The quick links and index to all of my blogs on church boards and governance has been updated

Updated quick links and index to all of my blogs on church boards and governance

Policy governance in the church: An Overview

Policy governance, popularized by John Carver is getting increasing attention as a governance method in the church. I have helped many non-profits and larger churches move to a policy governance model. In this blog I will give an overview of policy governance and in subsequent blogs I will lay out the advantages and disadvantages of this governance approach when applied to the local church.

Boards are notoriously poor at doing effective board work. For instance, boards often:

• Rehash decisions endlessly
• Make decisions that others in the organization could make faster and better
• Focus on the small rocks rather than the big rocks
• Are unable to prioritize their work
• Control the leader of the organization rather than releasing him/her
• Routinely get into staff issues
• Do not have defined boundaries between staff and board roles

All of these hinder the organization (in this case the church) from being as effective as it could be and it discourages good leaders both on the board and outside the board. Policy governance is meant to cut through the clutter of poor board work, release the leader within boundaries and create a framework for how the board operates. Here are the basics of policy governance.

The board operates with four sets of policies which cover their work

The first set of policies is called Executive Limitations. These lay out what the senior leader of the organization cannot do without the permission of the board. Anything that is not prohibited in these policies the senior leader can do and he/she is expected to use reasonable interpretation of the policies in making leadership decisions. In the event that the senior leader is out of compliance with any of these policies they must inform the board of their lack of compliance and their plan to get back into compliance.

The second set of policies is called Linkage which is the relationship between the board and the staff of the organization. It is common for boards to get into staff decisions below their senior leader (who presumably everyone reports to). In policy governance there is only one employee of the board and that is the senior leader. Boards are not to get into other staff issues as their linkage to the staff is through the senior executive or pastor. While this policy is often misinterpreted in the church (and can be misused by the senior leader) it clarifies the reporting role of the staff to the senior leader and prevents the board from giving direction to staff apart from the senior leader. 

The third set of policies is called Board Policies which define how the board operates, what the qualifications for board members are, how they make decisions, resolve conflict and all issues related to board work. Since church boards are notorious for not defining many aspects of their work, the Board Policies force the board to define their work. In addition, things like Mission, Vision, Guiding Principles and other key church health commitments are found in the Board Policies.

The fourth set of policies is called Ends Policies, which describe what the goals of the ministry are, or what the board is holding the senior leader accountable for accomplishing. This goes back to the vision and mission of the church and clearly defines the ends that the board is committed to. This is the hardest set of policies to write but one of the most important as churches often cannot define the target that they are working toward. They operate like Charlie Brown who never used a target when using is bow and arrow. When asked why he answered, "Because this way I hit it every time."

The board can change policies at any time

In Policy Governance, the policies are a living document that the board can change at its discretion. For leaders who lead well they may broaden the range of freedom given that leader. For leaders who have challenges in certain areas, they may contract the freedom in those areas. Thus, the board is able to redraw the lines for the senior leader, for itself (Board policies) or its ends as it deems helpful and necessary.

The board governs through policy

Many boards waste inordinate amounts of time dealing with individual situations which may be revisited numerous times. In policy governance the board focuses on general or specific policies so that as like circumstances arise the policy is in place and the board need not again address the issue. This forces the board to focus on the principle behind a policy rather than individual situations. 

Policy Governance forces boards to address and clarify fundamentally important issues in the church, its mission, vision and desired outcomes. It raises the bar for what the board does as well as for the senior leader. It clearly delineates the boundaries between staff and board and who is responsible for what. And it frees senior leaders to lead without board interference in those areas where the board has not placed limitations.

Caveats

I believe that Policy Governance as practiced by non-profits generally need to be modified for church use and I will address this in the near future. I also believe that policy governance can by misused by leaders if not carefully overseen by governing boards. Boards and leaders who do not have a solid grasp of policy governance can do a great deal of harm to a congregation which I will explain in subsequent blogs. Done right it can expedite decisions and ministry effectiveness.

