How would your staff and board actually describe your church and why it matters

 

Here is an instructive exercise if you want to think about what your church is about. Ask your staff and board this question: How would you describe our church? Forget about vision and mission statements and focus on how you would actually describe the church. For real!

In fact, take this one step further and describe the positive pieces of your church culture, the problematic pieces and the negative pieces. Put those in three columns on a white board and have a discussion around all three columns. 

Think about these questions;

• How can we capitalize on the positive pieces of our culture and continue to encourage those pieces?
• What can we do about the problematic pieces of our culture?
• How do we address and change the negative pieces of our culture and where do those influences come from?
• How do these three columns impact new people who come into the congregation?
• What impact do the three columns have on the spiritual health of our congregation?
• Do we have the courage to address the negative pieces of our culture?

My guess is that such a conversation will open up some honest and candid dialogue among your staff and leaders. The problematic and negative pieces of a congregation's culture are often ignored or left as elephants in the room. Don't ignore them because they impact the spiritual lives of your people for good or bad. In fact, at some point, in some way, it is necessary to address those negative pieces of your culture and that takes courage and a long term plan.

It starts with a conversation. 

The Evangelical Church is Breaking Apart - Peter Wehner in the Atlantic

 

THE EVANGELICAL CHURCH IS BREAKING APART

Christians must reclaim Jesus from his church.

By Peter Wehner

American missionaries and family members kidnapped in Haiti - Washington Post article

 

American missionaries

 and family members 

kidnapped in Haiti by

 ‘400 Mawozo’ gang,

 groups say

Ten ways to evaluate whether your ego is getting in the way of your leadership

 An overly inflated ego is one of the challenges of leaders who are often in their positions because they have seen success. The success that positions one for leadership can also be our subtle undoing when we allow it to feed our ego which has a voracious and unrelenting appetite. 

Most of us like to think that we are not conceited and yet that is the greatest conceit of all. However, we can be aware of signs that our ego (and conceit) are getting in the way of our own emotional health and leadership. Awareness can help us manage the appetite of our egos.

Being defensive or angry when we are challenged.
Defensiveness is nothing more than our ego screaming "don't challenge me because I am right" even when we are not. It keeps us from hearing truth and perspective from others leaving us with only our limited perspective. This is why the best leaders train themselves to be open to differing perspectives and cultivate a non-defensive attitude.

Being reluctant to delegate

An unwillingness to delegate is often our ego speaking: "No one can do this as well as I can." Actually, in most things others can do things better than we can but who wants to admit that! Healthy leaders do. In fact, they encourage others to find better ways of doing things in order to build better organizations. We may not realize it but an unwillingness to delegate can be a sign of an unhealthy ego.

Needing to always get our own way
Why would we need to always get our own way if not because our own self worth or conviction that we are always right reveals an overinflated and unhealthy ego? Healthy leaders desire to do the best thing to reach the desired outcome which has nothing to do with whether it is their way or not. Unhealthy egos demand their way regardless of whether other ways might be better.

Being jealous of the success of others
Whenever we become jealous at the success of another we ought to sit up and take note that we have an ego problem. Jealousy over the success of another is a sign that we believe their success in someway diminishes us! Only unhealthy and hungry egos react this way. These egos will resist hiring anyone who might outshine them in some area and is a dangerous trait.

Taking credit for success and deflecting blame in failure
This happens in ministry, in business, in politics and everywhere there are people. We love to overinflate our abilities and underinflate our weaknesses. Accolades feed our hungry egos and those same hungry egos don't want to admit failure so they deflect it to others. Healthy egos share success with the team and are willing to take responsibility for failure. Healthy egos never need to be fed at the expense of others in success or failure.

A critical spirit
Critical spirits can come from a need to build ourselves up by putting others down or an attitude of superiority - both of which are connected to unhealthy egos. If we find ourselves becoming critical we need to ask ourselves why we find a need to diminish rather than encourage others. An attitude of criticism is rarely a sign of a healthy leader and it usually has to do more with them than with those they are critical about.

Slowing down on learning and developing
How is this related to ego? It is an assumption that we no longer need to learn new things or put another way, we already know all that we need to know. That is a lie of our ego. If anything, the need to invest more time in learning is critical because our world is changing at an increasing rate. Humble individuals invest in learning while proud people feel they don't need to.

