Guard the gate to your church leadership

How well do you guard the gate in your church to determine that the right people get into leadership and the wrong people do not? Most churches have poor systems for leadership selection - and they pay a high price.

Consider this: the most powerful group in the church are those who choose who will lead. Yet, this group is rarely given any training, little guidance or leadership in choosing the best leaders for their congregation. In fact, serving on the "nominating committee" is often a kind of consolation prize for those who are not on a ballot for something else!

Not everyone, no matter how godly are qualified to serve in church leadership. The quality of our leaders will determine the quality of our ministry. If we care about Return on Mission, we will care deeply about how we choose leaders. Furthermore, it takes only one individual to significantly compromise the working of a good board team.

It is estimated that some 80% of churches in the United States have lost their way and are floundering to one degree or another. That is a direct reflection on who they have in leadership. Get the right leaders along with a strong staff and the church will flourish. Get the wrong leaders and even with the right staff and ministry is significantly compromised. Choose the wrong leaders and have a weak staff and you have the makings of trouble. Never compromise on who you put into church leadership. Their impact is huge.

The New Testament actually has much to say about who we should put into church leadership and it gives us the characteristics of healthy church leaders. Consider these:

Exhibits godly character and lifestyle
This is the most critical, non-negotiable characteristic of a church leader. We are called to lead on behalf of Jesus Christ, as shepherds accountable to the Chief Shepherd (1 Peter 5:4). Paul made it clear in First Timothy and Titus that, above all else, a leader's life must be in the process of being transformed into the likeness of Christ. Only those deeply committed to personal transformation and authenticity can lead others in that direction.

Has a deep passion for Jesus
The church is about Jesus! He is its leader. We serve as leaders under Him. Thus, only those with a passion for Him are qualified to lead His people. Those we lead will be influenced by whatever passions drive us. It is painfully obvious when church leaders are more interested in power, ego or their own agendas than in leading Christ's people where He wants them to go. Remember, few congregations rise above the spiritual level of their leaders.

Displays personal humility
Leadership in the church differs in two significant respects from how it is practiced in other arenas. First, it is a leadership of service rather than power.  As Peter wrote, "Overseers should be 'eager to serve: not lording it over those entrusted to you.'" Second, this leadership already has its agenda set by the Lord of the church. Our agenda has been set, and our leadership priorities are Christ's not our own.

Genuinely loves people
Ego-driven individuals love themselves, not others. Humble godly individuals love others as Christ loves them, and their leadership is fueled by genuine spiritual concern. The driving characteristic of God's pursuit of us has been unexplainable, powerful, unrelenting love, bathed in mercy, compassion, forgiveness and grace.

Is a lifelong learner
Leaders are learners. They are hungry to understand the leadership task. They are driven to lead well to become more effective. Nowhere is it more important for leaders to be lifelong learners than in the context of the local church. Healthy leaders are learners of God, of effective ministry options and methods and of leadership. Once leaders give up learning as a high value, their effective leadership days are over.

Understands and agrees with God's leadership assignment
I often ask leadership boards if they can clearly articulate their responsibilities. Invariably the answer is no, apart from generalities. It is my belief that God has given leaders specific responsibilities and every leadership board should be able to define its responsibilities.

Grapples with the future
To lead is to be out in front of others. True leadership is primarily about the future and secondarily about the present. While this may seem obvious, most leadership boards spend the majority of their time dealing with present-day rather than future issues.

Focuses on the team
Warning: Never elect or appoint to leadership an individual who cannot graciously work in a team setting - and publicly and privately support decisions that the team has made. Leadership teams require team players. Those who cannot function as a healthy member of a team will destroy the unity necessary for a leadership team to lead (remember humility). Mature, healthy leaders choose to subordinate their egos to the will of the group and deeply value the perspectives and input of others and the collective decisions of the board.

Leads willingly
Good leaders are willing leaders (remember 1 Peter 5). Willing leaders are ready to make the sacrifices necessary to lead, without inner resentment and frustration. It is a mistake to coerce individuals to serve in leadership positions. When we push people to serve before they are mature enough to handle the difficulties of leadership (such as conflict), they often have experiences that cause them to avoid future leadership.

Positively influences others
Real leaders have influence over others, whether they are in positions of leadership or not. This is the key: When considering individuals for leadership, ask the following questions: "Do they already have a positive influence over others? Do people look to them for leadership? Do they lead people closer to Christ and in positive ministry directions?"

Has an action bias
Leaders do things. They have a bias toward action and away from the status quo. They don't always know what to do but they will try things and see what sticks, what works. Leaders are never content with how things are but dream of how they could be - continually looking for ways to accomplish mission more effectively.

Is a purveyor of hope
Leaders are optimistic about the future and convey that optimism and hope to those they lead. They believe that positive things can and will happen because they understand that it is God who empowers and it is He who has promised to be with the Church until the end of the age. Pessimists are not leaders! Pessimists telegraph caution and see all the reasons why things cannot happen.

Rarely will a church rise above the personal, spiritual and missional health of its leaders. Who you select is a key either to mediocrity or to health. No one has all of these characteristics in equal measure but they are key questions to ask about those whom you put into leadership.

Ten ways that ministry boards undermine themselves

Ministry boards undermine their own work when they ignore the following issues.

