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. 

Ten Dysfunctions of Church Governance Boards

 

I want to say this gently but straightforwardly! There is a leadership crisis in the church as it relates to who we put in leadership, whether we call them councils, boards, elders, deacons, or simply the leadership boards. This crisis is responsible for many of the dysfunctions in local churches. Leadership at this level matters a lot. 

Having served for years as a pastor, board member, or board chair, I know it is difficult. That being said, it is vital to the church's health that we have healthy boards. There is much that I could say - my book High Impact Church Boards is an accessible and readable book for boards. But for now, let's look at the top dysfunctions of church governance boards.

Not guarding the gate to leadership.
It takes only one or two wrong board members to sabotage the health of a board. See my blog, Eight kinds of people who should not serve on a church board. This means that how we select leaders for church leadership matters a lot. There are actual implicit and explicit qualifications spelled out in Scripture that must be considered. Most churches do not have a safe and effective way of choosing church leaders, which hurts the board and the church. See The profile of an effective church leader.

Allowing elephants to exist in the boardroom.
Elephants are the issues everyone knows are there, but no one will name them. They are dangerous precisely because the board is unable to talk about them. And they are issues that usually matter. Dysfunctional boards allow elephants to exist that healthy boards do not, and those issues are generally issues that cause harm to the ministry and church body. Periodically, I recommend asking the board if any unspoken elephants need to be named. Once named, elephants are simply issues to be discussed.

Allowing known issues to fester way too long.
There needs to be more courage on many boards. Either we don't talk about known issues (elephants), or we talk about them but only resolve them once they finally become significant issues that must be dealt with. Passive boards that avoid conflict lead passive churches that will do the same. Peter makes it clear in 2 Peter 5 that church leadership is not easy or for the faint of heart. Many boards don't deal with known issues until that issue has caused a lot of damage in the church. Here is a principle. It is relatively easy to deal with an issue straightforwardly when it appears. When you allow it to fester for years, it is far messier to clean up.

Substituting business for the spiritual work of leadership.
Boards must do business, but it is not their only work. It is spelled out in the New Testament as keeping the spiritual temperature high, ensuring that the congregation is taught, cared for, developed, and released into meaningful ministry, protected, and led well. Most boards I work with have allowed prayer to become a perfunctory way to start and end board meetings rather than a central priority of seeking out the heart of God. Boards devoid of significant spiritual life will lead churches of the same nature.

Not doing due diligence on issues.
I have seen associate pastors fired with no questions from a board on the word of the senior pastor when even a cursory conversation with the affected party would have indicated that what they were hearing was highly skewed and inaccurate. I once interviewed all staff who had left a church over 12 months, and they all had the same story of abuse and unfair treatment by the senior leader, yet no one on the board had ever asked and were living in denial. Where there are patterns, pay attention, ask questions, and verify. I have often encountered boards that knew something was happening but chose not to inquire. In the meantime, people were severely hurt.

Not asking the hard questions.

Board members tend to avoid questions that might create conflict or create embarrassment for the senior leader. A good board meeting is seen as one where there is harmony and the avoidance of controversy. This is sad because it is in the hard questions that we get to the heart of existing issues or ensure that we cover our bases in the ministry. In fact, the very best board members are willing to ask the most challenging questions for the sake of the ministry. Hard questions create the dialogue necessary for a church to improve and get better. 

The inability to police their own members.
I am regularly fascinated by the fact that board members want congregants to "behave" and will even sometimes "bully" them into doing so but are unable and unwilling to police their own behaviors. That is a huge disconnect. I tell boards they operate without a board covenant at their own risk. In some congregations I have worked with, the congregation's behavior surpassed that of their presumptive spiritual leaders. 

Lack of a plan, intentionality, and accountability for results.
Part of the biblical mandate of leaders is to lead. Yet many boards cannot articulate where the church is going and why. That is clearly not leadership but rather babysitting the status quo. Where there is a plan, there is often no intentionality about pursuing it, and few church boards hold staff accountable for real ministry results but simply spiritualize the issue (the Holy Spirit is responsible for results). There is a reason some churches see more results than others: they have a  plan, are intentional about the plan, and regularly evaluate how they are doing.

Misusing the authority of a leader.
Some church leaders are frankly bullies and full of themselves because of their title. Most of us have met one. Of course, this goes back to the need to guard the gate on the front end so that people with agendas or a lack of humility don't get into leadership. The predominant job of church leaders is to serve God's people in the spirit that Jesus served people during his life on earth. It is about service more than position, example more than pronouncements, living the Jesus life and pursuing His agenda rather than our personal agendas. I encounter too many leaders who throw their weight around rather than serve.

