We are equals

Editor comment:

The following blog from contributing writer, Lindsay Norman is a followup to her recent blog titled "Subtle disempowerment." This is not a discussion on the theological issues of egalitarianism or complementarianism which is one that has implications for church leadership. This is a discussion about how we honor, treat, respect and work with women in the Christian workplace - like ReachGlobal. God cares how we treat one another: we are all made in His image.

Contributing writer

Lindsay Norman, Reach Global

As a follow up to the blog entry “subtle disempowerment,” I wanted to offer some practical ways we can empower women. However, I want to unpack the word “empower” first. This word conjures up many images: feminist, dominance, control, angry women, etc. I want to tell you what this word means to many gracious and humble women in ministry, and what other words and phrases have been used synonymously with this word.

When I and those in the ministry I serve make references to empowering women (we can include empowering minorities and young leaders as well), what it refers to is the following: treating people as equals, speaking to and about people as equals and allowing ALL people’s gifts to be honored, valued and utilized in the Church.

When there are references to “coming to the table,” “having a voice,” “wanting to be heard,” these all reference the same idea: I want to be treated as an equal, spoken to as an equal and want my gifts to be honored, valued and utilized in the church.

This means if a man has the gift of hospitality or administration, he should utilize those strengths. If he feels called to be a stay at home dad, he should follow the Spirit’s call to do this. If a woman has gifts of leadership or teaching, she should utilize those strengths. If she is called to work full time instead of stay home as a homemaker, she should follow the Spirit’s call to do so.

None of these scenarios should result in guilt as long as we are utilizing the strengths and gifts God has given us to glorify Him, edify his church, and reach our communities and families.

With that in mind, here are some suggestions for how to take steps toward gender (and I would argue ethnic) equality.

Spot potential female leaders and take the time to mentor them into leadership roles.

Use language that is inclusive: when referencing all people in the room, refer to them as staff, leaders, friends, etc. (whatever might apply).

Spend time listening to thoughts, experiences and input from women of all generations and ethnicities. Don’t try to offer solutions right away. Just listen.

Include women in the decision-making process in your ministries.

Help women gain the knowledge and understanding of their spiritual gifts. Then give them a platform to use them.

Create committees and teams to collaborate on key organizational issues. Include men and women on those teams.

Provide leadership seminars and training for women that do not just focus on women’s ministries.

Do not assume that women in a meeting will take care of taking notes, meeting prep, follow up details.

These last couple of suggestions are for women:

Women, own your voice. If you have thoughts or input, use it for constructive and strategic change. Take responsibility for your thoughts and input.

At work, and in the ministry setting, expect to be treated as a ministry/business professional first. Many people (not just women) expect their work in ministry to fulfill personal needs of friendship and family. Sometimes there is a desire to integrate personal and ministry life when at work.

I am not saying we should not have friends or family at work, or that we should not discuss personal issues at work. What I am saying is that should not be the expectation. We as women should not be disappointed if our boss or coworker does not ask about our personal lives. When you are at work (even in ministry), you are a professional worker first and should treat others the same way.

Let’s continue to dialogue on this. I’d rather have this topic be a gracious, honest dialogue than a one-way direction of thoughts and suggestions. Any time we discuss issues such as gender and ethnic equality, let’s make it constructive and for the purpose of glorifying God and working toward reconciliation and understanding.

Evaluating and Coaching Leaders

Many churches, ministries and mission organizations do not have an adequate coaching and evaluation tool for leaders. In the absence of such a tool, expectations can be vague and evaluations more subjective than objective. This is not helpful to those being evaluated or to those doing the evaluation.

Nor is the typical job description the answer. Job descriptions are typically a list of activities rather than results. Thus an individual can stay very busy on activity and actually not accomplish the necessary results.

Key Result Areas
Far more important than defining activities is that of defining the necessary results of a leaders job. We call these Key Result Areas (KRAs) and they define what we want success to look like. Thus, both myself and the many leaders in our organization (ReachGlobal) are clear on what we must accomplish in order to be considered successful. It becomes our personal roadmap and the basis on which we are evaluated annually and coached monthly.

The five responsibilities of every leader
Anyone who leads a team, from the senior leader through all levels of leadership really must accomplish five things if they are going to be successful. We use these five Key Result Areas with all of our leaders.

KRA One: Personal Development
Summary: Ensuring that I live intentionally in my spiritual, family and professional life.

KRA Two: Strategic Leadership:
Summary: Providing strategic leadership to ReachGlobal values, mission, and vision for the future, and through annual strategic initiatives.

KRA Three: Strong Team
Summary: Building a strong, unified, aligned, strategic, and results-oriented team

KRA Four: Leadership Development
Summary: Develop current and future leaders

KRA Five: Mobilizing Resources
Summary: Mobilize key resources necessary to flourish and build for the future

These KRAs do not change from year to year but the plan for how a leader accomplishes the plan changes annually.

An Annual Ministry Plan

If these areas spell success for a leader, the next step is to put feet to each of the areas so that there is a clear annual plan for how they will accomplish each of the KRAs. This plan is developed by the leader and agreed to by the board or supervisor (with modifications if necessary).

Here is an example of my own plan for 2008 for KRA 2.

KRA Two: Strategic Leadership
Summary: Providing strategic leadership to ReachGlobal values, mission, and vision for the future, and through annual strategic initiatives.

-Review and finalize all current key documents of RG to ensure a common voice and proper alignment
-Drive intentional diversity in RG domestically and internationally
-Help RG move toward greater multiplication in all of our ministries
-Champion the ReachGlobal Sandbox
-Provide maximum clarity to the leadership and personnel
-Ensure the smooth launch of LIVE0
-Provide regular communication to personnel of vision, opportunity, and strategy.
-Work with the chair of the ReachGlobal Board to ensure the board contributes the greatest value possible to the ReachGlobal.
-Realign schedule for less activity and more “think time”
-Ensure that the benchmarking of new metrics
-Develop relationships with national movement leaders
-Complete a book on “Missions in the Color World” by June 2009

Each of my other four Key Result Areas have a similar annual plan. Because I have my plan in place I know exactly what my priorities are for the year, as does my supervisor (the president of the EFCA), my board, colleagues and staff (because I make them public for the sake of example and transparency).

