Charting a healthy change process

When you are going to propose major changes to an organization it is important to have a clearly defined process up front that you intend to follow and that will help the organization negotiate the whitewater that will result.

Prepare people for coming changes

People do not like surprises. Once you know that you are going to enter into a process of change, let people know and let them know why. You are not communicating final decisions; you are paving the way for changes that are going to come.

Always tie your process and proposed changes to your mission, guiding principles, central ministry focus or culture.

Remember that people are naturally change resistant. Thus if you are going to bring change you must appeal to values that are a higher value than their resistance to change. The discussion is not fundamentally about structure or programs; it is about mission fulfillment (ROM: return on mission). The more you communicate this, the more people will 'get it.'

One of the gurus on change processes, John Kotter, suggests that in order to get people's attention and convince them of the need for change, you need to "create a crisis." In the absence of a crisis, why change anything?

In ministry organizations, the "crisis" is that the lack of change will compromise (or is already compromising) our ability to do what Christ has called us to do. The result of change will be greater return on mission. Again, it is all about mission.

Recruit a guiding coalition

In any key change you are going to make, you want to have a guiding coalition of individuals who are on board and will publicly and privately support the process. This certainly should include all board members and key ministry staff members. (If you have board members or staff members who are not publicly supportive, you have other issues to deal with).

This should also include other people of positive influence in your organization - those who can help the early or late majority who may not understand the need for change. This is not about a lobbying exercise but recognition that people influence people and that within every organization there are key influencers. If these key influencers understand where you are going and the reasons for it, they become voices of reason and encouragement to the rest of the organization on the merits of moving forward. If you find that your key influencers are opposed, you may want to do more homework and groundwork before you move forward. After all, wise leaders are not going to propose something that they think will not have the support it needs to succeed.

A best practice is that before you propose major change, know that it is going to succeed to the best of your ability. You can test the waters by sounding out those who you need to be in the guiding coalition to influence others.

Provide ways for those in your organization to have input.
The higher the stakes in proposed changes, the more critical it is that you provide forums for members of the organization to ask questions and provide suggestions. The more open that leaders are perceived to be, the more likely the organization will be supportive of the process and outcome.

At this stage, proposed changes are seen to be in 'wet cement.' There may well be feedback or suggestions that would cause leaders to tweak or modify certain proposals before the cement hardens. This also allows those who will be affected by the change to speak into the process although they are not the prime movers in the process.

In the process...over-communicate with the organization.Possibly the greatest failure of leaders in a change process is the failure to adequately communicate with their organizations. This does not usually happen intentionally. Leaders already know what is going on and assume others do as well. In addition, once they have communicated, they feel that the job is done. This underestimates, however, the number of times necessary to communicate to a group before a message is heard. When there is not adequate communication, leaders are seen as aloof, arrogant, unaccountable, power hungry - all of which are probably far from the truth.

Trust is gained by leaders, in large part, by three simple disciplines: being missional, communicating well and listening.

Do everything you can to keep anxiety and conflict over possible changes low

As we have noted, anxiety over change often brings out the worst in people - much like weddings and funerals do within family systems. Leaders have a lot invested in major proposals they make and it is normal for them to become defensive when people push back hard or even attack. Whenever anxiety is present in a family system - and organizations are family systems - one of the jobs of leaders is to lower anxiety wherever possible. A key to this is a non-defensive attitude when challenged. If one responds low key and gently to emotional attacks, the level of conflict is usually lowered.

Do not neglect a prayer strategy for change initiatives

Our battle is not against "flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms (Ephesians 6:12)." If you are proposing change or a ministry initiative because it will give you a greater return on mission, know that the evil one will oppose you at whatever level he needs to, to keep it from being successful. The bolder your plans, the bolder his response.

And if Satan can bring division in the process, or encourage bad attitudes or sinful junk to surface, he will. Why? Because your changes will make your ministry more effective. Sorry, but he doesn't want that to happen.

Relax, persevere and lead boldly

Change is not about us. Ministry advances are not about us. God has called us to lead boldly, and even more so when leading is not easy. Leaders need to be wise, to respect process and people, and to trust God for the outcome. What will surprise us more often than not is that when we do this right, the vast majority of those we lead will respond positively - even when they are not innovators or early adapters. Why? Because they have the same desire to see Christ honored and His kingdom expanded as we do.

Pursuing wise men and women

Real wisdom is in short supply today. Too few people think deeply and equally few people have so saturated their thinking in Biblical paradigms that wisdom emerges from their lives. When you find a wise person, that individual is a treasure. When we are able to provide wisdom to others we become a treasure and gift to them.

Biblical wisdom is first of all grounded in "the fear of the Lord." It is an acknowledgement that God is above all and that the wise individual takes God into account in all of their thinking, actions, strategies and decisions. For the wise individual, God and the things that matter to God are central to everything!

That means that wisdom is not simply pragmatism. A course of action can be pragmatic but not take into account God's view of the matter. God's perspective, whether practical or pragmatic is central to a wise individual.

Wisdom is also the ability to understand a situation and know how to respond in a way that would please God, demonstrate mercy, fairness and righteousness, and accomplish what God has given us to accomplish.

Wise people are able to take complex issues and many moving parts and find a solution while keeping God's perspective or character in the center of the equation. That is a gift indeed.

Not all of us are given that gift but all of us have access to people who God has gifted in that way. Where you find them, get to know them, dialogue with them, ask them questions and look for their perspective. They will in turn ask you questions that will help focus the issues on what is most important and help you get to a wise solution.

Who are the wise people in your life? Do you spend enough time with them? I have a handful of wise people around me and they are a huge gift.

Finding the perfect chair

I have a fondness for comfortable leather chairs. In fact, I recently spent several months looking for the perfect leather chair for my home study. In the process I sat in many chairs in many stores, looking for the one that fit me the best. From that chair I can comfortably write this blog post.