Passivity

This is the most common dysfunction of boards I have worked with. These are boards that, in the face of apparent issues to any outsider looking in, have ignored the obvious for years. They have simply been passive in the face of issues that need attention. I have often wondered why otherwise brilliant individuals choose to park their thinking at the door of a church boardroom. Is it because they don't feel qualified to deal with spiritual issues? Is it because challenging their pastoral leader messes with "God's anointed?" Or is it simply that we are a culture of "nice," and dealing with issues threatens that culture? As a consultant, the issues often seem so obvious that I have to ask why they have been ignored. Passivity is not leadership and is a sin of many church boards.

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?

Seven evaluative statements for your board

 

Church boards (and other boards) often forget what good governance looks like. Not because they don't care but because, in the press of ministry life, they forget. 

A simple way to evaluate your board work is to have everyone on the board assign a number from 1 to 10 for each of the statements below. Ten signifies we do this well and consistently, and one signifies we do it poorly or inconsistently. Average out the scores for each statement and have a board conversation around it.

1. We have an outward vision rather than internal preoccupation

Churches with an outward vision do so because their boards are more occupied with thinking about how to impact the community and world rather than spending the majority of their time discussing what happens inside the church.

2. We encourage a diversity of viewpoints

Healthy boards do not do "group think" but encourage each member to think for themselves, share their thoughts, and, through the diversity of viewpoints, come to better decisions.

3. We do strategic leadership more than administrative details

Boards are not designed to spend their time on administrative details that others can do. They are designed to provide strategic leadership to the organization and grapple with the BIG rocks.

4. We have a clear distinction between the board and lead pastor roles

A lack of clarity between the responsibilities of a church board and that of a lead pastor creates either confusion or conflict. Clear distinctions between the board and lead pastor roles foster healthy relationships between the two and smoother leadership.

5. We make collective rather than individual decisions

Healthy boards make collective rather than individual decisions. They also have an understanding that once the decision is made, each member will be supportive of the decision. No individual can force their will on the board or choose not to support its decisions.

6. We are more future-focused than we are present or past-focused

The best boards have a clear focus on the future rather than on the past or present. While they may need to deal with current crises or some administrative details, their primary focus is on the future and how they can help the organization meet the needs of the future.

7. We are committed to being proactive in our leadership rather than reactive

The vast majority of church boards live in a reactive world - dealing with crises or day-to-day issues. The best boards are proactive in their leadership by setting appropriate policies and thinking about the future rather than doing reactive leadership that is focused on the present and second guessing the decisions of others.

See also, 
Church board self assessment. 15 Questions

Why self evaluation by church boards is so critical

 It is an interesting thing that church boards are quick to evaluate what is happening in the ministry of the church, their pastor and staff 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, the issues they face, the intentionality of their leadership and their own effectiveness.

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. Thus elephants are allowed to linger on the board, sometimes for years.
• 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.
• Avoidance of learning and growing as a board and in their leadership assignment.

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.

Six: At the end of every board meeting take three minutes and ask how you did in the following areas:

• Did members listen well?
• Was their disagreement (a good sign)
• Was everyone able to share their views honestly?
• Did we make decisions?
• Did we follow the agenda well?
• What did we discuss that we left unresolved?
• Did everyone come prepared?
• Did we start and end on time?
• Did we allow the Holy Spirit room to interrupt us at any point?

Healthy boards do not just happen. They are crafted through hard work, good relationships, honest dialogue, egos that are checked at the door and intentional leadership. 

Eight issues that can be confusing for church boards

 Church board leadership is always a challenge. And, often boards or individual members are confused on the role of the board. If these areas of confusion can be resolved, the work of the board becomes far easier. Here are eight issues that often cause confusion on a board.

1. What are we actually trying to accomplish?
This sounds like a simple question but the truth is that a majority of church boards cannot answer the question with any specificity. They have a mission but apart from that general statement which generally reflects the Great Commission (more believers and better believers), there is often no objective target that the church is pursuing and without a target there are no metrics to gauge one's progress. 

It is the board's responsibility, working in conjunction with staff to clearly determine what the church is trying to accomplish and then to assign metrics to the target so that it can evaluate its progress.