1. Board members who disagree with board decisions outside the board.
2. Allowing any one board member to hold up a decision because they have a policy on unanimity.
3. Focusing on day to day management rather than on organizational values, direction and those things they want to accomplish.
4. Learning together as a board.
5. Building agendas around the most important issues.
6. Helping the ministry get to maximum clarity on what spells success.
7. Crowding out prayer because of all the business of the board. Prayer is the business of the board!
8. Ensuring that the ministry has an annual ministry plan that drives the missional agenda.
9. Operating without a board covenant that defines relationships, expectations and procedure for the board.
10. Not living with a culture of expectation that God is going to do something significant through the ministry.

Competitive ballots in church elections: Don't do it!

I still run into congregations that use competitive ballots in church elections for leadership positions. It is a bad idea!

What it conveys to those running is that you are not sure they belong on the board but you will give them a shot. What usually happens is that well known names win and lesser names don't - irregardless of what their relative qualifications are or are not. In many cases, after losing, individuals will not allow their names to be put on the ballot again. Not that they are sore losers but they don't see the point. Often it is the church that loses out. 

In one church I worked with recently that still has competitive ballots the same leaders have rotated in and out for years simply because they are well known. So for decades, the same thirty or so people have served as leaders. They may have been good leaders but in the end that is not necessarily how they got elected. They were simply better known than others who didn't. Many who lost said they would not agree to be on the ballot in the future.

Those who are going to serve in church leadership ought to be carefully vetted and the best candidates put on a ballot for affirmation, not for a competitive vote. In other words if you need three new leaders, there are three leaders you believe in on the ballot. You know who you want, they know you want them and the congregation has the ability to vote yes or no. This is not American democracy, after all but church leadership.

Church leadership should not be about competition, winners or losers but rather the right people at the right time for the right reasons. Competitive ballots don't do that. I for one would not agree to being on a competitive ballot. I would assume that the nominating committee didn't really know who they really wanted!

Choosing the right leaders in your church: You get what you choose!

This is the time of the year that many congregations choose leaders for their congregation. Whether it is called the Leadership Board, Church Council, Deacons or by some other name the quality of those you choose will in large part determine the health of your church and ministry in the years to come. 

This is not an area to take lightly or to compromise. Churches get what they deserve when it comes to choosing leaders - for better or for worse. In fact it takes only one bad choice to poison a whole board - or to keep the board tied up in trying to deal with the individual rather than on missional issues.

I believe that he New Testament spells out six core responsibilities of leaders for the church and these responsibilities have a significant bearing on who we choose to lead. If they are not qualified to do these things you need to think again. 

The six responsibilities of church leaders are:

1. To keep the spiritual temperature high
2. To ensure the congregation is well taught
3. To ensure that the congregation is protected from heresy, division and ongoing serious and unrepentant sin
4. To ensure the congregation is cared for
5. To ensure that people are developed, empowered and released in meaningful ministry (inside and outside of the church)
6. To ensure that the congregation is led well in missional ministry

If those are the six key responsibilities of church leaders what are the personal profile of a good church leader. If we look at the New Testament for its explicit and implicit statements on the matter we see 13 non-negotiable characteristics of a good church leader.

1. They exhibit a Godly Character and lifestyle
2. They have a deep passion for Jesus
3. They exhibit personal humility
4. They love people
5. They are life long learners
6. They agree with God's leadership assignment for church leaders
7. They are able or willing to grapple with the future
8. They are team focused
9. They are a willing leader
10. They have positive influence on others
11. They are purveyors of hope
12. They have a action bias
13. They have good Emotional Intelligence

In case you wonder where #13 comes from in the New Testament - it is implied as you cannot fulfill many of the other characteristics without good Emotional Intelligence.

Remember, it takes only one bad apple on a board to destroy a board's effectiveness. Every board should have a job description including qualifications and a board covenant that spells out how the board operates. The health of the board will be directly reflected in the health of the church. Be clear about what you want in board members and focus a great deal of attention on building a healthy board team.

See these articles as well:

Operate without a board covenant at your risk

Signs of a dysfunctional church board

Rethinking leadership selection for the church

The Emotional Intelligence of your ministry team or board: take the test

The emotional intelligence of your ministry team or board makes all the difference in terms of its health and your ability to carry out healthy and effective ministry. Here is an inventory that can help you gauge the EQ of your team or board. 

Give each question a number from 1 to 10 that describes the accuracy of the statement with 1 being very untrue and 10 being very true. 

Ask each member of the team/board to score the ten questions. Take the total score for each participant and divide by the number of respondents for your group score. 

You may want to discuss the ten questions in one of your team/board meetings as a growing exercise.

What the scores tell you:

• 60 or less, your board/team needs to do serious work and would be considered to have poor corporate Emotional Intelligence.
• 60 - 75, your board/team has moderate Emotional Intelligence but needs to be more intentional in these areas.
• 75 - 90, your board/team has fairly good Emotional Intelligence and would gain by talking about places where the score was low and could be brought higher.
• 90-100, your board/team has excellent Emotional Intelligence and should both celebrate and work to stay that way.

Take the test and grow your board/team.