Monthly coaching meetings
Our organization has a commitment to a monthly meeting with one's supervisor. Because the roadmap for the year is clear through the KRAs and Annual Ministry Plan, this meeting is designed to ensure that things are on track, that barriers are removed, that relational health is maintained with others and that problems are resolved. We see it as a coaching/mentoring meeting.
Annual Evaluations
With Key Result Areas defined along with an annual ministry plan, annual reviews are really simple. How well has the leader done in accomplishing their plan? All one needs to do is to examine each of the KRAs and the accompanying ministry plan to determine how well the individual has done in accomplishing what they said they would accomplish. It becomes an objective rather than subjective process.
Further, this paradigm removes the discussion from busyness and activity to results and focus.
For more information on KRAs, Annual Ministry Plans, coaching/mentoring meetings and intentional living, see Leading From the Sandbox: Developing, Empowering and Releasing High Impact Ministry Teams.

The Three Top Responsibilities of Leaders

What do leaders do? There are many things they can do but there are three things that they must do if they are going to maximize the effectiveness of their organization. These three are non-negotiables.

One: Leaders provide maximum clarity around mission, guiding principles, central ministry focus and culture

Leaders must provide clarity about what the ministry stands for, what its mission is, how it will operate (guiding principles), what it must concentrate on (central ministry focus) and the culture of the organization.

Staff, donors, constituents and congregations all want to know where we are going, how we are going to get there, what we are about and they want a mission that is so compelling that they can give their energies, their resources and their best efforts. General clarity leads to general commitment. High clarity brings high commitment. The more clarity a leader provides the more commitment they will have from others.

Two, leaders ensure that mission is accomplished.

Leaders care about ministry results. They focus on ministry results and they hold their staff accountable for ministry results. Leaders distinguish between activity and results. They do not confuse activity with results and help staff understand that their activity must be focused in ways that are most likely to bring results. Everyone is busy but not everyone sees real results.

Staff pay attention to what their leaders pay attention to. If leaders are always focused on ministry results they will be too. If leaders don't focus on ministry results staff will not either. Leaders set the tone for the seriousness with which staff take actual missional effectiveness.

Three, leaders intentionally create an organizational culture that will allow it to best live out its clarity (one) and achieve missional results (two).

Most leaders underestimate the power of culture and pay too little attention to it. One can have the highest clarity and deepest commitment to missional effectiveness but have a culture that is unhealthy and which does not encourage healthy relationships, collaboration, robust dialogue, innovation and personal development. Healthy culture is critical to missional effectiveness and leaders are ultimately responsibility for that culture.

If you are interested in learning more about these three responsibilities of leaders, the book Leading from the Sandbox deals with these issues extensively.

The mentor/coach model of supervision

What does it mean to be a supervisor? For many the word 'manager' comes to mind. But think about that. Do you like to be managed? For many, that word spells control and it is not a cool or empowering word. What it says is that my manager does not trust me to do the job I have been hired to do or that two people need to have a hand in doing my job - my manager and me.

One of the most frustrating issues good people face is the sense that they have too little freedom to use their gifting, skills and creativity to accomplish the work they have been hired to do.

Do you really want to 'manage' others? Most ministry leaders and supervisors I know find the traditional job of 'managing' others frustrating and time consuming. And it should be because good people were not made to be managed. They were made to be empowered, set free and then coached and mentored. If people on your team cannot be set free, empowered and then coached, you have the wrong people on the team.

A mentor coaching model is dependent on your staff having a clear plan and a clear understanding of what spells success. Thus the importance of Key Result Areas (KRAs) and Annual Ministry Plans (AMPs). If you need more information on KRAs and AMPs you will find a clear paradigm in the book, Leading From the Sandbox.

I am going to make a distinction between mentoring and coaching. They are different sides of the same coin, each with its own focuses. A good team leader needs to practice both, depending on the circumstances.

The Practices of Coaches

Coaches want to release the gifting and potential in others
Coaching is not about helping others become like us! Or having them do things the way we would do them. Coaching is about releasing the gifting and potential in others and helping them become as successful and impactful as they possible can be.

'Release' is a key word for a coach. Good people have been gifted by God with unique skills and particular ways of approaching problems and situations. Coaches want to tap this potential and these gifts, pulling them out so that the gifting and potential are released in increasingly productive and effective ways.

Coaches don't tell, they ask
Releasing the potential in others means that our challenge is not to tell people how we would do things if it were us, but to help those we coach figure out how to solve problems and meet challenges themselves. Coaches ask questions, lots of questions, questions that make others think and come to good conclusions.

Coaches care about the whole person
Many leaders and organizations simply use people. While good organizations, teams and leaders are deeply missional, coaches understand that there are many factors in a person's life that affect their work, their emotional health, and their makeup. Caring about the whole person is one of the keys to unlocking potential.

Coaches are exegetes of those they coach
People are different and need to be approached differently. People cannot be treated alike in a cookie-cutter way. Individuals are just that - individuals, and our approach, whether mentoring or coaching, needs to fit who they are and the wiring they have.

Coaches hold people with an open hand
The ultimate test of whether we want the best for those who work with us and for us is: Do we hold them with an open hand? Are we willing to develop them for their sake even if it means that we end up developing them out of the organization?

Holding people with an open hand and wanting the best for them engenders huge loyalty and appreciation. The message we give is that we ultimately care about them, and what God wants for their lives, not what we want for their lives or what we can get out of them. When we try to control others we are violating them and may be violating God's best for them.

