A common leadership trap: Adding without subtracting

As leaders grow they take on new responsibilities. Often however, they fall into a common leadership trap by not jettisoning other activities to make space for the new. You cannot add without also subtracting! If you do, margin disappears and the quality of what you do is not what it should be. 


Regardless of our abilities we all have a finite amount of time and energy. We choose what we place in that available time and energy. But once full it is full. To put something new in requires that we take something old out. For something new to grow, something old must die, or be passed on to others.


Why do we hold on when we should let go? We know how to do something and may be very good at it. We may not like to disappoint people who want our time or attention. We may not be good at saying no. Or we enjoy doing it. Whatever the reason, to put something new in requires that we take something old out. 


This is actually the price of personal growth. Without taking on something new we don't grow. So the price of growth is to let go of other things that we have already mastered. As we grow in new areas our effectiveness also grows. The cost is giving something else up. You cannot effectively add without also subtracting.


What do you need to subtract?

Retaining great staff and dealing with their leaving

The quality of the staff we lead is everything in terms of the success of the organization. Two questions regularly present themselves with great staff. How do we retain them and how do we deal with them should they choose to leave. 

I believe that one of our primary responsibilities with staff is to help them develop all the God given potential they have. This means mentoring and coaching, giving them opportunities to grow, ensuring that they are in their "lane" and are using all of their potential. I regularly ask my key staff, "what is your happiness factor?" I am looking for a number on a scale of 1 to 10 and if it is a seven or less I will ask follow up questions to clarify what it is that is causing them to be lower than I would want on the scale. 

This can open up conversations about personal or home issues, or issues on the job: boredom, needing a new challenge, needing a larger platter, desiring to go to the next level and so on. It gives me the opportunity to evaluate options with an individual to re-motivate and sometimes reposition. 

But developing staff comes with another price. When we do the right thing, we may actually develop them out of the organization when their growth leaves them ready for a greater challenge. Perhaps a challenge that we cannot offer. This is where our commitment to wanting our staff to use all their gifts in the greatest possible way meets the real world.

Selfishly we desire that they stay. Unselfishly we must hold them with an open hand - they are not ours - but God's and ultimately we must want what is best for them and be willing to trust them and the Holy Spirit to sort that out. I actually ask my staff members to let me know if they are looking at something else. Some do and some don't but if they do, it allows me to explore their reasons for thinking of leaving, to affirm their gifts, explore options but most of all communicate that we want the best for them and if that is leaving us we will bless them and help them in the process. It can be personally painful but I am convinced that it is the Jesus attitude and that in blessing them, we do the Jesus thing.

We are stewards of our staff on a temporary basis. I desire former staff to look back at their experience with ReachGlobal and say, they cared for me, they developed me, they encouraged me and they held me with an open hand. If they can say that, I am a happy leader.

This is about a spirit of generosity. Selfish leaders want to control staff. Unselfish and generous leaders want the very best for staff and are willing to trust them and the Holy Spirit's leading when it is time to leave.

A vision without a workable strategy is an hallucination

Vision is a funny thing. Lots of people (and leaders) have vision but many cannot deliver on that vision because they cannot develop a realistic strategy that will allow them to accomplish the vision. That is why a vision without a workable strategy is hallucination: an unfulfillable dream, a false hope and an empty promise. 


The problem with this is that vision usually comes from leaders and leaders have followers and staff. It is staff who have to live with the unmet dreams of their leaders and the implications of chasing a vision that they know is a foolish dream. I remember a leader I once worked for who hired a staff member to accomplish a specific task that was vital to the organization. 


As I listened to the vision of that new staff member and his strategy for how he would accomplish it I knew in my heart that "this dog won't hunt" but I was not in a position to do or say much as I was lower in the organizational chain and this was a senior level hire of a senior level executive. Nor was I asked my opinion.


In this case we wasted three years of effort, built a staff we had to eventually let go and lost one million dollars in the process. And I had to pick up the pieces when it fell apart and the staff member was let go. Not only did we pay huge "dumb tax" for the foolish expectations and their results but the senior leader lost great credibility in the eyes of his staff for leading us down a path that resulted in organizational damage and could have been avoided. The Walter Mitty vision of the senior leader was an hallucination.


It is not that this leader (the one who hired) and the staff member (the one who was hired) did not have a strategy to reach their vision. Their problem was that it was not a workable strategy. It was built on false assumptions, optimistic rather than realistic thinking which did not even move the ball down the field a bit but rather went the wrong direction entirely.


How does one avoid moving mistaking vision for dreams or hallucinations? A key is not to develop vision by oneself. Senior leaders should work the visioning process with other senior staff who must help deliver on the vision. That includes a reasonable, workable strategy for how the organization will accomplish its vision. Usually that will mean changes in the current paradigm or strategy that the organization is using. After all, the current paradigm got you to where you are but was not designed to get you to where you need to go next. 


That raises the question of whether the organization and its leaders are ready and willing to refocus their efforts, personnel and resources toward the accomplishing of the new vision? Adopting a new vision without refocusing the organization toward that new vision is also an hallucination. Refocusing may well mean that some staff who were key in the past will need to be let go in order to accomplish the new. It may well mean that other staff will need to be refocused and even organizational structures changed to meet the needs of a new vision and a new day. It is a grave mistake to assume that your current ministry paradigm will get you to a new vision and the next level.