1. There are no issues that we cannot put on the table for discussion. _____
2. Members of our team/board respond with non-defensive attitudes when their position is challenged. _____
3. All of our team/board are willing to abide by decisions of the group once they have been made. _____
4. Members of our team/board keep short accounts and quickly resolve interpersonal conflicts. _____
5. There are no ongoing divisions on our team/board. ______
6. Total honesty and candid discussion is always encouraged by the team/board leader. _____
7. Members who may disagree with a course of action are never marginalized. _____
8. Members carefully listen to the opinions of others and fully engage in the discussions of the group. _____
9. There is a high level of interpersonal trust among members of the team/board. _____
10. When members of the team/board become disruptive to the work of the group the issue is handled and not ignored. _____

The heart of a Christian leader: sacrificial service

I have recently been mulling on the words that Paul wrote to the Corinthians in 2 Corinthians 6:3-10 and their implications for Christian leaders everywhere. The Corinthians were not an easy bunch to minister to. They were full of themselves it seems and rather ungrateful for Paul's ministry to them. He had opened his heart to them but they not to him (2 Cor. 6:11-13). All of us can relate to that at times in leadership.


Read carefully what he said about how he ministered to them.


"We put no stumbling block in anyone's path, so that our ministry will not be descredited. Rather, as servants of God we commend ourselves in every way: in great endurance; in troubles, hardships and distresses; in beatings, imprisonments and riots; in hard work, sleepless nights and hunger; in purity, understanding, patience and kindness; in the Holy Spirit and in sincere love; in truthful speech and in the power of god with weapons of righteousness in the right and in the left; through glory and dishonor, bad report and good report; genuine, yet regarded as imposters; known, yet regarded as unknown; dying, and yet we live on; beaten, and yet not killed: sorrowful, yet always rejoicing; poor, yet making many rich; having nothing, and yet possessing everything."


These themes stand out:


- A life and ministry that are above reproach
- Kindness and patience toward those he ministered to
- A life lived in the presence and power of God
- A willingness to suffer hardship for the sake of the Gospel
- A spirit of joy in spite of those hardships


There was no sense of entitlement on Paul's part. Rather, there was a willingness to endure hardship, misunderstanding and physical deprivation for the Gospel. He did not envy those who had more (the Corinthian church was wealthy) because he understood what he did have in spite of all his difficulties. He took a humble posture even toward those who had a posture of pride.

This is evident from the last sentence which is profound: "having nothing and yet possessing everything."  He fully understood that whatever his personal circumstances he actually possessed everything in Jesus. 


It is very easy in ministry leadership to feel sorry for ourselves, to think about what we do not have that others have and to feel a sense of entitlement and pride. But the heart of a true Christian leader is one of sacrificial service that gets its true satisfaction from the One we serve.


I want the heart of Paul because it is the heart of Jesus.

The single greatest ministry accelerator: It is not what you think!

The single greatest ministry accelerator is overlooked by many leaders. It is not a great strategy. It is not working harder or doing more. It is not having the right people (although that is important). It is not a charismatic leader (and does not require one). It does not require money. 

It is clarity! 

Many leaders miss this and expend a lot of energy in the wrong places. Getting to clarity is the single greatest accelerator of ministry there is. But it requires time, careful thought and constant reinforcement. It is actually the most important thing a leader does - or fails to do.

Lack of clarity leaves personnel to their own devices to figure out what is important, and different individuals will come up with different answers leaving the organization without a focused, aligned ministry. General focus yields general results with general accountability and general effectiveness.

Without maximum clarity, an organization will never have integration or alignment (around what?), will not attract the best people who want to know what they are giving their lives to, will not know when they have achieved success (what results are we seeking?) and leaders will not know how to intentionally lead their teams (toward what?) or have a clear means of making key directional decisions.

It is not necessarily an easy task to achieve clarity but getting there is the single most powerful accelerator to ministry results and organizational alignment. While a leader must take responsibility for helping the organization get to clarity, it is essential that the key stakeholders (boards and key leaders depending on the structure of the organization) take part in the process and are in complete agreement.

Without clarity one cannot lead well. With clarity, your leadership becomes much easier because there is focus and common direction for you, your team and the organization. Maximum clarity changes the leadership and organizational equation in a huge way.

The four areas were maximum clarity are crucial are these:

Clarity on mission: what we ultimately are committed to accomplishing.

Clarity on guiding principles: how we are committed to working.

Clarity on the central ministry focus: what we need to do every day - and do it well to accomplish our mission.

Clarity on the culture of the organization: An intentionally created culture that makes it possible to accomplish your mission.

If you have not gotten to clarity you may want to look at chapters 2,3, and 4 of Leading From the Sandbox. There is a path laid out there that can help you.

Five issues often ignored by church and ministry boards

There are a number of issues that ministry boards often overlook, thinking that they are small items and not worth pressing into. These small items, however, have the potential to significantly impact the ministry over the long run.

1. Allowing their leader (pastor or other) to operate without a definable annual plan. The thinking is that we have a competent leader and insisting that he has an annual plan isn't that important. It is! 

If the senior leader does not have an annual plan then neither in most cases do other staff or the organization as a whole. Bad idea if you want a results oriented ministry.

2.  Not evaluating your pastor or ministry leader annually - and against the annual plan they developed. Again we think, at this level, evaluations are not important. In fact, at this level they are even more important because the leadership of your senior leader impacts everyone in the organization. 

In addition, it gives you a venue to talk about issues that you may want dialogue on. You don't want to start reviews when there is a significant issue. Get into the rhythm before issues arrive so that you have a venue to deal with them when they do.

