As one with leadership gifts, I can think of no arena more exciting to use them in than in the church of Jesus Christ. Amazingly. with all the ensuing challenges, difficulties and problems, Christ has chosen the local church as His means to reach the world with His good news. He has never given up on the church, and we can never give up on the church. Our challenge is to grow in our ability to lead well so that the leadership is a joy rather than a burden, and to lead in ways that allow Christ to fulfill His mission for our congregations in the expansion of His Kingdom.
Because many boards have not grappled with critical leadership issues, they live with a high degree of frustration. But there is hope. Over the past decade, I have watched many frustrated boards become energized, active and even high impact as they have made the choice to lead with greater boldness. This can be true for your board as well.
With many boards, there is a significant fear factor that prevents bold leadership. This is the church, after all. What if our decisions make some unhappy? Some probably will; leadership always gets 'pushback' of some kind. But consider the alternative!
Unfortunately, the local church, in general, is one of the most leaderless institutions in America. We have not learned to lead boldly, and we have paid too little attention to the selection of leaders. We have more fear than courage. You may take issue with me. However, think about it: Why is it that despite all of our churches, we make so little impact on our communities in terms of the gospel? Satan must rejoice over this general condition. Timid leaders don't threaten him. Bold and healthy leaders keep him highly occupied.
Almost without exception, congregations that are truly making a difference in their community and experiencing real life change within their body are led by a godly, healthy, bold, energized leadership team - pastoral and volunteer. Leadership matters. It matters to God because the quality of our leadership has direct impact on the depth of His disciples and the effectiveness of His mission.
Many of us do not have training in leadership (and seminaries are not stepping up to the plate). This is often true of pastors. Even though much of a pastor's ministry relates to leadership, few have received leadership training or mentoring. The good news is: We can learn to lead! There are few natural-born leaders. Most of us are 'leaders in training' and will always be learning to lead more effectively. As Paul said, if you are going to lead, "govern diligently" (Romans 12:8). Lead Boldly.
Thursday, July 11, 2013
Wednesday, July 10, 2013
Tools for dealing with significant criticism
Everyone in leadership faces the challenge of those who are their critics whether for good reasons or not. The question is not whether we will face our critics but how we will respond to our critics and that response makes all the difference to our leadership.
Critics can be our best friends or become our worst enemies and which it is depends ironically not so much on them as it does on us. It often depends on how we react. Often even with the worst critic whose actions are unhelpful and whose bite is painful there is something for us to learn - if nothing else - how to respond to someone who is angry with us.
Job one with an angry, frustrated or critical individual is to de-escalate the situation. Usually angry people are frustrated. Something has punched their button.
Nothing brings down the level of frustration, anger or conflict like a non-defensive reaction: Something like, "I am really sorry I have caused you that frustration. I would never do so intentionally. Help me understand the issues and what you would suggest if you were in my place." That kind of response immediately takes the wind out of a critics sails, opens up dialogue and asks them for their counsel. It is so rare that it will surprise those who have significant issues with us.
Often times, people want to be heard, to be understood: they do not intend to hurt - even if their criticism hurts. Opening up a dialogue allows that to happen. Asking their counsel, whether you can follow it or not, allows them to be heard.
Asking the next question, "how can I rectify the situation" allows them to speak into the issue that has caused them angst and allows one to stay in relationship even if one cannot come to a fully satisfactory mutual solution. Most people can live with differences if we can stay in relationship with them. That is why defensive reactions are so deadly - they push people away rather than bring them closer together; from you rather than to you.
Further, explaining one's own self (without being defensive) often allows the other party to understand our heart, our perspective and the reasons behind our actions. If they realize that we are not meaning to cause them angst or hardship they will often soften their tone and attitude.
I personally see criticism and conflict as a challenge: Not to win the day necessarily but to do all that I can to win the person. If I want to win them rather than the argument my approach will be very different - and healthier. You won't win all over but you can increase your chances.
Critics can be our best friends or become our worst enemies and which it is depends ironically not so much on them as it does on us. It often depends on how we react. Often even with the worst critic whose actions are unhelpful and whose bite is painful there is something for us to learn - if nothing else - how to respond to someone who is angry with us.
Job one with an angry, frustrated or critical individual is to de-escalate the situation. Usually angry people are frustrated. Something has punched their button.
Nothing brings down the level of frustration, anger or conflict like a non-defensive reaction: Something like, "I am really sorry I have caused you that frustration. I would never do so intentionally. Help me understand the issues and what you would suggest if you were in my place." That kind of response immediately takes the wind out of a critics sails, opens up dialogue and asks them for their counsel. It is so rare that it will surprise those who have significant issues with us.
Often times, people want to be heard, to be understood: they do not intend to hurt - even if their criticism hurts. Opening up a dialogue allows that to happen. Asking their counsel, whether you can follow it or not, allows them to be heard.
Asking the next question, "how can I rectify the situation" allows them to speak into the issue that has caused them angst and allows one to stay in relationship even if one cannot come to a fully satisfactory mutual solution. Most people can live with differences if we can stay in relationship with them. That is why defensive reactions are so deadly - they push people away rather than bring them closer together; from you rather than to you.
Further, explaining one's own self (without being defensive) often allows the other party to understand our heart, our perspective and the reasons behind our actions. If they realize that we are not meaning to cause them angst or hardship they will often soften their tone and attitude.
I personally see criticism and conflict as a challenge: Not to win the day necessarily but to do all that I can to win the person. If I want to win them rather than the argument my approach will be very different - and healthier. You won't win all over but you can increase your chances.
Tuesday, July 9, 2013
A leadership fable
"Keep watch over yourselves and all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers. Be shepherds of the church of God which he bought with his own blood. I know that after I leave, savage wolves will come in among you and will not spare the flock. Even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth in order to draw away disciples after them. So be on your guard! Remember that for three years I never stopped warning each of you night and day with tears."
-Paul in his farewell address to the elders of Ephesus, Acts 20
'Pastor Bill' moved to Pennsylvania as the first pastor in a church plant. Soon after, staff members from the larger 'mother' church stopped by for a visit. Before they left, they said, "We're really praying for you."
At first Bill assumed that they were simply praying for ministry success. Soon, though, he began to realize that they knew something he didn't.
Bill noticed that at the leadership board level in the new church, an individual who was one of the founding members seemed to have veto power. He also noted that when decisions were made that "Chris" didn't like, Bill started to hear the board's confidential discussions become common knowledge among Chris' friends in the congregation, a violation of board policy. These friends would then lobby Bill and others to move in a different direction.
Over several years, Bill watched the elder-board meetings become increasingly difficult and sometimes downright ugly, with language and attitudes from several of the members that shocked him. As well, some on the board who had been close supporters began becoming distant and critical as Chris moved in on those relationships Bill could only conclude that his leadership was being undermined behind the scenes, slowly but surely. He came to deeply dread board meetings after becoming a target on numerous issues.
Pastor Bill was in a conundrum. The church was growing rapidly from a group of about 60 to well over 300. Most members had little idea of the pain behind the scenes, but Bill was increasingly discouraged. He began to see Chris as an arsonist who lit fires all over the church but was never around when the firemen came to extinguish them.
At one congregational meeting, after a vote to overwhelmingly support Bill against a group of dissidents headed by Chris, one of those who wanted Bill to leave loudly stated he was going to withdraw all financial support from the church because of its decision. He then stalked out of the auditorium.
