A question that too few leaders and supervisors ask of their staff

It is a simple question but one that unasked can have significant ramifications. It is this: Are you being used to your capacity? Or another way of asking this is Are you challenged and engaged? Often the answer is NO. The no signifies someone who wants more on their plate, who is underutilized and may not be fully engaged which leaves them vulnerable to looking for another job and another organization.

Of course, the loss to your organization whether they stay or leave is that gifts and potential are left on the table, a situation that few organizations can afford in our competitive day. All organizations have more that we could be doing than we do with the people we have. Leaving coinage on the table is foolish!

Why is this question not asked more often? It is because supervisors take the status quo for granted, and assume that staff are in their lane. When I do staff audits for ministries and organizations I find that there are many instances where staff feel underutilized and long for the opportunity to take on more responsibility. That is a gift to the enterprise if we can uncover it.

It is not unusual for staff to leave one organization and find another opportunity at another with higher responsibility and higher pay. Who loses? Usually it is the organization that missed the cue because they didn't ask and the staff member assumed that there was not way for them to develop in the place that they are. One simple question might have saved an employee who your organization had invested a great deal in.

Watch your staff and their abilities. Talk to them informally. Find out what their passions are and where they are on the happiness scale. Ask if they are engaged and fulfilled. And if not and you value them, try to get them into a place where they can use their gifts and abilities to the fullest degree.

Creating cultures of excellence
AddingtonConsulting.org

What is your word for the year?

Here is a simple exercise but one that can have a significant impact on your year. It is January so it is not too late to put into action. Consider praying about one word that you would like to focus on this year. My word for this year is peace. To be a person of peace, live in peace, have a home characterized by peace. Each morning as I awake I remind myself that I want to be a person of peace and live a peaceful life.

What is the one word that you would like to characterize your year? Courage? Reconciliation? Intimacy? Love? Joy? Patience? Healing? Leadership? Usually one does not need to think long and hard because you have already been thinking about something in your life that you need to focus on.

Because I journal I can note each day what I did to live out the meaning of the word peace. There are many opportunities and many ways I can do this. It is simply another way that I can be intentional in my life as I listen to God's promptings. If one does this year after year the cumulative affect can be significant.

What is your word?

.Creating cultures of organizational excellence
AddingtonConsulting.org

Life giving behaviors of healthy leaders

There are some life giving behaviors that good leaders engage in and live by. It is what sets them apart from other leaders, gives them great credibility and earns them the loyalty of their staff. It is also what makes their ministry or team successful. I say life giving because they give life to people and to the mission of the team or organization.

One: Good leaders never make it about themselves. They have the humility to understand that their leadership is about the mission they have been given and that they are stewards of that mission. Healthy leaders keep the focus on the mission, not on themselves. While relationships are critical the best glue is missional glue.

Two: Good leaders build a great team. Many leaders hire people who will do what they tell them. The best leaders hire people who they can empower within boundaries and release them. They empower rather then control and are not afraid of staff whose skills exceed their own. In fact they intentionally look for people who are better than they are in the areas they lead.

Three: Good leaders do not take credit for success. They give it to the whole team rather than take it themselves. They know that without God's empowering and the team they work with, success would not happen. It is not about me but about us together. Staff are not always out front and they appreciate it when their leader platforms them.

Four: Good leaders don't blame others for failures. Bad things happen and leaders know that if it happens on their watch they need to take responsibility. This sends a strong message that "my leader has my back." There may be private conversations but in public, there is no blame.

Five: Good leaders don't fail to address known issues. One of the things that gives leaders credibility with their staff is that they deal with issues even when they are hard. Issues that are not dealt with hurt staff and the ministry and staff need their leader to step into the tough places. Respect for a leader comes when they engage the issues rather than ignore the issues.

Six: Good leaders build a healthy life giving staff culture. Healthy cultures have an ethos of candid conversation, collegial relationships, trust, lack of turf wars, common mission, cooperation and humility. They avoid gossip, undermining of others, unresolved conflict, passive aggressive behavior,  and other negative behaviors that destroy healthy cultures.

Seven: Good leaders don't ask others to do what they don't do. They model the values and commitments of the organization, don't take advantage of their position and lead the way by example.

Eight: Good leaders pay significant attention to their staff. Making time for staff, being available to them, removing barriers they face and staying relationally connected are all factors in a healthy staff culture. They are never too busy to ensure that staff have what they need to do their job well.

Nine: Good leaders keep the mission central all the time. Few things are more demoralizing than mission drift because it robs the organization and staff of a cause worth giving their lives for. One of the first jobs of all leaders is to keep the mission front and central with great clarity.'

Ten: Good leaders continually clarify what is important. There is nothing more helpful to any team or organization than clarity. Ambiguity creates all kinds of questions while clarity answers those questions. Leaders clarify all the time.

