When there is not adequate organizational clarity

If there is one thing that many organizations lack it is crystal clear clarity about who they are, what they want to accomplish and how they are going to get there. This is especially true of non-profits and ministries as the profit motive is not the driving factor. In fact, clarity is the glue that holds the organization together as it grows. In my consulting with numerous non-profits I have observed four related consequences of poor or no organizational clarity.

Conflict
I am speaking here of conflict between leaders and departments. Why? Because a lack of clarity from the top results in leaders one level below creating their own clarity and going in their own direction. When there is a vacuum, someone will fill it. The problem is that we fill it with our version of clarity rather than a shared version of clarity, find ourselves at odds with one another, create silos and find ourselves fighting over direction, finances, resources and strategy.

Relational disconnect
This conflict creates relational disconnect and we often assume that the conflict is a result of people with bad motives or who are not team players. More likely the disconnect is a result of the senior leader not developing a shared clarity about who the organization is and how it will get to where it wants to go. The relational disconnects are a result of poor leadership at the very top of the organization.

Lack of alignment
In this situation, senior leaders and departments are not aligned with one another. Each may be doing good things but often they are working at cross currents with each other. If each were an arrow, the arrows would be pointing in different directions rather than all in the same general direction. This lack of alignment creates conflict and relational disconnect and is deeply frustrating to good leaders who often leave if the situation is not solved. 

Dispersed energy and compromised impact
Because the arrows are not pointed in the same direction and departments and leaders are working at cross purposes with one another the energy and impact of the organization is severely compromised. In fact, leaders are often trying to negotiate issues within the organization rather than focusing on the mission of the organization. There is nothing more distracting and discouraging to people who have bought into a mission than to be fighting intermural wars when they could be delivering on the mission.

Organizational clarity matters...a lot. 

Ministry anchors that hold you back

Do you ever feel like there is an anchor that keeps your board or staff team from moving forward like it should? Like many of you are trying to row as hard as you can but it's like you have an anchor dragging behind you that makes the going slow and frustrating? You wish that you could cut through the water at a nice clip but each pull on the oars is hard!

Usually when this happens it is because of an individual on the board or team who don't belong there and until you move them on, the rowing will remain tough. And the team or board will grow increasingly frustrated about the slow pace given that they are throwing their energy into the process. Here are several anchors that keep boards and teams from moving forward.

Lack of clarity
Clarity is like the wind in the sail, you know clearly where you are going and therefore all hands on deck are helping move the organization in the right direction. Lack of clarity, on the other hand, is like a sail with no wind and an anchor off the back. Let's face it, if you don't know where you are going you will actually get there: wherever that is.

Lack of empowerment by leaders
Leaders who don't empower become ministry anchors! Everything ultimately comes back to them (because they  don't delegate authority and responsibility) holding things up, causing disempowerment to staff and ultimately making it all about the leader who does not trust his/her staff. Controlling leaders always hold the ministry back.

Lack of alignment
It only takes one individual who is not on board with the direction of the team to throw off the rhythm and momentum. After all you are all trying to go to a certain place but this individual does not agree and is trying to pull in another direction. Their resistance may be active or passive but it is real and it throws the rest of the team off kilter.

Inability to think at the right level
Here you have a nice board member or staff member who may well have the best interests of the ministry at heart but they cannot play at the level of the rest of of the group. In order to help them understand you spend inordinate amounts of time trying to explain. The process discourages the rest of the group and at every critical juncture you have an anchor keeping you from moving at the pace you could be moving.

Black and white thinkers
These are the individuals who don't understand nuance, or grey and for whom all issues are black and white and must be parsed that way. They become frustrating because they don't have the ability to be flexible in their thinking and flexibility is a key to a good team or board. Their stand on "principle" is so rigid that anything that violates their interpretation is a problem to them.

People who need to have their own way
I will call these people for what they are: narcissists. They are not team players. They have an agenda and they simply want their way. They may hide behind spiritual talk but the bottom line is that such talk is simply a smokescreen for their own selfishness and arrogance. These folks are deeply frustrating because they have a hidden agenda that keeps them moving in their direction at all times.

People who are not gifted for leadership
These may be deeply Godly folks who get on a board or team but who simply are not wired to lead. Making decisions that may offend someone in the congregation (and many decisions will) causes knots in their stomachs and getting them to a decision point is arduous.

I have on occasion tried to run the motor of a fishing boat without first pulling up the anchor. You realize very quickly you have a problem with forward momentum. And you pull it up. My advice to boards and teams, deal with the anchor when you have one. Not to do so is to settle for a significant momentum loss and great frustration for the rest of the team.

