So bad things have happened in your church!

Well, first, lets be clear - you are not alone. It has been happening since the time the church became a reality in the New Testament which is why we have a good number of the Epistles. In other words, you are in good company and it is precisely because your church is made up of redeemed but flawed people that bad things have happened. While we don't like it, be of good cheer, you are not alone.

Second, you need to do what you can to clean up whatever mess there is. Facing the truth and looking in the mirror is the only way we avoid the bad things from becoming a trend - and often they already are. This may mean an "autopsy without blame" to figure out why what happened happened. That may lead to admitting fault and seeking reconciliation where that is possible. Certainly it means that we understand why bad things happened and deal with whatever we need to deal with.

Third, when bad things happen it is not usually that there was a bad person afoot (although that is possible). Usually there is a confluence of events that led to whatever we must deal with. This may include leaders inattention to issues they knew were present, a lack of leadership acumen on the part of a leader, a DNA within the congregation that prevented the issue from being dealt with or other factors. Here is my point. When bad things happen in  your church there is rarely one reason but rather multiple reasons and all of them need to be factored in.

Fourth, you cannot "resaw the sawdust." In other words, what has happened has happened and apart from dealing with issues one needs to deal with (above), leadership needs to focus on the future rather than focusing on the past. This will irritate some people who desire that leaders resaw the sawdust and recreate what was! That will not happen. The past is over. We cannot recreate the past but we can re-envision the future. I learned a long time ago that some things don't get solved this side of heaven. 

Fifth, crisis in one's church is a great opportunity to address issues that have probably been present for some time but have not been dealt with. This is the upside of crisis. The question is whether we will take the opportunity to deal with the situation so that we don't repeat the cycle in the future. This is where courage from leadership is needed. This is not a time to spin, to ignore or to cover up. It is time to take an honest look, be transparent with the congregation and act to ensure that the church moves toward greater health. Crises can be opportunities if seen in that light.

Finally, if the crisis is significant, get a coach from the outside to walk you through a process to handle it. If leaders were in any way liable for not acting when they should have or ignoring issues that got you to where you are there is a loss of credibility already so finding an outside coach to help you negotiate the situation can save the church greater pain and help leadership move in a healthier direction. An outsider can also speak to the congregation without being perceived as having a personal agenda which is critical if "sides" have formed and positions taken.

Crises can be opportunities if you choose to see them in that light.

TJ Addington (Addington Consulting) has a passion to help individuals and organizations maximize their impact and go to the next level of effectiveness. He can be reached at tjaddington@gmail.com.

"Creating cultures of organizational excellence."

I am listening - or am I?

Listening is an interesting thing. We can do it without doing it! How many times has my wife said, "I told you that already," and it's like, "Really? I didn't hear it." 

One of the jobs of a leader is to listen to those who they supervise regarding concerns that staff or constituents have. It is not uncommon for me to hear from the same that their leader does not listen to them. Or, to put it another way, he or she did listen, but they did not feel heard. This does not mean that they didn't get their way. It means that a conversation took place, and they didn't feel their leader actually understood their concern. It was a kind of listening but not the kind that elicits appreciation.

Active listening is one where we are fully engaged and are able to articulate the concern that the other individual has. It is genuine hearing rather than passive listening. Further, it is a hearing that seeks to come to a common understanding and, hopefully, a solution that can work for both. When there is not a win/win, at least there is a mutual understanding of why! 

Why does this matter? For one, it gives regard to the concerns of others. Hearing is not the same as listening, as my wife would like to point out on a regular basis. Second, it matters that we are able to address the concerns of our staff or constituents in a way that hopefully allows us to move toward common solutions. As a leader, I should care about those concerns. If I don't, I will find myself leading fewer people. Or unhappier people. Third, those sharing concerns might just be right, and I might be wrong. But I won't know that if I don't care enough to actively engage in the conversation.

Here is what I desire people to say when they have shared concerns with me. I want them to know that I heard their concerns and can articulate them. I want them to know that if there is a way to address those concerns, I will. If I cannot move toward their solution, I want them to know the reason why. Finally, I want to preserve the relationship if at all possible. And I want them to know that I will consider what they have said - seriously.

I don't want to be a leader who "listens" but doesn't "hear." Oh, the same with my wife as well.

At Addington Consulting,

We Simplify Complexity

Speak Candidly

Help You Find a Way Through

tjaddington@gmail.com

The case for those of us who are older to mentor those who are younger

The book I released early this year, Deep Influence, has prompted many conversations with individuals and groups over essential issues of the inner life of a leader. One of the common themes is this: "I wish someone had talked to me about these issues when I was younger."