2. Who is responsible for what?
When there is ambiguity between the responsibilities of the senior pastor (and other staff) and the board there is in the worst case scenario conflict and in the best case confusion. If there is not a written document clearly delineating the responsibilities of both there will be issues that create frustration for both parties. The role of a board is governance while the role of the staff is the day to day ministry. Wherever you draw those lines, be sure you draw them so that there is both clarity and accountability.

3. How does the board interact with the church staff?
The short answer is that boards interact with staff only through the senior pastor. Staff can have only one supervisor and boards are not in a position to supervise or tell staff (apart from the senior leader) what they should or should not be doing. This does not mean that board members cannot have relationships with staff members but it does mean that they cannot direct the work of staff.

4. What is the senior pastor empowered to do on their own and in what areas do they need board approval?
None of us like micro management but this is what happens with many senior pastors who are never sure what they are empowered to do and what decisions they can make and alternatively what issues they need to bring to the board for approval. Constantly needing board approval is demeaning and demotivating for leaders. 

It is incumbent on the board to make clear the leadership parameters of the senior leader so that they are free to lead but are still aware of the boundaries that the board has established. It is the difference between a permission withholding culture and a permission granting culture.

5. What is the board's job description?
In the absence of a clearly written description of the responsibilities of the board every board member has their own definition of their role. That means there are multiple definitions of the board's role. And, it creates confusion and even conflict on the board. Furthermore, it is not possible for the board to evaluate its own work in the absence of a clear job description. 

That role description should include the fiduciary and legal pieces of their responsibility along with the responsibilities delineated in the New Testament for leaders. If you are not clear on these Biblical requirements ask me for the PDF to my book High Impact Church Boards and I will gladly share it.  

6. What are the board's rules of engagement?
In other words, how does the board operate? How does it make decisions? What happens if a board member disagrees with the majority? Does the board always speak with one voice? How does it deal with rogue board members? Is there a board covenant that spells out how the board operates together?

Because many board do not have that clarity, there is a great deal of dysfunction on church boards. This need not be the case but the board must clarify its roles (number 5 above) and how it operates. Without clearly defined guidelines, confusion and conflict will emerge.

7. Who does the board represent?
Many board members believe that they represent their particular ministry interest or constituency in the church. This can easily lead to divided boards especially if there are factions within the congregation that board members see as their job to represent. This view of church leadership has more to do with how we think about American political polity than it does a Biblical theology of leadership. 

Board member do not represent any constituency in the church. Rather they are called Under-Shepherds of the Chief Shepherd - Jesus Christ. Jesus is the head of the church and church leaders lead on His behalf (1 Peter 5:1-4). This does not mean that board members ignore the concerns of the congregation but their leadership is a sacred trust given by the Chief Shepherd. Church leaders lead the congregation where they believe Jesus wants them to go.

8. How do your choose and engage new board members?
Too many congregations do not have a process in bringing new board members on that is designed to set the board up for healthy leadership. Furthermore, in the absence of clarity on 1-7 above, there is no objective way to acclimate new board members to their role as it has not been clarified. 

The most powerful group in most churches is not the board but the committee or group that chooses board members. For a healthy board it is critical to guard the gate of leadership. Only healthy board members can contribute to a healthy board. 

All of this comes down to good clarity. A lack of clarity in these eight areas create confusion. Clarity allows you to move forward in greater health. If you desire help in any of these areas, contact me at my email below. 

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.

Ways that church board members view their role impacts board effectiveness

 

How individual board members see their role as a church leader directly impacts the ethos of your board and the effectiveness of its work. Often, however, we have not defined the role of the board and board members with clarity, so these individual beliefs about one's role create hidden but real barriers to effective board work. 

Having worked with thousands of church leaders, here are some of the common but faulty beliefs about why one serves in church leadership. Each of these views will impact decisions that a board member is willing to make.

• I am here to represent the desires of the congregation - similar to how an elected official serves their constituency.  
• I am here to guard the status quo and ensure that we don't upset the status quo. In general, what we have done in the past has worked well.
• I am here to represent my faction or group in the church and guard their interests.
• I am here to steer the church in a better direction and I have strong convictions about what the church should be doing and how it should do it.
• As a church leader, I have the authority to bring any issue to the table for board discussion.
• I want to ensure that the pastor stays in line and that ministry goes smoothly.
• I am here to ensure that the staff does their job.
• I am here because it is my turn to serve in church leadership.
• I am not sure why I am here except that the nominating committee asked me to be.
• I am here as part of a team of under shepherds of Jesus Christ, the Lord of the church to ensure that the spiritual temperature of the church is kept high, that the congregation is taught well, empowered and released, protected, cared for and led in healthy directions. I work with the board and Senior Pastor to ensure that our staff are empowered, encouraged and that our congregation is empowered and released in meaningful ministry and that we are moving toward our agreed upon ministry goals.