It takes only one leader to hijack a team and cause great pain to your ministry

I often write on the issue of alignment within organizations. I know from both personal experience as well as from working with numerous organizations the pain that an unaligned leader can bring to the organization.

Unaligned leaders essentially hijack their entire team from the rest of the organization. It happens in churches, missions and other ministry organizations. Unfortunately, when this happens, and the leader is redeployed, (often outside the organization) it often takes great time and energy to bring the team back into alignment with the organization as a whole. As a senior leader who has had to deal with this on a number of occasions I know the harm it does and the incredible effort it takes to rectify the situation.

Ensuring alignment throughout an organization is one of the most important jobs of a leader and one of the most critical issues to constantly monitor. When senior leaders allow leaders in their organization to drift or act as independent contractors they take their staff in the same direction. The longer it is allowed to exist the longer it will take to rectify. 

How do you ensure that your leaders are in alignment? Alignment always requires great clarity as to what the organization is about and what the non-negotiables are. Without clarity there will never be alignment.

Second, Senior leaders must spend quality time with leaders throughout the organization, dialoging, asking questions, probing and observing those who lead throughout the organization. And, asking questions of staff throughout the organization. 

If one knows or senses that there are alignment issues, push into it. It may well be that the issue can be resolved. Sometimes resolution means that a leader who is operating as an independent contractor needs to be moved out of their role. Remember though that where nonalignment occurs it impacts everyone on that team or in that division and therefore hurts the organization as a whole.

Philosophically I deeply believe in empowering leaders in our organization and our leaders have a huge degree of freedom. What I cannot do is to delegate and ignore issues of alignment. I never take it for granted, guard it constantly and talk about it regularly.

If you are dealing with alignment issues you may want to read Leading From the Sandbox which deals with clarity, healthy teams and healthy leaders.

The glue that holds good teams together

It is a fun game: how many cards can we stack on top of another until the house of cards comes down.

In real life, it is more serious - for leaders and team leaders. The measure of our leadership is not what happens when we are leading but what happens when we leave. Does what we built hang together and continue to flourish or does it come apart like a house of cards?

Some leaders build their team or organization on the force of their personality but once they are gone the glue is gone - the cards fall. Other, wiser leaders build their team or organization on values and principles and good people. When they are gone, the values, principles and good people remain and the organization or team continues strong. These leaders have not built a house of cards but a team of strength.

If you are a leader here is a question you should ask. If I disappeared today, what would happen? Would the direction and effectiveness continue in spite of my absence or would it flounder and come apart? In too many cases the reality is the latter rather than the former.

True team and organizational strength is built on a commonly held mission, set of guiding principles, central ministry focus and a carefully built culture that is held, believed in and practiced by everyone. It is in their bones, not just in their leader because their leader has brought alignment around beliefs and practices not around their personality or authority. One builds true long term stability while the other builds temporary but weak alignment.

The mission clarifies what you are about. The guiding principles clarify how you go about doing what you are about. The central ministry focus clarifies what you must do day in and day out to succeed and the culture clarifies the ethos that you are committed to creating. These are the four most important questions every leader answers for their team or organization and they are the glue that holds people together for maximum alignment and ministry passion.

Missional glue is far more powerful than the glue of one's personality - especially if one wants to build something that has influence beyond their time in leadership. It is also a sign of a humble leader when they build around a set of principles and values and a clear mission, rather than themselves. After all it is not about us but the mission God has entrusted to us. 

If you want help in building a ministry based on those principles that will last, read Leading From the Sandbox. It contains the secrets of clarifying those things that are most important for your team or organization. It will take you from a house of cards to a house intentionally built to last.

When there are alignment issues

Few things are more frustrating to good leaders, staff members or board members than to have an individual on the team who is significantly out of alignment with the rest of the board or staff. It takes just one individual who is not committed to the same direction to stall out what would otherwise be healthy governance or staff dynamics.

The most important work of a staff or board is to ensure that they are clear regarding their direction - and that there is equally clear support for that direction. That clarity is hard work but without it you have people moving in multiple directions and essentially negating the opportunity you have.
Once direction is clarified, what happens if there is a staff member - or board member who simply will not buy into the ministry direction?

At the staff level, the alternative is pretty clear. The staff member needs to find a place of ministry where he or she can minister with a happy heart and a clear conscience. I am constantly amazed at the poor EQ of some individuals who think it is OK to simply go their own direction even if it is at odds with their leader or the team. It is not OK - and leaders need to bite the bullet and transition the individual out of their ministry - or get on board.