3. Ignoring bad hires, early departures or trends with staff that could be warning signs of staff culture trouble. We want to give our senior leader great leeway and we should. But not at the expense of asking hard questions when there are warning signs flashing that all might not be well. If there is a warning light coming on, explore it, don't ignore it.

4. Allowing a leader to continue year after year when the ministry has plateaued, direction is missing and key people are departing because of it. We don't like confrontation (which is usually a good thing). But keeping quiet in the face of organizational decline is criminal for board members whose job it is to guard the organization. When senior leaders cannot lead well and they become the cause of ministry decline, they must transition out of their leadership role.

5. Not honestly and candidly evaluating themselves as a board - and allowing for unhealthy practices at the board level. Boards are not immune from the same scrutiny they give their leader and the ministry they oversee. When they are immune, they often allow unhealthy and non-missional behavior that hurts the organization they represent.

While these issues may not seem important to you right now there will come a day when they are. Ignoring them it a prelude to trouble that can be traced back to those in governance.

What your pastor might want to tell you if he could

Dear congregation:


It is a joy to serve you, most of the time. I love you and I love what I do but there are things that irritate me too. The problem is that while you have full freedom to tell me those things that irritate you, it is harder for me to tell you. So, this anonymous letter.


I know that Sundays are convenient days to talk to me about concerns you have, or criticisms, but it is not convenient for me. Nor Monday's. I work so hard to be ready for Sunday when I preach and teach and it is really discouraging when I get sideswiped by issues on those days. Can you wait till at least Tuesday?


Also, as a pastor I have a congregation with 500 adults which also means 500 people who have an opinion on almost everything. I want to know what you think if you can share it nicely and without an agenda to force me to do something. Part of being a body is being flexible enough to deal with the varied people we have and to learn to live together in harmony. I try to be flexible. I hope you can be as well.


On that matter. Remember that this is not the church you left to come to this one. I know they did things a certain way but we are not that church (remember why you decided to leave there?). We are a different church with our own DNA and way of doing things. So please don't expect us to do things the way your past church(s) did them.


Sometimes I do things that irritate others. I guess it is part of being human. I know that as the pastor that is not really allowed but it can and will happen. Can you forgive me as I get to forgive a lot of others on a regular basis? It is hard to preach to people who are holding grudges and issues that they won't let go of. Maybe you could sit in the very back instead of the front row if you can't let it go :). 


I am learning to not be as defensive as I sometimes am. I guess one can become so when they care so much about something and I care a lot about the church and its people. Easy criticism is hurtful to me because I am doing my very best. Thoughtful, loving dialogue is something I can handle a lot better if you have constructive ideas.


I know it bothers some of you that I cannot be at all events. The truth is that I have a family like you and I do my best to balance my family and ministry responsibilities. I also get tired from the many heavy issues that people have and bring to me. I love to minister to hurting people but sometimes I just need to get away and regain my perspective and rest. Thanks for understanding.


Oh, another thought. On a lot of things you really don't need me. You need someone to help but not necessarily your senior pastor. We need to learn to minister to one another and not expect the pastor to do all the ministering. I am pretty sure that is why the Holy Spirit gives gifts to everyone. Let's spread out the caring and ministry so that we are all in ministry because otherwise I will burn out. I cannot carry the load but I will gladly share the load. And you?


Really, most of the time my work is a joy which is why I do what I do. But I did need to share with your my perspective on a few things. Thanks for listening. I love you (most days).


The pastor of a typical church, maybe yours.

"I knew I should have said something!"

I have heard that statement numerous times from staff or board leaders about a decision that was made that they knew was not a good idea but did not speak up. It only takes one individual who is willing to show up to stop a train that looks like it is gathering steam - toward a train wreck.


Especially is ministry there is a tendency toward optimistic thinking. That things will work out or we just need to have faith. But faith and optimism in foolish or reckless decisions is not faith but folly. 


Whenever we have a "check in our spirit" we ought to pay attention to it. That "check" or "doubt" may well be the Holy Spirit, or plain wisdom, saying, "Don't go there." "Speak up even if you lose the day." Never ignore the whisper of doubt when making an important decision.


We have a lot of group think on staffs and church and ministry boards. It is an unfortunate thing. The very reason that God designed church leadership as a "plurality of leaders" is that no one individual has the wisdom or gifts to lead alone. But group think circumvents that design by the group simply acting as one individual. Plurality in leadership only works well when each individual is willing, able and courageous enough to speak their minds and even to go against the flow when necessary.


This is not about being the "gadfly." It is about being an independent thinker who is able to speak honestly, candidly and truthfully even when that means raising uncomfortable questions that others don't want to raise. Often, if one individual has doubts, others do as well and the one who is courageous enough to speak gives others permission to speak as well.


One of the marks of good emotional intelligence (EQ) is the ability to be self defining. That is, to be able to state one own's opinion with conviction and clarity even if it is a lone voice. 


There are ministry leaders who exert a great deal of pressure for their boards or staff to go along with them. Healthy leaders and staff are respectful but independent thinkers who hopefully won't wish after the fact that they should have said something. 

Leadership fear and faith

Is there one key issue you know that you need to address in your organization that you have put off because of fear? The fear may be of dealing with the consequences, explaining to someone that they are not a good fit or needing to make a major shift that you know has unknowns attached to it.

Leadership fear that paralyzes action you know must be taken is not uncommon. You are in good company - but also dangerous company. Leaders suffer from it. Boards suffer from it. Fear is normal but not acting because of it is leadership default.