Bill started to ask questions of pastors at the mother church and found that Chris had a problematic history there as well. In fact, the pastor had vowed that Chris would never serve in leadership there again. Chris and his friends were no longer even attending Bill's church but continued sowing seeds of discord and dissension among friends and acquaintances still there.
Eventually, Bill and his wife made the painful decision to leave. His board was not ready to place the two main dissidents under discipline, although board members had been strongly encouraged to do so by many from whom they sought counsel. Bill left, discouraged and clinically depressed.
The congregation was increasingly becoming aware of the underlying power issues. In response to Bill's leaving and the lack of resolution to those power plays, more than half of the congregation left after a series of congregational meetings even as Chris returned to the church and reclaimed a leadership role.
A new pastor was called, and he was out of the ministry within a short number of years. A third pastor was called, and he, too, left amid power issues within a short number of years.
Finally, the local bishop intervened on the same issue where the church board had not acted, insisting that Chris could no longer serve in any leadership position in the church. The church had churned up three pastors and left numerous wounded members it its wake. One individual who had watched the destruction observed that this church had hurt more people than it had helped.
How many of us have watched similar situations where leaders have not had the courage to confront toxic, divisive individuals who wound the sheep and divide the bride of Christ? Even those who hide behind a mask of 'spirituality' and 'concern' for the church. One of the primary roles of a shepherd is to protect the flock from harm. David actually fought lions to protect his flock, but we are often unwilling to confront divisive individuals who do as much damage as a lion loose among the sheep!
Those leaders' reluctance to confront was an egregious but common failure. Amazingly, church leaders often allow behavior to flourish that would not be permitted in the secular business workplace.
Conflict will occur in the church, even those with attentive shepherds. So how we handle conflict is important. The scriptural principle (see Matthew 18, 1 Corinthians 5, 2 Corinthians 2:5-11 and Galatians 6:1-2) is to start gently and with prayer in the hope that we can persuade those causing harm to move away from their sin. If this is not successful, we are to apply successive steps of pressure, always seeking resolution and a restoration to fellowship. When all else fails, Scripture calls for the individual to be put out of the body - again, with the hope that this action will cause him or her to turn back to God. All confrontation is to be done in love, accompanied by firmness.
Most people do not like conflict and confrontation (beware of those who do). We live in a day of political correctness, where it is not popular to label behavior as "wrong." We are told that it not right "to judge" others. None of us sign up for leadership to deal with sinful people and ugly situations.
The question is: Do we love God's flock as much as He loves His flock? When we confront false teaching, sinful behavior or division in the body, we are simply acting on His behalf as shepherds of His flock and in obedience to His command in order to protect His sheep for whom He gave His life. Are we willing to put up with momentary discomfort in order to protect people for whom Jesus was willing to die? This is an unwelcome but necessary part of the leadership calling.
-Paul in his farewell address to the elders of Ephesus, Acts 20
'Pastor Bill' moved to Pennsylvania as the first pastor in a church plant. Soon after, staff members from the larger 'mother' church stopped by for a visit. Before they left, they said, "We're really praying for you."
At first Bill assumed that they were simply praying for ministry success. Soon, though, he began to realize that they knew something he didn't.
Bill noticed that at the leadership board level in the new church, an individual who was one of the founding members seemed to have veto power. He also noted that when decisions were made that "Chris" didn't like, Bill started to hear the board's confidential discussions become common knowledge among Chris' friends in the congregation, a violation of board policy. These friends would then lobby Bill and others to move in a different direction.
Over several years, Bill watched the elder-board meetings become increasingly difficult and sometimes downright ugly, with language and attitudes from several of the members that shocked him. As well, some on the board who had been close supporters began becoming distant and critical as Chris moved in on those relationships Bill could only conclude that his leadership was being undermined behind the scenes, slowly but surely. He came to deeply dread board meetings after becoming a target on numerous issues.
Pastor Bill was in a conundrum. The church was growing rapidly from a group of about 60 to well over 300. Most members had little idea of the pain behind the scenes, but Bill was increasingly discouraged. He began to see Chris as an arsonist who lit fires all over the church but was never around when the firemen came to extinguish them.
At one congregational meeting, after a vote to overwhelmingly support Bill against a group of dissidents headed by Chris, one of those who wanted Bill to leave loudly stated he was going to withdraw all financial support from the church because of its decision. He then stalked out of the auditorium.
Bill started to ask questions of pastors at the mother church and found that Chris had a problematic history there as well. In fact, the pastor had vowed that Chris would never serve in leadership there again. Chris and his friends were no longer even attending Bill's church but continued sowing seeds of discord and dissension among friends and acquaintances still there.
Eventually, Bill and his wife made the painful decision to leave. His board was not ready to place the two main dissidents under discipline, although board members had been strongly encouraged to do so by many from whom they sought counsel. Bill left, discouraged and clinically depressed.
The congregation was increasingly becoming aware of the underlying power issues. In response to Bill's leaving and the lack of resolution to those power plays, more than half of the congregation left after a series of congregational meetings even as Chris returned to the church and reclaimed a leadership role.
A new pastor was called, and he was out of the ministry within a short number of years. A third pastor was called, and he, too, left amid power issues within a short number of years.
Finally, the local bishop intervened on the same issue where the church board had not acted, insisting that Chris could no longer serve in any leadership position in the church. The church had churned up three pastors and left numerous wounded members it its wake. One individual who had watched the destruction observed that this church had hurt more people than it had helped.
How many of us have watched similar situations where leaders have not had the courage to confront toxic, divisive individuals who wound the sheep and divide the bride of Christ? Even those who hide behind a mask of 'spirituality' and 'concern' for the church. One of the primary roles of a shepherd is to protect the flock from harm. David actually fought lions to protect his flock, but we are often unwilling to confront divisive individuals who do as much damage as a lion loose among the sheep!
Those leaders' reluctance to confront was an egregious but common failure. Amazingly, church leaders often allow behavior to flourish that would not be permitted in the secular business workplace.
Conflict will occur in the church, even those with attentive shepherds. So how we handle conflict is important. The scriptural principle (see Matthew 18, 1 Corinthians 5, 2 Corinthians 2:5-11 and Galatians 6:1-2) is to start gently and with prayer in the hope that we can persuade those causing harm to move away from their sin. If this is not successful, we are to apply successive steps of pressure, always seeking resolution and a restoration to fellowship. When all else fails, Scripture calls for the individual to be put out of the body - again, with the hope that this action will cause him or her to turn back to God. All confrontation is to be done in love, accompanied by firmness.
Most people do not like conflict and confrontation (beware of those who do). We live in a day of political correctness, where it is not popular to label behavior as "wrong." We are told that it not right "to judge" others. None of us sign up for leadership to deal with sinful people and ugly situations.
The question is: Do we love God's flock as much as He loves His flock? When we confront false teaching, sinful behavior or division in the body, we are simply acting on His behalf as shepherds of His flock and in obedience to His command in order to protect His sheep for whom He gave His life. Are we willing to put up with momentary discomfort in order to protect people for whom Jesus was willing to die? This is an unwelcome but necessary part of the leadership calling.
Monday, July 8, 2013
SDR: For mature audiences only
OK, I acknowledge up front that a few who read this blog will possibly be distressed by the language. That being said, I will write it anyway.Every organization should have a rule about bad stuff that happens - and it will. The bad stuff might be an employee who gets into trouble, a stupid decision that leads to unintended consequences or some other "bad news."