Here are the kinds of questions that need to be addressed if a vision is going to be more than a dream:

• Is this a realistic vision and is it the right vision for us as an organization?
• Do we have buy in from senior staff toward a new vision and what is our plan to create a guiding coalition within the organization to move in a new direction?
• Do we have a realistic and workable plan to accomplish the vision?
• What are the unintended consequences of moving in our new direction?
• How do we need to restructure staff, budgets or organizational structure to focus on the new vision?
• How will we know if we are being successful and how do we monitor progress?

Vision is a wonderful and necessary element of leadership. But, a vision without a workable strategy is simply a hallucination.

Are you beautifully equipped to deal with a world that no longer exists?

Eric Hoffer puts his finger on a critical truth when the world in which we live is in significant change.  “In times of change, learners inherit the earth, while the learned find themselves beautifully equipped to deal with a world that no longer exists.” 

One of the central jobs of a leader is not to specialize in what is today but to anticipate what will be tomorrow. It is to live in the present and the future at the same time knowing that the present will soon be history and the future will soon be today.

Take the US Postal Service which is hemorrhaging red ink as people send far fewer letters. The day the first fax was sent was the day that the Postal Service became obsolete. But no one noticed. Today they are begging junk mailers to send more stuff because the rest of us are using email. They are beautifully equipped to deal with a world that no longer exists.

Or think of the evangelism strategies of most local churches which assume that people who don't know Christ will come to our church and find Him through some program. For the most part that world no longer exists but the church has not yet noticed. While we are beautifully equipped to put on programs that share the gospel at church the people we want to reach are less and less likely to come to church! The future is going to where people are who need Jesus, not expecting them to come to us - but the church continues to be blissfully unaware that it is bringing the gospel to every sector of life and work that is the key to evangelism.

The most beautifully equipped institutions to deal with a world that no longer exists are seminaries who continue to sell us on the idea that one cannot minister effectively without their education which entails sitting at the feet of the professors for four years. In the meantime many of the most effective workers today are being raised up in the context of ministry, are getting their education on the job and are not infected with the traditional ministry paradigms that still drive the church world. But try to get ordained in most denominations without a seminary education! We have professionalized ministry but the future is the releasing of people into ministry who are called, creative and equipped but not necessary in traditional ways. It almost sounds like the New Testament church!

I work in the world of missions where the whitewater of change is huge. As a group, western missions are beautifully equipped to deal with a world that no longer exists. Today it belongs to those who are equippers of indigenous workers, rather than those who are still doing what nationals could be doing better than they. 

If you lead anything, one needs to be living in the present and the future simultaneously or run the real risk of becoming museum pieces beautifully equipped to deal with a world that no longer exists. Learners inherit the earth. Learners are those who are paying close attention to the changing environment and are adapting to that change. Learners know that the status quo is not static for long and that tomorrows realities will be different than today's. There are plenty of people who are beautifully equipped to deal with today's realities. Leaders are learners who are equipped to anticipate the needs of tomorrow which will be today all too soon.

TED talk at the Mission Exchange on critical shifts that need to take place in the mission world today

Recently, I had the opportunity to talk to US based mission leaders on the critical shifts that must take place in the mission world today.

You can access both my talk as well as others here.

The world has changed and mission agencies must change if they are going to survive and thrive in the globalized color world.

Endings in our lives are normal

We tend to do beginnings much better than we do endings! But just as beginnings are a normal part of life, so are endings. Something must end before something else can begin. It may be a relationship that has run it's course, a job that has been miserable for years or maybe a termination that is long overdue. It may be a personal obligation that we have had for years and it is time to move on.

I am challenged by a new book by Henry Cloud called "Necessary Endings" where he seeks to normalize the endings in our lives, help us to see them as necessary as beginnings and to do endings as well as we do beginnings. Something must end before something else can begin. Somehow, however, we find endings far more difficult than beginnings.

Too often we see endings as negative when they are just a part of our lives. Not only that but they are the precursor to better things in many instances. I once resigned a job feeling like a failure. That ending was the best thing that could ever have happened to me as the situation was destroying me from the inside out. It opened up opportunities that I never would have had if I had stayed. I need not have agonized about "failing." It was a necessary ending and truly a gift.

I currently know leaders who need to end a relationship with someone on their staff but they cannot pull the trigger in spite of the fact that the staff member is in the wrong place and causing a drag on the ministry. Somehow they feel that it "would be too painful" to do end the relationship. Yet, that necessary ending is normal - and needed - and would open up opportunities for the staff member in the wrong role and the ministry that needs a new beginning.

Endings are obviously more challenging because of the emotional investment we have made over a period of time. Endings mean that we have to let go, move on, turn our attention to a new thing and be OK with the letting go. That takes a certain amount of maturity, intentionality and discipline to do well. The past can be celebrated but our attention, focus and emotions must move toward a new beginning - leaving the old behind. Imagine how Abraham would have fared if he had continually longed to be back to Ur after God told him to go to Canaan, necessitating an ending (Ur) and a new beginning (Canaan). The leaving was a necessary ending to the blessing he would receive by doing so. I cannot imagine it was easy.

Things run their course in our lives. And in order for something new to begin there must be and ending. I love my job but one day there will be an ending and how well I handle it will determine how well I move to a new beginning.

If you are struggling with a necessary ending, pick up a copy of Henry Cloud's book. He helps us think through a transition that is hard for all of us - but necessary - and the prelude to a new beginning. Endings are not bad. They are necessary.

When ministries need to change

Many ministries have not kept up with the changes in today's world. This includes many churches but it is especially true in the mission world where I work. In many organizations radical change is needed.