Eleven: Good leaders foster candid dialogue and a non-defensive spirit.  It is wonderfully refreshing to meet leaders who encourage honest dialogue and who are totally non-defensive when their ideas are challenged.

Twelve: Good leaders lead collaboratively rather than autocratically. Collaborative leadership beats autocratic leadership every time because there is greater intellectual capital at the table as well as greater by-in. Few truly good staff will stay long term without having a voice at the table.

Thirteen: Good leaders require high accountability but exercise low control. They set appropriate boundaries but give a great deal of empowerment. Nor do they insist that staff do things their way but encourage them to use their creativity and gifts.

Fourteen: Good leaders develop their staff and the next generation of leaders. It is life giving when leaders are proactive in helping their staff grow. It is critical to the ministry to develop the next generation of leaders.

Fifteen: Good leaders don't stay beyond their usefulness. There comes a time for leaders to move on and it is better to move on when people want you to stay than leave when people want you to leave. And when they leave, they leave well!

Ignore these employee behaviors at your own peril

Those who lead people are usually optimistic about the staff they lead. But there are times when we need to recognize that it is not going to work with a specific staff member without significant change. In fact, there are behaviors that if not confronted will hurt your team and by extension your leadership. Many leaders err in allowing the behaviors to exist for too long. 

What are the signs that this is the case?

We keep running into attitudes or behaviors that are counterproductive to the mission of the ministry or the team a staff member is on. I spoke to a leader recently who has a staff member whose behaviors indicate unteachability and a significant amount of hubris. He has coached and told the staff member that his behaviors are counterproductive. But nothing changes. I suggested that he is dealing with someone who doesn't listen or believe that what he is saying is true. Unteachable people are unlikely to succeed as they tend to sabotage themselves. They also negatively impact those around them.

The staff member does not seem to value the mission or non-negotiables of the organization and want to do their own thing. Teams and organizations only work well when everyone is in alignment with the rest of the group. Lone rangers don't work well on a team or within an organization even if they are brilliant. If you have one staff member who is allowed to do their own thing, why should the others be in alignment? It is not ok for staff to be out of alignment with the organization's mission, values or practices.

There are significant EQ issues that keep popping up. The question here is whether the individual can be coached toward greater EQ health. If not, and if their EQ issues create issues within their team or organization, it is unfair to other staff to leave them in place. Further, unhealthy behaviors directly impact the culture of the organization. And a healthy culture is a key factor in your success! Often the result of EQ deficiencies is relational conflict, passive aggressive behavior, and unteachable attitudes, all of which create a degree of chaos among staff and often impacts constituents as well. 

You have tried to get someone into a productive lane but you have been unsuccessful. When there are high expectations for team members and there is an unproductive employee, everybody notices. They not only notice but leaders lose points when they don't address the issue because others are held to a higher standard. You cannot give an individual a pass. Sometimes there is no longer a fit. When I have done employee audits in organizations this issue pops up almost every time. It is noticed and it matters. 

When a significant amount of time and energy has been expended in trying to make it work and it continues to remain problematic it is most likely not a good fit. Optimism needs at some point to be tempered by reality. It is amazing how the exit of one staff member can be the key to freedom, joy and productivity of the rest of the team. It is not always a conclusion we desire to come to but in some circumstances it is the right conclusion.

An important factor in all of this is the impact of problematic behaviors on the rest of your staff. It is fundamentally unfair to the rest of your staff to allow unproductive behaviors to continue. What is often considered grace by a leader in allowing a problematic staff member to remain, is not grace for the rest of the team who are all impacted by the behaviors of other team members. Your "kindness" to one is not a kindness to others!

We cannot solve all the issues of staff members. It is not that they cannot find a place of effectiveness somewhere but sometimes it is not with our team or organization. Learning to be realistic as well as redemptive is a skill all leaders need to learn. After all, when it is not working for the leader it is usually not working for the rest of the team either. When we have done our best and it still does not work we need to take action - for our well being as well as for the well being of the organization.  Ironically it is usually the best for the staff member who does not fit as well. Run good process but don't prolong the pain.

 Creating cultures of excellence
AddingtonConsulting.org

8 responses to change: Understanding who will help you and who will hurt you

Many are familiar with the bell curve that describes how people respond to change: innovators, early adapters, middle adapters, late adapters, 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 significant difference when considering them for either staff or board leadership positions.

Resisters. Like the laggards on the bell curve, these people will actively resist change because they are wired that way. This individual 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.

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 individual told me and many others that the changes I brought to ReachGlobal would destroy the mission. 

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 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, they can be either an ally or a critic on any day.

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

Change agents. These individuals support proposed changes and 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 champions of change publicly and privately live the change out, help others understand and get there, and advocate for the new direction.

In my experience, realists, change agents, and evangelists will help drive change, while 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: who you hire, who you put into leadership, and who you ask to serve on a board. After hearing these descriptions, one church leader 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 positions of leadership and influence! 