I agree! I wish someone had taken the time to talk to me about these issues when I was younger: Humility, suffering, EQ, managing the shadow side, living with transparency, intentional living, thinking like a contrarian, leading from who God made me to be and so on. I had to learn these the hard way and often through my own painful experiences. I wish someone had come alongside me as a young leader and shared their experiences in these and other things that would have given me context for the times when I needed that counsel.

This is what drives me to mentor and coach others. It is not that I am all wise (most of everything I learned was through my own mistakes) but that I want to help other young leaders develop an understanding of the issues they will face, help them understand how God designed them and provide some tools that will help them. I do not want them to look like me but to lead from who God designed them to be.

It does not need to be a formal coaching and mentoring. Some of my relationships are and some are not. Mainly it is a desire to help others avoid some of the dumb tax I experienced and move toward greater maturity earlier in life (knowing that some of that maturity is simply experiencing life). It is also about wanting to help young leaders grow spiritually so that their leadership comes out of inner health rather than the dysfunctions that drives so much of leadership - even in the church.

I am convinced that in our fifties and beyond our greatest legacy is what we pass on to the next generation. It is not about us (and never was) but about how we can equip the next generation of leaders to meet the unique challenges they will face. Many of which will be different from ours.

Who are you mentoring and coaching? Not because it is your job but because you desire to pass on what you have learned to the next generation of faithful leaders (2 Timothy 2:2).

TJ Addington (Addington Consulting) has a passion to help individuals and organizations maximize their impact and go to the next level of effectiveness. He can be reached at tjaddington@gmail.com.

"Creating cultures of organizational excellence."

How the Gospel ended my same sex relationship - From Borrowed Light

How the Gospel changed my same sex relationship



Posted from Grand Rapids, MI

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

Is your ministry perfectly designed for who is there rather than for who is not yet there?

Organizations develop cultures that too often focus on who is already in the organization rather than who is not yet in. Think of that in a church situation where we often resist change or innovation because "what we do has worked well for us." That is a true statement, perhaps in that, it has worked well for those who are already in the church. But, it does not take into account those who are not in the church and are not likely to get there without addressing their needs.

Many denominations, for instance, are not seeing growth today, even Evangelical groups. Is it possible that their ethos and policies are keeping young, entrepreneurial leaders from joining them because they are looking for more flexibility? Those in the denomination could argue that their culture works without realizing that it works for those who are in but not for those who could be in.

The mission I lead used to devalue leadership as a value that had the unintended consequence of keeping many leaders from applying and joining. Those inside thought things worked well, but it did not work well for many who chose not to join. 

One of the important jobs of a leader is to understand that they may well have barriers to others joining them and then deal with those barriers. One way to find this out is to ask those outside the organization or church why they might not join. I am not suggesting violating key values but that the culture or strategies that worked in one day may not work in another. As insiders, we may not see that our ministry is perfectly designed for those who are already there and not for those who are not there.

At Addington Consulting,

We Simplify Complexity

Speak Candidly

Help You Find a Way Through

tjaddington@gmail.com

Four problematic leadership lessons from the life of Richard Nixon

I just finished reading a fascinating new biography of one of the most complex leaders of our century - Richard Nixon. (Being Nixon: A man divided). Not only was he a "man divided" between who he wanted to be and who he was, but he could never bring his divided self into alignment, and that was his ultimate downfall. It reminded me of many leaders who have imploded for the very same reasons. 

There are some lessons to be learned from the Nixon story for any in leadership.

First, he was essentially a man without true close friendships, and that left him without people who were willing to tell him the truth. It is a fatal flaw. Three weeks before he resigned, George Bush, the senior, wrote a perceptive letter to his four sons in which he said this about Nixon. "He has enormous hang-ups. He is unable to get close to people. It's almost as if he's afraid to be reamed in some way - people who respect him and want to be his friends get only so close - and then it is clear - no more (p. 520)." The first time Nixon shook Haldeman's hand was the day Haldeman resigned! In addition, if you listen to the Nixon tapes, it is clear that those around him, with very few exceptions, did not tell him the truth but what he wanted to hear. 

Leaders who don't forge close friendships with others eventually get themselves into trouble. Nixon's presidency was called the "imperial presidency." Leaders can become "imperial leaders" when they shut out other people.