Finding that perfect chair is a lot like finding the perfect work spot where our work responsibilities are uniquely designed to fit our passions, our skill sets and our sweet spot (those areas where we have great skill and strength). If you sit in a chair like that in your work you are a lucky individual indeed and it often does not take place until our forties and fifties when we understand ourselves more fully and have a team around us that makes it possible for various members to play to their strengths and thus, we to ours.

Our sweet spot is where we are most effective, where we are energized and where the responsibilities of our jobs are in line with our unique gifting and wiring. For me that means a job that allows me to architect the vision of an organization, mentor key leaders of the ministry, resource the ministry financially and otherwise and write. If I can spend a minimum of 60% of my time in those areas and better yet 80% of my time in those areas, I will be happy, challenged and effective. That is my perfect chair.

When less than 60% of our time is spent in areas of our sweet spot (which means that we are not that effective at them and that they drain rather than energize us) we will find ourselves fatigued and not very satisfied. If we agree that God wired us in a certain way, it then becomes imperative that we do what we can to spend as much of our time in the zone where he wired us rather than trying to do (not very effectively) those things we were not wired to do.

We usually start out our work careers doing many thing. Over the years we recognize that out of those many things we actually are best at a few things (none of us are great at more than two or three things). So our challenge is to figure out a way to get seated in a chair that has us doing primarily those things that we are really good at doing.

Some suggestions on getting there:

1. Talk to your supervisor or board about how you are wired and where you are most effective and satisfied and ask if you can dialogue about a restructuring of your job so that you are able to spend 60 to 80 percent of your time in those areas
2. If you are a ministry leader, intentionally build a staff or team around you that allows you to play to your strengths and offload to other gifted people those things they do well but you don't do well.
3. Be willing to give up things that you feel are obligations but not in your sweet spot and allow others to take them on. The fewer things we do that are focused in our sweet spots, the more effective we are.
4. Build a culture in your organization that says, to the very best of our ability we get people into their sweet spot even if it means that we annually look at job responsibilities and how we can best configure our staff for maximum effectiveness and job satisfaction. The book, Leading From The Sandbox can be of help to you in this.
5. Don't be satisfied with a chair that does not fit you. When you are uncomfortable you won't be happy or effective. If you cannot redefine within your organization you may need to look for a chair in another. Your legacy (what you leave behind) is dependent on it.

It takes time to find the perfect work chair but if you can and when you do you begin to live in the flow of everything God made you to be and it is a wonderful experience.

Investing in your staff

One of the highest callings in Christian leadership is to be in a position where one must discern the character, gifts, skills and abilities of others and direct them to a meaningful, purposeful, and fulfilling ministry. God’s call in our life is always to be in a context where we can grow in him and effectively serve him, using the gifts and talents that he has given us to serve his Kingdom communities (the Church) and be a witness to his compassion and love.

Therefore, one of the most important tasks of a leader is discerning proper placement for the service of those they lead. (I Corinthians 12). And then to mentor, develop and coach them in that spot.

Many leaders do not understand either the priority or the value of making a significant investment in their staff. From a priority standpoint, the better one's staff, and the better they are positioned for success and the better they are developed and empowered, the more missional success your ministry will achieve. Because ministry happens through people, the larger your ministry the less it will be directly impacted by you and the more it will be impacted by others. Therefore your investment in others becomes one of your most critical tasks.

From a value standpoint, staff who are invested in to help them grow, develop and work from their strengths, not only become better but they become deeply loyal to your organization.

As I have reflected on the senior level leaders in our organization who oversee many others it is my conviction that at least 25% of their time must be spent in the development, coaching, mentoring and placement of people so that they reach their full potential.

I believe that senior pastors have the same obligation with their staff, leaders and volunteers. The best ministries are those that have a huge commitment to develop and release their staff in line with the gifting God has given them.

The largest inhibitor to this practice is that many of us did not go into ministry to develop others but to do ministry ourselves. Thus as our leadership position grows or our ministry grows we continue to do ministry rather than making the fundamental shift to a leadership role of developing our staff for their maximum success - and therefore for your maximum success!

Take a look at your calendar and ask the question, in the course of my month, how much time do I spend in the mentoring, developing and coaching of those who report to me or to my larger staff (if some report to you through others). Many of us would find that we spend very little time in that arena yet it is one of the most important things we should be doing. How are you doing?

Growing our wisdom one decision at a time

There is much written in Scripture about wisdom. We all want it, all believe we have it and certainly don't like the alternative - being a fool. The thing about wisdom is that like a tree it grows slowly, one ring at a time, one layer at a time, one decision at a time and it is the accumulative layers of right thinking and right decisions and right priorities and right behaviors that build true wisdom.

Wisdom starts with "The Fear of the Lord." There is a lot wrapped up in that simple statement but fundamentally it is the acknowledgement that God's ways for our lives are the right ways even though we are constantly challenged by our selfish hearts, the media and our society that there are "better" ways than His ways. Or to put it another way, His ways are great, as long as they don't get in the way of My ways! When they do, well, lets say it is negotiable.

Those who grow little rings of wisdom have made the decision that His ways are indeed the right ways and they consciously and intentionally align their lives to be in sync with his ways. Wisdom, then is not just how we think, it is directly connected to the life choices we make and our obedience to God. It is not just about wise decisions, but about wise living.

Wisdom is also about what we choose not to do. Proverbs is a book that contrasts two types of people. The wise and the fool! Fools choose certain paths and the wise other paths. For instance, fools do not listen to other wise people. Fools, act on their own without consulting God or others. Fools are not discerning about their advisers or actions. It is an interesting exercise to look at the ways of the fool and the ways of the wise. Avoiding the practices of the former and committing to the practices of the latter are the way of wisdom.

Wisdom then is also about discernment: the discernment to avoid certain behaviors, decisions, actions and people, and the discernment to choose certain behaviors, decisions, actions and people. Fools lack discernment while the wise specialize in discernment.