Inability or unwillingness to listen

Those who don't listen or who listen and ignore the perspectives of others are sending a message that they don't need the input of others. That is Ego all the way. Humility requires listening as well as openness to the opinions and suggestions of others. Those who don't listen are actually saying, "I don't need you or your input. Just do as I say." That is arrogance!

Unkind or demeaning words

Those who put down others, treat them unkindly, demean them or their efforts, use words that hurt rather than help, use unkind words or speak in an unkind way are placing themselves above others (pride and ego) rather than treating people with the dignity and compassion that they would want themselves. Humble individuals are kind and understanding. Ego driven people are often unkind and place themselves "over" others rather than "alongside" others. 

Why does this matter? The behaviors above are toxic to those around us, to our team and to our organization. More importantly they are toxic to us because when our egos get in the way of our leadership we are both hurting our leadership and our own hearts and minds are compromised. Ego hurts others but it also hurts us. 

The correlation between Emotional Intelligence and organizational culture

 It is a given that the Emotional Intelligence of an organization is the sum of the EQ of its members. In other words, the organization's EQ reflects the general emotional health of its people. When I ask people about the culture of their workplace, they can quickly identify the positive and the negative aspects of their organization. What they often don't realize is that they are describing the EQ of those who work there. 

In effect, the EQ of the organization (which reflects the EQ of the individuals within the organization) creates the organizational culture. There is a direct correlation between EQ and culture. So, if one is going to change the organizational culture, it becomes necessary to grow the EQ of its members. 

For instance, if one has a culture that is rife with gossip, backstabbing, unhealthy competition, conflict, and people taking credit when they should not or blaming others when they are to blame, one has a dysfunctional culture that reflects poor Emotional Intelligence among its members. The core issue is not the culture but the people who make up that culture and their level of emotional health.

The lower the EQ of the staff, the more dysfunctional the organization is. The higher the EQ of staff, the healthier the organizational culture. And the culture almost always reflects an organization's leadership as people take their cues from leaders.

Because we don't often think of organizational culture as related to the EQ of its members, we become frustrated with our inability to deal with issues in our organizational culture. However, by teaching and coaching in EQ, we can directly impact the culture of the organization in healthy ways. 

One issue that is often ignored is this: The EQ of leaders has a disproportionate impact on the organization as they are the ones who set the standard for behavior. They set the tone for how others are treated, how they serve, and how they lead from a place of humility. 

Some behaviors need to be illegal in an organization because they are antithetical to healthy relationships and interactions. As someone has said, Culture is what we create or allow. In creating a healthy culture, we model good EQ. In disallowing unhealthy behavior, we set a standard for what personal and relational health looks like.

It is instructive to look at your own organization and ask what the corporate EQ quotient is. Are you intentionally creating a healthy culture, or are you allowing things that hurt your culture?

All cultures have positive and negative aspects to them. Take a moment and think about the problematic areas of the culture of your team or organization, and armed with that knowledge, do some teaching and coaching in the requisite areas of EQ that are involved in the problematic areas.

For examples of the signs of good and poor EQ, click here.

Why self evaluation by church boards is so critical

 It is an interesting thing that church boards are quick to evaluate what is happening in the ministry of the church, their pastor and staff but slow to evaluate themselves. This lack of self evaluation is ironic given the expectation of a healthy staff while they do not apply the same expectations to themselves. I am speaking of how the board deals with one another, the issues they face, the intentionality of their leadership and their own effectiveness.

Some of the dysfunctions of church board internal dynamics include:

• An inability to deal with known issues in the church because raising the issues would cause controversy. Thus elephants are allowed to linger on the board, sometimes for years.
• In the interests of "harmony" board members are unable to candidly evaluate their senior leader or other issues in the church.
• Board members have distinct skill sets but are often unwilling or unable to tell a board member that they are "out of their lane" of effectiveness. 
• A lack of periodic discussions as to the overall effectiveness of the board and the contribution that each board member is or is not making.
• Ineffective conflict resolution and unresolved tensions.
• Board members who take disagreement personally and allow their ego to become bruised.
• An unwillingness to submit to the will of the board as a whole.
• A lack of candid, truthful but loving dialogue with one another.
• Passivity toward ministry issues.
• An inability to speak the last 10%.
• Not fully resolving issues because of an avoidance of conflict.
• Avoidance of learning and growing as a board and in their leadership assignment.