Congregations that experience a lot of conflict or lack of directional agreement are usually taking their cues from either a board that is not unified or a staff that is not unified. If boards or staff are not in alignment, the congregation won't be either.

At the board level, it is a harder issue. However, a board can, (if it has the courage), have honest dialogue together and ask an individual to step off the board if they will not cooperate or cannot agree on a common direction.
This is not to stifle robust dialogue at the board level. But if there is not fundamental philosophical agreement after the hard work of determining clarity of direction, then there is a miss-match between the recalcitrant member and the rest of the board. For him or her to stay in leadership in those circumstances is counter productive for both parties.

This can also involve specific issues a board faces. I was once on a church board during significant conflict in the church. One board member was unable to deal with the conflict and come to a decision. I asked him to step off the board for a period of time so that the board could act rather than allow him to keep the board in constant dialogue and put off necessary action.

Wise boards do not allow anyone to join the board who is not in philosophical agreement with the direction of the key leadership (staff and board) or without signing a board covenant that spells out how the board interacts with each other.

There is no possibility of maximizing ministry without alignment in staff and boards. If you have an arrow going in the wrong direction, do what you need to do to resolve the issue.

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

Herding cats and congregational alignment

Congregations are effective to the extent that their people are moving in the same general direction. When leaders have a direction and can mobilize their people in that direction, there is great power. When leaders don’t have a direction or people don’t know the direction, or there has not been significant effort to herd the cats in that direction, mission suffers.

It is not easy to herd cats and it is not easy to get a group of people pointed in the same direction. But it is possible and wise leaders work on making it happen. Here are some basic tips in how to make that happen in your church.

Clarify the basics. 
Leaders need to have clarity before they can communicate clarity. They need clarity around four key areas. One, what is our mission? Two, what are our guiding principles or the non-negotiables for how we do what we do and relate to one another? Three, what is the single most important thing we need to focus on (central ministry focus)? Four, what do we want the end result of our ministry to look like (spiritual vitality)?

Leaders, pastors and staff must have a common set of commitments and a common vocabulary around these four core issues so that they can communicate them consistently and clearly with the congregation.

Communicate constantly. You cannot over communicate the basics. While we may get tired of hearing ourselves saying them, it is in the constant communication of what is truly important that people start to assimilate those beliefs. People crave clarity and good leaders provide the clarity on a regular basis. If you can communicate those key issues in a simple, clear and consistent manner, people will start to remember them.

Be upfront with new members and attenders.
The reference point for what church is or should be for people who have had prior church experience is some church in their past. They often come into a new church thinking that your church will be like some past church. It won’t in all likelihood. Use new member classes or informal gatherings of new attenders to communicate who you are, what your commitments are and what your direction is. Clarify the four issues noted earlier.

This is important if you truly want your culture to reflect your mission, guiding principles, central ministry focus and end result. The fact is that you do not want people importing values that are inconsistent with who you are or want to be. Not all churches fit all people. Be clear as to who you are and what people can expect in their experience in your congregation.

Ensure that every ministry in the church is communicating the same thing. You will either lose alignment or gain alignment depending on whether every one of your ministry leaders and key volunteers is communicating the same message. For instance, all staff, volunteers and ministry leaders need to know those things that you are clear on regarding mission, guiding principles, central ministry focus and the end goal of your ministries - and have a plan for how they will communicate them in their particular ministry. If all ministry leaders communicate and live out the same message – it will get through.

Use small groups to focus the congregation on key ministries. 
Small groups can either align or miss-align a congregation depending on whether there is a strategy to ensure that leaders are paying attention to the key ministry commitments of the congregation. For instance, one should ensure that every small group is intentionally helping people move toward a common definition of spiritual maturity – depending on how your church as defined maturity. Or, if community involvement is key to your ministry, every small group should have a plan for how they will contribute to community ministry.

All small group leaders should have the same understanding, commitment to and concern for the mission, guiding principles, central ministry focus and the desired end result of ministry. If they do not have the same commitment as staff and leaders, the cats will not be moving in the same direction.

Develop your "way"
Executives from around the world pay big bucks to attend Disney seminars on the “Disney Way.” It is the way that the Disney Company does business, treats employees and the unique culture they espouse. Every church ought to have “a way” or a culture that defines it that is inculcated into every staff member, every board member, every volunteer or key ministry leader – and then into the congregation as a whole.