A common response when faced with the need to change is to start tweaking the current paradigm. Tweaking is "fear based change." We are so afraid to rock the boat significantly that we hope we can tweak our way out of our predicament. It never works. Change requires new paradigms in how we think and new ways of delivering on our mission. Furthermore, talking change but making tweaks tells the whole staff that leadership is not truly committed to change so they can keep their heads down and continue to do what they have always done.

A similar response is that of incremental change. Going in the right direction but slowly. At the pace of change in our world today, those who move slowly will find themselves in the same place they currently are as change in our environment outpaces our ability to respond.

Another observation. Ministries are often unwilling to bring in an outside facilitator to help in the change process or to bring in new leadership from the outside. The sub culture they have created is not friendly to those coming from the outside with new ideas and new ways of thinking. This is an absolute killer of any real change because it leaves one locked into the very culture that must change if the organization is going to change. I am watching several ministry organizations right now wrestling with needed changes but until they bring in someone from outside their insular culture there is no chance that it will happen.

Often the leaders who brought an organization to where it is today cannot take it to where it needs to go tomorrow. But until boards and current leaders face that reality they will not move forward. Sometimes courageous choices need to be made and leadership or board changes need to take place if we want to re-invision the organization for its next run. Remember that while we always honor people, our stewardship of the ministry requires us to do the right thing for the ministry even if it means changes in staff. That is the real world. Do it graciously but don't be afraid to do it.

The issue of leadership courage is huge in change. Leading change is a tough business. People resist, some get nasty, change is messy, personnel changes must take place which can be hard, arrows come! It is the nature of change. Organizations that desire to change but who don't have a leader who can effectively lead the change will lose. In addition that leader must be able to articulate the new realities and vision so that people have clarity on where they are going even if they don't like the white waters of change.

If you know your organization needs significant change ask yourself these questions. Do we have clarity on what the future should look like? Do we have a leader who can take us there? Do we need to bring key staff in from the outside? Do we have the courage to let people go who no longer fit? Do we have the resolve to see this through? Are we willing to make radical paradigm shifts to get us to where we need to be?

Redemptive responses to problematic staff

In spite of our best efforts to hire well, there are times when a staff member's behavior or interactions with others cause problems on a team. Often it is not a matter of competency but of not being aware of how their words, attitudes or actions negatively impact those around them. Or, they may have a personal ministry agenda that is dear to them but which does not fit with the rest of the team or the overall ministry. Sometimes it is an issue of a wonderful staff member who fit the ministry when the ministry was smaller but as the ministry grew their ability to keep up has lagged and their competency in a small ministry has become a liability in a larger ministry. This is not only an issue for the leader who may be frustrated but it can also become an issue for other members of the team who are also impacted.

Being redemptive wherever we can be is consistent with the character and example of Christ. Healthy ministries will do all they can to resolve the disconnects before they simply fire someone or let them go. A redemptive response can take several routes.

First, honest dialogue with the staff member in question is key. Often in ministries, we are not upfront with issues that are present because we want to be graceful. But in not engaging in honest, candid dialogue the staff member is left with a frustrated leader and team without necessarily knowing how their behavior or work is negatively impacting others. Speaking the truth in love in a dialogue form where there is give and take and the opportunity to clarify gives the staff member valuable information on the issues. This should include bottom line concerns of their supervisor along with behaviors or issues that need to change.

If the issue is one of competency in their present role there should be exploration of other posssible roles that are in "the lane" and "gifting" of the staff member. When staff are in the wrong lane they are frustrated and frustrate others. Often the issue can be resolved by getting them into a lane more in line with God's gifting and their wiring.

Where the issue revolves around EQ (emotional intelligence) it sometimes takes an outside executive coach who can help the staff member understand how their behaviors negatively impact those around them. Lack of EQ is one of the most common causes of problematic behavior and if it can be resolved the issues will dissapear. This means that we are willing to make a financial and time investment to help a staff member get to greater health but that is a far cheaper (and more redemptive) proposition than simply firing them and starting over. I will do all I can to resolve issues with staff before letting them go. But if the issues cannot be resolved I will not prolong the pain for the organization.

Where issues of competency or EQ cannot be resolved, it is clear that a transition needs to be made and even then redemptive thinking asks the question, "How do we make a transition that honors the staff member and the organization?" Of course, that requires the active cooperation of the staff member to transition well and in ways that do not do harm to the ministry. I have always believed that how we leave a ministry is the real test of our character. If we honor it on the way out, God will bless. If we try to hurt it because of our anger, God will not. As a leader I cannot control the response of the staff member but I can seek a redemptive and smooth transition.

Any time we can bring health to an unhealthy staff situation we have a win. When we cannot, the win is transition. But in all cases we seek to do it as redemptively as possible.

What are you doing to intentionally raise up the next generation of leaders?

Every church, every mission, every ministry is one leadership generation (and that is not a long time) away from decline if we are not deeply intentional about raising up the generation who come behind us. In fact, I believe that our leadership stewardship is not primarily about what happens when we are in leadership, but when we are gone and the long term fruit of our work is either evident or not. And that means that we have paid attention to the sucession to the next generation of leaders in our ministry.

For church boards this often means taking the risk (in the eyes of current board members) to mentor and bring on young leaders who think differently and come with a different perspective than older leaders. And, making them welcome at the leadership table.

For churches with long term pastors who are now in their late fifties or early sixties, it may mean bringing on the next senior pastor and making a transition over a period of years so that the pastoral transition is planned and smooth. The larger the congregation the more helpful this is. It is a change in paradigm from simply waiting until the present senior pastor retires and then hiring someone completely new to the church. That obviously takes a selfless and unthreatened current senior pastor who is willing to share leadership for a period of time and then transition to the new leader as he transitions to either retirement or a different position in the church.