Coaches always try to keep their people engaged
People, especially highly motivated people, are not static. They grow, they change, they get bored, and they periodically need new challenges. My philosophy is that I want to find the very best people I can find and then keep them highly motivated by changing their responsibilities when I need to.

The Practices of Mentors

Mentors give honest feedback
Constructive feedback is often missing in ministry organizations where the culture is supposed to be 'nice.' The lack of honest feedback hurts the individual and the organization. It does no one any favors and can eventually result in people actually being let go for behaviors that might have been modified if someone had been courageous enough to be honest.

Mentors get people individual training when necessary
Good mentors not only provide honest feedback but also, where necessary, insist that an employee or team member receive help that will allow them to be more effective. This often means help from a psychologist or a good mentor, especially when someone is dealing with behaviors that negatively impact their own lives, the lives of others or those on their team.

Mentors care about their people but they also want a winning team
Leaders build teams that can win. Healthy leaders are committed to results, insist that the team play well together, that players are playing to their strengths, and that the results re consistent with the mission of the organization.

This means that if changing the responsibilities or team members to better organize the team for effective ministry is necessary, they will do it. It also means that there are times when they need to let someone go because they cannot play at the level needed in their ministry role, or the person is not effective in their job even after intensive mentoring. Good leaders do not allow the mission of the organization to be compromised by keeping people who are not effective.

Being a mentor/coach with those you supervise takes more time but it also brings out the best of those who work with us, engenders huge loyalty and yields huge ministry dividends. It is worth the investment.

Leaders and followers

The first step to leadership is followership. Until we can follow well and respond well to those who are over us we will not be able to lead well. Followership demonstrates an appropriate willingness to place ourselves under the authority of others. If we are unwilling or unable to do that, what right do we have to expect others to do that to us?

Followership and leadership are not simply different phases of life: first I follow and then I lead. For the vast majority of us, leadership and followership are constant realities and to lead well we must continue to follow well. As a leader, I am responsible for a large organization. As a follower, I am, like those I lead, under authority. I am a follower and a leader and it is my responsibility to do both well.

I believe that ministry leaders must pay special attention to the discipline of following. I have watched leaders who followed well and those who have followed poorly. For those of us who lead others I think there are several temptations that we must resist if we are to lead and follow well.

The temptation to think we no longer need to listen to the authority above us

After all, we are leaders and leaders lead. There is a subtle difference between doing what our leaders ask us to do and truly honoring our leaders with respect, lifting them up and taking their advice and counsel seriously.

A pastor or ministry leader who does not respect his or her board - assuming that they know better - has chosen not to be a good follower. I have often watched ministry leaders simply ignore what the board has said. In one case I was a board member of a ministry and regardless of what the board decided, the leader simply did his own thing. I resigned. He did not need me,or the rest of the board. He did he want to follow his authority.

I am often amazed and saddened by the number of people in Christian ministry who call themselves leaders who really want no authority above them. At its worst it results in narcissism where leaders start to not only ignore the authority above them but to mistreat and violate those who report to them. There is a connection between respect for authority and respect for those for whom we are the authority.

The temptation to be cynical of those above us

OK, leaders have opinions. Some think their opinions are better than those of their leaders and develop an attitude of cynicism toward those above them. Even if their leaders make mistakes, and who does not, cynicism is a sign of poor followership, not great leadership. In fact, those who harbor cynical attitudes regarding their own authority are actually undermining their personal leadership because good team members do not trust leaders who distrust their own leaders. Why should they?

People do not want to follow those who cannot follow others. I will never elevate an individual to leadership in our organization who is a cynic of those above them. What it tells me is that we have someone who is a poor leader and an untrustworthy leader - regardless of how competent they are. cynicism is about followership - or lack of it, not leadership.

The temptation to develop loyalty to us as leaders but not to the organization as a whole

This happens all the time (see my post on "Leadership Default"). This is a subtle form of the first two temptations because what it communicates is that "I want you to be loyal and cooperative to me as a leader" while at the same time not communicating that "we are a part of a larger whole and together we must be loyal and cooperative to those above us."

Thus, pastors sometimes develop loyalty of the staff but don't insist that together they are loyal to the board - dividing staff and boards. Mission organizations see mid level leaders develop good teams but do not create an ethos where that team is cooperative with or in synergy with the larger organization. In these cases, leaders have not led well because they are not following well.

The "us/them" mentality that pervades so many ministries is actually nothing other than poor followership on the part of leaders.

Leaders are followers. As the Executive Director of ReachGlobal I am a leader. As a member of the senior team of the EFCA I am a follower. My ability to follow will directly impact my ability to lead. And, I will not follow someone who will not follow!

If you are a leader, what matters first is how well you can follow. How are you doing?

Your annual roadmap

In my last post I talked about identifying those Key Result Areas that spell success for our lives. These KRAs do not necessarily change from year to year unless the focus of your job changes. KRAs are the broad definition of success. What does change is the Annual Ministry Plan (AM), which describes how one is going to fulfill each of the Key Result Areas in a given year.

Annal Ministry Plans (AMPs) are the specific steps one is going to take in any given year to fulfill one's KRAs. Before the beginning of a year all members of a team should have determined both their KRAs as well as the specific plan they intend to drive to fulfill those KRAs. These plans are developed by the individuals who must drive them and are then endorsed by their supervisor. They are specific enough to be measurable and form the basis of a monthly meeting with supervisors.

At the heart of intentionality is a commitment to thoughtfully and prayerfully think through what needs to be done and how one should do it. It is the difference between accidental and intentional living. This may be a stretch for those who are not used to planning, but they will get used to it and the results of their work will be measurably better.