Second, Nixon "resisted self-analysis." He told Frank Gannon that "I've never believed that any individual can analyze themselves (p. 529). In some senses, this is a true statement which is why deep and meaningful friendships are so important. But at the same time, this lack of self-analysis kept him from learning the hard lessons that suffering and setbacks can bring. Rather than learn from them, he plunged headlong into even greater leadership stupidity, lies, and scheming. "Nixon's tragedy was that he did not gain wisdom, at least about himself, from suffering - certainly, not until it was too late to save his presidency (p. 530)."  

Third, Nixon, when he was in a reflective mood, and especially when facing adversity, would know who he wanted to be but was unable to translate that view of himself into reality. At the end of his first year in office, he wrote one of a series of lists about who he wanted to be: "Excitement - joy in the job - sharing, lift the spirit of people, Pithy, Brevity, Statesmanship, Honesty, Candor, Consideration for subordinates, Concern for people, Vitality and so on (p. 245)." Yet these were the opposite of who he usually was, as evidenced by the Nixon Tapes, and he was not able to integrate his desired self into his real self. 

This is why leaders get into trouble. They focus so much on their leadership and too little on their personal lives, which directly impacts their leadership. The very things that brought this brilliant leader down were issues that emanated from his inner life, where he was unable to tame the demons that haunted him.

Fourth, Nixon was deeply insecure, and that insecurity drove him to resist close friendships, hear or deliver bad news, and caused him to divide people into those who were on his side and those who were not. With Nixon and other leaders I have met, people were either friends or enemies.

Insecurity is one of the most vicious enemies of good leadership. It is why I have chosen to live by the value that I have nothing to prove and nothing to lose, and nothing to hide. When we are putting our energy into proving our worth, proving we are right, and guarding our pride, we say and do things that are destructive. Ultimately insecurity is about our own pride and lack of humility.

What struck me about this book is that any of us are vulnerable to these four leadership issues. It is also why I believe that the inner life of a leader is of so much importance. It is our inner lives that make or break our leadership. Whatever is inside is what flows into our leadership decisions, attitudes, thinking, and values. 

I do not take anything away from what Nixon accomplished, but ultimately his accomplishments are overshadowed by his untamed demons.

At Addington Consulting,

We Simplify Complexity

Speak Candidly

Help You Find a Way Through

tjaddington@gmail.com

Women and girls endure unspeakable horrors during war according to Human Rights Watch

JULY 10, 2015

Women and Girls Endure Unspeakable Horrors During War and the UN isn't Doing Enough About it

Are you bored?

Boredom happens when we have accomplished what we set out to accomplish, and there is, therefore, either margin in our lives or a sense that we have done what God had for us. In other words, it is an indicator that we need to be looking for what God has for us in the "next season." Sometimes we find ourselves bored and unfulfilled without even realizing it until someone around us points it out.

That does not necessarily mean a different job. But it probably means a different focus. We either respond to symptoms of boredom by settling for what is, or we actively ask the question, what does God have next?

I spoke with a leader yesterday who has been through a period of years that were hard but necessary. But he knows that the season is over and it is time to move forward, and the question was, "What is the God-sized task that I can give myself to in the next five years?" His job is not changing, but his focus is.

Whenever we refocus, we want to keep in mind what it is that energizes us and gives us the most joy - the lane God made us for. That is where we will be the most productive and receive the greatest satisfaction. The closer we get to that place, the more effective we will be. There are certain seasons when we need to pay attention to things outside our areas of strength, but when we refocus, it should always be in line with who God made us to be.

If you were to refocus your attention and to do so around your areas of greatest gifting, here are two questions to consider. One, what is the God-sized "ask" and "task" for the next season? Two, how do I rearrange life so that I can go after it? Those who ask these questions find themselves with greater satisfaction and greater effectiveness.

At Addington Consulting,

We Simplify Complexity

Speak Candidly

Help You Find a Way Through

tjaddington@gmail.com

When not to write new organizational policies

In my experience, organizations often have too many policies and policies that reflect a general distrust of staff. It is always interesting to read the policies of organizations that I am helping because they usually give me insight into the problems that they have had in the past (solved, of course, by a new policy) and the general level of trust and empowerment in the organization, often low.

Here is something to remember. Policies reflect an organization's culture but do not create culture. People create culture, and policies reflect whatever culture is created. While policies are obligatory for any organization, how and why they are written sends a message to staff.

Here are some reasons not to write new policies.

One: Someone has done something dumb (It happens)! The answer is not to write a new policy but to deal with the individual who has crossed a line. It is unfair to other staff to establish policies based on one individual's bad choices. No policy can keep people from doing dumb things. Deal with the individual rather than write a new policy.