The issue of next generation leadership is particularly critical in mission organizations where my observation is that there is an aging leadership group and where leadership is often given to those who have long experience regardless of whether they have leadership skills or not. Mission organizations today are in a vulnerable position as the world is changing rapidly around them and unless they also change many current missions are going to find themselves in serious decline. I was surprised recently when one large and well known mission replaced its retiring CEO with an individual who was almost his age - as if it needed to guard the status quo rather than embrace the future.

Raising up the next generation of leaders in ministry does not happen without a passion to pass the torch well, to see the ministries we lead flourish and do even better when we are gone and a plan to bring new, younger leaders into key positions with the requisite mentoring and training to help them succeed. Any current leader over fifty ought to be thinking succession even as they continue to lead. Boards of ministries ought to be talking about this issue as well on an ongoing basis as they are stewards of the ministry.

This does not apply only to senior leaders but the the leadership bench throughout an organization. I know, for instance, a new senior pastor of a large church who inherited almost an entire staff of fifty five plus pastors who are locked into two decade old ministry paradigms. He must go through the painful process of bringing on a whole new set of leaders because the board and past senior pastor did not address the issue of leadership succession, or even keep their current staff growing and changing as the ministry grew.

The question for leaders is three fold: What are we doing to raise up the next generation of leaders througout the organization?; Who will replace us? and what are we doing to keep our current leadership staff on the cutting edge and not allowing them to coast toward retirement?

When does one know their job is done?

Nothing lasts forever but often we treat our job as if it does. In the business world this often comes with a rude awakening when someone else tells us that our job is finished. In the ministry world that is less true but all of us need to be aware that we serve for a season in the role we are in and there comes a time when transition is healthy. The question is, how do we know when that is?

The board/supervisor check: This is where we start getting signals from our board or supervisor that we should perhaps think about transition. Take those signals seriously and engage your supervisor or board in dialogue around them. It is not unusual for boards or supervisors to try to communicate in a gentle way that it is time, but for people not to hear. Even if one disagrees with the sentiment, the issue has been raised and needs to be addressed so that it is not "the elephant in the room." The bottom line is that it is hard to serve without the support of one's supervisor or board so entering into conversation rather than ignoring it is critical.

The gut check: I have accomplished what I set out to do. Some of us came into our roles with a vision of what needed to be accomplished and there comes a day when it is. The question then becomes, has God given me a new vision for the next run or having accomplished what I came to accomplish is it time to look for a new role (whether in the same organization or not)? 

The boredom check: Boredom is a sign that we are not in the right role anymore and we either need to reinvent our role or look for another role that will utilize all whom God made us to be. I was once in that place. I did the job well and no one was complaining but I was bored which was a sign that I had outlasted my shelf life in that role. When our heart is no longer in what we are doing, no matter how good we can do it, it is time to move on.

The next level check: If one is a leader, as I am, there are periodic and predictable moments when the organization or team must be re-envisioned for the next run. When leaders cannot figure out what that looks like and what the organization needs to do in the next phases of ministry it is time to step aside and allow a new leader to take over. 

This is a tough reality for senior leaders. Once they have exhausted their ability to take the ministry to the next level one is left in maintenance mode which over time will send the ministry into a holding pattern which leads eventually to decline. Unfortunately this happens at a stage when the senior leader is often going to find it hard to find another similar job (the age thing) so the tendency is to stay too long at the expense of the ministry. This is often where boards step in because they realize that the lack of energy or ability to take the ministry to the next level threatens that health of the ministry and they may pull the trigger themselves. It is healthier for the senior leader to make that decision rather than to be removed by their board. Once I cannot clearly articulate the next run for the ministry my leadership is effectively over. It is not a failure, it is simply that my job is done. When a ministry outgrows us it is a good thing and reflects well on our stewardship in that growth. When we hang on too long and retard that growth it is a bad thing and reflects poorly on us.

One real option senior leaders have if they find themselves in this situation and desire to stay is to engage a competent executive coach to help them think through the relevant issues and figure out how they take the organization to the next level. This may mean that they have to work harder than they have ever worked because they are now moving into uncharged territory even for them. 


The Spirit check: Things may be going along well but the Spirit of God gives us this feeling that it is time to move on. This happened to one of my colleagues who had been with me 20 years. He could have been at our ministry till retirement but God was nudging him to move to something new. He took the risk and is doing amazing things globally. He listened to the Spirit and took a huge risk financially to follow. 


Nothing lasts forever when it comes to our job. Discernment as to when our time is finished and it is time for a transition is an important part of our stewardship both of our own lives and of the ministry we serve.

Bringing change to your organization

The need for change and greater missional effectiveness is huge both for congregations and ministry organizations. Too many ministries are living in the dusty pages of the past with the illusion that all is well when they are actually one generation from extinction or irrelevance. The greatest gift in these situations is a leader who will take the risk to seriously rock the boat and bring about fundamental change to both the thinking and practices of the ministry. Let's talk about the steps that are necessary for that to happen.

Create a crisis.
Unless people see a compelling need for change they generally will not go there. A change agent's job is first to shake the confidence of the organization by creating a crisis and making the case that unless something changes, there is no compelling future for the ministry. This is often done by being honest about the lack of results, the health of the ministry and the trend lines. Bringing truth to the surface has a way of creating great discomfort if that truth reveals significant fault lines. Because a hallmark of unhealthy ministries is that they live with the illusion that all is well, that illusion must first be publicly punctured with truth.