If you have served on a church board for any length of time you undoubtedly could contribute to this list. All of these dysfunctions are avoidable if boards would adopt the following practices.

One: Set aside a board meeting annually or twice a year to specifically ask how the board itself is doing. This might include ways to measure health from board development materials. One set of questions you may find helpful are these 15 questions. White- board areas where the board is doing well. And, where the board has challenges and can become better. For those areas that you need improvement, list concrete steps that will help you improve.

Two: Do not gloss over relational difficulties on the board. Usually where these exist, no-one wants to take the risk of speaking about it. It is often the elephant in the room: We know it exists but don't talk about it. That is a mistake because if a church board cannot biblically resolve conflict one cannot expect the congregation to do so. The health of the board does spill over into the congregation as a whole.

Three: Understand that ego is the enemy to healthy boards. Ego pushes us to want to get our way, to put down others or their ideas, to be slow to resolve conflict (I am right after all) and often those with ego issues work the back room with politics to achieve their goals. Jesus blesses humility but hates pride. Many relational issues are related to pride. 

Four: The better the board, the better their work. Ongoing continuing education in how a healthy board functions is just as important as it is for the staff of the church. Often boards don't do their ongoing learning but the best boards do so on a regular basis.

Five: Learn to evaluate issues in the church honestly. One of the barriers to honest evaluation is that board members don't want to speak ill of anyone. There is a difference, however between speaking ill of a person and honestly evaluating their performance. When we are not honest about what is truly happening, boards do a disservice to the church that they are responsible for leading. Allowing issues to exist without honest discussion contributes to elephants in the room and elephants always hurt a board and a church.

Six: At the end of every board meeting take three minutes and ask how you did in the following areas:

• Did members listen well?
• Was their disagreement (a good sign)
• Was everyone able to share their views honestly?
• Did we make decisions?
• Did we follow the agenda well?
• What did we discuss that we left unresolved?
• Did everyone come prepared?
• Did we start and end on time?
• Did we allow the Holy Spirit room to interrupt us at any point?

Healthy boards do not just happen. They are crafted through hard work, good relationships, honest dialogue, egos that are checked at the door and intentional leadership. 

Churches that smell like Jesus have these seven characteristics

 "For we are to God the aroma of Christ among those who are being saved." 2 Corinthians 2:15

In conversation after conversation, I encounter people who have become cynical about the church. I am not one of those because I understand that Jesus is the hope of the world, and He has chosen to work through His bride, the church. 

Having worked with many churches, I have seen almost everything but retain what I call an irrational love for the church.

However, I understand the frustration of many who read Scripture and then have a hard time finding love, grace, and acceptance in a local fellowship. My own view is that there are too few churches that smell like Jesus. What are the smells that churches have that don't reflect Jesus? I think of legalism, judgment, conflict, self-absorption, or maybe a country club. This is why congregational cultures that are focused on being like Jesus are so wonderful and powerful. In fact, they are irresistible.

Churches that smell like Jesus intentionally cultivate the following Jesus characteristics, attitudes, and practices.

Grace

Think of the way that Jesus interacted with people: The woman at the well; the woman caught in adultery; the rich young ruler; the blind man who wanted healing; the woman who poured expensive oil on Jesus' feet; Mary and Martha, and the list could go on. In all of these cases, what stands out is the amazing grace of Jesus. Grace with the hurting, the broken, the guilty, the searching, the sick, the wounded, the criminal, the outcast, the poor, the alien, and we could go on. 

Jesus gave grace where others didn't. Jesus gave grace where it was not deserved. Jesus didn't require people to meet their expectations before He extended grace. Jesus was safe. He was gracious, and He was non-judgmental even when He spoke truth - with the exception of the Pharisees, who were deeply hypocritical. This leads me to wonder what He would say to some evangelicals today. We, too, can be accidental Pharisees.