Wise people are not born that way. They have chosen to grow it one decision, one action, one behavior and one discerning choice at a time until the cumulative effect is to default to a wise and Godly choice over a foolish and selfish choice. Like the rings of a tree, it is one season at a time that eventually shows its unique and faithful character, ring after ring after ring.

It does not happen by accident! It is a choice we make. Each time we have a choice.

Embracing the discipline of thinking deeply

Good leaders are good thinkers. They have embraced the "discipline" of thinking - and it is a discipline that can be learned, sharpened and honed with time and practice.

There are others who have ambition but not the will to think deeply. Instead of thinking deeply they copy ideas of others and apply them to their ministry, hoping for the same results. Usually they don't get the same results because they did not understand the underpinnings of the strategy that came from deep strategic thought.

The more leadership responsibility one has the more one needs to set aside for thinking - away from distractions, email, and interruptions. Where you have other deeply insightful and strategic people on staff you will want to engage them in dialogue on critical issues you face. Some think best in solitude, some think best in dialogue. Either way, the intellectual capital of others plays a major role in coming to the best solutions.

As an organizational leader, I allocate about 25% of my time for thinking, analysis, considering options and dialoguing with other key individuals. Most people gravitate toward action. Leaders activate but only after a lot of deep thinking.

Leaders also practice "grey thought." Thinking grey is the ability to evaluate and consider many different options - some of them contradictory - without coming to a conclusion until one needs to. Here is an irony. Great leaders put off making decisions as long as they can so that they can do all the grey thinking possible. That way when they come to a conclusion, they have considered as many of the ramifications as possible and have a much higher wisdom and success ratio than those who make quick decisions.

Distractions are the greatest threat to deep thinking. Twitter, facebook, CNN, Fox, Sirius, the pace of life, and the obligations we have all rob us of think time. They are good if used well and unhelpful if not. Those who run too fast - even with great success - often crash. They lose their bearings that could have been saved if they had taken the time to consider and think about their ministry and their personal life. This is why my study is a haven for me, it is a place to stay grounded, think deeply and avoid distractions.

Our own spiritual development is integrally tied to the discipline of thinking. One of the reasons for the shallow discipleship of our world today is that we don't take the time to consider the implications of what God says in his word. Reading his word or listening to a message is easy. Making thoughtful application of that word to our lives is far more complex and difficult.

Those who display Biblical wisdom are people who think deeply rather than shallowly and often rather than seldom.

Essential Leadership Commitments

Those who lead others take on special responsibilities...and must hold themselves to the standards that they ask of those they lead. That is not always easy and it takes a humble vigilance because none of us do these things perfectly. But the "commitments" of leaders ought to be the norm not the exception.


Leaders keep their commitments
Our word is our bond and leaders model what it means to keep their commitments. Sometimes this means that we will not commit to something we don't know that we can deliver on. But once we have committed we do all that we can to deliver on that promise. When we don't deliver we devalue those to whom we have made a promise and we communicate that good intentions are what counts, not delivery on our promises.

Leaders model relational health
It is easy for relationships to go sideways or south. Leaders do all that they can to prevent that from happening and when it does to seek to right it. They don't hold grudges, they keep short accounts, they don't shy away from addressing relational issues and they do all that they can to live at peace with all men - as the Apostle Paul admonished. What they never do is nothing - when relationships have soured.

Leaders keep a missional focus
Ultimately our leadership is not about us but about the mission we believe in - and which our team is committed to. Many others will be distracted from missional focus by all the activity of work but leaders remain focused on the mission so that they can keep their team focused on the mission. Mission leaks easily. Leaders don't let that happen for them or for their team.

Leaders pay attention to their spiritual health
Leaders heed the admonishment of Proverbs 4:23, "Above all else, guard your heart, for it is the wellspring of life." Before all else, the condition of our hearts matter for from our hearts flow all that we are, our motives, attitudes, behaviors, words, relationships and love for the God we serve. Leaders always have time for God, for the word, for prayer and for quiet meditation. They nourish their hearts so that in the heat of leadership what emerges is what God would want to emerge.

Leaders always have a learning posture
Leaders are sure about a few things but they are always learning on the vast majority of things. A leader who knows the answer to everything is a leader only in his or her own mind! Leaders are always questioning, always learning, always thinking grey, always looking for better ways, always open to ideas and suggestions. In the end they must forge a direction with and for their team but they are by nature humble learners and always growing.

Leaders don't ask of others what they are unwilling to do themselves.
We lead by example not by edict. Before we can ask others to certain commitments they must see those commitments in us. Our asking comes out of our own commitments that are plain to all and therefore have credibility in their own right. The commander who will not lead his troops into battle is not fit to be a commander because he will not take the risk he is asking his troops to take.

Leaders care about results not just activity
Leaders are not fooled by activity nor do they allow activity of their team to pass for results. Rather they have clearly defined objectives and they are always looking for and pushing for measurable results. They help focus their teams on those particular activities that are most likely going to result in missional results.

Leaders are approachable
Leaders do not put themselves on a pedestal nor do they allow others to do so. If they want team members to be approachable, they must be approachable as well. Unapproachable leaders are really unaccountable leaders because people do not feel that they can talk to them or be heard by them. As a result they don't receive the honest feedback that every individual needs in their lives and work.

Leaders display personal humility
Leadership is a trust that we hold for a time in order to accomplish a God honoring mission. We are stewards of our leadership responsibility and we are servants of those we lead, empowering them to become all that they can be and developing them to become all that they can become. Leadership is not about us, it is about helping all of us accomplish our mission for the cause of Christ.

Many will lead some will lead well. Those who do, understand and live by the commitments of leaders.

What is your passion quotient?

What are you passionate about? Really passionate! What is it that makes you want to get out of bed in the morning and tackle the day? What is it that you want to give your life to? What activity or work gives you the greatest joy in life? Real joy!