Bring a new clarity
As the crisis is being created, change agents also start to articulate a new clarity that creates an alternative to the status quo. What is must be balanced by what can and should be so that the truth of today's reality is offset by a hopeful alternative for tomorrow. There is no better way to do this than face to face, in conversation and group dialogue. One is not seeking to change the minds of the change resistant but to win the support of early adopters and reasonable people. You will not convince everyone, nor does one need to. You do have to convince enough people, however, to gain a coalition of the willing to move in a new direction.

Replace leaders
Inevitably deep change will require a new set of leaders. The leaders you have got you to where you are and it is unlikely that most of them will get you to where you need to go. In fact, most ministries that need change do not even value a true leadership culture where leaders lead. Often they value a management culture where nice people manage the status quo. So the challenge is really twofold, replace current leaders with true leaders who are fully aligned with you and create a leadership culture where leadership is valued and encouraged. But remember. Those who got you to here will almost never get you to there if you are bringing significant change.

Build healthy teams
All healthy ministry organizations are made up of healthy teams. So the next step is to intentionally build teams of people who will work synthetically with one another under good leadership with accountability for results. The lack of such teams is one of the contributing factors to an unhealthy organization. This is not an easy transition because in unhealthy ministries, people are not used to actually working with each other and what passes as a team is usually not a team at all. A great deal of attention is needed to coach and mentor team leaders who have not had such coaching or training in the past.

Focus everyone on the missional agenda
A lack of missional focus is one of the reasons that ministries flounder. Lack of clarity about what they are about, lack of good leadership to keep people focused, lack of teams to harness different gifts are all part of the equation. Change agents constantly keep staff focused on what really matters with an honest evaluation of results. Again, this is not an easy transition for people who have valued faithfulness above actual ministry fruit. 

Stay the course
Organizational change only comes when there is a dogged conviction that things must change and a leader who will do whatever it takes to see that change happens. Look for some wins along the way and celebrate but know that real change takes years, not months and the larger the organization, the longer it will take. It is not unusual for the change process to take five to ten years and it is not complete until a new DNA is so secure that the leader can leave and the change remains.

It can be a lonely job to be a change agent and it takes great wisdom to rock the boat without sinking the ship. Those who do so, however, are great gifts to the organization they serve. 

A test of character

How we leave our ministries when our time is up is a test of our character and emotional intelligence. One of the greatest gifts my predecessor gave to me was his absolute full support, commitment to pray for me every day and never to criticize my leadership – even though he knew that I would bring significant change – building on the gains he had made during his tenure. Because of his wholehearted support I felt free to ask Ben to serve as a Global Ambassador for the mission after his retirement. Ben demonstrated to me how to leave and I fully intend to follow the wonderful example he gave me.

Let’s be honest! What Ben did in his transition of leadership is hard. We pour ourselves into our role, we do our very best and then one day our time is up and we must humbly give to another something that is very precious, knowing that some things will now be different. It is far easier to be impressed with our own moves and success than the decisions and success of another.

Pastoral transitions are no different. We leave behind a web of long relationships and it is easy to subtly undermine our successor when we hear complaints from friends that things are not like they used to be – as they never will be. When we get pulled in after we leave, when we subtly criticize or even sympathize with our former parishioners we are guilty of sowing discord and division and we hurt the Bride. Humble and gracious leaders never hurt the Bride, or undermine their successor. Those who do, do so out of their own pride and insecurities.

Perhaps the most difficult transition and test of our character is when we leave because we are asked to leave. No matter how it happens, that hurts and our lower nature wants to bite back and hurt those who have hurt us. It is easy to do, it is commonly done and again it hurts the Bride. Sometimes it is to defend ourselves or our reputation. Yet, it never works to defend our own reputation. God can do that but we cannot as David says so well in Psalms 37 and 73. Furthermore, things do become clear in time. God has a way of redeeming even those things that are painful in the moment for His glory.

As a leader I have had on occasion needed to move people off of my staff. Sometimes, just because it was no longer a good fit as the nature of the organization changed. I have watched staff respond with great dignity, trusting God to go before them.  I have watched others leave in great anger and I have watched some act with dignity in public and sow discord behind the scenes. Each response is an indication of the true character of the staff member. When we intentionally hurt the ministry we worked for, we are hurting the ministry of Christ. 

My model is my predecessor Ben. He taught me how to both leave well and to support the one who takes up the baton when I am gone. I want to be their greatest cheerleader when that time comes.

How long should I stay?

It grieves me when a healthy pastor is saddled by a board that is weak, ineffective, unsupportive and continually critical. And the sad thing is that it only takes one or two malcontents on a board to infect the atmosphere of the whole board. I know how painful it can be – I have been there and I feel deeply for friends that are in that situation today.

The problem is greater than the discouragement that this brings to the senior leader as disunited boards usually infect the congregation with their lack of unity. So your own senior team of leaders is working against you and the health of the church when they cannot get their act together, act in unity, and support their pastor (I am assuming here a healthy pastor). No matter what a pastor does in a situation like this, he is continually undermined by the dishealth of the board because make no mistake that lack of health does not just stay at the board level.

What advice would I give a pastor who finds himself in this position? First, I would encourage them to be upfront with the board about how the board culture is impacting them and their ability to lead. Second, I would work through a book on healthy boards such as Larry Osborn’s Unity Factor or my High Impact Church Boards. Both books put the critical issues of board health on the table for discussion and give the board permission to police itself.

In particularly onerous situations it is often helpful to bring an outside individual who can help the board think through its culture and behavior and help the board develop a covenant of how they will work together. An outsider can say what others on the board often do not have the platform to articulate.