Two: You want to deal with an issue of organizational culture. The culture of organizations is a matter of leadership rather than of policy. I can create a culture that avoids gossip, but I cannot write a policy to do the same. Some issues are issues of leadership and modeling rather than of policy.

Three: You feel a need to control what people do and do not do. If we have a need to control people, we are either poor leaders or have hired poor staff. Mostly it is the former rather than the latter. The longer a policy manual, the more there is usually a desire to control rather than empower. 

In our organization, there are periodic issues that remind us that we need to clarify issues with our far-flung staff. What we rarely do is write a new policy. Rather, we create a dialogue on the issues so that they filter through the organization. For us, it is about creating a healthy culture with healthy leaders, staff, and teams. Only when necessary do we write a new policy.

Always remember that policies reflect culture. They do not, in themselves, create culture. It might be instructive for all of us who lead to have an outsider read our policies and give us feedback as to what they see. In one church I consulted with, I suggested that their policies reflected a great distrust of support staff. Reading them through that lens, they agreed with me. They had used policies to do all three of the above-named issues rather than simply spell out their non-negotiables and commitments. 

At Addington Consulting,

We Simplify Complexity

Speak Candidly

Help You Find a Way Through

tjaddington@gmail.com

An interesting view of the challenge of mega churches

Tullian's tragedy: How the megachurch business model is failing everyone, including pastors

Posted from Oakdale, MN

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

What real values underlie your ministry and can you name them?

All ministries operate out of a sense of values, either stated or non-stated. The best ministries have a clear set of values that everyone knows and lives by. Most ministries have a written set of values that no one knows and few live by. Which describes your ministry?

I often interact with church staff and leaders and ask them this question: "What values underlie your ministry?" In most cases I am told that there are a set of values somewhere but they would need to look them up. That is an "Ah Ha" moment for me as it indicates that whatever values are written down, they do not impact the ministry in the least.

Values matter - a great deal. When there is not a set of values all are committed to, everyone lives by their own set of values. In other words, there are competing and disparate sets of values rather than a set of values that unites. One of the most critical jobs of a leader is to establish values that undergird everything the ministry does. Often leaders do not do the hard work of clarifying values which leads to competing values. 

Competing values lead to competing agendas which leads to conflict and misunderstanding. Do you have a set of values that all in your organization subscribe to? If not you have competing values and it will lead to chaos over alignment.

Posted from Oakdale, MN

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

No ministry stands alone

Ministries love to start new initiatives. Unfortunately many of these initiatives do not contribute to the mission of the organization whether church or other non-profit. This is also true in mission organizations where it seems that any idea is a good idea as long as there is someone to champion it. I disagree! When we say that no ministry stands alone it means that all strategies must contribute to the whole and anything that does not contribute to the whole does not belong! 

In fact, when ministries stand alone, apart from the overall mission of the ministry, it is wasted energy (even if it does some good) because it does not contribute to the whole. This is why, for instance, in our organization, anything that does not contribute to our overall mission of multiplying transformational churches among all people is not a viable ministry - for us. It is not that it might not be valuable for others but it is not our mission and does not contribute to what God has called us to do. We are exceedingly wholistic as a mission agency but everything must be connected to our overall goal.

This is where an emphasis on programs gets in the way of the mission. It is easy to start programs but often those programs do not contribute to what we believe we have been called to do. This is why both mission agencies and churches end up with siloed programs and ministries which do not contribute to the overall mission of the organization - if they have one.

In my view, no ministry should stand alone - apart from the mission of the organization and if those who promote it cannot show how it contributes in a meaningful way to the whole it should not happen. Especially if one desires to build a cohesive, aligned ministry where all the arrows point in the same direction. In our organization (ReachGlobal) it does not happen. Yours?

Posted from Oakdale, MN

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

High accountability and low control are keys to ministry success

It is interesting to me that we often get a key value wrong in ministry. In most organizations, there is an ethos of high control and low accountability when in reality, the opposite should be true. People don't like to be controlled! At the same time, they should be accountable, but we often don't hold one another to that, especially in ministry situations. High accountability and low control are keys to ministry success!

High accountability speaks to the value that the quality of our work matters. In ministry circles, there is often the thought that all that matters is that I am faithful. I disagree! We also need to be thoughtful, strategic and focused and have a plan that makes sense. That is where high accountability comes in. We often forget that we are engaged in matters that impact people for eternity and that matters a lot.

But, the second half of this value is that we need to release people to do what they need to do in a healthy way, meaning that we are not going to control them. How I do things is how I do them. How you do things is consistent with how God wired you. We are not the same, and you may well have a better way of accomplishing your tasks than I would. Thus we need to exercise low control and allow people to do what they need to do in a way that works for them. Obviously, this means that they are keeping the values of the organization in mind as well.