Willow Creek and governance lessons: A watershed moment

The inevitable resignation of the entire board of Willow Creek Community church today along with that of the two senior pastors is a watershed moment for church governance - and its failure. There are many lessons to be learned about what good and poor governance look like when it comes to the church. The leadership failures at Willow will become textbook fodder on governance for years to come.

One: Boards exist to protect the church as a whole and not one individual. 
For several years as allegations have swirled around their senior leader the board tried to protect him even though many credible individuals came forward either who had been abused by him or knew of abuses. Yet the board chose to try to protect their senior leader rather than to uncover the truth of the claims even to the point of suggesting that the victims were lying and calling their character into question. 

This is not unusual. I once did an intervention in a church fraught with conflict. There had been a string of resignations over a three year period of staff. When I asked the board why their staff members had resigned they said they didn't know. So I interviewed every one of them and it always came back to abuse by the senior pastor. When I reported my findings back to the board they hung their heads in shame. Of course they knew something but they had chosen to ignore the obvious, not ask the relevant questions and protect their pastor while painting the victims as the villains. Subsequently for this and other governance failures I recommended that the entire board resign which they did.

Boards exist to protect the health, financial stewardship and direction of the church. They are responsible to ensure that the congregation is taught, led well, protected, released into ministry and that the spiritual temperature is kept vital. They may not do it themselves but they ensure this happens. This did not happen at Willow. Actions show that through a several year period the board chose to protect their pastor over dealing with issues they knew to be present. It was a classic failure of governance which will damage the church for years and possibly threaten its existence in its present form.

Two: Boards that are intimidated and manipulated by their senior leader cannot govern - period.
Some churches have such strong leaders that it is almost impossible for a board to hold them accountable and the board ends up working for the senior leader rather than the senior leader being accountable to the board. Whenever this happens alarm bells need to sound because boards that are intimidated or manipulated by their senior leader cannot govern. Rather they end up serving the agenda of their senior organizational leader.

This is why executive sessions are vitally important for any board even if there are no significant issues to discuss. It provides a forum where sensitive issues can be put on the table and candid discussion can take place outside the influence of the senior leader who is accountable to them. Even if this is resisted by the senior leader it should happen on a regular basis because many boards will not bring up sensitive issues in the presence of their senior leader. 

Three. Individuals who cannot deal with conflict should not be put on a church board. 
With leadership there is always conflict. Issues within a church that must be dealt with, differences of opinion on boards and sometimes relationships with senior leaders. Where I used to live we called the conflict resistant culture "Minnesota nice." This is the tendency not to deal with conflict. There is a lot of "church nice" on leadership boards where we don't have courageous enough people to put issues on the table and insist that the board look honestly at them. If someone cannot deal with conflict they should not serve on a church board.

Many congregations suffer for years without good leadership or pastors without adequate accountability because of "church nice" boards. Who suffers? The congregation! 

This also has implications for who ought to serve as the chair of a board. It takes a strong and independent individual to serve well as a board chair. They must be able to graciously police the board, interact with the senior leader, keep the board on track and in cases such as what happened at Willow Creek, lead the board in critical conversations. When this does not happen board chairpersons need to be challenged and/or replaced.

Four. When serious issues occur the board must find the truth and speak the truth regardless of the consequences.
Christian organizations generally have a poor track record of transparency around such issues as financial impropriety, sexual abuse, leadership abuse and issues that might impact their reputation. Unfortunately, when organizations try to hide issues it causes more damage then when they admit and deal with issues. 

Outsiders looking in on the actions of the board at Willow Creek have wondered about their actions during this period especially in the face of very credible individuals who have come forward with their story. Why did they not deal with issues that many others saw? The answer is simple: they were trying to protect their leader and the reputation of the church rather than trying to find the truth if it hurt either of these. In the process they destroyed their leadership (hence their resignation), hurt the church beyond what the senior pastor is responsible for and set the church up for trauma for years to come. Their "independent outside investigation" was not designed to find the truth but to protect their interests. 