I would also ask myself the question about whether it is worth my time, energy and emotional health to stay in a situation where I don’t have the support of those from whom I need it the most – the board. I am convinced that churches get what they deserve when it comes to pastors. And it often comes down to the board/pastor relationship. There is a time to try to help the board get to health for the sake of the church and there is a time to conclude that you are not going to be the one who can do that and choose to move to a place where one can use their leadership and ministry gifts with the synergy of supportive leadership rather than the anchor of unsupportive leadership. 

Obviously we need the direction of the Holy Spirit in determining which course of action to take. But, many pastors in unhealthy situations stay too long and in the end are deeply hurt by unhealthy boards. That pain often takes years to heal. There are situations we cannot fix this side of heaven. Others might be able to lead in that situation but if we cannot, it is not worth compromising our family, our emotional health or our ministry opportunity by staying in a situation where we cannot lead from health. Remember only healthy leaders can create a healthy church. Unhealthy, divided, critical and dysfunctional leaders create the same in their church. Unless that is changed, even a healthy pastor cannot lead the church to health.

Having walked this path years ago, I would encourage pastors not to stay too long when their board is not healthy. Those who followed me in my situation faced the same situation I did for many years. That is the reality of church DNA. Unhealthy churches can become healthy but not without healthy leaders. They may choose their path of dysfunction. I want to work in a place where I can maximize my gifting and calling and that only happens if I have the support of leadership.

Restlessness

Twice in the past week I have had conversations with ministry leaders, one in their forties and one in their fifties who expressed a deep restlessness and significant boredom. Both are in good and secure ministries but knowing that their time is probably up for what they are currently doing.

Restlessness should not be ignored. It is a sign that some kind of transition is needed and it is often planted in our hearts by God so that we don't simply stay in our comfort zone but rather on the cutting edge of where He wants us to be. Those who ignore the restlessness often end up settling for the easy route in their latter years but not the route that would have yielded the most ministry impact.

Restlessnes does not necessarily mean it is time to leave (although it could) but it does meant that unless there is significant reformulation of what one is doing, the satisfaction and joy of work will be noticibly lesser than it should and could be. It is often a sign that we are not operating at our fullest capacity and that God wired us for more than we are currently doing.

Restlessness is a time to pray and explore new options for our ministries. It is also a time to find avenues of growth (boredome often means extra time on our hands) where we can grow and develop where we are as we wait for our next assignment. It is really a gift from God to get our attention that He has something more and better for us at this time of our lives and in the meantime, personal growth can prepare us for what comes next.

If you are restless, don't ignore it. Maybe it is just a stage of life. More likely, it is a divine nudge to either reformulate what you are doing or to consider a move where you can better play to all the strengths God gave you.

Organizational Gaps: Vision vs. Reality

Those who lead entrepreneurial ministries, or ministries going through change always face a challenge. It is the gap between the organizations vision for who they want to be and where they want to go and the reality of where they actually are.

A healthy organization's vision for itself is never full realized because as it becomes better at what it does the goal line continues to move. Thus the gap between vision and reality is always a reality for healthy organizations.

There are seven common responses to organizational change and to the gap between vision and reality. Understanding how people respond and why they respond the way they do can help leaders negotiate the whitewater of change and deal with the responses that follow from change and the space between current reality and desired future.

The continuum of responses runs from resistors to change to active evangelists of change.

Resisters. Resisters can come in two forms, active and passive. These are the people who don't like change, or are so vested in the past that they cannot envision the future - or don't want to. Active resisters are vocal about their opposition to the future being articulated. There are also passive resisters who pay lip service to the new future but do not bring their actions into alignment with it. They quietly rather than actively resist.

Cynics. Cynics choose to believe that there are ulterior motives behind the change being proposed. Typically, they are deeply cynical toward leadership and therefore transfer their cynicism toward the ideas that leaders propose. They will often see change as the flavor of the month and figure that given time the proposed changes will go away and the organization will go back to what it was. Cynics will often call attention to the gap between where a leader is calling the organization and where it is - using that gap as proof that the vision is either unattainable or foolish.

Loyal followers. These are individuals who like organizational clarity and who appreciate its articulation - whatever it is. They appreciate clear leadership and simply want to know what the direction is and they will follow that direction. While they will not necessarily promote change, they will gladly move in the direction that leaders propose, trusting those leaders in their direction.

Idealists. These are individuals who readily grab on to the vision of the future, embrace it, love it and expect that the organization will be there today. The up side is that they embrace the vision quickly. The down side is that they can easily become disillusioned and critical when change does not happen at the pace or in the way they desire. It is very difficult for idealists to be patient or accept gaps between vision and reality.

Realists. Realists understand both where the organization is trying to go and where it currently is. They understand the challenges of change, will not stand in the way of change and usually are not overly bothered by the gap.

Change agents. These individuals not only embrace the future, understand the past and present but they actively work all the time to close the gap between vision and reality. They take responsibility in their areas of influence and leadership to personally work on closing the gap. They are voices in the organization for the preferred future and work well with leaders who are the evangelists of change. In many ways, change agents are the guiding coalition for leaders seeking to bring change.

Evangelists for change. These are the leaders who are actively engaged in helping the organization move from reality to their preferred vision, and calling others to join them in the effort. They explain change, are architects of the new, and do all that they can to help move the organization from where it is to where it needs to go. They are deeply realistic about what is, deeply passionate about what must be and have the resolve to see the process through.