Truth

Jesus was about the truth of God. Truth is often a limited quantity in our world, and we need to understand the truth about God, ourselves, His character, the life he calls us to, and our own need for salvation and grace. In almost all cases, Jesus delivered truth with compassion, love, and understanding, but He always spoke truth. Truth without grace is not like Jesus. Grace without truth is not like Jesus. Grace and truth go together.

Love

Love for one another is the mark of disciples. In fact, "The entire law is summed up in a single command; 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'" (Galatians 5:14). Love is one of the Fruits of the Spirit. It always speaks the best, wants the best, thinks the best, and treats one another as Jesus treats us - with patience and grace. One of the most toxic characteristics of any church is a lack of love: conflict; uncharitable language; gossip; backbiting; and poor attitudes. 

Having attended many congregational meetings, I tend to think this is where the true character of the congregation is displayed. In many cases, the Holy Spirit must be embarrassed. In my first congregational meeting in one church, I was a part of, the chairperson asked someone to call the police! Yet where love prevails in a congregation, it is powerful and infectious.

Generosity

God is a generous God who did not spare His own Son but sent Him to die for us. If you want your church to have the aroma of Christ, it will be generous with what it has. Many churches are generous toward themselves, investing heavily in their stuff. Fewer churches are generous toward the community, and other churches, meeting the real needs of those around them as well as being significantly involved in the world. Generosity is contagious within a congregation and to outsiders who see people who are open-handed.

Humility

I think this is one of the more difficult character traits of churches that want to reflect Christ. We can be very proud of who we are and the glory days we have experienced in our ministries and often believe that we somehow are better ministries or Christians than the congregation down the street. These are signs of pride rather than of humility. It is ironic that the one Being in the universe who has no need to be humble is the most humble: Our God. Philippians 2 calls us to the same humility as that of Jesus! Humble churches are not filled with their own importance but rather with God's importance. That is a key distinction.

One of the key signs of humility is a congregation's willingness to work with other churches in the community across denominational lines for the cause of the Gospel. Prideful churches won't do that, but kingdom-minded and humble churches do.

Engagement

God's kingdom and God's people are about action. We are called to a life and a mission that reflects the life and mission of Jesus. He had many hangers-on who liked to be around Him and be entertained but were not interested in truly following Him. The church does as well! 

But churches that look like Jesus are filled with people who are actively living out their faith: loving on one another, loving on the community, caring for the poor, the marginalized, and those without anyone to defend them. They care about racial reconciliation and justice as Jesus does. They address community needs in Gospel ways because engagement is to be like Jesus. 

Discipleship

There is no Jesus culture without Jesus followership. This is a followership that involves not only the hour of worship on Sunday but life throughout the week. It is a place where becoming like Jesus is the norm in all walks of life. It is highly practical in helping people follow God more closely and is a place where transparency, pain, and failure can be translated into lives where God uses all of our biographies to be used by Him. In discipleship, each of the prior characteristics is lived out in real-time and in real ways.

If you are in church leadership, it would be worth your time to evaluate how you, as a congregation, are living out these seven characteristics.

Eight issues that can be confusing for church boards

 Church board leadership is always a challenge. And, often boards or individual members are confused on the role of the board. If these areas of confusion can be resolved, the work of the board becomes far easier. Here are eight issues that often cause confusion on a board.

1. What are we actually trying to accomplish?
This sounds like a simple question but the truth is that a majority of church boards cannot answer the question with any specificity. They have a mission but apart from that general statement which generally reflects the Great Commission (more believers and better believers), there is often no objective target that the church is pursuing and without a target there are no metrics to gauge one's progress. 

It is the board's responsibility, working in conjunction with staff to clearly determine what the church is trying to accomplish and then to assign metrics to the target so that it can evaluate its progress.

2. Who is responsible for what?
When there is ambiguity between the responsibilities of the senior pastor (and other staff) and the board there is in the worst case scenario conflict and in the best case confusion. If there is not a written document clearly delineating the responsibilities of both there will be issues that create frustration for both parties. The role of a board is governance while the role of the staff is the day to day ministry. Wherever you draw those lines, be sure you draw them so that there is both clarity and accountability.