Intentionality is about understanding what the end goal is (KRAs) and how one should best get there (AMPs). While the secular world has long stressed such planning, the ministry world has been significantly behind, especially when it comes to focusing on results. Good ministry is impossible without good planning.

Another advantage of AMPs is that supervisors and team members now have a way to measure progress. There is a plan and supervisors can use this plan to gauge progress. Because the team member developed the plan him or herself (with the supervisor sign off), they can be held accountable for its execution.

For individuals, the Annual Ministry Plan provides the roadmap for the year in terms of what they need to concentrate on. The hard part is done (knowing what to do) and now one can concentrate on executing the plan. This is a wonderfully helpful tool for self management. It puts the responsibility for ministry execution on individual team members rather than on the team leader. It empowers and provides for accountability.

There are people in the ministry world who believe that results do not really matter. I am told on occasion that "the only thing that matters is faithfulness." While faithfulness is a non-negotiable, results do matter because they matter to God. We are all about much fruit (John 15). Annual ministry Plans help us measure how much progress we are making according to the plans we have laid out.

The ministry world is notoriously lax in helping people know the success of their performance on an annual basis. With KRAs and AMPs, it is possible to have an objective annual performance review. How did the team member do in fulfilling their AMP and therefore fulfilling their KRAs? Even if it is not done perfectly (perfection is not the goal, intentionality is), the presence of an identifiable plan makes evaluation objective and easier and forms the basis of the next year's Annual Ministry Plan.

What spells success for you?

Fast-forward your life to the day of your funeral. Your family is there, as well as your friends and colleagues. What are they saying about your life? What are your children remembering? Your spouse! Those who knew you best? If there were a handful of things you would want to be known by, what would they be?

Assume that you have five years left in your current ministry. If you could accomplish three-to-five things that leave a lasting influence, what would they be?

What you have just identified are the big rocks of your life. They are the key results that you want your life and your work to have? Getting these big rocks right is one of the most important things we can do if we are going to live intentionally and focus on results. If we don't know the big rocks, we don't know where to focus our activity.

Now take another moment and answer this question for each of the big rocks above for your life and work. How strategically is my activity aligned with the few key results I want for my life and work? Be honest with yourself.

KRAs are Key Result Areas. Understanding of and commitment to KRAs is a major contributor in moving from activity to focused living (activity and results are two different things). Much of what we have been taught or seen modeled that is related to how we structure our lives, focuses around activity. For instance, most job descriptions are a description of the activities that the job entails. The message is that if one carries out the activities found in the job description they will have been successful in their work. But it is not true!

There is a major fallacy here because activity does not equal results. There are many people whose work lives are filled with activity but there is not much to show for it. All of us are busy with activity but activity is not the relevant issue.

Key Result Areas are the specific results that spell success for us in our job and life. KRAs do not spell out how we will achieve those results (activity) but describes the definition of success (results). KRAs define the critical areas of success that one must achieve if one is going to be successful in one's work.

Because KRAs define what success looks like, they cut through the clutter of activity and get to the heart of the matter - what our activity must lead to. They answer the question of success and are applicable in both our personal and professional lives. KRAs do not define activity, goals or methods. They define the end result of our work, the ultimate outcome that we want to see in any given year. Goals and methodology come after we have defined our KRA's.

Why KRAs? Key Result Areas allow us to focus on the critical rather than be driven by the urgent. They clarify the non-negotiable priorities and allow us to make decisions about our time and energy on the basis of a set of clear outcomes that will allow us to fulfill God's call on our lives.

Think of all the demands on your time. Some of those demands come from others who love to tell you what is important for you and how you should spend your time. All of us have options and opportunities as to what we could do with our time and we face regular pressures to fulfill the expectations of others. We face the challenges:

• How do we prioritize?
• How do we schedule?
• What gives us the confidence to say yes or no?
• Where do we focus?
• How do we deal with competing voices?
• How do we free ourselves from the tyranny of the urgent?

The answer is to identify your Key result Areas. They become your key focus and priorities and the grid from which you can answer these questions.

My Key result areas are these:

1. Personal Development: Ensuring that I live an intentional life in my spiritual, family, emotional, relational and professional life.

2. Strategic leadership: Providing strategic leadership to the organization or the part of the organization that I lead.

3. Strong team: Building a healthy, unified, aligned, strategic and results oriented team.

4. Leadership Development: Develop current and future leaders.

5. Mobilizing Resources: Mobilize key resources necessary for the ministry of the team to flourish.

Have you identified what spells success for you?

Emotional Intelligence (EQ) Revisited

In teaching a seminar on team recently we spent some time talking about the issue of the EQ (Emotional Intelligence) of those who serve on our teams. I was fascinated but not surprised about how many of the ministries represented were struggling with people whose poor EQ were causing relational chaos on their teams.

People with poor EQ leave a wake behind them. Signs of poor EQ include defensiveness, manipulation of others, anger, poor conflict management skills, lack of understanding as to how their words or actions impact others, triangulation of relationships, narcissism, divisiveness, inability to work productively with others, inability to listen to or to empathize with others.

All of these characteristics leave a wake of pain and relational chaos behind them. Sometimes the wake is with an individual or a team, sometimes it impacts entire organizations.

There are few things that compromise the health, effectiveness or synergy of a team than a leader or team member who exhibits poor EQ. I am convinced that if they cannot be coached and helped to understand and modify their behaviors that they do not belong on ministry teams (and if I worked in the secular world I would not want them on my team there either). They are too toxic and in the end undermine everything we are trying to accomplish.

How do you spot people with poor EQ? They leave a wake behind them of broken relationships, conflict and unhappy colleagues. Generally they always have a reason why the wake occurred and it is never their fault. Where there is a pattern, you know you have a problem.

Our evaluation is not about motives but about behavior which negatively impacts others and our ministry. When someone cannot or will not take responsibility for their own behavior in conflict but rather ‘demonizes’ those they are in conflict with, you know you have a real problem.

