Growing health and effectiveness

A blog centered around The Addington Method, leadership, culture, organizational clarity, faith issues, teams, Emotional Intelligence, personal growth, dysfunctional and healthy leaders, boards and governance, church boards, organizational and congregational cultures, staff alignment, intentional results and missions.
Showing posts with label ministry founders. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ministry founders. Show all posts

Thursday, June 14, 2018

Four critical behaviors that founders must give up as an organization grows


Organizational founders are special people - whether it be in business, in the church or in a not for profit. They get things going, pursue a dream and if all goes well grow an organization. In doing so, they do what many others cannot do or did not have the courage to do. 

However, as they see success, they also face growing challenges to give up certain practices, procedures or prerogatives they have enjoyed in the past. In fact, unless they give up these things that they are used to doing they will either plateau the organization, becoming a hinderance to its future growth, or they will sabotage their staff who will find it increasingly hard to work for the founder. 

The challenge for founders is that of letting go, learning to delegate and to trust the opinions of others as they lead their organization.  Here are four behaviors that need to change as the organization grows. Whether they can or will goes to the emotional health (EQ) of the founder. 

One: The small decisions
Founders are used to all decisions going through them. Inevitably this will become a barrier to growth as their capacity to make timely decisions decreases as the number of decisions increases. If one hires good staff one must also empower those staff to make decisions within the boundaries that have been set. If a founder cannot relinquish small decisions to their staff they are unlikely to see their organization continue to grow and flourish. Micromanagement might work when an organization is small but it becomes a barrier as it grows.

Two: Unilateral decision making
Here is my rule. Founders can make unilateral decisions until they hire additional management or leadership staff. At that point, key decisions must become the subject of discussion by the team as each member is a stakeholder and needs to carry out decisions that are made. Founders do not realize how demoralizing it is to staff when they unilaterally make decisions that impact others. If you have hired other leaders, bring their expertise to the table and give up the former practice of unilateral decision making. Good staff will not stay long term if their gifts and counsel are ignored.

Three: On the fly decision making
This is related to the second issue but with the added twist that "on the fly decisions" or "decisions made by the seat of one's pants" are often decisions that throw a monkey wrench into everyone else's day because a direction has been changed or some surprise has been announced that others are not prepared for. Rapid changes of direction without consultation with the key stakeholders is demoralizing as it often creates confusion to say nothing of now needing to redo what has already been done. Once you have a team it is imperative to engage that team in key decisions and not surprise them.

Four: Control
Central to the growth of any organization is the notion that one hires the best talent that one can and that together the team charts the course of success. That means that founders must be willing to relinquish some of their past control, trust their individual leaders to lead within the boundaries set for them and guide through metrics, coaching and relationship. How the work gets done will be different perhaps than how the founder did it. But this means that the founder needs to relinquish the sense that he/she must control everything that happens because that will strangle the organization.

The transition from a "founder mode" of leadership to a more "sustainable mode" of leadership is not easy. Certainly it depends of the quality of the team that is built. But, the most important factor is a founder who understands that they must change how they think and operate as the organization grows. What got you to here will not get you to there - it got you to here.




Sunday, February 9, 2014

Ministry founders and their ability or inability to take the ministry they founded to a place of maturity

I have come to the conclusion that it is harder to bring a ministry to maturity than it is to found one. That does not mean that ministry start ups are easy - they are not. However, what they require in the beginning -  moxie, energy, vision and enthusiasm is different than what is required to bring them to maturity - discipline, empowering others, letting go of control and being a steward of a vision and mission rather than of a ministry.

In fact, the very skills needed to start a ministry may keep it from maturing into an enduring ministry. After all, ministries start with the vision of a person but enduring ministries are driven by a team who have a common vision. Ministries start by the seat of the pants while enduring ministries exist with disciplined excellence. Ministries start with a fair amount of control by the founder while enduring ministries are not dependent on the founder but where authority and empowerment is given away to qualified individuals. Ministries start with a fair amount of chaos (you do what you have to do) while enduring ministries endure because of stability.

In my experience no more than 50% of ministry founders are able or willing to transition from the start up stage to an enduring ministry stage. And that statistic may well be generous. Why is this?

First, it means giving up control of something we have birthed. For anyone that is hard. For some, it is impossible. It is "their" ministry and that is how they see it. Yet enduring ministries belong to a group with a common vision not an individual. Unwillingness to give up control allows the ministry to go only as far as the founder can take it with his/her span of control.

Second, it means delegating responsibility and authority. An unwillingness to give up control makes this hard for some and impossible for others.

Third, it means allowing the ministry to develop through a shared vision of others not the singular vision of the founder. This inevitably means that the founder is no longer the singular voice and this is how it should be. Only a shared vision with at shared plan can move from the founder stage to and enduring stage. But, the founder must be willing to allow this to happen and believe that the shared vision of the right group of leaders will be even better and more enduring than the singular vision of a single leader

Fourth, it means that the vision and mission become more important to the founder than that of controlling what she/he birthed. Enduring spiritual influence comes from an attitude that what we have birthed belongs to Jesus alone, not to us. We were simply the servants that Jesus used to birth what He wanted to birth. To the extent that I am unwilling to give up control even when that would be the best for the ministry itself - I am believing that it is more about me than it is about Him. And when this happens, it often is to the very detriment of the ministry He used us to found. Ministry founders can both start and hurt the same ministry depending on how they steward it.

From the moment a ministry is founded, good leaders understand that they play a unique role for a season. If they are unwilling to see their role change in the next season, they limit that which God used them to initiate. I have watched founding leaders make both good and poor choices in this and their choices impacted the ministry they founded for better or for worse.

Taking a ministry from start up to maturity is not easy. It comes with losses But if done well it comes with kingdom impact and even greater influence than when initiated.