What we are passionate about is most likely closely tied to the work that God created us to accomplish. Passion and our "sweet spot" are closely linked. And our area of passion is most likely where we are most effective.

It is possible over time to drift out of our area of passion into all kinds of work that may be important but which do not align with our passion. That drift slowly drains our energy and compromises our effectiveness. Most importantly, it moves us away from the spot that God created us for and the place that brings our hearts the greatest joy.

Thoughtful individuals are always asking the question: how do I organize life so that I stay in my areas of greatest strength and how do I help my staff do the same? Sure there are responsibilities that we must do even though they are not our favorite things. But, if we are not playing to our strengths and passions 60 - 80% of the time we will suffer from diminished energy and vision.

Signs of drift from our sweet spot include boredom, restlessness, irritability, lack of energy and the absence of the joy that once drove us. Those symptoms are often indicators from our creator that we have moved away from the place He uniquely created us for.

Many choose to ignore those indicators and settle in for the duration in a place where they are not passionate - but "safe." Those who care most deeply about finishing well and making the most of the opportunity God has given never settle for "safe" or "security" but keep pressing back into the place where God created them to be.

That may mean a different job. It may mean re-negotiating your present responsibilities. It may mean a pay decrease in order to live in our sweet spot. It could mean retooling for a different occupation. It may mean greater discipline in determining one's priorities and activities.

One cannot read the gospels and not be impressed by the passion of Jesus to fulfill His father's will for his life. Paul exudes passion in each of his epistles for the work God gave him. Can you say you have that kind of passion for the work God gave you? If not, what do you need to do to rekindle that passion because our effectiveness is directly linked to our passion. The worst thing we can do is settle for less than God created us to be.

What is your passion quotient?

Six elements of successful organizational change

Many attempts at organizational change are not successful. Often they flounder because they lack one of six fundamental elements for change to be successful. If any one of these are missing, the change process is compromised.

Conviction
Major change will not happen unless leaders have an absolute and unshakable conviction that it must happen. Usually this revolves around the need for the organization to re-envision for its next run, to adapt to changing opportunities or to address a specific threat. The conviction comes from the belief that if the organization does not change it will be in trouble. Many leaders understand the need for change but lack a compelling conviction that they must help the organization move through it. It is easier to ignore the need than to address it.

Without a bedrock conviction of the need for change, it will get derailed by doubts, anxiety and push back from resistors. Conviction brings the peace of mind in moments of doubt that you are on the right track and that this needs to be done.

Courage
If change were easy it would be common. It is not either easy or common. Suggesting that major change must take place takes a great amount of courage on the part of leaders. They know that if they are rebuffed or if the change is not successful, their own job is in jeopardy. Change takes the organization through some whitewater and uncertainty and it takes courage on the part of leaders to be willing to enter those white waters.

Risk
Change means that old methodologies and ways of thinking are jettisoned for new. Often those new ways and thinking are untried and therefore there is a certain amount of calculated risk involved. Good leaders have through through the risks and unintended consequences but there is still risk. The willingness to take the necessary risks requires the conviction and courage already noted.

Process
Because change is unsettling to most people the way in which it is approached is just as important as the change itself. People need to understand the why and the how and what the future looks like and while there is white water in the process there should not be chaos. Change is a process of thinking differently and acting differently and that takes time to assimilate. 

Unmanaged change, or change that lacks proper process will likely fail because the very staff who need to live out the change are not given the time to assimilate the change. Never underestimate the need for process. If there ever is a time it is when the organization is going through change. Much of the process is a continual dialogue with leaders and staff about what you are doing, why your are doing it and how it is going for them.

New Practices
The best way to assimilate change is to commit to new practices. Change is theoretical until you actually put it into practice. Not only that, but actually doing something new channels anxiety among staff about change into productive energy and as they try out new practices they don't seem as threatening as they did when it was theory. As those new practices are being tried out, leaders should be in active dialogue with staff as to how it is going, what their frustrations are and encouraging them to keep pushing into the new. Because practices are driven by habits it will take a great deal of time for new habits to be formed - for organizations it can take years.

Resolve
People and organizations naturally seek the familiar and comfortable and thus even with new practices being tried there will be a pull back to the old ways of doing and thinking. Some of this is natural as habits are hard to break. Some of this will come from resistors who just don't want to change. This is where the organization needs to feel the resolve of its leaders that the change is going to happen, that there is no going back and that no matter what pressure is brought to bear organically or from individuals that the organization is going to push forward into a new future.

It takes a unique leader to drive organizational change and successfully see it through. These six elements are fundamental to a successful change process.

Ezra's and Nehemiah's: We need one another

A common theme I hear from highly qualified business people and other professionals today is "Why won't the church let me use my gifts in its ministry?" Many feel marginalized and underutilized. Some feel like they are not wanted at all on the ministry side.

Not that they are not allowed to minister. Ministry folks are often glad to let professional folks minister in ministry slots they have created that they need to be filled. That is not what these professionals are asking. They want to be able to use the skills God has given them in ministry - not filling slots the church has created!

Many ministry professionals lack experience and gifting in leadership, business, strategy and management. They don't like to admit it but it is true.

Many professionals lack experience in preaching, teaching, counseling or theological intricacies.

Perhaps given those facts, we need each other! Playing to each other's strengths and complementing one another. Actually making room for each other and not being threatened by one another.

Ezra was a spiritual leader and a good one. He was terrible as a leader or administrator! So God provided Nehemiah who did not pretend to be a priest, but who had amazing administrative and leadership gifts and who got done in a short time what Ezra could not get done in years. They needed each other, they played to their strengths and the people were stronger for it.

Ezra was a priest. Nehemiah was an executive of the king. Ezra's and Nehemiah's need each other. Too often they have not found a way to work well with each other. The church is the purview of the Ezra's and the world of the Nehemiah's.

We need the Ezra's and Nehemiah's in our churches to appreciate one another, trust one another and allow one another to play to the strengths God has given. Our congregations might, like the people of Israel in Nehemiah actually be better off because of it.