As you think about how you supervise, ask yourself whether you exercise low control coupled with high accountability. It makes a great difference, and we often get the two turned around.

At Addington Consulting,

We Simplify Complexity

Speak Candidly

Help You Find a Way Through

tjaddington@gmail.com

You can't control the human heart of another person

How many of us have a plan for the life of someone else? It can be a child, a grandchild, a staff member or a friend. And for that matter, how many people have a plan for our lives? And, there are those who would like to fix others - to help them solve their problems or perceived problems. That fact is that we cannot control the human heart of another person. We can influence them (see my book Deep Influence), but we cannot control them. And when we do we actually try to take the role of the Holy Spirit.

In the role of leader of a mission organization I spend a great deal of time helping others determine their role in the organization as well as potential staff members who are moving our way. It is a delicate role. What I can do is indicate that there is a potential fit but what I cannot do is determine for them whether they either want that fit or feel called to it. Only they and the Holy Spirit can determine that. And the Holy Spirit has a wonderful way of revealing to us where we should be if we listen.

This is also why I hold all staff with an open hand. There are many times when staff resign that I wish it were not so but who am I to question the direction of the Holy Spirit in their lives? What I don't like is when people leave because they don't feel they have a large enough platter because we can generally solve that if we had know about it. But God's call and fit are His issue, not mine. The day will come when God will call me from this job to something else and again, that is His role, not mine.

We need to be careful in our mentoring and coaching of others, informally or formally, not to take responsibility for what is God's role in their lives. We can give feedback, provide counsel and encourage but ultimately we must always give others the ability to decide what is best for them - between them and God. Not to do so is to potentially put them in a place that is not where they belong. Some people will respond to the pressure of others rather than from the guidance of the Holy Spirit. 

God has a plan for my life, and yours. I have insights into that plan for others but cannot play the role of determining that plan.

Posted from Oakdale, MN

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

Six issues to avoid for those in professional ministry

Professional ministry can be a place of great joy and great frustration. It is the frustrating part that can often cause us angst. My own observation is that there are six issues that those in professional ministry need to guard against.

Cynicism: Let's face it, lots of people are not going to get with the program. I remember people who attended the church I pastored who came once in a while but it seemed that God never touched their lives. At least it didn't seem that way to me. It is easy to become cynical but those folks have always been out there. As have the hard times in ministry when the arrows come from the pew and not from the pagans. There are times when we just need to fight cynicism off because it is not what God wants for us and it won't allow us to minister well. Jesus is our judge and He wants us to be faithful.

Anger: It is a close second to cynicism. It is easy to become angry: power politics in the church, how long it takes to get something done, feeling under appreciated, and any number of things. Anger is often about us instead of other people. Things didn't move on my timetable or in my way. It pops up in unexpected places but when it does, it is time to take stock of myself rather than of others. 

Self-focus: The two issues above are really about allowing ourselves to focus on ourselves rather than on those we are called to minister to. No one said ministry was easy, in fact no one should go into ministry who has something better to do. It is hard, and it becomes harder when our focus is on ourselves. There is plenty to complain about but only when our focus is in the wrong place. Read Paul's list of issues he faced. Yet he did not focus on himself but the mission God gave him. It changed the picture for him.

Professional Spirituality: This is about allowing our work for God to take precedence over our relationship with God. It is easy to do and most of us in ministry have done it. But it is a trap because Jesus wants us, not just our work for him. There is no substitute for our own personal time with Jesus and for our own followership. Just because we may know more than others (and it is often not true) it does not translate into a deeper relationship with Him unless we are deeply intentional about it.

Misidentity: This follows from the last. It is allowing our identity to be formed by our work rather than our relationship with the living God. It is also why many Christian professionals are quick to take offence when people disagree with them. They have not separated their identity in Jesus with the work that they do. 

Arrogance: It can come from knowing too much, having the wrong identity and a professional spirituality. No one in ministry should be arrogant but a lot seem to be. The way to guard against arrogance is to be focused on others and to guard our own hearts against its insidious grip. Other focus, accountability with people who know us and will tell us the truth and an identity in Jesus are all keys to remaining humble.

Posted from Oakdale, MN

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

One nation under God. Can we claim to be a Christian nation today?

The Supreme Court decision this past week only clarifies the unfortunate fact that we cannot any longer be called a Christian nation. It is the logical outcome of many seismic shifts that we have seen in our nation since at least the 1960's which brought with it the abandonment of authority and at least a modicum of a Christian world view.