Your way includes the culture you want to create (guiding principles), the mission you exist for, the desired end result of your ministry (spiritual vitality) and the central ministry focus – the developing, empowering and releasing of people into active, meaningful ministry.

This also includes a common vocabulary that is spoken in your hallways, the living out of your preferred culture and a consistent message over time. Done well, you will develop your unique culture and the cats will move generally in the same direction.

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

Seven indicators of a healthy organization

Leaders are always looking for the magic bullet to differentiate their organization from others and give themselves an edge. Often, they end up chasing the wrong things. In fact, the key to a great organization is pretty simple: they focus on health. This is the opposite of a toxic workplace which is unfortunately more common than we wish.

What are the signs of a healthy organization?

One: They have great clarity about what they are about. There is no ambiguity regarding their mission, their guiding principles, what they need to focus on and what they desire to accomplish. Because of this clarity, the whole organization is on the same page and are moving in the same direction.

Two: They have a candid and trusting culture where there are no elephants (issues that cannot be discussed) and where honest dialogue is valued and expected. Unhealthy organizations shut down candid and robust dialogue as a threat. Healthy organizations encourage and expect it knowing that the only way to better solutions is honesty. This can only happen in a culture of trust which is the ground from which such honest dialogue emerges.

Three: They empower people to make necessary decisions within well defined boundaries. Controlling organizations stifle creativity and are permission withholding cultures. Healthy organizations encourage creativity and empower people as permission granting cultures. Unhealthy organizations control people through rules while healthy organizations empower people through well defined clarity (one above). Healthy organizations trust their staff while unhealthy organizations control their staff.

Four: They treat people with dignity. Great organizations are places people love to work because they value their staff and live that value in all relationships. Every organization says that their people are their most valuable asset but most organizations do not live out their stated value. Treating people with dignity means that staff are trusted, empowered, their opinions valued, failure is not fatal but a learning opportunity, and staff are regularly developed to maximize their potential. 

Five: They care about real results. Of course every organization says it cares about results but the truth is that in the ministry world very few actually have ways to measure results which means we are not truly serious! Healthy organizations have great clarity and are focused on living out that clarity for tangible results that they measure and evaluate. Healthy organizations can easily answer the question "How do you measure success?" Can yours?

Six: They constantly develop their staff. Toxic organizations use people while healthy organizations develop and grow people on a regular basis. They create a culture where emotional, relational, spiritual and skill health is both an expectation and something that is constantly growing. Healthy organizations are made up of healthy people so any focus on health must start with staff. 

Seven: They are humble. Humble organizations continue to grow because they know they have many areas where they can grow. Proud organizations actually hurt themselves by their pride. They think they have a corner on ministry and are superior to others. Great organizations take a humble posture with humble leaders and staff whose humility allows them to continually evaluate how they can do what they do better. Humility breeds a servant mentality while pride does not.

How does the organization you lead or are a part of compare to these seven indicators of health?

You know your ministry organization is unified and healthy when...

We assume and want to think that our ministries are unified and aligned when in fact they often are not. Why does it matter? Non unified ministries are simply a collection of independent ministries housed under a common name. This is true of many churches where each ministry does their own thing. It is also true of many mission organizations where various divisions or teams or missionaries are going their own way oblivious to a common and unified and aligned vision, mission and strategy. The net result is a dilution of missional effectiveness and organizational confusion along with competition among its parts.

Unified organizations have far greater potential for missional effectiveness because everyone is pulling in the same direction. Here are some of the characteristics of a unified, healthy organization.

One: There is a mission, vision and set of guiding principles that are common to all, that all leaders believe and live out and which their part of the ministries conform to. In other words the ministry has great clarity about who it is and what it is about. In addition, all ministries are on the same page and know what that page is. It is not as common as one might assume, nor easy to clarify what the whole ministry is about and just having these on paper somewhere does not count! 

Two: There is active cooperation, coordination and synergy between leaders across the ministry. This only works when the first characteristic is present. If there is not mission and vision that applies to the whole, the parts will not know how to cooperate and coordinate but are forced to do their own thing. Often in the absence of ministry clarity we try to force cooperation and synergy but it rarely works and usually creates significant frustration. The best glue among leaders and ministries is a common missional agenda that equally applies to all and which all can live out.

Three: All ministry leaders are evangelists for the same missional agenda. In a truly unified and healthy ministry, every key leader is equally passionate about the clearly defined purpose and vision of the ministry. In the organization I lead, ReachGlobal, I knew things had changed when people started telling me that they heard the same story from everyone they talked to along with the same passion.