Inability to address necessary issues can increase with our longevity as leaders. The longer we have been in a position the more we have to lose if we rock the boat. So it is easy to look the other way or even to figure our successor will take care of it. If you inherited such issues from your predecessor you know how well that works!

Often our inability to act comes from confusing the issue we need to address with the question of how we should do it. These are two very different questions. The first question is what do we need to do and once we are clear on that the second is how do we do it. 

If you have an issue, don't ignore it but make a conscious decision as to what you need to do. Then, start thinking through the strategy for how you can best address it with as little fallout as possible.

Remember that doing the right thing honors God, is what we are called to do in our leadership roles and is critical to the health and missionality of the ministry. I have been amazed at how God has gone before me when I have done the right thing even if it was the hard thing. 

Being willing to address those issues we know we should address is not only a matter of courage but of faith. Do we believe that God honors leaders who do what is best? Do we trust him for the wisdom to do it in a way that is prudent? Do we believe that if He is prompting us to act that He will act on our behalf as well?

Most of us know when we need to act on something. The question is whether our faith or fear will win out. As Paul said, if God has given one the gift of leadership, lead!

Four key church board documents

Church boards have too many documents. Many of them are of no real use because they are written and filed but there are some basic documents that every church board should have. These documents guide the work of the board in significant ways. I would suggest four.


1. Your picture/document that reflects your clarity. As laid out in my book, Leading From The Sandbox, if you cannot explain your ministry philosophy, commitments and desired ends on one piece of paper, in one picture it is too complicated. Whether you use a sandbox, vision frame, ministry table or some other metaphor, this one picture should be able to tell anyone who asks what is truly important to your ministry and it becomes the picture/paradigm/language for explaining who you are to others.


2. Your board covenant that regulates your relationships. Board covenants are a one page document that spell out the relational commitments of board members to one another. Congregations rarely rise above the spiritual and relational commitments of board members so clarifying those commitments and living them out is key to a healthy board and therefore to a healthy church.


3. Your board policies that reflect how you operate as a board. Good boards have thought through the process they use to operate as a board. No healthy group operates without a set of implicit or explicit rules or principles for how they work together. Healthy boards have well written policies that reflect good governance principles, including how decisions are made and what even constitutes board work. These policies lay out the way you operate as a board, is the training manual for new board members and allows you to deal with rogue members should they arise.


4. Your annual ministry plan that reflects where you are going. Whether developed by staff, board or a combination of both, no congregation should be operating without an annual ministry plan which spells out where you are going. That plan then becomes the basis of a ministry assessment annually. It is your directional road map.


Boards should keep their work simple but they do need a set of core documents. These four explain your ministry, regulate your board relationships, board work and church direction.

Is there a connection between the lack of spiritual transformation generally and the spiritual lives of Christian leaders?

We talk much about spiritual transformation in the church and the lack of it among many believers. My own observation, however is that there are many lay people who are more concerned about true transformation and intimacy with God then those who lead them.

This may well be why there is a restlessness among many in our congregations for something more authentic in their Christian lives, something they are not getting or hearing from the pulpit. They are less enamored with theological knowledge and more hungry for the transformation and living waters that Jesus promises. Is their hunger a symptom of our own lack of hunger and therefore inability to deliver that living water to them?

I don't believe this is intentional but I do believe it can be dangerous for those of us in professional ministry. It is very easy to substitute our knowledge of all things theological for the hard work of translating that knowledge into our own lives. It is also easy to substitute our engineering of disciplemaking pathways in our churches for the needed transformational pathways in our own lives. In fact, while I believe in disciplemaking pathways, the truly transformed and vital spiritual life of a leader is more powerful than any pathway. You cannot ignore a life that is lived close to Jesus.

Since we cannot lead people to places we have not gone we cannot deliver living water that we are not drinking deeply from. Our enemy is our schedule, the good things we are doing for God (in our minds) and our theological knowledge. That knowledge is an easy but empty substitute for God's work in our own soul. In fact, I am no longer enamored by prodigious knowledge that is not also coupled by a deep hunger for God's transformational presence in one's life.

If our churches are seeing far less transformation than they want to see (as the Reveal study shows) is that possibly a symptom of our own lack of transformation as Christian leaders. It is uncomfortable for me to ask the question but I wonder.

The first and most important work of a Christian leader is to ensure that Jesus is our first love and highest priority. That we are allowing him to do the fundamental work of growth, transformation and stripping away of all things base in our lives. That takes time, introspection and the hard work of following closely after Jesus ourselves. Only then can we truly bring people to the living waters of Jesus.

A failure of nerve

Leaders are periodically faced with issues or situations that they know in their gut ought to be addressed because they are threats to the success of the ministry. It is amazing how often, however, that they choose not to act on what they know, somehow hoping that the situation will right itself and continue on as if the threat did not exist.


It is simply a failure of nerve and it is a leadership failure.


Ministry and church boards are guilty and leaders at all levels are guilty of this when they know there is a threat to the organization but fail to address it. And it happens far more often than we would like to admit.


Boards and leaders have a great capacity to gloss over, ignore, put off, or explain away threats because they do not have the willingness and courage to name what is and figure out how to deal with it. In fact, most crises when they occur do so because there is a history of not dealing with an issue long before it damaged the ministry. The crisis is not really a surprise and was probably inevitable because the factors leading up to it were know but not dealt with along the way. Someone did not want to face hard facts.