Supervisors and staff: Maintaining appropriate boundaries

Leaders have an interesting dilemma when it comes to how close or distant they are socially from those they lead. It is often something that they don't think much about but it has important ramifications for how they relate to others.

There is a difference in the relationship between peers and those one leads. This is obvious when a leader is promoted from within and goes from peer to supervisor. Everyone knows that something has changed and that the relationship is different.

It is different because now one who was a peer is leading those he or she was a peer with. Now instead of relating as peers, they are asking hard questions and holding others accountable for results. Often the transition is not easy. I remember one such transition myself where I was now supervising former peers and some of them never adjusted to it.

The issue of social distance can be framed this way: How close or distant do I position myself as a leader from those I lead, knowing that while we have a collegial relationship it is not by nature a peer relationship?

Some leaders try so hard to be best buds with those they lead that they lose their ability to speak into the lives, ministries, or strategies of their team because that is not the function of being best buds. In other words, in their attempt to be "one of the boys or girls" they lose their ability and authority to lead well. It is a leadership error.

Other leaders are so intent on their leadership role that they become distant and unapproachable from those they lead. Another leadership error because the human element is lost to the leadership role.

Social distance for a leader really depends on the situation. The best leaders are highly personable on a personal level. They care about families and kids and the personal issues of life and easily engage in discussions that deal with the human issues we all face. On that level, the relationship feels like a relationship of peers.

On the other hand, when leading the team, or pressing into a work related issue, they put on the hat of leader and can move into a collegial but clearly a leadership role where they are not afraid to give direct feedback, deal with a difficult issue or press into the work of those they supervise. In this role they are clearly not peers and need to be taken seriously by those they lead.

The most complicated relationships are those where a former peer was also a close friend. Now, there is both a friendship and a supervisory capacity that must be negotiated. In some settings they remain defined by the friendship but in the leadership setting it is the supervisory role that must be realized and acknowledged by both parties.

Wise leaders are both friends and leaders and they understand when it is appropriate for the social distance to be close and when it must be more distant. When social distance is too close it is difficult or impossible to lead. When it is too distant it is difficult to be seen as a leader who cares. Good leaders can and do switch from close to farther depending on the situation. They are collegial and human but also leaders and supervisors. If you are a leader, think about how you negotiate social distance with those you lead.

Leaders can be friends, colleagues and supervisors. They regulate the social distance depending on the situation so that they lead well. But they will never just be "one of the boys or girls."

What our calendars say about us

Whether we are an organizational leader or team member there is a very telling tool about our priorities and what is really important to us. It is not what we say. It is not what we communicate to our teams or one another. It is not the mission or priorities of our organization.

It is our calendar.

Nancy Ortberg in her book, Unleashing the Power of Rubber bands: Lessons in non-linear Leadership writes something that is all too true: "There is often an enormous disconnect between the vision of an organization and the events that make up the daily calendar pages of the organization's leaders."

Don't get me wrong. There is always great activity on a calendar. But the focus of that activity for too many does not match up with the vision or mission of the organization or the stated priorities of leaders (or team members). All of us can easily fall into the trap of mistaking activity for the results we say we are committed to.

I have only five priorities - Key Result Areas (KRA's). The are:

1. Personal development


2. Strategic leadership


3. Strong team


4. Leadership development


5. Mobilizing resources

Those are the big rocks of my work. Given those priorities, the proof of whether those are in reality my priorities is whether my calendar reflects those priorities. Do the majority of my appointments, obligations, and time allocations reflect those five areas, or does my calendar actually reflect a scattered and accidental approach to my work. The calendar tells the story!

If you are committed to a life of intentionality I would challenge you to identify the big rocks of your work and then compare the obligations of your calendar with your priorities. Do they line up? Are you intentional in scheduling your priorities? Can you say no to those things that distract from what you are called to do? Are you willing for your colleagues to see your calendar? Would they say it reflects your big rocks?

Our calendars tell the story of our true priorities. And they are a powerful tool in ensuring that we achieve those priorities when we allocate our limited resource of time according to those things that we know are most important.

I don't have time

Are you ever caught in the trap where you don't have time to do what you need to do? What someone else wants you to do? Something you feel obligated to do? How does it make you feel?

Here is a truth to consider: We all have time to do what is most important to us and we all have time to do what God has called us to do. If we run out of time, it may be that we have things in our schedule that are not really important for us, or we have taken on responsibilities that God did not intend for us to take on! They may be important for someone but not for us.

Those times in my life where I have been harried and hassled are also times when I have not been careful about what I said yes or no too, and times when I had taken on new responsibility without letting go of old responsibility - always a mistake.

When I feel like I don't have time it is really a symptom that I need to more carefully examine the responsibilities and obligations I have and determine where adjustments need to be made so that I have adequate and good time for those things that are most important.

And that in itself takes time, which is why a monthly personal retreat day is so important to me. It gives me time to prioritize, evaluate and find time for those things that are important. And jettison those things that are distractions that take away from what is actually important. It takes time to save time!

I have had periods when I was too busy. I am not impressed with busyness. In fact, I am far more impressed with those who are not too busy to find time for those things that are truly important in their lives - and still have margin. It tells me that they have wisdom. They have thought through their lives so that they have time for what the ought to have time for.

"Father God, help me (and us) to do that."

The advantages of engaging a coach

Many of us would benefit from a formal coaching arrangement from someone who can help us ask the right questions, think strategically and improve our personal effectiveness. I am aware of one large denomination that has every one of their senior executives in such a coaching relationship.

Many executives in the business world do the same thing and pay several thousand dollars a day for day long sessions. The good news is that one can find a coach who can be in touch monthly for an hour or two using the phone or teleconference.

Why consider a coach? We see what we see and know what we know. A coach is not there to tell us what to do but to ask questions that help us think about options we might not think of, to challenge our presuppositions and to help us figure out how to be more effective.