Five: Church boards must understand their role as a governance board.
I have to conclude that the board at Willow did not understand their role as a governance board. But they are in good company as many church boards do not. If they did, the story would have played out much differently than it did. They did not safeguard the health of the church. They did not protect the flock (or the abused). They did not listen to credible voices. They allowed their leader to manipulate them and the process. They protected the guilty rather than the hurt. They did not truly seek truth but sought to protect. In the end they caused more damage than they did to resolve their issues.

All of this to suggest that this episode ought to be a wake up call for the evangelical church regarding what good governance looks like. For the sake of the church - the Bride of Jesus.

Issue Logs: A simple way to force continuous improvement in your team or organization

All organizations encounter issues: Things that don't go as planned or complications in trying to get something done. Usually what we do with these is to complain and then find a work-around to get it done. The problem is that it happens again and again and again. 

In essence we are putting up with frustrations and time wasters that are unnecessary. Rather, we should see each issue we encounter as an opportunity to do something better. Every time!

This is where the issue log comes in. An issue log is a required reporting of anything that goes badly or any disconnect we encounter. You record the issue, rate it in terms of severity and list who was responsible for it (or responsible for the process). The goal is to bring problems to the surface so that they can be diagnosed, resolved, and if necessary the system changed so that it does not happen again and the process (and people) improved. And, not reporting a known issue becomes an issue so there is built in compliance!

Such a system makes a powerful statement within an organization that we are committed to becoming better in every way that we can. Issues can be good things because they show us an area that can be improved. It will also surface employees who are not doing the work they should be doing because their negligence shows up in the issue log. Yes: Accountability is a good thing. And, the issue should not show up again once handled.

Continuous improvement requires the surfacing of issues so that they can be resolved. Those organizations who embrace it see the benefits quickly.

Overcoming the fundamental attribution error

Wikipedia defines the fundamental attribution error this way. "The fundamental attribution error, also known as the correspondence bias or attribution effect, is the tendency for people to place an  undue emphasis on internal characteristics (personality) to explain someone else's behavior in a given situation rather than considering the situations external factors" The effect has been described as "the tendency to believe that what people do reflects who they are."

Have you ever been accused of doing something for reasons that are untrue? How did it feel? Especially when your motives were honorable but seen as dishonorable by others. Those who characterize your actions or behavior as bad and, therefore, see you as a problem are guilty of the fundamental attribution error. You probably had good reasons for doing what you did.

It is a funny thing that we tend to see our motives as good and responsible but often see the motives of others as suspect and reflective of character flaws. This creates conflict, ill will, and a lack of cooperation since we have translated their actions into false ill motives. If we assumed that the motives of others were as honorable as ours, we would avoid a biased reaction against them.

What we really ought to do is give one another a break. Assume the best until you have evidence of the contrary. It would solve a lot of relational problems all around.

See also: Dangerous and hurtful assumptions

The pursuit of wisdom

Wisdom in our world is short supply. It has been supplanted by instant gratification, pragmatism, a pursuit of the superficial and hectic schedules that drive out reflection and intentional living. Wisdom is a trait all of us desire but one that many are not willing to pay the cost for.

Wisdom comes at a cost just as any other pursuit of value does. Things of great value do not come cheaply or easily. 

It was the writer of Proverbs that said "My son, if you accept my words and store up my commands within you, turning your ear to wisdom and applying your heart to understanding, and if you call out for insight and cry aloud for understanding, and if you look for it as for silver and search for it as for hidden treasure, then you will understand the fear of the Lord and find the knowledge of God. For the Lord gives wisdom and from his mouth come knowledge and understanding (Proverbs 1:1-6)."

At its most foundational level, wisdom comes from and mirrors God who is the source of all wisdom. Thus it goes without saying that understanding Him and His desires for our lives is central to learning to walk in wisdom. We do that by spending quality time in the Scriptures which is where we start to understand the heart of God, the principles of God and what it means to follow him. The Scriptures are called the ancient paths in Proverbs and those ancient paths are the paths of wisdom. 

Ironically, while we love to be cutting edge and modern and up to date - the wise individual walks the ancient paths that God laid down for us. The path to wisdom in the current world is an ancient path found in the unchanging character of God.