3. How does the board interact with the church staff?
The short answer is that boards interact with staff only through the senior pastor. Staff can have only one supervisor and boards are not in a position to supervise or tell staff (apart from the senior leader) what they should or should not be doing. This does not mean that board members cannot have relationships with staff members but it does mean that they cannot direct the work of staff.

4. What is the senior pastor empowered to do on their own and in what areas do they need board approval?
None of us like micro management but this is what happens with many senior pastors who are never sure what they are empowered to do and what decisions they can make and alternatively what issues they need to bring to the board for approval. Constantly needing board approval is demeaning and demotivating for leaders. 

It is incumbent on the board to make clear the leadership parameters of the senior leader so that they are free to lead but are still aware of the boundaries that the board has established. It is the difference between a permission withholding culture and a permission granting culture.

5. What is the board's job description?
In the absence of a clearly written description of the responsibilities of the board every board member has their own definition of their role. That means there are multiple definitions of the board's role. And, it creates confusion and even conflict on the board. Furthermore, it is not possible for the board to evaluate its own work in the absence of a clear job description. 

That role description should include the fiduciary and legal pieces of their responsibility along with the responsibilities delineated in the New Testament for leaders. If you are not clear on these Biblical requirements ask me for the PDF to my book High Impact Church Boards and I will gladly share it.  

6. What are the board's rules of engagement?
In other words, how does the board operate? How does it make decisions? What happens if a board member disagrees with the majority? Does the board always speak with one voice? How does it deal with rogue board members? Is there a board covenant that spells out how the board operates together?

Because many board do not have that clarity, there is a great deal of dysfunction on church boards. This need not be the case but the board must clarify its roles (number 5 above) and how it operates. Without clearly defined guidelines, confusion and conflict will emerge.

7. Who does the board represent?
Many board members believe that they represent their particular ministry interest or constituency in the church. This can easily lead to divided boards especially if there are factions within the congregation that board members see as their job to represent. This view of church leadership has more to do with how we think about American political polity than it does a Biblical theology of leadership. 

Board member do not represent any constituency in the church. Rather they are called Under-Shepherds of the Chief Shepherd - Jesus Christ. Jesus is the head of the church and church leaders lead on His behalf (1 Peter 5:1-4). This does not mean that board members ignore the concerns of the congregation but their leadership is a sacred trust given by the Chief Shepherd. Church leaders lead the congregation where they believe Jesus wants them to go.

8. How do your choose and engage new board members?
Too many congregations do not have a process in bringing new board members on that is designed to set the board up for healthy leadership. Furthermore, in the absence of clarity on 1-7 above, there is no objective way to acclimate new board members to their role as it has not been clarified. 

The most powerful group in most churches is not the board but the committee or group that chooses board members. For a healthy board it is critical to guard the gate of leadership. Only healthy board members can contribute to a healthy board. 

All of this comes down to good clarity. A lack of clarity in these eight areas create confusion. Clarity allows you to move forward in greater health. If you desire help in any of these areas, contact me at my email below. 

Religious Terrorism at Record Low, Government Persecution at Record High - CT and Pew

 

Pew: Religious Terrorism at Record Low, Government Persecution at Record High

Twelve characteristics of healthy church leaders

 

If we desire healthy church boards, we need to ask: "What are the characteristics of an effective church leader?" The fact that 80% of churches are plateaued or in decline would indicate that this is an important issue. When I consult with troubled churches is it not unusual to find that those in leadership are poorly equipped to lead. Consider some of the ways churches have traditionally filled leadership roles:

• We look for Godly individuals.
• People who have 'power' in the church get the nod.
• We try to balance 'power blocks' in the church by making sure there is representation of the various blocks on the board. This is one of the most destructive strategies as it sets the board and the church up for ongoing conflict. 
• There is an unofficial system that rotates key leaders through the leadership spots.
• We choose those who have been in the church a long time.
• Congregations simply nominate people; if they have the votes, they end up on the board regardless of gifting or qualifications.
• Leadership slots are filled even when there is a lack of qualified candidates. Priority is given to filling slots rather than ensuring leadership 'fit.'
• In many instances there is no job description or list of competencies for prospective board members.

Clearly, none of these methods is likely to result in a board of great effectiveness or impact. Nor are these methods likely to be 'leadership friendly' - motivating those with true leadership skills to serve.