Only one of these views on why we serve in church leadership is valid - it is the last one. But all too often, this is not the common understanding of what it means to be a church board member because we don't have job descriptions that are biblical or understood by all on the board. In other words, there is not clarity on the job description and parameters of church leadership. All but the last statement are deeply flawed but common descriptors of how church leaders see their role.

The various reasons that board members give to why they serve in leadership are also the reason that so many boards experience conflict, gridlock and difficult decision making. If we have not stacked hands on why we are there and if it does not reflect the Biblical teaching for senior leaders, we will not be unified, effective or missional. It is that simple.

How does a board get on the same page?

Agree on a simple but Biblical job description for leaders including the Biblical job description (keeping the spiritual temperature high, ensuring that the congregation is taught, protected, cared for, empowered and released and led well.

Be clear on lines of authority as to what is a board responsibility and what is staff responsibility. One of the problems in many boards is the confusion of authority and responsibilities between these two entities. Clarity prevents a great deal of confusion.

Be sure that board members understand that they represent the whole church and not a section or constituency in the church. Board members are always there for the whole. Never a part.

Be sure you have a team covenant that lays out how your board will make decisions and how it will work together. Agree that you will hold members accountable to that covenant. If you don't, you will have confusion, gridlock or conflict. 

You must have an agreed upon document that spells out the qualifications for board members. If the wrong people get on the board, you will have trouble leading. 

My book, "High Impact Church Boards" can help you on these topics. What I can say is that getting on the same page together is one of the most important things you can do as a board.

Ensuring that your new church board member will help your board, not hurt your board. Nine questions to consider.

Adding a new member to your board is an opportunity to strengthen the governance to your organization. In many instances, however, it does the opposite because the new member has not been vetted well and they bring their own agendas to the board. This is especially true with church boards.

Here are specific questions you want answers to before you bring a new member on your board.

1. Does the prospective board member meet the Biblical qualifications?
While this may seem obvious, it is not! We overlook issues such as divisiveness, ego, lack of humility and even Biblical knowledge, especially when they are people of influence or wealth. Your board documents ought to specify the Biblical qualifications and any board that does not honestly evaluate a candidate against those qualifications is generally in for trouble down the road. 

2. What do you need on the board at this time to strengthen it?
A board full of type A personalities may well need someone who is more mercy oriented. Alternatively a board of nice Godly people who don't have strategic gifts may well need board members who think strategically. 

There have been too many instances in recent days of board members who have allowed ego driven pastors to do things that have caused shipwreck to the church because they did not have the courage or ability to speak truth and hold others accountable. In many of these cases the senior leader has stacked the board with individuals who will do their bidding rather than serve in a governance role in protecting the church.

3. Is the individual thoughtful and discerning?
Thoughtful individuals may not speak a lot but when they do, they often speak from a place of wisdom and discernment. Thoughtful and discerning individuals see below the surface, can identify the real issues at hand, and take a wholistic view of the ministry. They think before they speak, are able to identify key issues and contribute well to healthy solutions. They also ask the hardest questions which causes the board to think at a deeper level.

4. Do they understand how your board works and the ministry philosophy of the church. Are they in sync with that ministry philosophy? This question assumes that the board has done the hard work of determining the rules of engagement for the board, has a defined way that the board does its work and has that information in writing. The same needs to be true of the ministry philosophy of the church. Where these documents don't exist or are not known by board members chaos and conflict will inevitably take place. 

I have seen boards add people to the board who "represent rival philosophies within a church" so all voices are represented. This is foolish thinking as the board will not be able to work in a unified way. If a prospective board member does not agree with the rules of engagement for your board or are not in sync with the ministry philosophy of the church they will hurt you rather than help you.

5. Have they displayed any tendencies toward a critical spirit or divisiveness in their past?
Past performance is a pretty good indicator of future attitudes or actions. Critical spirits and attitudes will hurt your board while gracious individuals will help you - even when they are asking the hard questions. Those who have any history or being divisive may well do the same on the board which will hurt you badly while those who can unify will help your board. 

6. Are they team players who will wrestle well with issues and humbly submit to decisions of the majority?
Board members who are not team players and who will not submit to the decision of the majority end up holding the board hostage. These are signs that their personal agenda supersedes the united agenda of the board which will divide the board, stall its work, create unnecessary conflict which then needs to be resolved and hinder the work of the group. 