Four: The senior team representing different ministry divisions sees itself as one united team based on common clarity rather than as representatives of the various ministries they oversee, merely coming to a common meeting table. Many church staff teams, for instance are not a united team based on common clarity but are rather attending a common meeting representing their own clarity. There is a critical difference between these two versions of team and that difference tells you whether the organization is truly united and healthy.

Five: The ministry as a whole and among its parts can point to results that reflect its clarity. The central ministry focus of ReachGlobal, for instance, is to develop, empower and release healthy ReachGlobal staff and healthy national leaders. To the extent that we live that out in each corner of the world where we work we are unified and healthy. To the extent that the ministry parts are focused on different priorities with different results we are not. 

These characteristics are markers of three simple facts about a unified and healthy ministry organization.

There is maximum ministry clarity for the whole that applies equally to each of its parts.

There is alignment by all around that maximum clarity.

There are results by all based on that maximum clarity.

If that is true of your organization, you are truly a unified organization. If it is not you have some work to do, starting with real clarity!

Who are the keepers of organizational values?

All organizations and ministries have values, an ethos they are committed to and a culture that they are committed to upholding. Hopefully there is clarity in all of these areas. The question is, who is responsible for upholding those that ethos?

Every leader is responsible! Without exception. Every member of the organization is responsible! Without exception. Leaders, however, have a special responsibility to guard, uphold, champion, live out and champion what the organization believes in. We instinctively watch our leaders for clues as to how seriously they take the spoken and written promises of the organization. We are likely to follow their example no matter what is written or stated.

Anytime there is a fault line in upholding what the organization holds dear there is a direct threat to the ministry. People may give reasons and excuses for why they did not uphold the ethos but the fact that it was not kept is a threat to the ministry. This is why organizational leaders should never ignore violations to their ethos, culture or commitments. They may choose to respond publicly or privately but they always respond. They know what is at stake.

Staff members watch their leaders carefully. What they do is more important than what they say. What they model is what is followed. It only takes one leader who is out of alignment regardless of their place in the organization structure to disrupt the culture of an organization. One staff member, for instance on a church staff who is not living out the ethos, culture or values of that church compromises the health of the whole.

As I said in another blog, It only takes one individual to negatively impact the whole. That is why organizational alignment is so critical.

Healthy organizations intentionally live out their preferred culture and ethos. All leaders and teams work hard to stay in alignment. It is a critical factor in the health of all organizations and ministries. It is an issue worth talking about together: how well do we do it?

Any ministry is only as strong as its weakest area

Ministries like any organization are a series of interconnected parts where each plays a role in the whole. Given the connections, it is also true that in many cases, the ministry is only as strong as its weakest area - a sobering thought.

The corollary truth is that when we choose to ignore areas of weakness we actually hold the whole ministry hostage to those areas of weakness. A church may have quality ministries but if their small group ministry is weak (where this is the relational glue of the church) the whole ministry is weak because the back door remains open. Thus, this area of weakness impacts the rest of the ministry.

Generally staff have an opinion on where the weaknesses lie in any ministry. For years, an area of weakness was the intake process for our mission. If you don't catch dishealth at the front gate you must deal with it later and others pay the price. While the organization knew this was true, there was not a culture that made it OK to talk about the issue and so it went on and on. I spoke recently with someone who attends a church where the music leader is incompetent, will not listen to others, and is frankly terrible up front. No one dares push the issue and the church remains small and will probably stay that way because of this area of obvious weakness.

Healthy organizations have an ethos where areas of weakness can be identified and addressed. It is not about blaming people as the issue usually comes down to processes. Either way, however, if an area of weakness is present and is impacting other areas as they usually do, there must be a way to address it. And to address it there must be a way to talk about it. If there is not the very culture of the organization conspires against reformation.

One weak link in a chain compromises the whole chain. That is why any ministry is only as strong as its weakest link. 

Three transgressions of local church staff that hurt ministry effectiveness

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Symptoms of organizational non-alignment and signs of healthy alignment

The level of alignment within an organization is a direct indicator of its health, clarity and ultimately its ability to deliver on its mission. Thus it is worthwhile to consider symptoms of non-alignment as well as signs of healthy alignment. Think about the organization you lead or serve with as you consider these.

Symptoms of organizational non-alignment:

• There is little or no coordination of efforts between teams or ministries and often they do not know or care what others are doing.
• There is competition for resources and jockeying for position within the ministry and people guard their turf.
•  A common vocabulary is lacking.
• Active cooperation between teams and their leaders is rare or nonexistent.
• Members of various teams or divisions do their own thing without a cohesive ministry plan that everyone adheres to.
• Critical spirits and mistrust are common.