Perhaps the most difficult EQ issue to deal with is that of narcissism. People who are narcissistic believe that life is about them, that they are always right, that they have an inside track on wisdom and that problems are never their fault. That perspective on the world causes a narcissist to use other people, not listen to them, discount the input of others if it does not fit their world view and marginalize anyone who might disagree with them (they are the enemy). Given that view of the world, it is almost impossible to gain a hearing in order to help them to understand the pain they cause or to help them become healthy human beings.

I am a believer that we ought to be redemptive where we can be in ministry. That means that where we encounter poor EQ we are upfront and honest with the individual involved and give them a chance to modify behavior. I have seen surprising outcomes in those who have chosen to look in the mirror, listen to those who can help them and grow in their understanding of themselves and their treatment of others.

My experience has been that in about 50% of cases where we have had significant EQ issues, we have been able to help people grow and become productive with honest feedback and significant work with a professional. Rarely have I seen success in the case of those who suffer from narcissistic personality disorder.

I am also a believer that our ministries need to be healthy. Only healthy people can produce truly healthy ministry outcomes since relationships mean everything in ministry. Thus where it is not possible to help an individual with EQ issues, we will move them off of our teams. To do otherwise is to hurt the rest of our organization and to violate people. Much chaos, conflict, and unproductive behavior could be eliminated if we paid greater attention to the EQ of those who work in our ministries.

Spiritualists and strategists

Ministry teams and ministry boards often experience conflict between two kinds of people: spiritualists and strategists. When not understood this conflict can cause significant relational disconnect. When understood and appreciated, the difference between spiritualists and strategists can become a strength on the team or board rather than a source of conflict.

The spiritualist on your board or staff is the one who strongly identifies with the need to appropriate God's power through prayer - sometimes to the exclusion of planning and strategy.

Moses is a good example of a spiritualist. Moses loved nothing more than to be in the presence of his Lord, and God rewarded that desire by meeting with him face to face (Exodus 33:11). When faced with difficult issues, Moses' first instinct was to go to God.

Strategy was less of a gift for Moses. In fact, he nearly burned out from trying to personally deal with all of the issues faced by several million people! It took his father-in-law, Jethro, to help Moses develop a strategy for organizing the people and dealing with their problems.

On the other end of the spectrum, the strategists on your board or staff are the ones who love to plan, think ahead, set goals, evaluate results, question practices and insist on 'ministry results.' These individuals are sometimes impatient with the spiritualists who, in their opinion, are unwilling to use their God-given abilities to think strategically and naive to think that God's going to do everything without a lot of our own effort.

I believe that Paul qualifies as someone who tended toward the strategist end of the spectrum. On his missionary journeys, he thought carefully about where to plant churches and chose the population centers of the Roman Empire, where the gospel would have the greatest impact.

This does not mean that Paul was not also deeply spiritual or a man of great prayer. But he tended to look at his ministry from a strategic perspective. It may well have been this strategic bent that was at the core of the rift between Paul and Barnabas over John Mark (Acts 15:36-41).

Barnabas, whose name and spiritual gift meant 'encourager,' was probably much less bent toward the strategic than toward the relational and spiritual. Paul, with his strategic bent, grew impatient with John Mark and was blinded to the benefits John Mark brought to the work. Barnabas had a more understanding approach.

If Paul and Barnabas could stumble on the relational shoals over their differing approaches to life and ministry, it should not surprise us that we face these challenges as we work with one another. Apart from Christ, who was a perfect balance between the spiritualist and the strategist, all of us fall somewhere on a continuum toward one side or the other. We do not see life perfectly, and we have been gifted differently.

This goes to the question of which is right, the spiritualist or the strategist? Biblically, both are right, and those who are at either pole fail to understand the genius of 'and.' It is our prayer and strategy. It is following Christ and the best of our thinking on behalf of His kingdom. It is passionate dependence and ferocious resolve.

We ought to thank God for both the spiritualists, who remind us to trust God and live in dependence, and the strategists, who prompt us to think strategically for the advancement of His kingdom. When we understand that both of these approaches are biblical, and that it is in the balance of deep dependence and ferocious resolve that the best ministry happens, then we will embrace both and denigrate neither. God has gifted us differently, and it is in the plurality of gifting that we are most complete.

Leverage and contrarians

Ministry leverage is the ability to understand how to take finite resources whether people or financial and leverage those resources for maximum results. Leverage is a way of thinking about how we do what we do in order to achieve out of the ordinary results.

I spoke to a pastor this week who understands leverage. Fifty percent of the job description for everyone they hire is to raise up and train others to do what they do. Even if they are qualified to do the ministry they need to perform they will not be hired unless they are also able to train others to do that ministry. This pastor understands the power of leverage. He can hire someone to do a ministry or he can hire someone to multiply those who can do that ministry.

Larry Osborne and his leaders at North Coast Church in Vista, California stumbled onto leverage when they ran out of space and decided to try to replicate the teaching in their services via video preaching. The lack of space forced them to ask the question, how do we continue to grow without adding more services in our main auditorium? Today North Coast has thousands of people attending with several dozen worship venues.

Strategic people (and all of us should be strategic) are always asking the question, “Is there a way that we could get more done if we were to do something differently?” Sometimes we are forced to think that way when we run up against a wall. But we should always be asking that kind of a question just as a matter of stewardship.

This is a significant question in the world of missions. With 6.5 billion people on our planet, most of whom do not know Christ, we must think leverage and multiplication in everything we do. That is why the central ministry focus of ReachGlobal is to develop, empower and release healthy leaders around he world. It is not what ‘we’ do but what we can empower ‘others’ to do. We used to think of our personnel as ‘church planters.’ Today we think of them as ‘trainers and coaches’ who partner with others to help them be successful in their ministries.