The rule is that leaders and supervisors and boards do not like surprises so when bad stuff happens - and it will, they need to be told immediately, no matter how bad the situation is.
In our organization we call it SDR. It is the Sh*t Disclosure Rule. I use SDR intentionally among our staff because it is something they will not forget - since that is not language we normally use.
What I tell them is that I recognize that bad stuff happens. When it does I want to know immediately, not later, not after they have tried to contain it but immediately. I will be more unhappy if I don't hear about it or if it comes later as a surprise. Likewise, if anything bad happens in my division of our organization, I send my boss an SDR email or make a phone call.
Why do I want to know? Because I don't want a surprise and because I want the option of either myself or another leader helping to manage whatever situation it might be. SDR goes with another embedded rule, "No surprises." No leader likes surprises or wants to hear from others what he or she should have heard firsthand from someone in the chain of supervision.
Sunday, July 7, 2013
When the church hurts people
A friend asked recently, do you have a book on Christ's love for the church? She is a pastor's spouse who is feeling deep ambivalence about her husband's ministry having experienced deep pain - inflicted by - yes - churches they have served.
She was looking for some reinforcement that Christ does in fact love His bride because her experience with the bride has been very painful and there are days that her love for the bride borders on something less than love.
It is deeply ironic that all to often the church which is here only because of the pure, unrelenting, grace filled and mercy bathed love of Jesus is a place of pain, hurt, dysfunction and sometimes actual abuse of those who are a part of it. Explaining this away with a casual "we live in a fallen world," while true, is a poor excuse since the body of Christ is a redeemed people who are supposed to look like Christ - exuding like him that pure, unrelenting, grace filled and mercy bathed love toward one another.
In his high priestly prayer of John 17, Jesus prays that those who believe in Him "may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me." "May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me, and have loved them even as you have love me."
Our love and unity, according to Christ is the proof of His divinity. That is what He says. If that is true, then the corollary is also true: our disunity and our lack of love communicates that He is not indeed God. Love and unity in the church breeds faith in those who see it. Lack of love and disunity in the church breed atheism in those who see it. One is proof of His divinity, the other effectively denies his divinity. One reflects Christ and the other denies Christ.
How many churches reflect Christ? How many deny Him?
I have the privilege and opportunity to visit many churches. When I walk into some of them the welcoming, grace filled and loving culture is evident from the time I enter till the time I leave. There is a transparency among people, a felt unity and a highly engaged worship service - which happens when there is unity.
Others are cold, sterile, formal, non-transparent, filled with politics and congregations that are unresponsive when I speak (OK, maybe it is my preaching). Which of these kinds of churches is likely to attract people? Which is likely to be on that causes people pain? It is not hard to figure out.
I am not down on the church. Those that act like the Bride that they are are wonderful communities to be a part of because they reflect the grace, love and relationships of the who died for her. Those that don't act like the bride - they hurt people and they hurt Christ and they give His Bride a bad name.
I wish my friend did not need to find a book on Christ's love for the church. I wish the church so demonstrated His love, mercy, grace and character that it would be enough proof of His divine presence and power.
She was looking for some reinforcement that Christ does in fact love His bride because her experience with the bride has been very painful and there are days that her love for the bride borders on something less than love.
It is deeply ironic that all to often the church which is here only because of the pure, unrelenting, grace filled and mercy bathed love of Jesus is a place of pain, hurt, dysfunction and sometimes actual abuse of those who are a part of it. Explaining this away with a casual "we live in a fallen world," while true, is a poor excuse since the body of Christ is a redeemed people who are supposed to look like Christ - exuding like him that pure, unrelenting, grace filled and mercy bathed love toward one another.
In his high priestly prayer of John 17, Jesus prays that those who believe in Him "may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me." "May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me, and have loved them even as you have love me."
Our love and unity, according to Christ is the proof of His divinity. That is what He says. If that is true, then the corollary is also true: our disunity and our lack of love communicates that He is not indeed God. Love and unity in the church breeds faith in those who see it. Lack of love and disunity in the church breed atheism in those who see it. One is proof of His divinity, the other effectively denies his divinity. One reflects Christ and the other denies Christ.
How many churches reflect Christ? How many deny Him?
I have the privilege and opportunity to visit many churches. When I walk into some of them the welcoming, grace filled and loving culture is evident from the time I enter till the time I leave. There is a transparency among people, a felt unity and a highly engaged worship service - which happens when there is unity.
Others are cold, sterile, formal, non-transparent, filled with politics and congregations that are unresponsive when I speak (OK, maybe it is my preaching). Which of these kinds of churches is likely to attract people? Which is likely to be on that causes people pain? It is not hard to figure out.
I am not down on the church. Those that act like the Bride that they are are wonderful communities to be a part of because they reflect the grace, love and relationships of the who died for her. Those that don't act like the bride - they hurt people and they hurt Christ and they give His Bride a bad name.
I wish my friend did not need to find a book on Christ's love for the church. I wish the church so demonstrated His love, mercy, grace and character that it would be enough proof of His divine presence and power.
Saturday, July 6, 2013
When it may be time to leave a church
Some would say that church loyalty is one of the greatest values and certainly jumping from church to church is unhealthy. However, there are legitimate reasons to leave a church and look for another. Just remember that there are no perfect churches.
Consider these reasons:
Consider these reasons:
- The church is inward focused and having little or no influence outside of its walls
- There is a legalistic spirit which is anathema to what grace is all about
- You don't feel comfortable bringing unbelieving friends
- The congregation is controlled by one or more church bosses and politics is prevalent
- You have been marginalized by a leader or leaders and don't feel that you can make a positive contribution
- There is a high control factor to keep church members "in line" with the prevailing group think
- The church board is highly dysfunctional and cannot lead the congregation into healthy and productive ministry
- Independent voices are quickly stifled
- You are not hearing the Scriptures lifted up in the messages but rather psychology and self help
There are no perfect churches but there are churches that see far more Gospel fruit and changed lives than others. With the short time we have we want to make the most impact for Jesus that we can. If that means changing churches it is an OK thing. I have done it for some of these very reasons.
Congregations, especially dysfunctional ones make it hard for one to leave. They may use guilt and pressure of various kinds to keep one connected. Many take it personally when someone leaves a church. Remember, though that the church we attend is a choice we make and when the choice is taken from us we are no longer in a healthy place. Friendships do not need to go away because we don't attend the same church. If they do, they were superficial friendships in the first place. We will spend eternity together. Sometimes we need to change our location on this side of eternity!
Congregations, especially dysfunctional ones make it hard for one to leave. They may use guilt and pressure of various kinds to keep one connected. Many take it personally when someone leaves a church. Remember, though that the church we attend is a choice we make and when the choice is taken from us we are no longer in a healthy place. Friendships do not need to go away because we don't attend the same church. If they do, they were superficial friendships in the first place. We will spend eternity together. Sometimes we need to change our location on this side of eternity!
Character: The hidden self
What people see of us is a small portion of who we really are. Our thoughts, motives, intentions, intimacy with Christ, or lack of it, the habits that we practice, or don’t, the practices we cultivate in our hidden lives are the powerful but hidden core of who we are and they form the character that flows out of us. Too often we focus on ensuring that what people see ‘looks good’ rather than focusing on the hidden character that ensures instead that what people see is ‘genuine.’