The way we choose leaders and our understanding of what good leadership looks like goes to the heart of church health and ministry impact. Who you choose to lead will determine the impact of your congregation.

I would suggest that the New Testament implicitly or explicitly describes the kind of individuals who we should place in church leadership.

Exhibits godly character and lifestyle
This is the most critical, non-negotiable characteristic of a church leader. We are called to lead on behalf of Jesus Christ, as shepherds accountable to the Chief Shepherd (1 Peter 5:4). Paul made it clear in First Timothy and Titus that, above all else, a leader's life must be in the process of being transformed into the likeness of Christ. Only those deeply committed to personal transformation and authenticity can lead others in that direction.

Has a deep passion for Jesus
The church is about Jesus! He is its leader. We serve as leaders under Him. Thus, only those with a passion for Him are qualified to lead His people. Those we lead will be influenced by whatever passions drive us. It is painfully obvious when church leaders are more interested in power, ego or their own agendas than in leading Christ's people where He wants them to go. Remember, few congregations rise above the spiritual level of their leaders.

Displays personal humility
Leadership in the church differs in two significant respects from how it is practiced in other arenas. First, it is a leadership of service rather than power. As Peter wrote, "Overseers should be 'eager to serve: not lording it over those entrusted to you.'" Second, this leadership already has its agenda set by the Lord of the church. Our agenda has been set, and our leadership priorities are Christ's not our own. Without humility people are unlikely to bow to the will of the majority and far more likely to push for their agenda rather than God's agenda. 

Genuinely loves people
Ego-driven individuals love themselves, not others. Humble godly individuals love others as Christ loves them, and their leadership is fueled by genuine spiritual concern. The driving characteristic of God's pursuit of us has been unexplainable, powerful, unrelenting love, bathed in mercy, compassion, forgiveness and grace.

Is a lifelong learner
Leaders are learners. They are hungry to understand the leadership task. They are driven to lead well to become more effective. Nowhere is it more important for leaders to be lifelong learners than in the context of the local church. Healthy leaders are learners of God, of effective ministry options and methods and of leadership. Once leaders give up learning as a high value, their effective leadership days are over. Learners are flexible and teachable. They are willing to change their methodology to meet their mission as long as it is healthy and Biblical.

Understands and agrees with God's leadership assignment
I often ask leadership boards if they can clearly articulate their responsibilities. Invariably the answer is no, apart from generalities. It is my belief that God has given leaders specific responsibilities and every leadership board should be able to define its responsibilities. If you cannot define those responsibilities for your board you have a problem as it becomes every leader's opinion against another's rather than a shared understanding of God's leadership assignment.

Grapples with the future
To lead is to be out in front of others. True leadership is primarily about the future and secondarily about the present. While this may seem obvious, most leadership boards spend the majority of their time dealing with present-day rather than future issues. Healthy leaders are always looking toward the future. You can lead the status quo, you can lead crisis or you can lead into the future.

Focuses on the team
Warning: Never elect or appoint to leadership an individual who cannot graciously work in a team setting - and publicly and privately support decisions that the team has made. Leadership teams require team players. Those who cannot function as a healthy member of a team will destroy the unity necessary for a leadership team to lead (remember humility). Mature, healthy leaders choose to subordinate their egos to the will of the group and deeply value the perspectives and input of others and the collective decisions of the board.

Leads willingly
Good leaders are willing leaders (remember 1 Peter 5). Willing leaders are ready to make the sacrifices necessary to lead, without inner resentment and frustration. It is a mistake to coerce individuals to serve in leadership positions. When we push people to serve before they are mature enough to handle the difficulties of leadership (such as conflict), they often have experiences that cause them to avoid future leadership. In addition, unwilling leaders can often lead harshly without patience and grace. 

Positively influences others
Real leaders have influence over others, whether they are in positions of leadership or not. This is the key: When considering individuals for leadership, ask the following questions: "Do they already have a positive influence over others? Do people look to them for leadership? Do they lead people closer to Christ and in positive ministry directions?"