Do you remember John Lennon's song Imagine? A beautiful ballad but have you listened carefully to what he said?

Imagine there's no heaven

It's easy if you try

No hell below us

Above us only sky

Imagine all the people

Living for today...

Imagine there's no countries

It isn't hard to do

Nothing to kill or die for

And no religion too

Imagine all the people

Living life in peace...

You may say I'm a dreamer

But I'm not the only one

I hope someday you'll join us

And the world will be as one

What John Lennon imagined has largely come true. We are living for ourselves and have cast off Biblical truth. The results perhaps were not, however what he might have imagined imagined.

The Supreme Court decision in 1973 in Roe V. Wade led to the diminished view of what it means to be people made in God's image leaving 55,772,015 image bearers to die in the womb. Now with the redefinition of marriage - the first Creation Ordinance God gave mankind - the logical outcome of the journey our nation has been on away from God has taken its next step.

This is not simply a reflection of a Supreme Court that has redefined liberties and in this case the fundamental backbone of any healthy society - the family. Rather we must admit that it is reflection of a society moving away from God and of Christians who have often not upheld the truth of the Gospel. 

Indeed, the mainline denominations have been losing people for a long time because the Gospel is no longer preached or believed, except in a very general "feel good" sense. It is also true that materialism has hijacked the Christian commitment of many who call themselves believers, the concept of any absolute truth is not understood even by many who call themselves "evangelicals" and the legalism of many churches on the other side has led to its own bondage rather than the freedom of the Gospel.

It is easy for believers to point fingers at whoever is in the White House, Congress or Supreme court. But perhaps the real issue is that we the church have not been living out the Gospel in our own lives and bringing those same commitments of truth and grace into our neighborhoods, workplaces and circles of influence. In essence we have not produced disciples of Jesus who follow Him relentlessly and the lack of disciplemaking may even point to a lack of disciples in church leadership in many cases. 

Basic theology is neither widely understood or believed in many "Christian" circles. Just get into a discussion on whether Jesus is the only way to God and salvation and more often than not one will hear that He is one way but not the only way. Individual "believers" have found it easy to ignore those things in Scripture that are not convenient. The inerrancy of the Scripture as the ground of truth has seriously eroded leaving many in the churches that call themselves evangelical to choose which truth is applicable to their own lives and which they can ignore. 

Many of those who are the most vocal critics of the changes taking place in our society ignore the fact that it may be those of us who call ourselves believers who share much of the responsibility. It is easy to point at the sin of others and far less comfortable to evaluate ourselves. When we as the church are not truly salt and light, do not stand for truth (with the graciousness of Jesus) and do not live that truth ourselves, we share in the responsibility for where our society moves. Culture wars have been fought for decades with often vociferous voices that do not reflect the grace of Jesus while we have ignored the inconsistency in our own lives. Perhaps we should have fought fewer culture wars and instead focused on living like Jesus and being Jesus to others.

My conclusion is that we are not a Christian nation and have not been so for a long time. In fact, while we were founded on Christian principles, no nation is a Christian nation. 

But for me that is not a cause of depression. Daniel thrived in Babylon along with his believing compatriots. Esther thrived in a pagan court. Abraham thrived among those countries around him who were totally pagan. The heroes of Hebrews 11 thrived even under difficult and even fatal conditions. Those who follow Jesus relentlessly make an impact on those around them as they live out the Gospel in all of its implications. I often say "It matters more who is in my house (Jesus) than who is in the White House. The challenge for Christ followers is actually to follow Him with all our heart, soul and mind and to love our neighbor as our-self (The Great Commandment). That makes the difference no matter where the society around us is headed.

I want to be a fully devoted Christ follower in what I perceive to be a nation moving further from God. As that happens the difference between those who relentlessly follow Him and the rest of society will become more evident. We will stand out and do stand out when we ask the question Francis Schaeffer did in How Shall we Then Live?

Want to be encouraged? Listen to Larry Osborn's message Thriving in Babylon and then get his book by the same name. It is where we are so lets figure out how to look and live like Jesus in a Godless culture. And thrive as His people.

Posted from Oakdale, MN

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

Without this quality you cannot lead well

There is a quality that every leader who is going to lead over the long haul must have. That quality is resilience. Websters defines resilience this way: "The ability to become strong, healthy, or successful again after something bad happens." I would define leadership resilience as the ability to deal with hard situations and difficult people without becoming overly emotional, angry, or cynical. It is also the ability to live with a soft heart but very thick skin and not to be discouraged by the inevitable challenges and personal attacks that leadership brings.