What would happen if we concentrated on cultivating the deepest part of who we are rather than cultivating the ‘image’ we want others to see?
Proverbs 4:23 puts this into perspective: “Above all else, guard your heart for it is the wellspring of life.” Everything we truly are flows from our heart – that hidden part of us – so if we want to be everything God wants us to be and made us to be the first focus of our lives will be in protecting our hearts and growing into the likeness of Christ.
Who we really are comes out when we are under pressure or in pain. What will flow from our minds, lips and actions will be what we have cultivated in our hearts. Nothing more, nothing less.
What is success? Certainly we value accomplishing the job we have set out to do, being intentional in our lives, fulfilling our Key Result Areas and Annual Ministry Plans (see previous posts) and being productive. But none of these rises to the level of importance of guarding our hearts and growing into the likeness of Christ.
Solitude, time alone and without distraction where we can quiet our hearts, spend time in the presence of our Father, listen to his voice, be nourished with is word and think deeply about our hidden selves is the most important thing we do. For out of the heart will flow what we really are. Nourishing our heart is the key to real success for without the nourishment we are nothing more than spiritual anorexics.
Why do we find this so difficult when we know it is so important? Because it is hidden! Others do not see what is in our hearts, and the demands of life and work are so pressing. But we ignore our hearts to our peril. The public ‘us’ is only an extension of the private ‘us.’ Just as the iceberg we see is only an extension of the greater part of the iceberg we don’t see. Character is what we are when no one is looking – and character is formed in the dark, before we need to exhibit it.
Jesus regularly withdrew to “a private place to pray” and spend time with the Father. How often do we follow his example? Is there room in our busy lives to do ‘soul work,’ allowing Him to mold our thinking, our priorities, our passions and our innermost hearts? Is our private life ‘robust and healthy’ or ‘anorexic and stale?’ The answer to that question will contribute to our success or failure more than any other issue.
Take some time – alone – and think about it.
Friday, July 5, 2013
Relational resets
There are times when relationships have gone sideways and have become dysfunctional enough that it takes an intentional reset to get them back on track. I have been involved helping a number of individuals recently reset critical relationships.
A reset is not pretending that the issues that caused the dysfunction or conflict is ignored. In fact, it is only when both parties are willing to acknowledge the damage and the reasons for the dysfunction that one can realistically reset the relationship. Without truly honest dialogue parties can sometimes agree to live in peace but a relational reset requires truly honest and candid conversation.
It starts with the ability of both parties to tell one another the truth about how they truly feel and why. In most cases this conversation will need to be brokered by a skilled facilitator who can draw out the issues and ensure that they all get put on the table. In that conversation it is critical that all issues that have become problematic are put on the table so there are no elephants that remain. Getting it all on the table is the first step toward a relational reset.
The second step is to talk through the issues that have been identified without defensiveness on either side. Non defensiveness invites dialogue and without dialogue, parties do not have a chance to understand one another. When we can listen to one another and seek to understand one another it allow us to ask probing questions in order to understand one another and to push into attitudes or practices that have hurt the other party or ourselves.
The third step is to discuss what kind of relationship the two parties desire. Write it down and clearly define the preferred relationship.
Step four is to ask the question, "If we are going to reset the relationship in the way we have defined it, what changes are necessary for each of us?" This may involve, communication issues, keeping short accounts, changing attitudes, not questioning motives and any number of other changes. These identified changes need to be written down as well.
This may not be a short conversation. It could take a day or longer depending on how deep the divisions are. I can tell you from personal experience that it can make a great difference for us, for relationships and for the Kingdom.
A reset is not pretending that the issues that caused the dysfunction or conflict is ignored. In fact, it is only when both parties are willing to acknowledge the damage and the reasons for the dysfunction that one can realistically reset the relationship. Without truly honest dialogue parties can sometimes agree to live in peace but a relational reset requires truly honest and candid conversation.
It starts with the ability of both parties to tell one another the truth about how they truly feel and why. In most cases this conversation will need to be brokered by a skilled facilitator who can draw out the issues and ensure that they all get put on the table. In that conversation it is critical that all issues that have become problematic are put on the table so there are no elephants that remain. Getting it all on the table is the first step toward a relational reset.
The second step is to talk through the issues that have been identified without defensiveness on either side. Non defensiveness invites dialogue and without dialogue, parties do not have a chance to understand one another. When we can listen to one another and seek to understand one another it allow us to ask probing questions in order to understand one another and to push into attitudes or practices that have hurt the other party or ourselves.
The third step is to discuss what kind of relationship the two parties desire. Write it down and clearly define the preferred relationship.
Step four is to ask the question, "If we are going to reset the relationship in the way we have defined it, what changes are necessary for each of us?" This may involve, communication issues, keeping short accounts, changing attitudes, not questioning motives and any number of other changes. These identified changes need to be written down as well.
This may not be a short conversation. It could take a day or longer depending on how deep the divisions are. I can tell you from personal experience that it can make a great difference for us, for relationships and for the Kingdom.
Thursday, July 4, 2013
Is your organization a ministry or a collection of different ministries?
That may sound like a funny question but my observation is that many organizations are not one organization but many different organizations doing different things with different values and independent leaders. In other words, each team or division is doing its own thing in its own way. That is not an organization! It is a collection of organizations with a common name.
It happens with churches, mission agencies and other ministries. Usually it happens because:
It happens with churches, mission agencies and other ministries. Usually it happens because:
- There is not clarity so leaders and people do their own thing
- There is not a leader at the top who is committed to alignment
- There is not adequate time and effort put into choosing leaders who are committed to a common cause and know how to lead their team in that direction
- There is not accountability for common results allowing leaders and teams to do their own thing
Of course the cost to the organization is high. It is like a boat race crew where every crew member is rowing at their own pace rather than in a synchronized way. When members of an organization pull the oars together there is amazing speed. When members don't pull the oars at the same time the water splashes, the oars clash and the boat languishes.
Which boat characterizes your ministry?
Wednesday, July 3, 2013
It takes only one leader to hijack a team and cause great pain to your ministry
I often write on the issue of alignment within organizations. I know from both personal experience as well as from working with numerous organizations the pain that an unaligned leader can bring to the organization.
Unaligned leaders essentially hijack their entire team from the rest of the organization. It happens in churches, missions and other ministry organizations. Unfortunately, when this happens, and the leader is redeployed, (often outside the organization) it often takes great time and energy to bring the team back into alignment with the organization as a whole. As a senior leader who has had to deal with this on a number of occasions I know the harm it does and the incredible effort it takes to rectify the situation.
Ensuring alignment throughout an organization is one of the most important jobs of a leader and one of the most critical issues to constantly monitor. When senior leaders allow leaders in their organization to drift or act as independent contractors they take their staff in the same direction. The longer it is allowed to exist the longer it will take to rectify.
How do you ensure that your leaders are in alignment? Alignment always requires great clarity as to what the organization is about and what the non-negotiables are. Without clarity there will never be alignment.
Second, Senior leaders must spend quality time with leaders throughout the organization, dialoging, asking questions, probing and observing those who lead throughout the organization. And, asking questions of staff throughout the organization.
If one knows or senses that there are alignment issues, push into it. It may well be that the issue can be resolved. Sometimes resolution means that a leader who is operating as an independent contractor needs to be moved out of their role. Remember though that where nonalignment occurs it impacts everyone on that team or in that division and therefore hurts the organization as a whole.