Has an action bias
Leaders do things. They have a bias toward action and away from the status quo. They don't always know what to do but they will try things and see what sticks, what works. Leaders are never content with how things are but dream of how they could be - continually looking for ways to accomplish mission more effectively. Their focus is not the status quo but the future.

Is a purveyor of hope
Leaders are optimistic about the future and convey that optimism and hope to those they lead. They believe that positive things can and will happen because they understand that it is God who empowers and it is He who has promised to be with the Church until the end of the age. Pessimists are not leaders! Pessimists telegraph caution and see all the reasons why things cannot happen. Just read the epistles of the Apostle Paul. Always optimistic based on the power of God. Always expecting the power of God to prevail.

Rarely will a church rise above the personal, spiritual and missional health of its leaders. Who you select is a key either to mediocrity or to health. No one has all of these characteristics in equal measure but they are key questions to ask about those whom you put into leadership.

This one practice will set you apart from other leaders

Most leaders are over-committed and run with very little margin. We say yes too often, no too seldom and don't evaluate our commitments against our true calling and purpose. 

The net effect is that many of the most important things don't get done on time or well. We are too busy working in our business (and pleasing others) and don't have time to work on our business. There is not time to reflect, think clearly and allow our minds to roam freely where creativity flourishes. 

Ironically, we are so busy leading that we often don't lead nearly as well as we should. The key term here is busy. That busyness depletes our minds, energy and spirits. And, it keeps us from leading well. Many leaders don't even have time to go on vacation!

It need not be this way. There is a practice that can bring life to your spirit, renewed energy to your calling and set you apart from other leaders who are caught in the leadership treadmill. 

Most leaders will say they cannot afford the time to commit to this practice. However, if we cleared our calendars of all the things that were not truly mission critical or focused on what we need to do as leaders, we would have time for this practice. And that is simply a matter of discipline!

What is the practice I am referring to? It is to take one hour a day focused solely on your own development, thinking time, blue sky time and personal development. That is about one tenth of the hours most leaders work each day. Think of it as a tithe on your time. This has always been critical but it is even more critical in the post Covid world where all the rules have changed and it is going to take the best of our thinking to move our organizations forward.

Use this time to:

• Evaluate all your commitments (before you agree to them) and ruthlessly eliminate any that don't fit directly in your leadership purpose (that one discipline will save you many hours a month)
• Think strategically about your leadership, looking for how you can focus your efforts in the most important areas and how your team can develop a laser like focus around their purpose and work.
• Study the changing marketplace or ministry space you are in to understanding changing dynamics and trends. Better to be on the front of the wave than on the backside.
• Think deeply about what could give your organization or team greater momentum toward its mission. Not all strategies are equal but only those who think deeply will figure that out.
• Read widely. Often our greatest insights come from those who are not in our work space but one crucial insight can change everything for you.
• Evaluate your staff and how they are doing. What do they need from you and how can you increase their effectiveness.

All of these items and there are many more that could be added are about working on the business and on yourself so that the business or ministry you lead can go to the next level. Ironically, you will find margin for yourself as you evaluate your own commitments, will lead better and more wisely and ensure that the investment you are making in your leadership role is the very best it can be. 

It is a matter of continual focus!

It only takes one person to hurt a team

 One of the realities of teams is that it takes only one individual who is not in alignment with the rest of the team to significantly impact the unity of the team. This can be a result of any number of issues. For instance, they:

• may not be in agreement with the direction of the team or organization
• do not pull their own weight in terms of productivity and results
• may have attitudes that are counterproductive to a healthy team: cynicism, sarcasm, lack of trust, or some other unhelpful attitude
• may like to do their own thing and are not committed to working as a productive team member
• may have Emotional Intelligence (EQ) issues that disrupt the health of the team
• may not be teachable or coachable
• may be very smart and successful but will not cooperate with others
• may be a team leader who does not know how to lead

Here is the reality. It takes only one member of the team (paid or volunteer) to pull down the rest of the team and take a huge emotional toll on the other team members.  All of this hurts the overall missional effectiveness of the organization and creates discouragement among team members.

Ministries often ignore these situations in the name of "grace." We hope they will go away, but they rarely do without intentional and direct intervention. When we do not resolve these negative behaviors, we unfairly punish the rest of the team, who must live with the unhealth of one member, and we hurt the missional effectiveness of the organization.