7. Are they financially vested in your ministry at a reasonable level?
Yes, before you bring an individual on the board be sure that they are generous with the church personally. Those who are not financially committed are out of sync with God's mandate of generosity and will likely turn out to be critical board members. No one who is not personally generous should serve in church leadership where they are to model a lifestyle that pleases the Lord of the Church. Ignore this at your own peril.

8. Will they abide by your board covenant that spells out how you interact with one another?
Any board that operates without a board covenant does so at its own peril. Further, if you do you have no objective standards by which to judge the behavior of any board member. You want to know that the new board member understands the expectations of board behavior and agrees to it fully. If you don't have such a covenant, I strongly advise you to develop one today.

9. Do you have any reservations about their being added to the board?
If you do, don't put them on the board until those reservations have been satisfied. Too often we overlook concerns in the name of optimism that all will be well. That is foolish and unwise. If you have reservations you may want to talk with the individual and honestly share your reservations. Only when you are satisfied with their answers should you put them on the board.

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.

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.

12 characteristics of a healthy church leader

If we desire healthy church boards, we must ask: "What are the characteristics of an effective church leader?" The fact that 80% of churches are plateaued or in decline indicates this is an important issue. When I consult with troubled churches, it is not unusual to find that those in leadership are poorly equipped to lead. Consider some of the ways churches have traditionally filled leadership roles:

• We look for Godly individuals.
• People who have 'power' in the Church get the nod.
• We try to balance 'power blocks' in the Church by making sure the various blocks are represented on the board. This is one of the most destructive strategies, setting the board and the Church up for ongoing conflict. 
• There is an unofficial system that rotates critical leaders through the leadership spots.
• We choose those who have been in the Church a long time.
• Congregations simply nominate people; if they have the votes, they end up on the board regardless of gifting or qualifications.
• Leadership slots are filled even when there is a lack of qualified candidates. Priority is given to filling spaces rather than ensuring leadership is 'fit.'
• There is often no job description or list of competencies for prospective board members.

None of these methods is likely to result in a board of great effectiveness or impact. Nor are these methods likely to be 'leadership friendly' - motivating those with proper leadership skills to serve.

How we choose leaders and our understanding of good leadership goes to the heart of church health and ministry impact. Who you choose to lead will determine the effect on your congregation.

I would suggest that the New Testament implicitly or explicitly describes the kind of individuals whom we should place in church leadership.

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 passionate about Him are qualified to lead His people. Those we lead will be influenced by whatever passions drive us. It is painfully apparent 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, only some 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 established, and our leadership priorities are Christ's, not ours. Without humility, people are unlikely to bow to the will of the majority and far more likely to push for their agenda rather than God's. 

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 critical for leaders to be lifelong learners than in the context of the local Church. Healthy leaders are learners of God, effective ministry options and methods, and leadership. Once leaders give up learning as a high value, their effective leadership days are over. Learners are flexible and teachable. They are willing to change their methodology to meet their mission as long as it is healthy and Biblical.

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. I believe God has given leaders specific duties, and every leadership board should be able to define its responsibilities. Suppose you cannot explain those responsibilities to your board. In that case, you have a problem as it becomes every leader's opinion against another's rather than a shared understanding of God's leadership assignment.

Grapples with the future
To lead is to be out in front of others. Authentic leadership is primarily about the future and secondarily about the present. While this may seem obvious, most leadership boards spend most of their time dealing with present-day rather than future issues. Healthy leaders are always looking toward the future. You can lead the status quo, you can lead crisis, or you can lead into the future.

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 the team's decisions. Leadership teams require team players. Those who cannot function as healthy team members 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 leadership difficulties (such as conflict), they often have experiences that cause them to avoid future leadership. In addition, unwilling leaders can often lead harshly without patience and grace. 

Positively influences others
Authentic leaders have influence over others, whether they are in leadership positions 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 sometimes need help figuring out what to do, but they will try things and see what sticks and what works. Leaders are never content with things but dream of how they could be - continually looking for ways to accomplish their mission more effectively. Their focus is not on the status quo but on the future.

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 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. Just read the epistles of the Apostle Paul. Always optimistic based on the power of God. Always expecting the power of God to prevail.

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 these characteristics equally, but they are vital questions to ask about those you put into leadership.

Creating cultures of excellence
AddingtonConsulting.org