Philosophically I deeply believe in empowering leaders in our organization and our leaders have a huge degree of freedom. What I cannot do is to delegate and ignore issues of alignment. I never take it for granted, guard it constantly and talk about it regularly.
If you are dealing with alignment issues you may want to read Leading From the Sandbox which deals with clarity, healthy teams and healthy leaders.
Unaligned leaders essentially hijack their entire team from the rest of the organization. It happens in churches, missions and other ministry organizations. Unfortunately, when this happens, and the leader is redeployed, (often outside the organization) it often takes great time and energy to bring the team back into alignment with the organization as a whole. As a senior leader who has had to deal with this on a number of occasions I know the harm it does and the incredible effort it takes to rectify the situation.
Ensuring alignment throughout an organization is one of the most important jobs of a leader and one of the most critical issues to constantly monitor. When senior leaders allow leaders in their organization to drift or act as independent contractors they take their staff in the same direction. The longer it is allowed to exist the longer it will take to rectify.
How do you ensure that your leaders are in alignment? Alignment always requires great clarity as to what the organization is about and what the non-negotiables are. Without clarity there will never be alignment.
Second, Senior leaders must spend quality time with leaders throughout the organization, dialoging, asking questions, probing and observing those who lead throughout the organization. And, asking questions of staff throughout the organization.
If one knows or senses that there are alignment issues, push into it. It may well be that the issue can be resolved. Sometimes resolution means that a leader who is operating as an independent contractor needs to be moved out of their role. Remember though that where nonalignment occurs it impacts everyone on that team or in that division and therefore hurts the organization as a whole.
Philosophically I deeply believe in empowering leaders in our organization and our leaders have a huge degree of freedom. What I cannot do is to delegate and ignore issues of alignment. I never take it for granted, guard it constantly and talk about it regularly.
If you are dealing with alignment issues you may want to read Leading From the Sandbox which deals with clarity, healthy teams and healthy leaders.
Tuesday, July 2, 2013
A theology of relationships: 7 Biblical guidelines
Scripture has a great deal to say about relationships - principles that are often violated and which leads to all kinds of dysfunction, misunderstandings and conflict. If, on the other hand we lived out the relational counsel of Scripture there would be far less relational chaos in our world.
Speaking the truth in love
Speaking truth to others is incredibly important. Truth is about honesty. Not being fully truthful is a form of dishonesty which does no parties any good. Of course there are two temptations here. The first is not to speak the whole truth and the second is to speak the truth harshly (without consideration and love). Both will get us into relational trouble
Self definition
This is about the ability to speak the truth to others even when we know that others will disagree. There is often the temptation to tell others what they want to hear rather than what we really think. When Jesus says, "Let your yes be yes and your no be no," He is speaking to the issue of personal honesty (Matthew 5:37). When we give people the wrong impression of what we are actually thinking we sow the seeds of future misunderstanding.
Forgiveness
It goes without saying perhaps except that there are many who refuse to forgive those who have wronged them or for a perceived slight. Not only do we end up unable to restore the relationship when we don't forgive but we start to live in a prison of bitterness of our own making. A fallen world demands relational resets that can only take place when forgiveness is extended.
Making assumptions about motives
Much relational disconnect comes from assuming the motives of others - something we cannot do because we cannot know the thoughts and hearts of another. When Jesus tells us not to judge others but pay attention to the issues of our own hearts he is going to the heart of no making assumptions about the motives of others. We can judge behaviors but we cannot judge hearts and when we do we are usually wrong.
Extending patience and kindness
The fruit of the Spirit: Love, joy, peace patience, kindness, gentleness, and self control ought to be the guiding relational attitudes we bring to bear in every relationship and interaction. It is not easy and they are not called the fruit of the Spirit for nothing - they require the Holy Spirit in our lives to live out. Think of how much relational disconnect would be avoided if we lived that out!
Conflict resolution
When Jesus says not to let the sun go down on our wrath he is indicating that keeping short accounts is critical. The Scriptures say a great deal about peace between individuals and Paul tells us to live at peace with one another - at least as it depends on us. This is a choice we make. Matthew 18 makes it clear that to resolve conflict we must go to the one with whom a relationship has been broken and not to others.
Humility
A posture of humility, seeing ourselves realistically and treating others as worthy of honor is a huge asset in good relationships and one that was modeled by Christ. Pride and needing to be right and have our own way hurt relationships every time. By definition, pride destroys healthy relationships as it is now about me rather than about us.
Speaking the truth in love
Speaking truth to others is incredibly important. Truth is about honesty. Not being fully truthful is a form of dishonesty which does no parties any good. Of course there are two temptations here. The first is not to speak the whole truth and the second is to speak the truth harshly (without consideration and love). Both will get us into relational trouble
Self definition
This is about the ability to speak the truth to others even when we know that others will disagree. There is often the temptation to tell others what they want to hear rather than what we really think. When Jesus says, "Let your yes be yes and your no be no," He is speaking to the issue of personal honesty (Matthew 5:37). When we give people the wrong impression of what we are actually thinking we sow the seeds of future misunderstanding.
Forgiveness
It goes without saying perhaps except that there are many who refuse to forgive those who have wronged them or for a perceived slight. Not only do we end up unable to restore the relationship when we don't forgive but we start to live in a prison of bitterness of our own making. A fallen world demands relational resets that can only take place when forgiveness is extended.
Making assumptions about motives
Much relational disconnect comes from assuming the motives of others - something we cannot do because we cannot know the thoughts and hearts of another. When Jesus tells us not to judge others but pay attention to the issues of our own hearts he is going to the heart of no making assumptions about the motives of others. We can judge behaviors but we cannot judge hearts and when we do we are usually wrong.
Extending patience and kindness
The fruit of the Spirit: Love, joy, peace patience, kindness, gentleness, and self control ought to be the guiding relational attitudes we bring to bear in every relationship and interaction. It is not easy and they are not called the fruit of the Spirit for nothing - they require the Holy Spirit in our lives to live out. Think of how much relational disconnect would be avoided if we lived that out!
Conflict resolution
When Jesus says not to let the sun go down on our wrath he is indicating that keeping short accounts is critical. The Scriptures say a great deal about peace between individuals and Paul tells us to live at peace with one another - at least as it depends on us. This is a choice we make. Matthew 18 makes it clear that to resolve conflict we must go to the one with whom a relationship has been broken and not to others.
Humility
A posture of humility, seeing ourselves realistically and treating others as worthy of honor is a huge asset in good relationships and one that was modeled by Christ. Pride and needing to be right and have our own way hurt relationships every time. By definition, pride destroys healthy relationships as it is now about me rather than about us.
Monday, July 1, 2013
Who needs to grapple with leadership issues of an organization?
Every organization has significant challenges and many senior leaders believe that they need to come up with the answers to those challenges. Every senior leader must engage in those issues but the truth is that it is equally important that senior leadership teams engage in those issues together. Who is responsible to solve organizational issues? It starts with the senior leadership team together.
Wise leaders allow organizational issues to be discussed and problem solving done by the leadership team as a whole. The more the senior leader dominates the discussion the more the rest of the team will allow the issue to rest on his/her shoulders. The less they dominate, the more the rest of the team will take corporate responsibility.