Strategic folks are contrarians. Not in the sense of being contrary but in the sense of questioning conventional wisdom. Conventional wisdom is conventional but it is not always wisdom – or very strategic. Strategic folks are always asking “Why do we do it this way?” and “Is there a better way to do what we do?” Conventional wisdom in car manufacturing has nearly put Ford and General Motors out of business. The Japanese and Koreans questioned conventional wisdom and refashioned the automotive industry. Amazon questioned conventional wisdom and changed the way books are sold.

One of the secrets of those who understand leverage is that they think – a lot. And that takes time that is not available in the typical hurried life. They are also willing to take a calculated risk, go against conventional wisdom and try something new.

Here are the kinds of questions strategic people ask:

-What could we do to increase our impact and influence using our current resources?

-What are others doing that gives them leverage in their ministries?

-Are we doing addition or multiplication in the ministries we are involved in?

-Why do we do what we do the way we do it?

Team Covenant

Every team has rules, written or otherwise, by which they operate. These rules can be healthy or unhealthy. Unhealthy rules include certain topics that everyone knows are off limits (the elephants), or might be that nothing can ever be said that the leader might take as critical. Some teams are great at process but do not deal with accountability or results. Unhealthy rules prevent teams from having candid, honest, robust dialogue.

Only the leader can truly set the tone or culture of a team. Others can try but the leader has the authority to either encourage a culture of discourage it. The more a leader defines the team 'rules of how we work with each other' and then models that culture, the greater the freedom the team has to operate comfortably with each other. The following rules of engagement would typify a healthy team. It takes healthy emotional intelligence on the part of the leader and those on the team to make this possible.

TEAM COVENANT

We encourage robust dialogue where honest opinions, probing questions and potential solutions can be freely shared on any topic relating to the team's (or one another's) ministries. We commit to robust dialogue without attacking one another and to maintain on open, non-defensive attitude.

In the spirit of Matthew 18, we will always speak in love and keep short accounts when offense has taken place.

We will regularly evaluate progress of the organization or that part of the organization we are responsible for and do so with utmost honesty. We believe in timely execution and ministry results.

We practice autopsy without blame. We know things will go wrong and when they do we will do an autopsy of the failure so that we can learn from it without casting blame for the failure.

We keep our promises. When decisions have been made and assignments given, we are committed to fully executing those assignments on time.

We take full responsibility for corporate decisions our team makes and will not engage in leadership default. Our first loyalty is to this team and we will always represent this team well and fully support its decisions. Outside of our team meetings we speak with one voice.

We keep confidential those issues which are shared in our team meetings which should not be shared with others.

We are committed to thinking the best of one another, speaking the best of one another, praying for one another and supporting one another's ministries.

We agree to hold one another accountable for keeping this team covenant and we agree to allow others to call us on it if we violate this agreement

The five priorities of every leader

Good leaders must do at least five things well in their leadership role. There may be other things a leader does but if she or he does not do these five things well, they will not become great leaders. These five responsibilities are the five highest priorities in one's leadership role. How well they are done will determine the effectiveness of the team.

One: Personal Development - Ensuring that I live intentionally in my spiritual, family, emotional, relational and professional life.

By personal development I mean the core issues that make and keep a leader healthy spiritually, relationally, emotionally and professionally. These become a leader's highest priority because health in these areas determines their ability to lead spiritually and professionally and to model the kind of faithful, fruitful, connected life that the New Testament describes for leaders.

Two: Strategic Leadership - Providing strategic leadership to the organization or part of the organization you lead.

This is not about administrating the team. There is a crucial difference between 'activity' and 'results.' Good leaders are always seeking results that are consistent with the mission. Leaders do some administration but they are not administrators. Rather, they are always pushing the mission forward - which often gets lost in the press of activity. Strategic leadership is about keeping the mission of the organization central and the team aligned toward accomplishing the mission.

Three: Strong Team - Building a healthy, unified, aligned, strategic and results oriented team.

Newsflash: The higher the altitude at which you fly, the less you can do yourself and the more you are dependent on other people. Your ability to influence the organization you lead and advance the mission is directly dependent on the people who make up your team. Your success is tied directly to your team. So, the better the team, the more you will see accomplished.

Four: Leadership Development - Develop current and future leaders.

Are you developing current and future leaders for your ministry? It amazes me how many churches and organizations have no strategy or plan to develop future leaders and then wonder why they have trouble when new leaders come and create problems. Leaders pay close attention to identifying and developing new leaders for the future. I will have failed if I do not raise up the next generation of leaders for the organization I lead so that it flourishes into the future.

Five: Mobilizing Resources - Mobilize key resources necessary for the ministry of the team to flourish.

Team leaders are mobilizers of people, strategies, finances and other needed resources. Leaders use their authority, vision-casting ability and position in the organization to ensure that their team has the resources it needs to fulfill their responsibilities. This may mean negotiating with others at their level or higher for necessary budgets or cooperation.

Mobilizing resources is not simply about funding. Leaders are 'people raisers,' always looking for individuals who can contribute to the mission. They are always on the lookout for strategies that might work or people who have been successful in what they are trying to do. All to often we try to 'reinvent wheels.' Leaders point their team to those who have already figured it out and encourage them to explore successful models.

If a leader pays attention to these five priorities, they will grow healthy and effective teams.

Thinking about Emotional Intelligence (EQ)

Ministry organizations pay far too little attention to the issue of Emotional Intelligence (EQ). When we hire we look at competency and character and fit with our organization. But, we often gloss over the individual's EQ and if the EQ is not good we pay a price for neglecting this issue.

In most ministry settings the single greatest cause of conflict revolves around poor EQ causing relational issues, bad feelings, disempowerment and lack of health.

Emotional Intelligence, often labeled EQ, is the ability to understand ourselves, know what drives us, accurately see who how we are perceived by others, and know how we relate to others. EQ also measures whether we have the relational skill to work synergistically with others while being 'self defining' and allowing others to speak into our lives or work without defensiveness.