Signs of healthy alignment

• There is a common missional vocabulary that you hear from everyone in the organization.
• A great deal of interaction occurs between ministry leaders and team members as they pursue common goals, coordinate their efforts and actively support one another.
• Lone rangers (teams or leaders) don't exist and when they do occur, they are quickly brought into alignment and relationship with the whole.
• Rather than politics and turf guarding there is dialogue around issues and a concern for the health of the whole. 
• Teams and members speak well of one another in a highly collegial atmosphere.
• There is a high level of trust within the organization as a whole.
• Teams cooperate with one another, support one another and actively work together toward common objectives.

There is no doubt that alignment or the lack of it has a direct impact on the organizations culture and their ability to deliver on their mission. Which of these symptoms or signs describe the culture you work in?

It's not my job! Sometimes it is

There are many things in the organization I serve that are not my job - very many! 

Empowered ministry organizations don't get in the way of others or disempower them by doing what they should be doing unless there is a very good reason. That includes allowing others to make decisions you would not make and to learn from mistakes they might make. Much of what we learn in life is through our own "dumb tax."

Having said that, it is easy to so focus on what is our job that we neglect what is all of our jobs.

It is all of our jobs to see that what we do is integrated into the whole. My job does not live in isolation from others but must be part of a whole. That means that I have to think of the whole picture even as I concentrate on what I am responsible for.

It is all of our jobs to care about what is best for the ministry as a whole. What is best for me and my division is never the question. What is best for the ministry as a whole is always the question and my decisions must be made in light of the whole.

It is all of our jobs to be in alignment with one overall mission. I don't have my own mission but am a part of a common mission. Too often ministries are made up of sub ministries with their own mission leaving the overall mission hostage to multiple missions without an overall focus.

It is all of our jobs to do what we need to do to see the ministry succeed. If my part of the ministry flourishes but the ministry itself does not, I have not been successful. It is when the ministry flourishes that we are together successful. 

It is all of our jobs to engage in the kind of dialogue that will help the ministry get to where it needs to go. I cannot hunker down and stay silent on issues that impact the ministry. I am responsible along with other leaders to see the whole, care about the whole and discuss those issues that impact the whole.

You see a trend here? There are some things that are our jobs. There are many things that are all of our jobs. You may want to have a conversation with your teams as to what is everyone's job.

What characterizes great ministry organizations?

All of us desire to be part of a great organization. Who wants mediocre or average? A great organization can be a small local church, a large ministry or anything in between. But they are characterized by five key elements.

First, they have great clarity about what they are about and they focus on that clarity with a lazer like focus. Great organizations are not scattered but highly focused. That focus allows them to go after specific results and know when they have achieved their goals. Everyone in the organization is aligned around that focus and those goals. Great organizations are not distracted by all the things they could be doing but focused on the few things they must be doing.

Second, great organizations treat their staff well. They hire the best, compensate the best they can and empower staff to use their gifts and energies to achieve the goals without micromanaging. Staff morale is a significant marker of the health of any organization. 

No matter how strategic a ministry is, or how driven to meet their goals, if they do not treat staff well, develop them and have a high retention rate, one cannot claim to be a great organization. Staff culture and health is a major indicator of the true health of the organization. 

I recently stayed in a hotel in Kenya where I interacted with many staff. I asked all of them how they liked working for their organization and to a person they told me how happy they were with the General Manager and the empowered atmosphere he had created. At the end of two weeks I knew that this was a great organization just from watching and interacting with the staff. Staff culture reveals the true DNA of any organization.

Third, great organizations are team led and driven. The strongest organizations have strong leaders and strong teams. Teams provide far more synergy, energy and creativity than any one leader. Further, if that leader was to be hit by the proverbial "bus" there are others who can step in and continue on. Any organization that is dependent on one key leader is unlikely to be a great organization. The creation and deployment of teams is indicative of a collegial and empowered atmosphere.

Fourth, great organizations are always developing the next generation of leaders. I believe that the test of our leadership is not simply what happens when we are leading but what happens after we leave. Did we leave the organization stronger then when we came? Did we leave behind the next generation of leaders who could take the ministry to the next level? A culture of leadership development is a sign of a great organization. In making this a priority we are committing to the long term health of the organization rather than simply short term success.