In the Scriptures we find the word of God but it is in prayer that we commune with God. Where we talk face to face as it were and wrestle with the issues of life and His work in our lives. Prayer is time exposure to God and in that time together we don't change God's heart but our heart becomes more like his. As our hearts become like His heart we start to desire to live by His wisdom.

Wisdom does not become operable in our lives until we choose to take what we have learned in Scripture and apply it to the situations we face on a daily basis. That takes deep reflection on our part and is the reason that many choose to journal - recording their thoughts, clarifying their priorities and measuring their lives against the Ancient Paths laid down by God. It is not possible to pursue wisdom without regular reflection, evaluation and realignment of our lives.

In our pursuit of wisdom, choosing to spend time with people of wisdom is one of the best investments we can make. Other wise people help us to think more wisely ourselves. They ask great questions and offer us perspectives that others would not. Wise friends are not caught up in the zeitgeist (beliefs, ideas and spirit of an era) but in the character of an unchanging God.

Ways that we unintentionally create or contribute to conflict and misunderstanding

None of us sets out to create conflict with others. Most of us truly dislike conflict and will go to great lengths to avoid it. However, it is also true that we can contribute to conflict unintentionally through our attitudes, responses and words. Being aware of these issues can help us do a better job of lessoning or avoiding unnecessary conflict.

Our responses and conflict

A significant contributor to conflict and misunderstanding can come from our responses to others. For instance, if someone makes a suggestion, offers a differing opinion or even takes a shot at us, a defensive reaction will contribute to ratcheting up conflict in the relationship. Contrast that with an open response like "Tell me more about why you think that?" which invites response and dialogue rather than shutting it down. 

Other responses like anger or impatience will have the same negative effect so learning to control our emotions and responses with people who irritate or words that irritate is a key to lowering the possibility of conflict or misunderstanding. Staying calm, collected, friendly and approachable in the face of people or situations that punch our buttons lowers the temperature. When we don't control our responses we invariably raise the temperature.

Our attitudes and conflict

More subtle than our actual responses to others is that of our attitude toward others who challenge us. If I have a dismissive, impatient, disrespectful, angry, haughty or irritated attitude with those interacting to me (justified or not) it raises the temperature. 

Early in my leadership life I was not very skilled in hiding or controlling my responses and it hurt me with others. It was unintentional but it caused issues nonetheless. It really comes down to treating all people and ideas with respect whether those ideas will fly or not fly. If our attitude is always one of respect we will respond well to people regardless of the merits of their ideas or even sometimes poor attitudes.

Our words and conflict

We are stewards of our words. They can build relationships or destroy them. They can raise the level of conflict or lower it. They can encourage or discourage. The diplomacy of our words and the respect we show others makes all the difference.

I intentionally placed this after our responses and our attitudes because harmful words come from uncontrolled responses and poor attitudes toward others. And those harmful words create misunderstanding and conflict. 

Learning to control our words is a learned discipline. I have been known to silently say to myself "KMS" numerous times when I am with people who push my buttons. It stands for "Keep Mouth Shut." It is a reminder that my words are going to matter so think about what I am going to say and how I am going to say it before responding.

When misunderstanding and conflict occurs we ought to ask ourselves whether we contributed to it through our responses, attitudes or words and become aware of how all three can contribute to conflict or lower the temperature. 

Help your board do self-evaluation of their work with seven evaluative statements

Church boards (and other boards) often forget what good governance looks like. Not because they don't care but because in the press of ministry life they forget. 

A simple way to evaluate your board work is to have everyone on the board assign a number from 1 to 10 for each of the statements below. Ten signifies we do this well and consistently and one signifies we do it poorly or inconsistently. Average out the scores for each statement and have a board conversation around it.

1. We have an outward vision rather than internal preoccupation

Churches with an outward vision do so because their boards are more occupied with thinking how to impact the community and world rather than spending the majority of their time discussing what happens inside the church.

2. We encourage a diversity of viewpoints

Healthy boards do not do "group think" but encourage each member to think for themselves, share their thoughts and through the diversity of viewpoints come to better decisions.