Signs of poor EQ include the inability to listen to others, personal defensiveness, unawareness of how we come across to others, lack of sensitivity to the feelings of others, inability to constructively deal with conflict, a need to control others, narcissism, and the need to have our own way.

Good EQ includes openness to the opinions of others, lack of defensiveness, awareness of who we are and how others perceive us, sensitivity to others, the ability to release others rather than control them, allow for constructive and robust dialogue, and the ability to abide by common decisions.

It is possible for someone to have great competence but to have low EQ and leave relational havoc in their wake. Don't put them on your team. In fact, if they cannot be helped to become healthy, they probably should not be an employee of your ministry because no matter how competent they are, the damage they cause relationally in and outside the organization is too high. The alternative is to put them in a spot where they will do the least damage to others.

One of the sins of ministry organizations is that under the guise of 'grace' or 'being nice' we are not honest with people who have EQ issues. We don't tell them when their style hurts others or causes relational chaos. Then having not been honest, we finally get fed up and let them go. That is not helpful nor fair.

The first step in helping people develop better EQ is to sit down with them and honestly share how the behaviors that are problematic cause problems and to suggest ways that they can modify their behavior to minimize the negative fallout. Many times in our organization we will ask people to see a psychologist when there are significant issues to try to bring change. Where change is not forthcoming we will take action to help them find another organization to work for. The alternative is to compromise the health of the team they are on and the missional effectiveness of the ministry.

Good EQ for leaders is especially important. Leaders with poor EQ often control others, micro-manage, are threatened by people who are more competent than themselves, do not foster robust dialogue and consequently are unable to develop healthy teams. The fallout on the team are issues that people don't dare discuss, mistrust, silo mentalities, frustration of team members and lack of cooperation.

Two excellent articles on Emotional Intelligence are Leadership that Gets Results, Daniel Goleman, Harvard Business Review, March-April 2000, reprint number R00204 and What Makes a Leader, Daniel Goleman, Harvard Business Review, January 2004, Reprint number R0401H

Characteristics of High Impact Teams

High Impact Teams are groups of individuals who are committed to the same mission. A team is not a team because it is called a team. Healthy teams are based on a clear, definable, well-articulated, passionately held, common mission. In fact, if there is not passionate ownership of a common mission you cannot have a High Impact Team.

One of the key reasons teams do not function well is the absence of a clearly defined mission that all are committed to. Many churches and ministries do not have a clear mission. In the absence of clarity of mission, a team will find some other glue to hold it together but it will not be very effective because it does not have a central focus. Whatever your team, the glue that holds you together if you want to see significant results of your work must be a well articulated mission that you are passionate about. Mission is everything!

High Impact Teams are committed to alignment around a common mission. A common dysfunction of ministries is the lack of alignment between various departments. It is not unusual in church staff meetings for members to spend time reporting the happenings of their respective ministries without any concrete alignment between them. They essentially operate in silos, doing their own thing, oblivious to what others are doing in their ministries and while all the parts may be 'good' they are also 'isolated' and not part of a whole. Staff member are focused only on their slice and are not interested in doing the hard work of ensuring alignment.

Healthy teams reject that kind of silo mentality because it keeps the organization from being great and from maximizing its God-given potential. It takes more time and energy to be aligned than unaligned but the results of alignment around a common mission are a quantum leap from the outcomes that results from disparate, unaligned ministries. Good leaders and teams take the harder road because it yields greater ministry impact. A characteristic of good leaders is that they insist on ministry alignment around common mission.

Healthy teams commit to common values, practices and commitments of the organization at large. Integration means that all members are committed to a set of common factors. In the mission organization that I lead we have a common mission, a set of ten guiding principles, a central ministry focus and a defined culture. No one gets into leadership in the organization today without complete buy-in with these four areas. In fact, a person cannot join the organization in a ministry position without agreement in these four areas. Healthy teams commit to common ownership of the organizational values, practices and commitments.

Healthy teams believe in the complimentary use of gifts. Why bother with team? A central reason to care about team is that healthy teams get far more done in a more creative and synergistic manner than any one person could ever do alone. I am fascinated that God designed the senior leadership of the church (elders, overseers) as teams and not as a single individual. When the early church sent missionaries, they sent a team (Acts 13). When the early church designed a ministry to take care of the widows and the poor (deacons) it created a team. This is a recognition that God gives various gifts to different people and when they work in concert with one another, the team is at its strongest.

Good teams are not simply a group of people indiscriminately thrown together for the sake of 'team.' They are carefully made up of people with differing gifts that, when combined, creates something far more powerful than any one of the individuals could accomplish on their own.

Healthy teams think strategically and are execution oriented. Healthy team members focus on developing the best-possible strategies for the organization at large so that its mission is fulfilled. While there is an important element of simple communication and coordination in team meetings, the real work of teams is that of strategizing together on the best way to move the organization (or their part of the organization) forward. Team meetings should have a significant portion of time devoted to current problems that need solving, opportunities that can be leveraged, and planning for the future. This is always done in the context of the mission, values, and preferred future of the organization.

While some organizations are high on planning, they are often short on execution - or getting things done. The bottom line for good teams is that they are results-oriented. Team leaders must ensure that discussion regularly comes to concrete proposals with accountability for who is responsible for doing what.

Healthy team members allow others to speak into their ministries, methods and results. This is a logical extension of the descriptions we have given for teams. Because it is all about mission! Because all that we do is in alignment. Because we believe in the complimentary use of gifts, and because we care more about the whole than we do our piece of the ministry, we are ready and willing to allow others to speak into our area of ministry involvement without being defensive or protective.

