are about, what their priorities are and what they should say no to.

Leadership self evaluation

As a leader I have high expectations of those who work in our organization. These include integrity, being focused on our common mission, creating a healthy atmosphere for our staff to flourish and then small things like returning emails and phone calls. In fact, we have a short document called "expectations of a leader" that spell these out.


From time to time I need to evaluate myself to ensure that I am living by the same standards I expect of others. It is all too easy for leaders to develop a sense of entitlement that the rules do not apply to them. And we know that others will not generally call us on it - we are their leader. It doesn't mean they don't notice, however! 


Not only do staff notice but it directly impacts the opinion they have of their leader, either creating great trust and respect or cynicism and disrespect. It is easy for leaders to miss this point because no one is calling them on their failure to live up to the leadership expectations. 


Here is an interesting scenario. It is possible for a leader to be well respected outside his/her staff because they accomplish good things but have far less respect within their staff because those who know them the best don't see them living out staff expectations. The real test of our leadership is whether those who know us the best respect us because we keep the common commitments well. We live what we expect from others. 


From time to time I directly ask those who report to me if there are things I do or don't do that negatively impact them - or that they wish I would do differently. If there are areas where I am falling behind I want to know about it so that I can rectify my shortcomings. 


All of us have shortcomings but wise leaders ensure that they are living out what they expect of others. It is a matter of leadership!

True Acccountability

I have mixed feelings about accountability relationships. If someone wants to hide things they will and they will lie to your face if they have been hiding things from others. People do it all the time. The fact that one has an "accountability relationship" does not keep it from happening. It is a matter of the heart, not the "system" to keep us on the straight and narrow. People who are into image management will be untruthful in order to protect their image. All of us are capable of lying to others!


True accountability comes out of a commitment to be transparent with a group of trusted friends because we choose to and want to. In other words, the real accountability comes not from the outside and others but from the inside and us. It is not something imposed but something chosen for the sake of our spiritual lives. And, it comes out of deep trusting relationships with people who we know will call out the best in us. 


True accountability is not a program. It is a frame of reference that desires to be in community with like minded people for the sake of the pilgrimage we are all on. It desires to both influence others and be influenced by others who have the same Jesus commitment. It is not a checklist of questions but rather a life on life relationship where who we are rubs off on those we are committed to and who they are rubs off on us. It comes out of relationship and a heart that   wants to go the distance with others who are on the same path.


I want the relationships of true accountability as a lifestyle and not as a program or checklist. I want to travel with fellow pilgrims who will call out the best in me and with whom I can call out the best in return.