Why do boards and leaders ignore issues that later on often become a crisis? They simply lack the nerve to address what they know to be true. This is true of the mission leader who knows that if they do not make radical shifts in philosophy they will go into decline. 


It is true of church boards that don't deal with pastors who leave large numbers of bodies in their wake. It is true of ministries that don't deal with financial issues. It is true of ministries that are in organizational drift. There are many scenarios but the common element is that someone in leadership is not willing to deal with a threat that they know to be real. 


A failure of nerve is a leadership failure that often leads to organizational crisis that could and should have been avoided. The sad thing is that in not addressing a known issue, the leader(s) have set the organization up for great pain that will impact many people and derail the ministry's success for a long period of time if not permanently. 


Most ministry crisis can be traced back to current or prior leaders who chose not to address a known issue. The result is that someone else must now deal with an even greater issue and the mission of the organization has been compromised. Their choice to ignore what they knew to be true was the true cause of the crisis that eventually occurred. 


It takes courage to lead. What we do about issues we know should be addressed as leaders or boards has significant long term ramifications. Our inaction will most likely cause harm to the ministry in the long term, hurt people in the process, and cause a larger problem in the future. A failure of nerve is simply a failure of courage to address what we know to be true. It is a leadership failure!


Those who ignore known issues are just as guilty for a crisis as those who caused them. Both are part of the cause. Sometimes they are one and the same.

Unleashing our lay people and overcoming the dysfunction of professional ministry

I believe that one of the five dysfunctions of the church is that of professional ministry where we hire specialists to do the work of ministry rather than to equip others to do ministry. This professionalism is even more interesting in that the movement I am a part of (the EFCA) and sister denominations came out of lay led movements in the eighteen hundreds.


The free church movement came out of an environment in Europe where the state church (non free churches) had become liberal, were not preaching the Gospel and where parishioners were not encouraged to study scripture themselves. Because they were not being fed in church, many started to meet in homes to pray, worship and study scripture resulting in the pietistic movement which brought revival to a number of countries in Europe and with that revival the planting of non-state run churches (free churches) which then spilled over to the United States. It was Europeans out of the free church movement who planted the same kind of churches here in the eighteen and nineteen hundreds.


Fundamental to this movement was the belief that lay people who had not had formal theological education were qualified to teach, preach and lead the church. One did not have to be a "theologian" in the professional sense of the word or have had formal theological education. In fact, many of these lay leaders and pastors had a greater understanding of scripture and the Christian life than their "educated" counterparts. 


Today, however, it is very rare and often difficult for those in the EFCA and fellow free church movements to become ordained without a formal theological degree. The unwritten understanding is that you need to have a Bible school or seminary degree in order to pastor. And the ordination process is designed to enforce this.


As the leader of the EFCA international mission, ReachGlobal, I work in an environment that is much closer to the roots of our movement where it is informally trained leaders who lead and pastor churches internationally. Most of the world cannot afford the luxury of a formal theological education given the poverty of the majority world. That, however, does not keep them from growing churches that are often healthier from a Gospel perspective than many churches in the west with their formally educated clergy. 


I am not anti theological education. I have one of the best and it has informed all my work. What I do object to is the professionalization of ministry that requires a theological degree to be in full or part time ministry or to be ordained in many of our movements. Many large churches in the west are rejecting that paradigm, training their own leaders and releasing them to preach, teach and lead in their settings. 


In basically ruling out ordination for those not professionally trained we perpetuate the clergy/lay distinction and send the message that to really be effective in ministry one must have a theological education (read degree). It is a good thing this was not true in the early church. Or in the majority world. 


Rather than discourage lay people from leading, teaching and preaching we ought to encourage it. It would raise the level of biblical understanding in our churches and release new ministry personnel who are either part time (bi-vocational) or full time. And why would we not encourage these very people who are gifted to plant and pastor churches themselves regardless of whether they have a formal degree or not?


Further, why ordain only people who can give the definition of obscure theological terms rather than ordain those who know the bible, can explain it well and teach it diligently? Knowing what superlapsarianism and infralapsarianism means is far less important than simply knowing good biblical theology that comes from a knowledge of the bible and can be applied to everyday life. We ought to know the biblical terms. Why should one need to know the litany of theological terms dreamed up by two thousand years of theologians in order to be effective in ministry? Or for that matter, Greek and Hebrew in order to preach well? I have a hard time believing that those would be the standards that Jesus would have for those in ministry!


Why cannot we open real ministry up to those who are trained both formally and informally and encourage both to get into ministry either full or part time? The church might actually see significant growth in the United States if we again allowed it to be a movement of lay people, not just those who are professionally trained and can get through an ordination process that is designed to weed out those who are not. I wonder how many lay people were given gifts by Jesus to lead, teach and preach that we do not unleash in meaningful ways because they are lay and not professional clergy?

The Five Dysfunctions of Ministry Organizations

1. Ambiguity. 

Lacking clarity around who we are, what we are about and how we are going to get there. Job one of leaders is to provide maximum clarity to those they lead. Job two of leaders is to ensure that there is alignment throughout the organization around that clarity and job three is to ensure that there are results based on that clarity. Lack of clarity (ambiguity) is at the heart of much ministry dysfunction since in the absence of clarity, people will fill the hole with their own individual clarity withe the end result of competing agendas.