Fifth, great organizations are led by humble, intentional leaders. This applies not only to the top leadership role but all the leadership roles within the ministry. Humble leaders create a culture of dependence on God and collegial work, knowing that life is not about them. Humble leaders create opportunities for others and develop others. Humble leaders are open and approachable. Humble leaders serve others rather than use others. Pride is incompatible with Christian leadership.

Core ministries, ancillary ministries and focus

I recently had a conversation with a ministry where I asked what was truly "core" and "central" to what they did? They looked at me with confusion and said "everything."  So I went at it a different way and asked, "If you had half of the money you now have, what ministries would stay and which would go?" Their answer to that question got them on the road to identifying what was truly core and central and what was in fact ancillary.


Scarce resources are often the thing that force us to make the choice between core and ancillary. When you have to choose you have to make decisions as to what is truly central and what is not.


Here is the truth. For most ministries, there are core and ancillary sub ministries. Knowing the difference is critical because the majority of your time, energy and budget should be focused on the core, not the ancillary. Furthermore, you need to know what is core and central and what is nice but non-essential.


One of Steve Job's upsides as a leader is that when he returned to Apple for the second time, he helped them focus on a few core products and shed what was ancillary. He knew that the organization could not deliver excellence over a broad number of products. He ruthlessly shut down what was not central and they focused on the few products that have made Apple a very wealthy company today.


Ministries pick up all sorts of ancillary activities like a duster picks up dust. New stuff sticks all the time, often diminishing the core ministries as energy and focus is spread ever thinner. Disciplined organizations are very clear about what is core and central and they resist the temptation to add new and novel ministries that might be good for someone but are not core for them. 


Here are some important questions to be able to answer with your ministry team:
1. What is central and core to what we do and what is ancillary?
2. Do the central and core ministries get the energy, focus and resources they should get?
3. Are there ancillary ministries that are diminishing our attention to the core ministries?
4. Do we need to refocus around our core ministries and shed what is ancillary?

Sustaining vision for the long run

We all know that vision leaks - which is why many ministries that thought they had a common vision wake up one day and discover that it is no longer true. 


Almost every ministry leader has vision - and believes that everyone in his/her organization know that vision. But ask around and in many cases what the leader thinks others know is not so. Or, they may tell you, it is the leader's vision, not theirs. Shared vision is evident when everyone in the organization can tell you where the ministry is headed.


Every ministry faces the question, "How do we sustain our vision for the long run?" 


It starts with having a God sized and God given vision in the first place. People are not captivated by small dreams but God sized dreams. When we have a vision that is larger than us and which can only be accomplished through God's power, and which significantly contributes to His purposes, it is a powerful thing.


There are many pseudo visions in ministry that have more to do with buildings and expansion and personal success than they do with reaching people for Jesus or true life transformation. Here, vision is used to achieve the ends of a leader rather than to serve the cause of Christ. Real vision has everything to do with the expansion of God's Kingdom on earth (Thy Kingdom come, thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven), not the expansion of our kingdom on earth. When vision is about Him it motivates. When vision is about us, it manipulates.


Real vision is a shared vision. It makes sense to the group who will carry it out and as a group they are committed to seeing it happen. It may start with a leader (Nehemiah) but it must become shared by the entire organization. 


Vision must be able to be communicated clearly and concisely in ways that everyone can get it. Memorability of vision matters a lot. Long vision documents are never remembered but simple, understandable vision that is repeated time and again will be.


Every vision needs an evangelist who not only deeply believes in what God is calling their organization to do but is constantly communicating that call. You cannot over communicate vision but the fact that most organizations don't have a common vision is proof that you can under communicate. All leaders in the organization should be evangelists for where God is calling the ministry. If they are not, you don't have a shared vision.


Prayer around one's vision is a critical factor because if the vision is from God, spending time in His presence, asking for his empowerment to make the vision a reality changes our hearts and gives us a resolve and commitment that comes from Him.


Vision means nothing without results. Communicating those results encourages people to keep pressing forward. Vision without tangible results creates cynicism, as it rightly should. Celebrate the wins as they come. And, organize your time, energy and resources so that they are all contributing to seeing the accomplishment of your vision.


As you think about the vision of your organization, compare it to these markers of sustaining vision for the long run. How are you doing?

Ministry promises

Organizations make promises. We make them when we hire. We make them when we talk about our organization. We make them when we communicate to our donors. We make them when we talk to our staff. We make them in our policies. If we preach, we make them in our messages. 


Staff members hear those promises whether they are implicit or explicit and they respect us when we keep them and grow cynical when we don't. Above all they expect us to be serious about the promises we make. As they should.