There are trained coaches for pastors and ministry leaders, or one can ask someone who you respect and trust to coach you. It can be formal or informal.

The greatest barrier I find to entering into a coaching relationship is the fear of greater accountability. That is in fact one of the benefits of such a relationship because having that regular conversation with someone who is helping you focus on what is most important and to be disciplined in our use of time fosters accountability. But it is accountability from someone who is in your corner and is there to help you be more effective.

Monthly coaching from someone outside your organization is a great way to help you keep growing personally and become more missional and effective in the process

The soft side of leadership

I spoke with a member of a large organization this week who told me that the morale of the staff was hurting. One of the factors was that the new president did not connect with the staff like the previous president. When I probed as to why that was he could not explain the difference except that it was different and it had made a difference with morale.

There may well be reasons for this. The business is a lot larger than it used to be and many employees would not know the new president. Economic realities may well dictate that he spend his time on different issues than his predecessor. Or, he may not be perceived as relational.

What I do know is that there is an important but "soft" side to leadership which is not about strategies, vision, budgets or execution. It is showing an appreciation for one's staff, being personable and approachable when with staff, and caring about the impact of decisions on people in the organization.

One leader I have watched breezes in and out of the office with a sense of importance, rarely stopping to greet those he passes and when he does he says, "I'm really busy." What he communicates is "I am really full of myself and what I'm up to is important but you are not." This is a ministry leader - a pastor - and his lack of interest in or time for staff sends a strong message to those who work for him.

Rarely does he engage staff personally, stop into their offices or invite them into his and sends a strong message that he is the leader, is busy and does important things. Behind his back his staff have a name for him and it is not one he would appreciate - but it fits well. Any leader who sends those kinds of message may have authority but is not a good leader.

It also breeds mistrust among staff because trust is only possible in the context of relationship. Certainly a high view of ourselves and the perception that we use people rather than value people breeds mistrust.

The leader I work for is never too busy to stop, talk, engage staff and to find out what is happening in their lives, no matter where they are in the organizational structure. He is widely loved, trusted and respected while the individual above is neither loved nor respected. The difference? Treating people with dignity, concern and appreciation.

Organizations, whether businesses or ministries are made up of people. It is the staff which represents the heart, the intellectual capital and the ability of the organization to deliver something of value to those outside of the organization.

Staff knows whether their leaders use them or value them. That is essentially the difference in the illustrations above. People may fear a leader because he or she uses people but they will neither respect nor love them.

One of the best things leaders can do is to pay attention to those around them and those who work for them. It will deeply impact the morale of the group and treating people with dignity, well, it is what Jesus would do - and did.

Pretense, the enemy of authenticity

The enemy of authenticity is pretense, pretending to be what we are not! It is nothing less than dishonesty which compromises our personal integrity and causes us to live with personal dissonance. 

This was the problem with the Pharisees in Jesus' day. They worked hard to "look and play the part," but that is exactly what they were, actors, playing the part, rather than authentic people of God. It is interesting to me that the only people Jesus was "hard on" were the Pharisees. He hated their hypocrisy.

There are many practices that believers are "supposed" to follow. The "rules" that govern how we live, act, talk and behave. Often we are no different from the Pharisees. We play the part even though it does not reflect the real us. And many of the rules have nothing to do with God but are as man made as those of the Pharisees.

Authenticity is one of the greatest gifts that leaders can give their teams. Authentic men and women have problems, experience spiritual highs and lows, make mistakes, need to ask forgiveness, and don't need to pretend that something is not what it really is. What you see is what you get. People can relate to that because that is real life. People cannot relate to perfection (and of course that is a lie anyway).

Authentic people don't do appearances for appearance sake. Jesus certainly didn't. In fact, he went out of his way to tweak the minds of the Pharisees by breaking stupid man made rules. Authenticity is not about legalism or "keeping the rules." It is about being serious about our followership of Christ in a real way, caring about the important matters of the heart and living in the transformational power of the Holy Spirit - the opposite of trying to keep up appearances.

Authenticity is about living honestly. Being honest with ourselves about our followership and where we come up short and honest with others. If there is one thing that turns off non-Christ followers, I think it is the lack of transparency and honesty among those who tell them that they ought to follow as well. People see through pretense.

Pretense actually breeds legalism and more pretense  After all, if my role model is someone who pretends to have it all together, I may well decide that I need to pretend to have it all together as well. And keep the silly rules that accompany such pretense.  Pretense is a prison because it is not real, cannot be sustained and requires way too much effort to keep up the pretense.

Authenticity on the other hand is freedom. What you see is what you get and I don't need to spend energy trying to look like something I am not. Funny thing is that the only people who get ticked off with authenticity are those who are putting up a pretense themselves. Authenticity puts a lie to their lack of authenticity, hiding behind legalism and false spirituality. Jesus was the greatest threat to the Pharisees - and they knew it which is why they had it in for Him.

Here is an interesting question: where in my life do I feel a need to pretend I am something I am not? Why do I have that need? Something to ponder as we live out our faith.

What you need to know when you are going to suggest major change

Before a whitewater-rafting trip, a good guide is going to sit everyone down in the calm water and tell them what to expect. The reason is simple: knowing what is in store lowers the anxiety level. At least we say to ourselves in the middle of the whitewater, our guide told us that it would be this way.

Here are some realities of negotiating change:

Most likely you will face resistance. This is normal. Don't be anxious or discouraged when your great ideas face resistance; that is simply how many people are wired.

A few loud voices will often seek to shut down the change process. This is normal too. Don't allow their voices to keep you from doing what you need to do, even if they make threats. An exception to this would be individuals who you know have great wisdom and a history of being supportive (not squeaky wheels) and who have significant 'coinage' with you and others. Not everyone's voice carries the same weight.

Some people may threaten to leave to leave your church or organization. This is normal. The more intentional you are as leaders, the more resistance you will encounter from a few because you are messing with the status quo. It is not unusual for some people to leave a church or organization when key directional decisions are made. To cave into their threats is to compromise the kingdom impact of your ministry because of a few loud voices. Don't cave!