2. Control

Permission withholding organizations (you cannot do it without my permission) are dysfunctional organizations. Healthy organizations have great clarity and empower people within certain parameters. In unhealthy organizations leaders or boards feel they must control what happens. Of course if you don't have clarity, you don't know what you can and cannot do without permission. So lack of clarity feeds the need to control and control feeds the next dysfunction of bureaucracy. 

3. Bureaucracy

Bureaucracy is control gone amuk where permission, assent or funding must be negotiated with multiple individuals or groups (committees, boards) in order to get something done. This is the way many churches operate. And staffs, where there are endless reports to be made, forms to be filled out, permission to be gotten or forgiveness to be asked for (when the prior requirements were not kept). Bureaucracy is a means to control when one has not clearly defined the boundaries for a permission granting structure, or when a leader or group of leaders (boards) feel they need to control through creating multiple toll booths.  Bureaucracy is not to be confused with structure which every ministry needs. Bureaucracy is control gone amuk where order is kept by creating many checks on what can or cannot be done in a permission withholding culture.

4. Mistrust

It should come as no surprise that mistrust is the result of the first three dysfunctions. In fact, the need to control and put in place bureaucracies has at its core a mistrust of staff to make their own wise decisions (based on clarity and boundaries). Lack of clarity creates mistrust because the end result becomes competing agendas. Control breeds mistrust because it is obnoxious. Bureaucracy breeds mistrust because it is onerous. Dysfunctional organizations have a great deal of mistrust - the very system creates mistrust. Permission withholding cultures create mistrust. And, lack of trust, destroys healthy team dynamics. 

5. Professional Ministry

Professional ministry is the result of a failure to develop, empower and release others in ministry. Rather than hiring staff to develop others, we hire staff to do ministry for others. It is the subtle or not too subtle message that God has an A team and a B team, those called into full time ministry and the rest who are not. Qualifications for real ministry reside in theological education (never confuse education with ability). The dysfunction of  professional ministry is largely the reason that the church has so little influence in the community at large. 

If your team or organization suffers from any of these five, or all of  these five, two of my books, Leading From the Sandbox and High Impact Church Boards will help you escape from the dysfunction trap.

Empowered Structures

We pay far too little attention to the structures that we have in our churches and organizations for decision making. No matter how good our organizational clarity and  how competent our leaders and people, when the structures that one must negotiate to make decisions - or to organize staff - or work with a board get clunky, they hold up ministry, waste precious time and energy and demotivate otherwise good leaders.


Eventually, unfriendly structures can actually kill a ministry or company as GM found out prior to filing bankruptcy. I have watched churches that were shining lights at one time go into slow decline because their staff and governance structures were not brought into alignment with new realities. 


Let's consider staff structures. One church I am watching from a distance has a considerably large staff which has never been unified around common goals or direction. Led by fairly competent individuals, they have simply done their own ministries for decades. The end result is a staff with zero alignment, turf wars, confusion over who is responsible for what, lack of a common voice and when the church got into crisis, chaos. And this is a church that many would recognize by name in our country. 


Yesterday I did a church consultation in Europe and staff were begging for greater clarity about reporting relationships, who was setting direction and how to achieve alignment. The lack of these things in a growing and effective ministry is causing frustration for staff who in the process feel under appreciated and unempowered.


Structures at the leadership level are no less important. Here is the question: How easy is it for you as a leader to make timely ministry decisions and how many groups do you need to go to in order to do so? When the decision making process becomes frustrating you know it is time to tune up the process. This involves getting your board structure in sync, eliminating additional boards or committees that you need to negotiate with and simplifying your governance system. For those of you who have ever been through the Chicago area with its toll roads, it is moving from toll booths to easy pass. 


Staff and ministry structures matter because their either impede or help effective ministry. If you have issues with either one, take the time to address it. The positive impact of doing so will be significant.

Church board self assessment: Fifteen Questions

If you are a church board member, how would you rate the quality of your board's work? As one who consults with church boards I am encouraged by the concern of many board members to raise the bar when it comes to the leadership and governance of their board. For many boards there is still much to do and for all boards, honest self evaluation is a critical factor in leading at a higher level.

Here are some basic questions that can help a board rate its current work and look for areas where they can do better. What I suggest is that each board member answers these questions with one of three colors: Red, yellow or green. 

Red means that the board is not performing well at all in an area. Yellow means that improvements could be made. Green means that things are going well. Remember, you are looking for areas where you can improve so yellow and red are not bad colors in themselves. What you do with the yellows and reds is the critical question. Visual management is helpful so I would actually encourage you to use colors in answering these questions.

These fifteen questions should spark some good, candid and robust dialogue among board members. Be honest, listen to one another and ask the hard questions of yourselves so that you can go to the next level.