Two questions present themselves. First, where are you on this continuum in a change process and where are those around you? Understanding your position and that of others helps one understand the various responses to change and attitudes and actions related to change.

I have hit a wall! Help

Your ministry has grown and you are tired. You are no longer feeling the joy and enthusiasm you once did. You are peddling faster but still cannot keep up. The way you have done leadership does not seem to be working anymore.

If these apply to you and your situation and you feel like you have hit a wall understand that this is normal! It is not about you, it is about experiencing growth that has made the way you have done leadership as an organization outmoded. It is a symptom of a need for change that will allow you to breath again and help take your ministry to the next level.

At predictable levels of growth, walls are hit and one will keep hitting one's head against that wall until modifications are made to leadership. Hitting a wall simply means that you need to make some transitions.

Typically this will mean that as a leader you will need to refocus your work around a smaller number of focused areas. To put it another way, if you have been flying at ten thousand feet, you need to go to 20,000 feet and let someone else take over what you did at 10,000 feet. There will be a sense of loss but refocusing your work is critical to breaking through the wall.

This will mean helping your staff refocus their efforts as well so that some of what you used to do is done by others. They in turn will need to give some things away so that they can refocus their efforts as well.

Often decision making structures will need to be refined. Boards will often need to give staff the authority for day to day decisions so that they can focus on the overall ministry and looking toward the future. Staff configurations will often need to change with a smaller lead team at the top.

If you have hit a wall I have two suggestions. First talk to a leader who has worked through the transition you need to make and find a coach to help you rethink how you are leading and what your priorities are. Second, consider reading Leading From the Sandbox which deals with these kinds of transitions.

Whatever you do, don't assume that your situation is unique. It is not. Everyone in leadership faces these transitions if your ministry is growing. Be encouraged, you can get beyond the wall.

Leadership Transitions in the church

Senior leadership transitions are the most challenging time in the life of a church and negotiating them well is critical for the success of the new leader and for establishing a healthy foundation for a new ministry “run.” Where such a transition is done well it can provide the church with significant forward momentum. When it is done poorly it can take years to regain the desired momentum.

Congregations, boards and staff rarely understand the full ramifications of a senior leadership change, particularly when the church has a healthy history and there is excitement about the future. The tendency is to assume that the future will be similar to the past – only better! In reality, in some way, large or small, a great deal changes with the change in senior leadership. The church starts a new journey with a new leader, a refocused vision and five years in it will be a different church.

In the same way, new senior leaders rarely understand the full scope of the challenge ahead of them even in the healthiest transition. They inherit a staff that they did not build, spoken and unspoken values that are part of the church’s DNA, a desire for new vision but at the same time stakeholders in the old vision, and often to their surprise, resistance to change simply because of the built in bias against change among people in general.

This is complicated by the fact that whenever a church must re-in vision for the next ministry “run,” there is a refocus of ministry with the inevitable need to evaluate current ministry paradigms and current staff. Hard decisions will need to be made on both counts that will require ministry and staff changes to some degree – often a greater degree than is anticipated at the time of transition.

The critical period for a leadership transition in a church is the first twelve to eighteen months where the foundation for the next ministry run is being established. The church will experience significant change! The question is whether the change process can be navigated in a way that enhances its opportunities for the future or alternatively, complicates and prolongs the time it will take to get to those future opportunities.

If the incoming leader has not managed a major transition before it is very helpful to use an experienced coach who can help them navigate the inevitable change process. That may be another pastor who has negotiated a similar transition in a healthy manner or an outside consultant. A coach can help the new leader, the board and senior staff understand the issues they will face from a neutral and non-stakeholder perspective.

Transitions can be a wonderful time of envisioning and retooling for the next run - as long it is handled with care so that momentum is gained rather than lost due to transitional issues that are handled poorly. The former launches the church into a new future, the latter can cause momentum and opportunity to be lost.

Weak staff links

What happens when you have a staff team but one of the members of the team does not function at the level of other members on the team? You know you have a weak link.

Weak links on a team come in a number of forms. They may not have the capacity others have. They may not be team players. They may lack relational EQ. Or, they may not be in philosophical alignment with the leader, the team or the organization. In the later two cases they may be in fact very competent but a weak link nonetheless.

There are four options in dealing with weak links:

One: Ignore the issue

This often happens because of the desire to avoid conflict. Actually, however, this creates more conflict than it avoids. Weak links - for any of the reasons above - put a strain on both the team and the organization and it is a constant frustration and irritation.

Other team members often hold the team leader accountable for not dealing with the problem that they all have to live with. Weak links pull down the rest of the team in a negative fashion. While ignoring the issue is the easy way out, in the end it is a very foolish thing to do.

Two: Place the weak link on a development plan

This is a proactive approach where you clearly articulate the issues to the staff member involved, tell them what needs to change if they are going to be successful on the team and then put in writing a clear description of the above. Development plans always mean tighter supervision for a time to see whether the individual can up their game in the needed area.

Make sure that you document the issues and the plan along with timelines to determine whether progress is being made. In the event you need to use option four below you want to ensure that you have been fair, are legal and have done due process.

Three: Move the weak link to a position where they are no longer the weak link

It is possible that the individual is either out of their skill set or playing at a level to high for them to play at. This option should only be considered if there are not attitudinal, relational, or philosophical problems. In that case go directly to the fourth option!

Four: Move the weak link out of your organization

If option two or three have not worked, or if the individual has a fatal flaw (character, competency, relational or philosophical) which makes it impossible for them to function as healthy staff members in your organization bite the bullet and do what you need to do to transition them out.