3. We do strategic leadership more than administrative details

Boards are not designed to spend their time on administrative details that others can do. They are designed to provide strategic leadership to the organization and grapple with the BIG rocks.

4. We have a clear distinction between the board and lead pastor roles

A lack of clarity between the responsibilities of a church board and that of a lead pastor creates either confusion or conflict. Clear distinctions between board and lead pastor roles fosters healthy relationships between the two and smoother leadership.

5. We make collective rather than individual decisions

Healthy boards make collective rather than individual decisions. They also have an understanding that once the decision is made each member will be supportive of the decision. No individual can force their will on the board or choose not to support its decisions.

6. We are more future focused than we are present or past focused

The best boards have a clear focus on the future rather than on the past or present. While they may need to deal with current crisis or some administrative details, their primary focus is on the future and how they can help the organization to meet the needs of the future.

7. We are committed to being proactive in our leadership rather than reactive

The vast majority of church boards live in the reactive world - dealing with crisis or day to day issues. The best boards are proactive in their leadership by setting appropriate policy and thinking about the future rather than  doing reactive leadership that is focused on the present and second guessing the decisions of others.

See also, 
Church board self assessment. 15 Questions

Powerful relationships

We all have relationships. For most of us, however, they are relatively shallow and we long for something deeper: someone with whom we can reveal our true selves and the struggles we wrestle with. Friends who knows us fully and yet accepts us totally. That is a powerful relationship.

I am blessed with a few powerful relationships. Other men who know me, love me, accept me, challenge me and want the best for me. I have a handful of these but they are enough. I am thankful for each of them and tell them of my appreciation regularly. 

Why are these relationships so powerful? Because in each case there is a mutual commitment to honesty and wanting the best for one another. There is grace and love extended both ways. There is a desire by each to be there for the other and encouragement is a regular part of the relationship. We may or may not talk often but when we do it is a life giving conversation that leaves both of us uplifted, hopeful and accepted. Even if the rest of the world were to abandon me, I know that these will not, no I them.

The key to powerful relationships is that grace and understanding is always present - even when we are challenged or are challenging another. Judgmental attitudes kill openness while attitudes of grace invite it and make it a safe place to open our hearts and lives. I suspect that it is the absence of grace among so many that makes these relationships so rare - and special.  

Powerful relationships are safe places, one of the most sacred gifts that we can give and receive. They are sacred because it is like Christ who loves us unconditionally. They are sacred because it is rare. They are sacred because these are people who will never abandon or betray us.

Who are you a safe place for? What are the powerful relationships that define your life and allow you to give others a like gift? Never take them for granted. Nurture these friendships. Allow a few powerful relationships to enrich your life and you enrich the lives of others.

Seven personal behaviors for the best board work

We give each other grace

Boards debate ideas and options and must deal with difficult decisions. Without grace toward one another and each other's viewpoints, conflict can create animosity and relational issues. Grace allows us to wade in and speak truthfully in a context of peace.

We speak the truth as we understand it

Unless we share what is actually on our minds, issues cannot be properly discussed, and options are left unaddressed. Too many board members are unwilling to speak candidly in meetings and end up talking about the issues elsewhere or living with frustration. Grace allows candid dialogue. We are responsible for sharing the truth as we understand it.

We show patience toward one another especially when we disagree

Disagreements are inevitable on a board. In fact, if there was no disagreement, a board would not be necessary. It is in the confluence of opinions, options and ideas that the best decisions are made. But getting to those great ideas requires patience with one another.

We listen carefully

The best board members are those who listen carefully and thoughtfully to others. Wisdom cannot be mined without careful listening and evaluation. The best board members are those who thoughtfully listen. When they speak others tend to listen.

We meet without a personal agenda

Boards exist for the good of the organization and its mission. Decisions are not about us or getting our way. It is what is best for the organization and its mission. Board members who must have their own way hurt the work of the board and often the organization itself.