You may have leaders who suggest that you revoke the suggested changes, even though they agreed with the need before pushback occurred. This is normal, although unfortunate. True leaders don't retreat from something they believe to be right, just because their proposed change causes waves. Whitewater is all about waves. Change is about waves. Leaders who cannot live with waves are probably in the wrong place.

The greater the change, the more uncomfortable you may feel. This is normal. In the middle of the whitewater it is hard to think calmly. Change produces anxiety in people, which will cause you anxiety. Stay the course, keep your anxiety low and work the process.

You will get wet. This is normal. when the boat is bucking, water comes over the sides. When equilibrium is upset, people say things that are sinful and take shots at those who caused the waves. Respond in ways that lower the tension and stay the course. If you know you'll get wet going in, you won't feel as uncomfortable when it happens.

Did you see the theme here? This is normal. so often in the midst of change, when we are getting wet and are surrounded by whitewater, we question our decisions: We are tempted to retreat; and we lose our nerve, thinking that we must have really screwed up to be where we are No! All of this is normal. Expect it and negotiate it with wisdom, patience and low anxiety.

Issues to consider when hiring new staff

One of the top leadership tasks is to hire well. Every hire impacts the entire organization in a ripple fashion. Hire well and the organization becomes healthier and more effective. Hire poorly and the organization suffers. I am a fan of the concept, "hire slow, fire fast." Being slow on the hire allows you to avoid a lot of pain later.

When hiring:

Never negotiate the critical issues

Especially when hiring, it is a temptation to overlook character issues that may be present but are overshadowed by our view of a person's competency and what they might bring to our team. This is a fatal mistake for a leader in any organization, but especially in Christian ministry where the character of our staff goes to the heart of our credibility. If there is any question on the character issue, walk away!

There are others who have great Christian character but don't have the right competencies or EQ. I am always amazed when someone who does not have the competencies or EQ is recommended for a position with the statement, "Well, they are really nice Christians and they want to work for a Christian organization."

Be clear on the Key Result Areas for the job as well as the competencies needed to fulfill the job

Job descriptions are not enough when you are looking to hire. Job descriptions describe the activities that the position entails. What you really need to focus on are the results you need to see for the activities. For all positions there ought to be three to five clearly defined results that, if fulfilled will spell success (Key Result Areas).

Once you know the results that spell success for the position you can determine the core competencies that you need for the individual to be successful. The core competencies are the non-negotiable skills that an individual must possess to successfully fulfill the Key Result Areas. Many things are negotiable in the hiring process and will be determined by the wiring and gifting of the individual. What are not negotiable are the core competencies since without these, there is no chance for the prospective hire to be successful.

Understand the principle: pay now or pay more later

The longer I lead and the more people I hire, the more convinced I am of the wisdom of thorough testing before hiring (I've paid plenty of dumb tax for not doing it enough). The reason we don't do more testing and due diligence is that it costs money or we are in such a hurry to hire, or we choose to be optimistic and hope for the best.

Here is the reality. You either pay now and spend the time and money to ensure the competence of your potential hire, or you pay dearly later when you have to endure the pain of letting someone go - often after enduring months or years of performance issues.

If they will be playing at a senior level in the organization (including churches) it pays to put individuals through the same executive testing that any good secular organization would use. This will help measure capacity, leadership skills, conflict resolution skills and EQ. Untold pain and frustration would be avoided if we would take the long-term view and spend what we need to spend before we hire to ensure the best fit.

Never make a hiring decision by yourself

Ask those who know you best and who have good discernment to interview those you are thinking of hiring. Do multiple interviews and listen to the gut reaction of those you bring into the process. Include interviewers that are both male and female to see how both react. Be wary of hiring if others you trust express cautions. They are probably seeing something you don't see (or don't want to see).

Make the 'need to know' list

When you are adding someone to your team make two lists: what you need to know about the candidate and what they need to know about you. You need to know their wiring, background, competency, character, culture fit, work style, level they can play at, passions, values and whatever else is important to you.

They need to understand your leadership style, how you do team, expectations that you and the organization have, values, mission, preferred future of the organization, the culture of your ministry, what they can or cannot expect from you as the leader and other significant issues that define who you are as an organization. Be brutally transparent so that they know the upside and downside of your organization. If your honesty scares them away, they are the wrong hire.

Have potential hires interview those who know you best

Have the candidate meet with and interview several people you currently lead who know you well so that they understand how you are wired, how you lead and what they can expect from your. Often those around us can give a better explanation of who we are and how we lead than we can ourselves.

Questions to ask yourself in the process

-Does this person have high EQ?

-Can this person play at the level that other members of this team play at?

-Does this individual have a skill that will complement the team?

-Is this person a team player?

-Will they contribute to the whole rather than simply guard their turf?

-Do they fully embrace the mission and values of the organization?

-Do the other members of the team think they will fit well?

-Do they have the expertise needed for the ministry in which they will participate?

-Do they understand the implications of joining your team and what the expectations are for them as a team member?

-What level of leadership and management support will they need from you?

-If they will lead others, does their leadership style fit the leadership culture of the organization?

Empowering pastors

One of the most disempowering issues for senior pastors are boards that want to second guess much of what they do - or require them to ask permission before they can act. Frequently, churches are permission withholding rather than permission granting and many senior pastors chafe under controlling boards. 

It need not be the case and in fact controlling boards actually slow down and hinder ministry rather than facilitate it. So how does a board empower their senior leader - and therefore their staff - and still ensure that adequate safeguards are in place for the organization?

One simple solution is for boards and their senior leader to sit down and delineate those thing that the leader must do and those things that the leader cannot do without board assent. In policy governance used by many boards these are called executive limitations - the limits put on the senior leader by the board. Aside from those limitations, the senior leader is free to act with "reasonable interpretation" and make decisions as they see fit. 