Many talk team but do not live team. And the strongest reason not to live team is the cost it incurs. It demands our time, a commitment to a common mission, commitment to one another and alignment with others, a release of our independence, a focus that is wider than our personal ministry, and a submission of our gifts for the good of the whole.

Healthy teams have healthy leaders who love to develop, empower and release team members. Healthy teams are not possible without a healthy leader who has enough self confidence to bring around him or her other highly competent individuals without being threatened by their strength. Healthy leaders are not defensive or threatened. They have developed an attitude of 'nothing to prove, nothing to lose.' They are empowering rather than controlling. Good leaders hire good people, clearly define the boundaries of their work, and empower and release them to get the job done.

Healthy leaders are not autocratic but believe in and practice collegial, collaborative leadership. They allow robust dialogue and debate and help the group come to common conclusions and commitments. For those of us who lead teams, there is no substitute for continuing to grow as healthy, effective, empowering leaders. Others love to work for leaders who have those characteristics and will be exceedingly loyal to them.

Healthy teams are made up of individuals who are emotionally healthy. Beware of who you put on your team! Healthy individuals will make team work a joy. Unhealthy individuals will kill an otherwise good team. There is a growing awareness of the need to hire people who are competent, who have character and who fit the culture of our organizations. However we pay too little attention to the EQ of those we recruit to be members of our teams.

Healthy teams are deliberately created. They are created to maximize the effectiveness of the team through the right set of gifting and need in order to create the synergy, alignment, energy, wisdom and skills necessary to carry out the team's mandate.

When you consider adding people to a team consider a number of questions:

• Does this person have good EQ (emotional intelligence)?
• Can this person play at or above the level that the other members of this team play at?
• Do they have a skill(s) that will complement the team?
• Is this person a team player?
• Can they contribute to the whole rather than simply guard their turf?
• Do they fully embrace the mission and values of the organization?
• Do the other members of the team think they will fit well?
• Do they have the expertise needed for the ministry in which they will participate?
• Do they understand the implications of joining your team and the expectations for them as a member?

Healthy team meetings are carefully planned and executed. There are few things more irritating than to be required to attend meetings that are carelessly planned and poorly led. Leaders effectively set the tone for their team by the care they model in designing meaningful agendas, keeping the meeting on target and ensuring that the time is well spent. When this is not the case, the message to team members is that 'this is not that important,' and they will not take their part seriously.

Too many leaders under-prepare for team meetings considering them a distraction from more important issues. Team time is not an ancillary part of a leader's priorities. It is central. Team time is where leaders remind people of mission. It is where they plan, solve problems, dream, and whiteboard around the preferred future of the organization - or the slice of the organization represented by the team they lead.

Healthy teams encourage robust dialogue between members. One of the reasons team leaders must have a healthy EQ is that healthy teams encourage honest, frank dialogue about all issues with the exception of personal attacks. In our organization we constantly say we want no elephants in the room, and where they may exist, they need to be named and put on the table.

This does not work for insecure leaders who easily become defensive. One can judge the relative health of a team by the number of elephants in the room - the number of topics that are instinctively known to be out of bounds. The ability to have honest and frank discussion without personal attack is a sign that trust has been established between members allowing them to evaluate one another's areas of responsibility without taking umbrage of one another.

Robust dialogue is the ability to freely discuss any issue of organizational or ministry importance with candor while refraining from personal attacks or driving hidden agendas in order to further the effectiveness and mission of the organization.

What a ministry team is not

Teams are not about working with your best friends. You may work with those whom you consider good friends but ultimately teams are about common mission, not surrounding yourself with friends. Missional friendships are different than personal friendships. Missional friendships are collegial relationships centered around the common mission you have as a team and organization. Personal friendships are based on common interests and passions, many of which have nothing to do with the work you do. This does not mean that healthy teams are not friendly. In fact, they should be collegial. The important issue is not to confuse the role of 'team mates' with that of 'best friends.' The latter is a bonus but not a given.

The primary function of team is not to meet one's social and emotional needs. All of us have social and emotional needs that need to be met. The deepest of these will be met with family and friends. Some may be met by those we serve with but it is not a given. Our role on a team is a 'functional' one designed to achieve a specific mission. We may or may not be with our team long term. The team may change. Our responsibilities may change. Teams are not designed to meet our primary social and emotional needs and if we try to make them do so we will be disappointed when our needs are not met or when roles change.

Team does not mean that we necessarily spend huge amounts of time together. Team does require time. More time than some who are consumed by their own priorities want to give. less time than some who desire the comradeship and friendship of those with whom they work would like to receive.

Healthy, aligned, synergistic teams make adequate time for team. But that time is spent primarily on mission and secondarily on relationships. The purpose of team is missional - which will take time For some, that time will be a sacrifice because they don't want to be pulled away from 'their stuff.' For others it will not be enough because they are looking for the team to satisfy more of their emotional and social needs.

Team is not primarily about meetings. Team has far more to do with how we think about our working relationships, our alignment with others in the organization and the common mission to which we give our energies, than it has to do with formal meetings. It is about a mindset that always takes into account the whole organization, its best interests, its success and the inter-related ministries we each represent. This is a far cry from how many team members operate in ministry organizations where outside the 'team meeting' they make decisions within their own silo without taking into consideration the success of the whole. The latter perspective causes turf battles, conflicts and misunderstanding.

Team does not mean we are all working on the same project. Team means that we are committed to the same mission but not necessarily to the same project.

Team does not mean that we lead by committee. Teams are not 'leadership by committee,' which is a terrible way to lead. Good teams have good leaders. Good leaders practice collaborative decision making so there is common ownership and buy in. But, teams are not led by committee. Good leaders bring proposals to their teams, or ask others to do so for discussion, robust dialogue, tweaking and ultimate agreement. But someone must be the leader or coach of the team.

Definition of Team. A group of missionally aligned and healthy individuals working strategically together under good leadership toward common objectives with accountability for results.