If you have a situation where a team member is not in sync and is hurting the team, consider these options.

Provide very direct and immediate feedback in person and follow up in writing indicating the problems and the necessary changes that are necessary if they are to continue to play a role on the team and in the ministry. Be direct, honest, and defining. Indirect communication is unlikely to work in these situations.

Establish time parameters in which the issues must be resolved, or they will be placed on a probationary status. If they need additional coaching during this time, provide it and always give honest, direct feedback verbally and in writing.

If there is not adequate progress, place the individual on a probationary status (in writing - always document) with the understanding that if there is no appropriate resolution, they will not be able to continue on the team or with the organization.

Be willing to let them go and transition them out of the organization if they do not meet the requirements of the probationary period.

Your willingness as a leader to take appropriate steps in cases like this sends a powerful message to the rest of your team that you care about their health and the health of the organization. When one does not take these steps, the opposite message is sent - and clearly read that our organization does not take health seriously. Other staff have reason to be unhappy if unhealthy, emotionally unwell, or unproductive team members are left in place. What it says to the rest of the team is that they are not valued. Lack of action also fuels cynicism toward leadership and their unwillingness to deal with situations that are at odds with organizational values.

The emotional and energy toll that is paid for allowing an unhealthy team member to continue is higher than we realize until the issue has been resolved and we finally realize the price we paid. Don't allow one individual to pull the rest of the team down.

responses to change

 Many are familiar with the bell curve that describes how people respond to change: innovators; early adapters; middle adapters; late adopters, and laggards. In my experience in the change process, I have another set of suggested categories to watch for. Where individuals are on this continuum from change resistors to evangelists for change makes a great difference when you are considering them for leadership positions either on staff or a board.

Resisters. Like the laggards on the bell curve, these are people who will actively resist change because they are simply wired that way. This is the individual who told me, "T.J., you can bring whatever change you want to the organization but don't expect me to do anything different." No rationale is going to change the mind of a resister. This does not mean they are bad people. It does mean that they don't do change, and you cannot have them in a place of leadership - ever!

Protectors. The protector is also highly resistant to change but for another reason. They believe in the status quo, the way things have been done in the past, and they will actively try to protect "what is" rather than embrace "what could be." This was the individual who told me and many others that the changes I was bringing to the organization I was leading at the time that I was destroying the organization. 

Cynics. This group is simply cynical about change unless the proposed change is their idea. They tend to view change as "the flavor of the month" and are often vocal about their opinion. Cynics generally don't trust leaders, so proposals brought by leaders are quickly discounted.

Loyal followers. These individuals have a deep commitment to the organization and team. They accept change if there is a good rationale for it. These staff say, "Just tell me which direction we are going, and I will go with you." 

Idealists. This is an interesting group with an upside and a downside regarding change. When creating change, one inevitably creates a gap between what is and what should be. Idealists are highly impatient to get to what should be and believe we should be there now. On the upside, they want the change. On the downside, they can become highly critical that we have not arrived. Thus on any given day, they can be either an ally or a critic.

Realists. This group is supportive of change, realizes that it will take time and process, and is generally comfortable with that process. They are helpful in realistically figuring out how to get there and can live with the tension of what is and what should be.

Change agents. These individuals not only support proposed changes but will be active agents in helping the organization get there. They are your front lines in speaking a new language, setting a new course, and helping redesign philosophy and strategy.

Evangelists. These are the champions of change who publicly and privately live the change out, help others understand and get there and advocate for the new direction.

In my experience, it is the realists, change agents, and evangelists who will help drive change, while the resisters, protectors, and cynics will actively undermine change. Loyal followers and idealists will go with you but will not drive change. 

Think about the implications of these eight ways that people respond to change regarding who you hire, who you put into leadership, and who you ask to serve on a board. One church leader, after hearing these descriptions, aptly commented, "no wonder so many boards are stuck." He is right. Resisters, protectors, and cynics must be managed but beware of allowing them into leadership positions and influence! 

Further, when you are considering someone for a leadership position, it will be the realists, change agents, and evangelists who will help you get to where you need to go. Don't put someone in leadership who will not actively help you move forward and who is not change-friendly.