Leaders who lack resilience:

• Become easily discouraged
• Feel threatened and deflated when attacked
• Become emotional when things don't go their way
• Can become subject to depression and moodiness
• Are often fearful
• Can easily overact to situations that seem out of their control
• Crack under pressure

I am an avid reader of biographies and would suggest that individuals like Winston Churchill, FDR, Ronald Reagan, or Margaret Thatcher were individuals who personified resilience. Each of these was able to overcome regular difficulties, keep their cool, and continue to lead. In the New Testament, Paul certainly has this trait.

The test of leadership is not what happens when all is well but when all is hell. That is when the mettle of our souls and resolve is tested and where our resilience or lack of it becomes critical. When I hear leaders complain and feel sorry for themselves and express significant emotions, anger, and frustration, I often wonder if they have the resilience to lead well. 

Resilient ministry leaders usually have the following characteristics:

• They have thick skin and have learned how to weather personal attacks
• They take the long view and know that the irritations of the moment will pass
• Their self-worth is not wrapped up in their leadership role, and realize that leaders are often targets
• Their focus is on the mission of the organization rather than on themselves 
• They have learned to see the tough times as leadership challenges 
• They are generally optimists and communicate hope to their teammates
• They have a good team around them
• They have a high view of God's sovereignty and therefore are able to trust Him
• They have learned that anxiety is wasted energy and manage it well

Resilience can be learned and should grow over time as we recognize that the crises of the moment do pass, life does go on, the world does not fall apart, and the worst possible case does not usually come to be. It has much to do with our perspective on God, life, and ourselves. The more we focus on ourselves, the less resilient we will be. The more we focus on the mission and on God, the more resilience we will have.

At Addington Consulting,

We Simplify Complexity

Speak Candidly

Help You Find a Way Through

tjaddington@gmail.com

The critical role that deep friendships play in the lives of healthy leaders

One of the key indicators of a leader's success is the depth of the friendships they have.  While not always true, one of the observations I have made in dealing with healthy leaders is that they have a set of deep friendships. On the other hand, many leaders who burnout or flameout do not have those deep friendships. 

I think there is a correlation here and it centers around a leader's willingness to be transparent and truly authentic with other trusted individuals. Those who resist authenticity often resist deep friendships because those relationships are based on authenticity and a willingness to reveal the true us. This is why putting leaders (any leader) on a pedestal is dangerous. Pedestals keep others at a distance and allow a leader to live without true authenticity. 

It is in the context of deep friendships that we allow others to see all of us because we also know that they love us and our shadow side (we all have one) will not deter their love. In fact, the more authentic we are with others, the more respect we gain. Those friendships are also critical in our own spiritual journey because it allows others to speak into our lives on issues that we might otherwise ignore. And all of us have issues we want to ignore.

The authenticity of deep relationships invites counsel, insight, a shared spiritual journey and ultimately the accountability that comes from having friends who love us and will tell us the truth. Those who are afraid of this tend to keep others at a distance while those who value this intentionally develop deep friendships. 

Deep friendships are an anchor in our lives to honesty, growth, the accountability that comes from relationship and the truth about ourselves. Healthy leaders know that they vulnerable due to their leadership position and the fact that their staff will not always tell them the truth. In addition, success can go to our head and it often does. Key friendships are anchors to reality that every leader needs.

Posted from Oakdale, MN

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

Can you disagree with me as your leader?

As a leader of others I always want to know that those who join my senior team or cabinet are able and willing to disagree with me. Too many leaders define loyalty as agreeing with their position and therefore surround themselves with "yes" people. In my mind this is not loyalty - but disloyalty to the good of the organization. Thus I will not put someone on my senior team who does not have the courage and willingness to disagree with me as their senior leader.

It surprises many people to find out that I do not make unilateral decisions for ReachGlobal. Rather, we say we are team led and team driven and all issues that impact staff go through the ReachGlobal cabinet or the Directional team. People ask, "Do you always get your way?" I say "no." They ask, "Do you care?" I say "no." Then they ask "Why." My answer is that I believe the very best decisions are made when you have the right people in the room and are able to think through the decisions together. It is in the multiplicity of gifts that the best decisions are made.

I find that many senior leaders are threatened when people disagree with them and I find that sad. It is a reflection of their own insecurities and need to prove something rather than truly wanting the very best for the organization. One of our values is that we engage in Robust Dialogue, where "Any issue can be put on the table for discussion with the exception of personal attacks or hidden agendas." It makes for a culture of freedom where together we can work toward what is best for the organization.