Not to do so is to hurt the organization, its mission and the remaining staff. If supervisors or boards cannot make those tough calls they are in the wrong job and should let someone else lead.

Transitioning someone out of the organization should be done legally (talk to an HR person), with grace, with generosity as you are able and with honor but it must be done if you are going to take your ministry to the next level. We honor people but we always do what is best for the ministry.

Passing the baton

Leadership transitions are frought with peril. Four years ago when I was named the Executive Directior of ReachGlobal, my predecessor gave me a great gift. He made it exceedingly clear that the role was now mine, that I would never hear a negative word attributed to him and in every conversation, public and private he was only positive. Then he gave me a baton, symbolizing the leadership transition.

Because of the huge trust I have in him, I asked him to stay on as a Global Ambassador for ReachGlobal. It would not have worked in many situations but it has worked perfectly for us. In large part because of how he handled his own transition.

On the other hand I have watched other leaders, organizational, pastoral transition very badly and the end result is that it hurts the organization.

Why do many leaders transition badly?

I think there are a number of factors. One is that they cannot let go. They have invested too much and are unable to take their hand off the wheel and essentially hand off the baton. In a race, once the baton is handed off, it is over for the previous runner. Some people do not have the emotional intelligence to accept the fact that their run is finished.

Second, many leaders are unable to celebrate a different kind of leadership - which it will be from theirs - when somone else is not in charge. They second guess them, are unhappy with staff or directonal decisions and either publically or privately make their views known. In either case the views become public and it hurts the new leader.

Part of the reason can be defensiveness and even an unhappiness at the success of the new leader. Their success can be seen as a failure for the previous leader - after all it did not happen on their watch. Whatever the motivation for not being supportive or for speaking ill or even remaining neutral - there is something coming from a unhealthy place.

What healthy transitions look like

In a healthy transition, the past leader makes a commitment, as mine did that he would only speak positively, would never criticize or even take a neutral attitude. What is interesting is that while I stand on his shoulders as a leader, I am a very different leader for a very different day. He could have taken exception to a number of decisions that I made but he never did. Not to me and not to others.

His wonderful, supportive attitude came out of a place of spiritual health. He had prayed for his sucessor for years before the transition happened. He had also been clear that he would support that successor no matter who it was. So when I was chosen, and I would not have been his choice, he could and did say, this is who I have been praying for, this is God's choice and I will be fully supportive. And he was from day one.

It takes humility to see a successor who has strengths we do not have exercise them and see success. But his success will not be my success and the reverse is also true. We are different people with different strengths for different times.

Healthy leaders are willing to understand that their leadership is finished and refuse to get involved in the discussions, details or offer counsel unless it as asked for by the new leader and then only to him or her. People will fish for the opinion of the prior leader, wanting to know their opinions of the new leader and any criticisms there might be. After all, the staff have relationships with the prior leader. Healthy leaders never get drawn in and simply remain supportive.

Wise new leaders honor the past even as they reinvision for the future. There is never a need to put down the past leader (indicates poor EQ on the part of the new leader), nor is it necessary to critizice the past. New days requrie new strategies and the fact is that will be true when we give up our leadership post as well.

A key underlying philosophy for both the previous leader and the new leader is that it is not about us. It is about the mission and health of the organization. We are simply stewards of the organization and when we choose to be critical we are hurting the organization - and indicating our own insecurities.

When I leave this position my intention is:

To walk away with thanksgiving for the opportunity I had

To publically and privately support the new leader

To pray for that leader and their leadership

To never be critical of the new leader or new direction

To celebrate the gifts and qualities of the new leader.

I learned from the best. Thank you Ben

What altitude should you be flying at?

One of the critical issues for leaders is to determine what altitude they need to fly at and then do their best to stay there. For instance, as the leader of a large organization, my responsibility is to fly at the 40,000 foot level so that I can see the horizons from the best vantage point. My senior team members need to be at 30,000 feet and their area leaders at 20,000 feet and many more will be at ground level.

If I default to flying lower than I should be (by getting into issues that someone else should be dealing with), I am compromising my leadership because I have defaulted to old habits and old responsibilities. My job is not to deal with 20,000 foot issues but with 40,000 foot issues.

Joel is a leader who rose through the ranks of a mission organization to become a senior leader in that organization. He started as a missionary 'on the ground,' then became a team leader, soon an area leader and then a senior leader. In this role he needed to be flying at 30,000 feet but there were things he loved to do at the 5,000 foot level and he had a habit of 'losing altitude' to get into things he used to do and enjoyed doing. Yet he was now responsible for a huge area of the world, scores of missionaries and many national partnerships.

His leader had to coach him to stay at the 30,000 foot level. Could he still do the things he used to do? Not personally. If he wanted those projects to get done he had to find someone to do it through rather than doing it himself. His altitude was 30,000 feet as a leader, not 5,000 feet. It took coaching and practice but he learned to stay at the right altitude.

This does not mean that leaders are aloof or distant from those they lead. Leaders are always with those they lead. What it means is that we are doing those tasks that are appropriate for our current role and have given up those things that were appropriate for our past role. You cannot take on new responsibility - and do it well - without giving up old responsibility.

Further, when we hang on to the old tasks we disempower those who should be responsible for those tasks. Remember, healthy leaders make the transition from independent producer to leading through others. This transition - related pain of loss is a natural result of agreeing to fly at a higher altitude than we previously did.

Understand the altitude that you need to fly at and stay there. It is a transition from a lower to a higher altitude. It requires you to give things away, empower others and ultimately to lead at the level you need to lead. When you lead at the right altitude, you allow others to lead at their appropriate altitude.