We take a humble posture

Humility is at the heart of all good leadership. Our leadership is not about us and we do not possess all wisdom. The best leadership comes from humble leaders and board members who believe that the best decisions are corporately made. Humble board members learn at each meeting. Prideful members are simply focused on their own agenda.

We engage in robust dialogue without hidden agendas or personal attacks

Robust dialogue is the coinage of good boards. The ability to speak truth, disagree, talk through issues and even be emotional or passionate about an issue. This is healthy with two caveats: No personal attacks - it is not about people but about the mission; and no hidden agendas but only honest dialogue.

Be kind to those who irritate you because....

We make many assumptions about people around us, especially those who tend to irritate us. Why do they behave the way they do? Why do they irritate us? Why are they so irritable? There can be many "Whys." When irritated, Remember: "Everyone you meet is fighting a battle you know nothing about. Be kind. Always." 

It is easy to respond harshly, cynically or irritably to those who respond poorly to us. The natural response is to respond back in kind. Or to confront. A loving response is to reply with kindness and see if you can uncover the pain that is causing their reaction to you. 

Sometimes pain is public like when one loses their job or a family member dies. Most pain is held in private hidden from the outside world: marriages in crisis, severe financial pressure, decisions that need to be made. Everyone has either public or private pain. Usually it is private and until we understand the issues someone is dealing with we cannot understand them - or their reactions. Once we do, we can not only minister to them but understand why they responded the way they did. 

We live in an increasingly polarized and busy world where relationships that allow us to share deeply are becoming more rare. Being sensitive to those around us and responding to them in kindness, knowing that we don't know their struggles, is a posture of love that can open the door to better understanding.

Four critical behaviors that founders must give up as an organization grows

Organizational founders are special people - whether it be in business, in the church or in a not for profit. They get things going, pursue a dream and if all goes well grow an organization. In doing so, they do what many others cannot do or did not have the courage to do. 

However, as they see success, they also face growing challenges to give up certain practices, procedures or prerogatives they have enjoyed in the past. In fact, unless they give up these things that they are used to doing they will either plateau the organization, becoming a hinderance to its future growth, or they will sabotage their staff who will find it increasingly hard to work for the founder. 

The challenge for founders is that of letting go, learning to delegate and to trust the opinions of others as they lead their organization.  Here are four behaviors that need to change as the organization grows. Whether they can or will goes to the emotional health (EQ) of the founder. 

One: The small decisions
Founders are used to all decisions going through them. Inevitably this will become a barrier to growth as their capacity to make timely decisions decreases as the number of decisions increases. If one hires good staff one must also empower those staff to make decisions within the boundaries that have been set. If a founder cannot relinquish small decisions to their staff they are unlikely to see their organization continue to grow and flourish. Micromanagement might work when an organization is small but it becomes a barrier as it grows.

Two: Unilateral decision making
Here is my rule. Founders can make unilateral decisions until they hire additional management or leadership staff. At that point, key decisions must become the subject of discussion by the team as each member is a stakeholder and needs to carry out decisions that are made. Founders do not realize how demoralizing it is to staff when they unilaterally make decisions that impact others. If you have hired other leaders, bring their expertise to the table and give up the former practice of unilateral decision making. Good staff will not stay long term if their gifts and counsel are ignored.

Three: On the fly decision making
This is related to the second issue but with the added twist that "on the fly decisions" or "decisions made by the seat of one's pants" are often decisions that throw a monkey wrench into everyone else's day because a direction has been changed or some surprise has been announced that others are not prepared for. Rapid changes of direction without consultation with the key stakeholders is demoralizing as it often creates confusion to say nothing of now needing to redo what has already been done. Once you have a team it is imperative to engage that team in key decisions and not surprise them.

Four: Control
Central to the growth of any organization is the notion that one hires the best talent that one can and that together the team charts the course of success. That means that founders must be willing to relinquish some of their past control, trust their individual leaders to lead within the boundaries set for them and guide through metrics, coaching and relationship. How the work gets done will be different perhaps than how the founder did it. But this means that the founder needs to relinquish the sense that he/she must control everything that happens because that will strangle the organization.