This is all done in a collegial atmosphere where are differences are not personal and do not become personal. Rather we have learned how to stay in relationship while differing in our perspectives, to have candid dialogue and then to support the decision with one voice once it is made. The fact that I submit to this process as a leader also means that when I do feel strongly on an issue, it is taken seriously by the team. Leaders actually gain influence when they bring others into the decision making process. I know that when the decision is made that all support it and key people have had the chance to speak into it.

So the actual question is: Can you disagree with me as your leader and stay in relationship with me?

Posted from Oakdale, MN

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

Eight reasons why boards do not address known issues caused by a senior pastor

A recurring theme in my consulting with troubled churches is that there were issues known to leaders who chose not to address them until there came a point of crisis, often after a pastor left and after many congregants had left as well. 

The question is - why were those issues not addressed so that a crisis could have be averted and the congregation not wounded as it was - in this blog by the senior leader. After all the cost of unaddressed and known issues that brings conflict to a congregation is high and it can take years to recover. As I have reflected on this question I would suggest that the following reasons are often in play.

One: Often the pastor is relatively new to the church and the prevailing thinking is that we need to give him a chance. While there is truth to this it is never an excuse to allow the congregation to be hurt by poor decisions, lack of process or change that is too fast for the body to deal with. Ironically, the leadership knows the congregation better than a new pastor and therefore has a higher responsibility to ensure that the congregation is protected and unity is guarded.

Two: A new pastor is bringing many new people so the reasoning is that even if there is great unhappiness among many, the new folks are proof that we should let the issues go. What that means is that we effectively give a leader a pass for behavior or decisions that hurt the body simply because new people are coming. That is faulty reasoning at its best. It is like a corporate board overlooking fraud because the CEO is bringing in new business. Really? Behavioral and leadership issues should never be given a pass simply because a church is growing.

Three: The senior leader is a strong leader whose personality is hard to go nose to nose with so leaders don't take the risk to confront issues. This is true of some very charismatic leaders who make it very hard for anyone to disagree with them and they win the day by the force of their personality effectively blunting any efforts for someone to say "wait a minute, we have an issue here." It is very easy to be manipulated by strong personalities and those with them know it very well and use it to their advantage.

Four: Group think is hard to overcome. While it only takes one independent thinker on a board to raise uncomfortable issues, often it takes a long time for anyone to have the courage to speak out clearly when the board is pseudo "united" by saying "we have to be together" and group think prevails. Sure the board must speak publicly with one voice but the conversations within the board room ought to be robust, candid, honest and disagreements must be aired with candor. 

Five: Boards have too few executive sessions where concerns can be discussed without the presence of the senior leader. While people may be willing to speak up in the absence of a senior leader, many will not do so when the leader is in the room, especially when they can use the force of their personality to win the day. Every healthy board has regular executive sessions where they can speak freely.  

Six: Many boards are driven by fear of what might happen if known issues were addressed. That fear keeps people from speaking up, from listening to others and from insisting that issues be addressed and not ignored. What boards ought to be most afraid of is not dealing with the elephants in the room on their watch because they will be held responsible if things come apart for not dealing with them. 

Seven: It is simply easier to ignore issues than to deal with them. I remember sharing candidly with a board when things had come apart in their (large) church with the pastor resigning. They hung their heads (literally) and acknowledged that they knew there were serious issues but chose to ignore them because it was easier to pretend all was well than to deal with them. They ended up being asked to leave the board and new members appointed. 

Eight: Even though board members have suspicions and questions they often choose to trust the word of their senior leader but not verify the facts. Not everything a board is told is always true. In one case there had been a series of people leaving the church staff but the board never interviewed any of those folks even though they suspected there was a pattern of abuse (and there was). In other cases, board members have been told by staff that they work in a culture of fear but no one has bothered to ask candid questions of staff but simply took the word of the leader(s) who fostered that culture of fear - that everything is OK. There is nothing logical or helpful about that behavior but it happens all too often. Trust but verify.

When there is a crisis in the church caused by a senior leader but ignored by a board I place the greatest responsibility on the board for not acting when they should have acted. It is the responsibility of the leadership to protect the congregation. Ultimately they answer for the health of the church. Don't allow one of the eight reasons above to keep your board from addressing known issues if they are there. Leadership is a high trust. If there are things that Jesus would not be happy about we ought not to be happy about either. 

And in case we think it doesn't matter - think "Mars Hill."

Posted from Oakdale, MN

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