This requires a leader to allow transparency on issues the organization faces. Either hiding issues or not wanting them to be carefully scrutinized - usually because the senior leader takes personal responsibility - is a major mistake. If you want significant dialogue the team needs to know exactly what the issues are and the true picture. Bad news or problematic news means that there is significant opportunity for improvement. Hiding the bad news prevents the very dialogue that makes it possible to solve problems.
The key to a senior leadership group taking responsibility for an organization's issues is a senior leader who is willing to share the facts, willing to engage the team in problem solving and has the humility to admit that he/she does not have all the answers. That humility breeds others who become problem solvers with you - for the good of the organization.
Wise leaders allow organizational issues to be discussed and problem solving done by the leadership team as a whole. The more the senior leader dominates the discussion the more the rest of the team will allow the issue to rest on his/her shoulders. The less they dominate, the more the rest of the team will take corporate responsibility.
This requires a leader to allow transparency on issues the organization faces. Either hiding issues or not wanting them to be carefully scrutinized - usually because the senior leader takes personal responsibility - is a major mistake. If you want significant dialogue the team needs to know exactly what the issues are and the true picture. Bad news or problematic news means that there is significant opportunity for improvement. Hiding the bad news prevents the very dialogue that makes it possible to solve problems.
The key to a senior leadership group taking responsibility for an organization's issues is a senior leader who is willing to share the facts, willing to engage the team in problem solving and has the humility to admit that he/she does not have all the answers. That humility breeds others who become problem solvers with you - for the good of the organization.
Sunday, June 30, 2013
Trust busters and builders
There are practices that contribute to cultures of trust and those which contribute to cultures of mistrust. Leaders of others set the pace by choosing practices that support cultures of trust.
Trust Builder: Choosing to trust.
Trust Builder: Choosing to trust.
Trust Buster: Starting from mistrust
You can count on me to trust you unless you give me a reason not to do so. In the event that trust is broken, I will clarify how trust can be re-established. I will always start from a position of trust rather than a position of mistrust
Trust Builder: Being candid and up-front.
Trust Buster: Being vague and fuzzy
You can count on me to tell you what I am thinking, what my expectations are, how I perceive your strengths and weaknesses and if there is a performance issue, what you need to do to solve it. You may not always agree with me but you can count on me to be clear a bout what I am thinking and why.
Trust Builder: Keeping my promises
Trust Buster: Breaking my promises
I will commit to those things that I can commit to and you can count on me to follow through with my commitment. If for some reason I find myself unable to carry through on a promise, I will tell you. I will not commit to those things that I know I cannot deliver on.
Trust Builder: Acting consistently
Trust Buster : Acting inconsistently
My life will match my words and you can count on me to be consistent in how I treat those who report to me, in the pattern of my life and in living out the commitments of the organization. Inconsistency will be an exception rather than the rule.
Trust Builder: Listening carefully
Trust Buster: Not engaging in real dialogue
I will respectfully listen to and dialogue with you and will be candid in my responses. This means that there is always opportunity for dialogue, questions, clarification and my commitment is to carefully consider your opinions and suggestions even if in the end I choose a different path.
Trust Builder: Being fair and equitable
Trust Buster: Giving preferential treatment
You can expect me to act with your best interests in mind and to always seek to be fair and equitable in decisions that impact you.
Trust Builder: Caring for people
Trust Buster: Using people
You can expect me to genuinely care about you as a whole person and never simply use you for my or the organization's purpose. This means that I will also seek to engage you in your sweet spot where there is convergence between your gifts and our needs.
Trust Builder: Self disclosing
Trust Buster: Secretive or unable to 'read'
You can expect me to be appropriately self disclosing about who I am, what I am thinking, where I am going and my own challenges.
Trust Builder: Empowering
Trust Buster: Controlling
Where you are given responsibility I will empower you to carry it out within clearly articulated boundaries rather than micromanage you or control you.
Trust Builder: Clarifying
Trust Buster: Making assumptions
If it appears to me that you have violated my trust or acted inappropriately, I will ask you for clarification on what happened and why rather than assume that you deliverately chose to do something unwise or inappropriate.
Saturday, June 29, 2013
Don't resaw the sawdust
How many of us live with high levels of regret: issues from the past that continue to haunt our minds, our hearts and our conscience! Yet we know intellectually that God has taken care of all that has been forgiven and sin which we have forsaken. But our intellectual knowledge often does not match our heart acceptance.The regrets of life are like sawdust and you cannot resaw sawdust. It is dust that has already been sawn and now is good for nothing but to be swept up and left in the sawdust bin.
God's grace covers all of our sin and all of us have plenty of sin to cover, and his grace is always greater than the amount or severity of our sin. He has made sawdust of that sin removing it from us as far as the east is from the west.
The evil one wants us to continue in our guilt and shame. Both which have been lifted and paid for. Don't let him.
The next time you think of those regrets, remind yourself, "You cannot resaw sawdust." God shredded it, leave it in the bin. It is a simple reminder that can free us from what God has already paid the price for.
Friday, June 28, 2013
Healthy teams
Consider this definition of a healthy team: A high impact ministry team is a group of missionally aligned and healthy individuals working strategically together under good leadership toward common objectives, with accountability for results. All of these same criteria apply to healthy church boards as well.
A team is not simply a random group of people thrown together because there are slots to fill - at least healthy teams are not built that way. Think of the team you are on or the team you lead and consider these key elements of healthy teams.
Healthy teams are missionally aligned.
They are made up of people who are all committed to the same mission and understand with great clarity what that mission is (see the last blog on alignment). Mission is the true glue that holds the team together more than any other factor. Non aligned teams are not teams because by definition they cannot be moving together in the same direction (the arrows don't all point in one direction).
They are made up of healthy individuals.
Too often we ignore the issue of Emotional Intelligence (EQ) when building team. Healthy individuals are open to the opinions of others, lack defensiveness, are aware of who they are and how others perceive them, are able to release people rather than control them, can engage in constructive and robust dialogue and have the ability to abide by common decisions.
When you consider the definition of a healthy person above, you realize how critical that is for a team to function well because in the absence of that kind of health teams will be dysfunctional and dysfunctional teams are never high impact.
They work strategically together toward common objectives.
Good teams are those where the members are committed to working syneristically together rather than simply doing their own thing and showing up for meetings and pretending it is "team." This means that team members embrace the objectives of the whole team and take the whole team into consideration in decisions that they make. It is about "we" not "me." Teams that are about "me" rather than "we" are not true teams and do not see the same results.
They have good leadership.
Teams are not led by committee. Someone must lead and provide the necessary clarity and direction and accountability but in an open, collegial atmosphere where robust dialogue is practiced and the team has ownership of their objectives. But there must be leaders. In fact, good leaders are those who can do just that.
Passive leaders cannot lead healthy teams and in the absence of leadership someone else will step in or the team will exist as a "gathering" but will not be team.
This requires team leaders to put a lot of time into team meetings for the sake of missional alignment, increasing the health quotient of team members (development), white boarding strategy together, determining common objectives and ensuring that there are real results. Team leaders cannot treat team meetings lightly if they want to lead a healthy team.
They hold members accountable for results.
This is not very popular or common in ministry circles. We focus more on relationships than we do on ministry results and do not exercised the discipline which teams in the marketplace must exercise in order to stay viable. It is sad, however, because the mission of the church and other ministries has eternal implications not just quarterly returns. Thus results matter, quality matters, discipline matters and measurement of how well we are doing matters.
Where there is no accountability for results, there cannot be healthy team. Nor will you attract or keep high quality ministry personnel who want their lives to count.