By putting these into policies the senior leader knows what his or her limits are and are free to make decisions consistent with the ministry vision of the church without needing to run all of those decisions by the board - a redundancy that makes for inefficient ministry. Policies that make sense in one stage of a church's life may not make sense in another and these limitations can be either relaxed or tightened depending on the need. It also clarifies which issues are management issues delegated to the senior leader and which issues are board issues so that there is no longer confusion around responsibility and authority - a common issue in church governance. 

Often in working with boards, someone will ask the question, "But what if we don't trust that our senior leader will make the right decision." The question is either about trust or about competency and if the question needs to be asked there are other issues that the board and senior leader need to work on. Often a board member is simply not willing to allow the senior leader the latitude to do their job as they want to control not empower.

It is always amusing to me to see the competencies that churches look for when hiring a senior pastor and then the lack of empowerment they give this individual who they believe matches those competencies. Pastoral work is hard enough without a board second guessing everything that one does. Clarifying what the expectations are and then giving maximum freedom outside those limitations is one of the greatest gifts a board can give their leader.

Job competency and emotional competency: which is more important?

Here is an interesting question: What makes a person competent in their job? For many of us the first answer would be that they "do their job well" referring to their professional ability. I believe, however, that professional competency is only part of the equation and that relational and emotional intelligence is just as important as professional skill.

Take a top rate accountant for instance. They may be superbly trained and incredibly accurate but if they cannot get along with their peers they will never be successful. In fact, I believe that we underestimate the impact on poor relational and emotional skills to our detriment because they impact so many others on our teams.

No matter how competent someone is in a specific skill - if they have significant relational or EQ deficits they become a real liability to the health of a team or organization. We often overlook the damage because of their skill but the truth is that a strong skill cannot make up for the negative impact of relational and EQ dishealth. 

This has two important implications. The first is that relational and EQ health must be a significant issue in the hiring process. Can they do the job is an important question. Equally important is whether they can get along with others and display healthy EQ. 

The second implication is that we need to be addressing issues of relational and EQ health on a regular basis with our staff. All of us can grow in these areas unless we have a significant personality disorder. Growth in these areas grows the health of the organization as a whole. Many individuals have never been trained in relational and EQ health. Yet it is perhaps the most significant issue in their professional and personal success.

I meet many professionally competent people. I meet fewer people whose relational and EQ health matches their professional skill. I am committed to developing both sides with our staff and certainly look at both sides when hiring.

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?

Leaders and managers and definitions

There is a lot of talk about leadership and some confusion about who is a leader and what it means to lead. It is easy to define organizational leadership because organizational leaders are visible, have leadership titles (president, lead pastor etc) but it is harder to define leadership at other levels or sometimes recognize that while we may not be organizational leaders many of us are in fact leaders and need to lead well. Consider these types of leadership that are critical to any organization.

Team leader: Anyone who is responsible for leading a team whether  as a paid staff member or as a volunteer is a leader. The team will only be as good as the one who helps them move toward common objectives in a healthy manner. One of the primary but often neglected responsibilities of a team leader is to ensure that what the team is doing contributes to the overall ministry objectives of the organization rather than doing their thing (one of the dysfunctions of teams).

Project leader: Those who drive strategic projects for an organization that require coordination of people, resources, teams and often outside groups or individuals. They may not have direct line authority but they use their influence to bring people together across department lines to ensure the project is successful. In some ways this requires even more skill than a team leader who has direct authority over their staff (unless they are leading volunteers).

Many would call project leaders managers. I prefer the word leader because while they are managing processes they are also leading people to ensure that the project is accomplished. If they don't lead well the project does not get accomplished. People don't like to be "managed" but they do want to be led.

Influence leader: These are individuals who have no direct or indirect authority over those they are working with apart from their personal influence that results from their expertise and experience in a particular area. They lead through mentoring, training and influencing others. A good example of this kind of leadership is the Global Equipping Team in ReachGlobal which trains in the areas of theology, church planting, pastoral skills among national partners globally. They are leaders in every sense of the word but they lead through their experience and expertise. 

Take that one step further. Those who look at your life and emulate your actions because you have influenced them are following your example. You are leading through the model of your life. Yes, leading.

Many people who don't think of themselves as leaders, actually lead. Where we lead we want to lead well. Organizational leadership is not a top down affair but is dependent on those who lead at every level of the organization starting with the leadership that is the responsibility of every one of us - self leadership.

Are you an institution or a movement?

Is the church or ministry you are a part of more of an institution or a movement? Look at this excellent description of the difference between the two by H.R. Neibuhr.

There are essential differences between institutions and movements: the one is conservative the other progressive; the one is more or less passive, yielding to influence from the outside, the other is active influencing rather than being influenced; the one looks to the past, the other to the future…the one is anxious, the other is prepared to take risks; the one guards boundaries, the other crosses them.

By this definition most churches and ministries are more institutional than they are missional. Most start their ministry journey with  missional energy and vision but over time move to the institutional side of the continuum. Institutional is more comfortable, demands less of us, requires us to think less and does not demand that we change much. It is a nice place to be.

And a very dangerous place to be! The cost of institutional is that we lose our ability to flex to meet current ministry challenges. We become comfortable with what is rather than with what could be. We become oblivious to the threats to our existence. We allow comfort to subvert effectiveness. We live with the allusion that all is well while in fact it is not!

How do you know where your ministry falls? Ask the following questions from the quote above. Better yet have all your staff and board members answer the questions and then compare notes.

1. Would we be considered conservative or progressive in our ministry paradigms?
2. Do we yield more to influences from the outside or do we influence our direction actively?
3. Do we look more to the past or more to the future?
4. Are we risk takers or risk adverse?
5. Are we afraid to try new things or actively look for new opportunities to pursue?
6. Where would we peg ourselves on the institutional/movement continuum?
7. Are we satisfied with where we are? If not what do we need to do about it?