The transition from a "founder mode" of leadership to a more "sustainable mode" of leadership is not easy. Certainly it depends of the quality of the team that is built. But, the most important factor is a founder who understands that they must change how they think and operate as the organization grows. What got you to here will not get you to there - it got you to here.

Anthony Bourdain, Kate Spade and depression

Unless you have suffered from depression or have lived with someone who does you will not understand how two such successful people who seemingly had everything going for them could commit suicide. But if you have experienced significant depression or lived with someone who does, you do! 

How can one describe depression to one who has never experienced it? 

Waterboarding of the soul

The dark night of the soul

Being stuck in your own head with all its fears and thoughts without a way out

Pain, pain and more pain - the kind that you cannot escape from

Brain fog where everything is a struggle, everything is hard

Darkness and sadness and hopelessness

Drowning in a vast ocean

Constant feeling of fear

If you have experienced depression you will have your own metaphors but none of them are sufficient to describe the experience. Most illnesses can be described. This one can only be felt and it feels like there is no escape. Money, position, power, family and any number of other things we often aspire to cannot free the depressed person from the prison of the mind. It is an illness and that illness needs compassion, understanding and help.

Because this illness resides in the brain, there is no escape from it. It can appear at the oddest moments and rob the brightest and most successful of their joy. It is in the brain but it is not just a matter of just "getting over it," or "thinking positive thoughts." It often requires extensive therapy and medication and ways to cope with the inner pain. 

If you cannot understand the suicides of Anthony Bourain or Kate Spade it is because it is not understandable apart from understanding the unpredictability of depression and the darkness that even successful people experience. Outward appearances can hide deep inner pain regardless of one's success in life. 

Many evangelicals and deeply religious people misunderstand depression thinking that if only one would give their issues to God all would be well and quote Scripture verses to that affect. Life is not that simple and answers are not that easy. Depression is a disease. "Just get over it," is not an answer but a deeply painful attitude to those who suffer from depression. You would not say that to someone with cancer and it equally does not apply to depression.

There are, thankfully, many good therapies for depression, as well as medications (Don't be one of those - especially in the religious community - who look down on those who take medication for depression). Sometimes it is learning how to deal with the disease rather than curing the disease. It can be a hard road but one worth travelling so that joy can replace depression, if only part of the time.

I have deep compassion for Anthony, Kate and their families. In a moment of time and in a season of depression, suicide seemed the only way out. I wish with all my heart they had chosen a different path but understanding the metaphors above I understand the pain. If you know someone who suffers from depression, encourage them to get help. It is available! Like anything else it can be a hard road but worth the effort. A life lost to depression robs the world of a precious individual made in God's image and of inestimable value.

Why boards need to change as an organization grows

Boards, especially in the non-profit world are not static entities. Unless they grow along with the growth of the non-profit they represent they will eventually stall out the effectiveness of that organization.

Consider, for instance five identifiable kinds of non-profit boards.

1. The Board of Friends and Relatives. Organizations start with the vision of an entrepreneur who has a vision to change something that needs changing.  There is nothing more natural than to find a group of friends and ask them to help you by serving as your board. The upside is that you have some advocates who will help you get the organization started. The downside is that they are friends and will not easily challenge the leader as the organization grows. Friends rarely challenge friends and certainly easily acquiesce to them. Thus while the board of friends and relatives may be appropriate for a season, it is only a season.

2. The Perpetual Board. These are boards that have no real mechanism for adding or subtracting board members and they serve in perpetuity. I have worked with these boards and they can be characterized as ingrown, a determination to hang on to power and control the staff of the organization, are resistant to change and are often led by a strong individual - perhaps the individual who had the original vision for the organization's mission. That individual often controls the board that controls the organization. There is not much upside to Perpetual Boards as they remain locked in the past while the organization needs to move forward.