How healthy is the team you lead or the one you serve on? What could you be doing differently to raise the level of its healthy and effectiveness?
Thursday, June 27, 2013
Nine Leadership Essentials
EQ matters a lot!
Emotional intelligence is one of the most overlooked issues when hiring or building a team. Those with poor EQ leave relational havoc in their wake while those with good EQ are able to maintain good relationships, are generally not defensive or arrogant and can play well on a team.
Clarity is critical
The first job of a leader is to provide maximum clarity to their team on what the organization is about, how the organization will achieve its ends, the values it espouses and the culture that it is committed to create. Clarity is job one.
Coaching is necessary
The intentional developing of staff cannot be taken for granted and is the job of its leader. Monthly check ins with a mentor/coach mentality focused on helping staff become all they can be is a non-negotiable for good leaders. Leaders who do this develop a world class staff.
Feedback is essential
Leaders both provide honest feedback to their staff and want it themselves. They are honest with what they see in their staff, and want their staff to be honest with them on issues they see.
Mission drift easily happens
Mission drift happens all the time and it is the leader's role to keep the team focused on what is most important. Leaders never take their eye off the ball and are always pushing the missional agenda and asking the questions that will keep the team on that agenda
Activity does not equal results
Leaders are not fooled by activity. Everyone is busy but not everyone sees the same results. Leaders ensure that they and their team are focused on the right kinds of activity that will bring maximum missional results.
Wiring must be understood
Leaders are students of the wiring of their staff and work to ensure that staff are in their sweet spot where gifts and strengths converge for the best results. Leaders don't fill slots with people. They put people in the place where they will be the most productive and successful.
Empowerment and accountability both
matter
Leaders empower their staff to do what they are responsible to do in ways that align with their gifts and strengths. They do not micromanage! But they also hold staff accountable for measurable results. They know that empowerment and accountability are two sides of the same coin.
Consistency is key
Leaders are predictable. They treat people consistently, have predictable and consistent behaviors and stay the course they have chosen. Their consistency becomes an anchor to the rest of the team. They are seen as trustworthy
Wednesday, June 26, 2013
What we know, think we know and don't know
Most of us believe we know more than we actually do – which is a dangerous position to be in. In fact, the greater our ability the greater the risk that we confuse what we know with what we think we know and minimize what we don’t know.
Jim, ranks as one of the brightest leaders I have ever met. Yet, he rarely makes a key decision without bouncing it off of a few key advisers who are in a position to tell him exactly what they think – some from outside of the organization he leads. With all of his skills as a leader, Jim wants to make the right call, not simply the call he thinks is right. In his use of a few key advisers in whom he has great trust he minimizes the risk of a bad call. It also demonstrates great humility and EQ.
There is a massive third category: what we truly don’t know! Here is one of the key distinctive between leaders with good EQ and real humility: those with it acknowledge on numerous occasions that they don’t have the answer and seek wisdom from those who might while those without it pretend or believe they have the answer and pay for that foolishness dearly.
I know many leaders who believe that they must have the answer and that their internal compass is always right. Thus, not only do they not solicit feedback or wisdom from others (with the exception of those who would agree with them) but they consistently get themselves into trouble with others because they went it alone (of course it is never their issue). It rarely occurs to these leaders that they don’t actually know what they ought to do. The result is that in a universe of possible solutions on any one topic, they are stuck in the small prison of what they actually know – or think they know.
Humble and healthy leaders do not assume they know the right course of action or that they can figure it out by themselves. In fact, they are by nature curious, always asking questions, desirous of knowing what others are doing and approach issues with an open mind that invites the best thinking to the table. They do not doubt their ability to get to where they need to go in the end but they are humble enough to realize that in the world of possible solutions, they know only a few and if there is a “game changing” solution they want to know about it.
For this reason, humble leaders rarely make quick decisions but “think grey” and solicit the opinions and ideas of the best people they know – in the area where they need to make a call. Often, they bring multiple voices together at once to think through an issue.
In the process they learn a lot – one of the reasons they are truly good leaders and they develop a cadre of highly competent people who they add to their circle of friends that they can call on in the future. Ironically, their history of making good calls my seem brilliant but if you peel back the process you realize that they did not make them in a vacuum but through their willingness to engage other bright people in the process and admit that they did not have the solutions themselves.
In contrast, prideful leaders – those who cannot admit their need for the wisdom of others either copy someone else’s solution (it may have no context in their case) or trust their limited wisdom never realizing how small their world of knowledge actually is!
What we don’t know is a powerful stimulus to living with a spirit of humility. The more we understand what we don’t know the more open we are to soliciting the input and wisdom of others. And the more we learn from other bright people, the better our own leadership and decision making. Wisdom does not come to the insecure and prideful but to the secure and humble.
Tuesday, June 25, 2013
Attitudes of grace
There are few more important themes in Scripture than that of grace. One of the hallmarks of Christ is that He was full of "grace and truth" (John 1:17). The gospel is all about the grace of God applied to our lives, His unmerited favor given freely to us not only in salvation but on a daily basis!
As one reads the gospels, one sees Christ interacting with graciousness with all, with the exception of the Pharisees who were hypocrites. There was always truth in His conversations but it was a gracious truth.
Organizational leaders set an example and monitor the culture of the organization or team that they lead. In the Christian world, one of the hallmarks of our ethos should be a graciousness in our interactions with one another.
There are many attitudes that do not exude grace: gossip, cynicism, mistrust, assuming the worst rather than the best, anger, and impatience. These are often encountered but they do not reflect the character and attitudes of grace. In fact, they are the opposite of grace: ungracious judgement of others.
This does not mean that we cannot address questions, issues or press into dialogue on difficult subjects. Just the opposite should be true and Jesus certainly did not dodge the difficult conversations or issues. What it does mean is that as we interact with one another, the grace that Jesus gave to us ought to be evident in our interactions with one another. His grace to us ought to be our grace to one another. To not show grace to one another is to deny God's grace to us.
Grace and truth is a powerful combination that creates a unique and God honoring ethos in any organization. Leaders model it and call others to it.
Monday, June 24, 2013
It is policy
Last week I stayed at the Hilton Mexico
City Reforma (yes they deserve to be named in this blog and I have kindly
forwarded a copy on to them). On my first morning I was sitting with a
colleague in the lobby with my eyes closed as we waited for our friends to
arrive for the day. All of a sudden I was prodded by a security guard who
proceeded to lecture me in Spanish for some unknown infraction. It turned out I
was not allowed to “sleep” in the lobby which I was not in fact doing. Just
because one’s eyes are closed does not necessarily constitute sleeping. My
colleague will attest there was no requisite snoring.
Once I understood what he was adamant
about I went to the front desk to share my unhappiness regarding my treatment. The answer was, “It is policy sir.” I asked
for the front desk manager, told her what happened and was told, “It is policy
sir.” She knew that I wanted to talk to the hotel General Manager but he was
unavailable and we left for the day.
Inexplicably, the General Manager did
not attempt to leave a message for me although he had been told of the
situation so I called him later that afternoon to dialogue with him about my
treatment as a guest at his hotel. “Sorry sir, it is policy” he said. “We have
had people from the street come and sleep on our chairs so we have this policy.
It is unfortunate but it is our policy.”