1. Our board meetings start and end on time and there is always a clearly defined agenda. Red/Yellow/Green

2. Our board is able to engage in robust dialogue around any issue as long as there are no personal attacks or hidden agendas. There are no elephants we cannot discuss. Red/Yellow/Green

3. We have a written board covenant that defines how we operate together and we keep that covenant. Red/Yellow/Green

4. We spend more time thinking about the future than we spend on current issues. Red/Yellow/Green

5. We delegate management to staff and stay focused on the big rocks of direction and health. Red/Yellow/Green

6. We insist that our staff operate with a clear annual ministry plan. Red/Yellow/Green

7. Our senior pastor has a clear annual plan which forms the basis of an annual review. Red/Yellow/Green

8. Our board itself has an annual plan in how they will grow in their leadership and governance. Red/Yellow/Green

9. Our board has a clear job description as to its responsibilities and role and all new board members are clearly trained in those responsibilities. Red/Yellow/Green

10. Our board has a clear picture of what they desire the church to become and has clearly articulated this vision to the congregation. Red/Yellow/Green

11. We candidly evaluates the health of the church based on that clearly articulated vision. Red/Yellow/Green

12. We do not ignore real issues that exist on staff or in the congregation because of conflict or issue avoidance. Red/Yellow/Green

13. The leadership structures of our church are designed to help leaders lead easily and make decisions quickly. Red/Yellow/Green

14. We regularly spend time in concerted prayer for the ministry and needs of the congregation. Red/Yellow/Green

15. We guard the gate of leadership so that we get the best leaders who are wired to lead and to keep the spiritual temperature of the church high. Red/Yellow/Green

With over thirty years of working with boards I am available to help your board be the best they can be. Whether remotely using technology or in person, together we can make substantial strides toward healthier and more missional board work.

As the author of High Impact Church Boards I have worked with thousands of board members to ensure that the right people end up on an organizations board, that the board is intentional in its work and that the culture of the leadership system is empowering rather than controlling. Cost is kept to a minimum by using technology like Go To Meeting, or I can join you in person for governance training or retreat.

I can be contacted at tjaddington@gmail.com or 612.868.0487. I look forward to talking to and working with those who desire to raise the level of their board's effectiveness. 

When the bodies pile up

I am not one who normally gets excited when people leave a church or a ministry when change comes. The truth is that when change comes, some folks (good folks) decide that they don't want to stay on the same bus anymore. I am OK with that. I write about this in my book High Impact Church Boards. I understand the dynamics of change. There are clearly times when people need to leave a church or ministry in order for that ministry to move forward.  The issue is not whether people will leave but which people will leave! 


And, when leaders together chart a new course for the church, there will be those who leave and others who come. This is normal and to be expected.


However, when the pile of bodies reaches a critical mass behind a leader there need to be questions asked. People who have found reason to move on, people who have been marginalized and choose to leave, people who have been hurt and decide to quietly disappear to other churches or ministries! At some point when the body count becomes high enough, wise individuals ask questions! Especially when the common factor becomes the leader himself! Is the fallout from needed change or is the fallout from a toxic leader? This is a critical distinction because change will often bring fallout (sometimes necessary fallout for the church to move forward).


There are toxic leaders who hurt people. Boards who allow those leaders to hurt others at some point become accountable for their choice to not hold senior leaders accountable. The church is by definition a place of grace, healing, compassion, and mercy. When leaders in the church allow it to turn into a place of hurt and alienation the purpose of the church has been compromised. 


Most folks alienated by a church leader will not make a scene. They quietly leave. Sometimes they leave because they no longer fit and need something different. But, when the list accumulates and leaders do not pay attention, ask questions or seek to determine why folks are leaving, they do a disservice to their responsibility as leaders. They may agree that it is not an important issue, but at least they know what the issues are. Too often they are simply negligent in even trying to know. Or, negligent in doing anything about it.


I am saddened by people who have been hurt by church and ministry leaders. I am more saddened by leaders who do not hold their own leader's accountable for their actions that hurt others. 

Pastoral and staff reviews

I remember my first annual review as a pastor. It was painful: not because the elders thought I was doing a poor job but because it was not based on a clear job description so the comments were random, some felt petty or unfair and simply reflected the personal biases of various board members. I remember thinking, "well that didn't feel good!"

As a firm believer in feedback and reviews I also have strong views on the context in which they are done. 

First, they should only be done after a staff member or pastor have been working with a clear set of expectations for at least a year. In our organization, we use Key Result Areas and an Annual Ministry Plan which define the key results expected from the job and the plan laid out by the staff member to achieve those results. This changes the equation from a focus on activity to results, and it is based on agreed upon results and plans so there can be objectivity. Without agreed upon results, any review will simply be a reflection of the biases of a particular board member and not a fair evaluation of the staff member. 

Second, it is critical to do a review annually, not when the board or supervisor starts to believe there is a problem. Often, the first review a pastor gets is when there is disagreement between them and the board. The review is then used as the means of addressing long standing problems but unfairly so since there has not been agreed upon outcomes up to that point. 

Third, reviews should not have any surprises in them. Good supervisors or boards talk about issues long before they become major issues. There is ongoing dialogue between staff and supervisor or senior pastor and board in healthy ministry situations so that there is never a surprise. Surprises are an indication that such dialogue has not been taking place.

Fourth, reviews should be honest and candid. Don't dodge issues that need to be addressed. If you do, staff don't grow and become all that they can be. Direct and candid feedback is a critical element in growth. When we are not honest - often in the name of grace - we compromise the development and growth of staff. Be direct, honest, candid and invite dialogue to ensure that the issues, if there are any, are understood.

A full paradigm for Key Result Areas, Annual Plans and annual reviews is found in my book "Leading From the Sandbox: How to Develop, Empower and Release High Impact Ministry Teams." It lays out a simple, clear and results oriented process to clarify expectations as well as a healthy process for creating dialogue around work results. Do it right and annual reviews are a key part in creating a healthy environment for staff. Do it wrong and the opposite occurs.