When we say "People are our most valuable asset" but don't develop them, empower them or treat them with dignity and respect our actions do not live up to our promises. If we talk about integrity but leaders do not display it in decisions they make we don't live up to our promises.


One of my deepest fears when we bring new staff into our organization is that they will find themselves in a situation where what we promise in our "sandbox" will not be what they find. In fact, at our recent bi annual leadership team meeting we spent the whole week discussing where we were in living out the promises and commitments of our sandbox (mission, guiding principles, central ministry focus and culture). It was a "check/adjust" to ensure that we deliver on our promises.


Staff do not expect perfection but they do expect that we are consistent in keeping our promises to the best of our ability and where there are gaps working to close them. They need to know that we are serious about becoming who we say we aspire to be.


A simple way to know how well we are doing is to have honest dialogue with staff about how they perceive we are doing. Of course this means that we are able to receive that feedback with appreciation rather than defensiveness. Staff can give a perspective that leaders often do not see.


Think about the promises you or your organization makes implicitly or explicitly and evaluate how you are doing. The good thing is that there is always room for improvement.

Three questions regarding your mission

Every good organization has a mission statement. In a really good organization everyone knows the mission statement. It's like a law of the Medes and Persians, you have to have one so we all do. I have helped many organizations develop theirs. So here are three questions regarding the mission statement of your ministry.


First, do you believe in your mission statement? I mean passionately believe that what your mission states is what your organization is called to do. 


Second, how would you honestly evaluate how your ministry is doing in fulfilling that mission? My observation is that there are often massive disconnects between many mission statements and real results. I realize that mission statements are by definition long view statements but nonetheless, what grade would you honestly give the organization you are a part of for results on that mission? Often, the organization is not even configured to actually fulfill the mission except in very general or tangential ways. 


Third, what would it take in organizational realignment to actually deliver well on your mission? Think of a mission as a big arrow pointing in a specific direction. Then think about every part of your organization or ministry and ask whether all the subsidiary arrows are pointed in the same direction as the mission or whether there are many arrows pointed in other directions - doing nice things but not directly contributing to the big arrow.


Now let me go back to question one. Many organizations that have a mission are not really passionate about that mission even when they say they are. How do I know? They are not willing to align all parts of the organization so that all the arrows go in the same direction as the mission. That is when you know the organization - and leadership is passionate. Multi directional arrows are not about mission alignment or fulfillment. 


Missions are meaningless unless the whole organization is truly aligned around that mission. 

Empowered Structures

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


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


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


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


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


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

Subjective and objective organizational clarity

One of the most frustrating paradigms for staff to work under is subjective clarity. This is organizational clarity that exists in the mind of a leader rather than clearly defined on paper clear with staff. With subjective clarity, in order to know what is acceptable or not, what directions to pursue or strategies that are "OK" one needs to talk to the leader. The organizational clarity is essentially what is acceptable to them but since it is not spelled out one either must ask permission or forgiveness after the fact (if they get it wrong).


Subjective clarity by definition means that one has a permission withholding culture in the organization. One cannot move forward without the permission of the leader since we cannot read his/her mind. If you get it wrong there is often the duplication of effort as you must go back to redo what was previously done, but this time in the way the leader desires. Subjective clarity is a moving target that disempowers staff, makes the leader a bottle neck in decisions, allows him/her to micromanage and frankly is the sign of either a poor or immature leader.


Objective clarity is clarity that is clearly defined for all staff, understood by staff and is the "measure" they go back to when thinking about what they do and how they do what they do. It is clarity around things like mission, guiding principles, central ministry focus and culture with commonly held definitions of what they mean and how they are articulated. 


This takes the organizational clarity out of the subjective realm of the leader's mind and puts it in an objective form that all can go back to for direction, guidance and decision making. With objective clarity, one moves to a permission granting organization where staff can move forward without constantly consulting their leader because they know what the ground rules are. In addition, the how of what they do is largely left up to them as long as they achieve the mission of the organization.


There are many organizations who do not yet operate with objective clarity. This is especially true in the church where the senior pastor has whatever subjective clarity he has in his head and staff must go through him on all major initiatives. It works, to a point, but it is permission withholding and it disempowers staff. Getting to a commonly held clarity is a far better route to take and attracts much better long term staff. They know what the mission is and what the non negotiables are.


If you are in the subjective side, make the transition to the objective side. Subjective clarity is actually not clarity. It is simply the thinking of one person at the time they are asked. It is arbitrary and inconsistent. 


If you need more information on getting to clarity, Leading From the Sandbox, chapters two, three and four are focused on that topic.