I suggested to him that it would be
fairly evident that I was not a homeless individual from the streets of his
capital – I was wearing professional clothes including a white dress shirt, had
a camera and was sitting with a colleague but that seemed to make no
difference. After all, he said he had not met me personally so he could not
make a judgment on that. Policy is policy. And this is the hospitality industry
and I was paying to stay in his hotel.
I asked him why I should consider
staying in his hotel again for which he had no answer nor seemed the least bit
concerned: So much for “hospitality.” Incidentally, I have Diamond Status with
Hilton which seemed to make no difference in any of the three conversations.
Now I stay in a lot of hotels around
the world each year and this has never happened to me although I have had many
adventures in lesser hotels – which is to be expected. When I shared this with
the manager he just said, “I am sorry, but that is our policy.”
It got me thinking about policies. It
is easy to write policies but harder to write policies that get the right
outcome. In this case, in an attempt to stop street people from sleeping in
their lobby the hotel developed a policy that disenfranchised their own guests.
They were also evidently unable to differentiate between a street person and a
hotel guest. How dumb is that? Yet we do the same thing in organizations all
the time, especially when we write policies to solve problems that could and
should be solved in other and better ways.
Following his lead, I will never stay
at his hotel again. It is my new policy! I learned from the best. What policies
do you have that are counterproductive to what you are trying to accomplish?
Measuring our hearts against God's heart
There is nothing that challenges me more than to understand the amazing heart of the eternal God and then measure my heart against His. Think about this:
While I find it so hard to forgive at times, He forgives easily and quickly because He does not want to live out of fellowship with us.
While I can tolerate injustice small and large, His heart is broken by the injustices that are so much a part of our fallen world.
While I can become deeply engrossed in my own ministry, His heart is for all ministries - His is a big and generous and non-parochial heart.
While I quibble over fine points of doctrine, He is driven that all men and women and children hear the Gospel and find a relationship with Jesus.
While I am loyal to my denominational brand He cares for His whole Bride.
While I pray for my own needs, His heart is for the needs of a world gone wrong through sin with all the brokenness that comes with that fact.
While I can marginalize some people who are not like me, He sees every human being as made in His Image and equally worthy of His love. His heart never marginalizes anyone.
While I like to hang out with people who are respectable His heart is for the unrespectable as well - just look who He hung out with in the incarnation.
While there are people I would pass by, there is no-one He would pass by.
While I am impatient, critical and condemning of those who don't meet my standards, He is patient and gracious and forbearing.
Take a moment this week and consider where your heart is against His heart. His greatest goal for us is that His heart would become our heart.
Sunday, June 23, 2013
We do solutions, not complaints, blame or excuses
In any organization or team there is plenty one can complain about. People and life and circumstances are not perfect which is why there are no perfect organizations. Unfortunately there are always those who enjoy complaining about what goes wrong or what could be better and those who cover their own issues with excuses.
My mantra is that "we do solutions, not complaints or excuses."
Actually, finding deficiencies is a good, not bad thing, as it allows us to get better. However, what one does with those deficiencies is the key.
If I complain, I am putting the onus of the issue on others which may make me feel good (it is not my issue) because it is someone else's issue to solve. That of course puts the one we perceive as responsible on the defensive with gets us no-where except into the realm of bad feelings.
If I cover up my own deficiencies with excuses, I am also usually blaming others because I have to find someone or something to excuse the fact that I did not deliver on something. Someone or something got in the way of my being able to deliver so it is not my fault. Again we enter the real of blaming others.
Both complaining and excusing are off limits in a healthy organization or team. What is encouraged is to find places where we need to do better and then work to find solutions. Solutions are not about blame, criticism or complaints but about solving problems. And problem solving is a positive exercise while the previous tactics are negative exercises.
Which do you allow in your organization? Complaints, excuses and blame or solutions?
My mantra is that "we do solutions, not complaints or excuses."
Actually, finding deficiencies is a good, not bad thing, as it allows us to get better. However, what one does with those deficiencies is the key.
If I complain, I am putting the onus of the issue on others which may make me feel good (it is not my issue) because it is someone else's issue to solve. That of course puts the one we perceive as responsible on the defensive with gets us no-where except into the realm of bad feelings.
If I cover up my own deficiencies with excuses, I am also usually blaming others because I have to find someone or something to excuse the fact that I did not deliver on something. Someone or something got in the way of my being able to deliver so it is not my fault. Again we enter the real of blaming others.
Both complaining and excusing are off limits in a healthy organization or team. What is encouraged is to find places where we need to do better and then work to find solutions. Solutions are not about blame, criticism or complaints but about solving problems. And problem solving is a positive exercise while the previous tactics are negative exercises.
Which do you allow in your organization? Complaints, excuses and blame or solutions?
Saturday, June 22, 2013
Churches and group think
I have recently run into a number of situations where pastors of churches got into trouble with their boards and senior pastor when they disagreed with them or spoke their minds (in appropriate ways).
In both cases, at least at the leadership level there was a high degree of group think with any deviation from the specified allowed thinking patterns labeled as disloyal, sinful and in fact grounds for punitive action. In both cases, the punitive action was to be kept "secret" and the staff members were not allowed to talk to anyone about the issues at hand. Nor were they given a proper hearing by leaders who demanded absolute loyalty.
These are obviously highly dysfunctional churches and border on cult like practices. In cults there is an absolute mandate to take the party line, no place for either dissent or independent thinking and when someone starts to think independently they are strictly warned of the consequences. There are also "secrets" because these are not open systems, secrets and lack of transparency are high.
Paul obviously felt free to disagree with Peter in the early church. Unity in the church (a word that gets bandied about often in group think churches) does not mean that we all agree on everything. It does mean that we agree to work together - and the best working together happens when there is honesty, grace, transparency and the ability to speak one's mind. It never happens when these elements are missing.
Interestingly, in the latest example, the church in question is moving significantly downward in its attendance, there are secret board meetings taking place regularly, absolute loyalty being asked for, dissent being punished and and secrecy of all these issues from the congregation. My prediction is that the church will continue its downward spiral until it's leaders either get out of the way or choose a different leadership culture.
Group think in the church is never healthy. Or in any organization and in some churches it comes very close to if not over the line into cult like practices.
In both cases, at least at the leadership level there was a high degree of group think with any deviation from the specified allowed thinking patterns labeled as disloyal, sinful and in fact grounds for punitive action. In both cases, the punitive action was to be kept "secret" and the staff members were not allowed to talk to anyone about the issues at hand. Nor were they given a proper hearing by leaders who demanded absolute loyalty.
These are obviously highly dysfunctional churches and border on cult like practices. In cults there is an absolute mandate to take the party line, no place for either dissent or independent thinking and when someone starts to think independently they are strictly warned of the consequences. There are also "secrets" because these are not open systems, secrets and lack of transparency are high.
Paul obviously felt free to disagree with Peter in the early church. Unity in the church (a word that gets bandied about often in group think churches) does not mean that we all agree on everything. It does mean that we agree to work together - and the best working together happens when there is honesty, grace, transparency and the ability to speak one's mind. It never happens when these elements are missing.
Interestingly, in the latest example, the church in question is moving significantly downward in its attendance, there are secret board meetings taking place regularly, absolute loyalty being asked for, dissent being punished and and secrecy of all these issues from the congregation. My prediction is that the church will continue its downward spiral until it's leaders either get out of the way or choose a different leadership culture.
Group think in the church is never healthy. Or in any organization and in some churches it comes very close to if not over the line into cult like practices.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)