3. The Controlling Board. These are boards that feel that nothing can take place in the organization without their blessing. Many church boards function this way. Rather than empowering the leaders of the organization, they essentially hold them hostage by requiring that they receive permission for anything they do. In addition, they often get involved in the affairs of the staff when in fact, staff should report not to a board but to the leader of the organization who reports to the board. Controlling boards do not understand the role of a board and the role of staff and will keep the organization from becoming all that it can become. In my view, there is no upside to a Controlling Board.

4. The Protective Board. These boards believe that it is their job to protect their leader at all costs. In the church it is why arrogant leaders get away with their behavior when the rest of the world knows something is not right. Boards are not there to simply protect the leader but the organization.

5. The Healthy Board. These are boards that empower leaders within boundaries while holding them accountable, are clear about the mission and its results, encourage robust debate and dialogue and ensure the health of the organization. This is a very different kind of board than the first four boards and unless boards move in this direction they will hinder the capacity and opportunity of the organization. 

All boards exist on a continuum between dysfunction and maturity. Healthy boards regularly access where they are and have an annual plan to up their game and governance. This starts with regular self analysis and even hiring a coach when necessary to move to the next level of maturity. Healthy boards lead healthy organizations whereas dysfunctional boards contribute to dysfunctional organizations.

The umbrella principle: Creating safe spaces for honest conversation

We have become a people divided: By opinion, politics, theology, preferences, lifestyle choices and any number of other issues. Those divisions alienate people from one another, create tribes that harbor animosity toward other tribes and prevent honest conversation that might just help us understand one another - even with our differences. What we lack are safe spaces for honest conversation.

Thus the umbrella principle. If you have a table with an umbrella in your back yard or deck, what happens when you raise the umbrella? What was before an impersonal space becomes a personal space for those sitting together underneath that umbrella, creating a more intimate and safe place for conversation. If you doubt me, try a conversation with friends with the umbrella down and then with it up. When you raise the umbrella you create a different environment. 

Those of you who enjoy an occasional cigar will understand me when I say that you cannot easily get into a fight in a cigar lounge. It always amazes me that such different people become such close friends when communing together over a cigar. Differences seem to disappear as honest conversation takes place in a safe place that encourages rather than discourages friendship. And in the context of friendship, differences of opinion can be honestly discussed. 

In every setting whether it be business, church, among neighbors and even family we ought to be looking for and creating safe places where understanding and friendship can be come more important than our differences - whatever they might be. And who knows, we might even learn something. 

In the absence of friendship, differences divide. In the context of friendship, differences create opportunities to challenge one another in a healthy way.

How do you measure the success of your organization?

I recently had an interesting conversation with the leader of a homeless ministry in the south. The city he is in has a large homeless population living in hidden places within the city. Because the weather is fairly mild it is a good place for homeless folks to congregate. The ministry he leads has a stated mission of helping these homeless folks get off the streets and into a stable living and working environment. This is also his desire.

His board however, measures something much different. They love to tell folks about the 40,000 meals they serve each year. The more meals served, the more successful they are in their view. On one level this is understandable. Feeding the hungry is necessary and it is a ministry. Helping the homeless become stable with homes and jobs is very tough, especially with the prevalence of drugs and alcohol within the population, to say nothing of mental illness. It can take years to help an individual move out of one world and into another.

The problem, of course is that focusing on the number of meals does not get to the heart of why the ministry exists. But because it is easy to count, it has become the measure of success for the board. The result is that more and more resources are focused on meals at the expense of the ultimate goal of the ministry which is to help the homeless leave the streets. By measuring the wrong thing - a good ministry in itself - the board sabotages its ultimate objective.

What you measure is what gets the attention in any organization. if you measure the wrong thing the attention is focused in the wrong direction. And it is easy to do. Everyone in leadership should regularly ask the question: "Are we measuring the right thing to ensure that we are moving in the direction of our mission and vision?" This means that we must do the hard work of figuring out what to measure and how to measure in order to determine whether one is heading in the proper direction and seeing success?

This is especially important in churches where our measure of success is often attendance, giving and buildings. But these are truly peripheral to the mission of the church which is more believers and better believers: Evangelism and Discipleship. That is harder to measure but it is possible to measure. Remember, what you measure is what gets the attention!