Confusing, outdated, unclear and vague church governance systems

Many churches are long overdue to change their governance systems, but I am still surprised to read many church constitutions that make real leadership very difficult. Church leaders who would never structure their business the way their church structures leadership are seemingly OK with the fact that it is almost impossible to do any kind of leadership within their governance system.

Yes, churches are not businesses. They are far more important that a business because eternal lives are at stake. Yet we continue to hamper leadership that would help the church to be more effective. Here are some common governance issues that congregations still allow to hamper their leadership.

Keep the leadership from controlling the budget

In what other arena would you find a system where those who are charged with the direction and effectiveness of the ministry (elder, Deacons or whatever the group is called in your polity), must go to another board (often trustees) to designate funds toward ministry initiatives. One board is charged with the effectiveness of the church ministry and its direction and the other board holds the dollars to carry it out hostage.

Such systems are absolute foolishness from a leadership perspective, yet they continue to exist. Every decision the first board makes must then be negotiated and made by a second board when it involves funds. And a board that is not vested with the direction of the ministry can determine whether they release the funds or not. In the best scenario this is a waste of time and energy. In the worst scenario, it sets up conflict between the two boards.

Multiple boards and multiple authorities

When you give a group the designation of “board” you give them implied authority. So, when you have multiple boards such as elders, deacons and trustees you have multiple groups with implied authority. Of course, this raises the question as to who is ultimately responsible for church leadership. When no one is in charge, everyone is in charge!

It is these kinds of structures that cause the best leaders to stay out of church leadership. They cannot lead and when they do, it is a very frustrating experience. And because no one desires to give up their power it is hard to change. In both scenarios, the power issue keeps people from making needed changes. We would not admit it, but it is true! And again, key decisions must be negotiated with multiple groups.

Confusing, overlapping and vague authority

Reading many church constitutions is a laborious activity because they are often full of confusing, overlapping and vague authority that makes it impossible to interpret who is responsible for what. Good governance documents should be simple, clear and designate lines of authority with precision. When this is not the case, the authors (well intentioned I am sure) set the congregation up for conflict and endless discussion.

If it is not simple, clear and delineate clear lines of authority it is a poor governance document and should be revised. Yet we resist revision because “you cannot change the bylaws.” Actually, you can since the bylaws serve the mission of the church rather than the church serving the bylaws. And you should.

What many don’t realize is that these kinds of poor governance structures keep leaders from leading and the church from moving forward. If you like the status quo this is a great strategy. If you care that the church is effective it is a terrible strategy. Often it takes the courage and diplomacy of a true leader to help others realize that their structures need to change if they want to be effective.

Let’s call poor governance systems for what they are and revise them for the sake of the gospel. 

The culture of your church staff directly impacts the culture of your congregation

How healthy is your church?

One of the leading indicators of that question's answer is the health of your staff culture. The culture of your staff is generally a microcosm of congregational culture, and whether good or bad, will ripple on the rest of the congregation. When I work with congregations who are struggling with significant issues, one of the first things I do is to get a handle on the culture of the staff. It will tell me a great deal.

The best way to understand the staff culture is to do a staff audit. These are 30 to 60-minute individual conversations with all staff with a carefully chosen series of open-ended questions - usually conducted by an independent third party that staff will feel free to open up with. Having completed many of these, I have learned that staff are willing to share honestly about the joys and challenges of working in their environment. The results of such an audit help senior leaders understand where they are doing well and where they could do better.

In this process, you can learn how empowered or controlled staff feel, whether they have what they need to do their jobs, whether there is alignment throughout the team regarding ministry direction if there is clarity around who the church is and where it is going if they are coached intentionally or left to their own devices if there is a collegial or competitive spirit and even the general happiness of staff in their work.

Here are some observations.

• Where staff are not empowered, volunteers in the congregation are not empowered either.
• Where there is openness among the team and the freedom to talk and share honest opinions and ideas, there is generally an open atmosphere in the congregation where people feel free to tell their stories without fear of censure. The opposite is also true. 
• A happy staff usually indicates a happy congregation.
• Leaders who control staff members often try to control people and ministries across the church.
• Where leaders allow unresolved issues to fester on staff, they also tend to allow the same in the congregation. 
• Leaders who don't shepherd and care for their staff often do not do so with the rest of the congregation.
• When there is a culture of grace on the team, you usually find that same culture within the congregation.

Much of staff culture reflects the commitments of the senior leader. The best leaders pay careful attention to the culture they create on their staff, knowing that what they build there will become the culture of the congregation as a whole. Self-absorbed or controlling leaders are more concerned about themselves and the church's image than they are about the health of their staff. The result can be a ministry that looks great on the outside with a significant lack of health on the inside. Many congregations fit that bill. This is true of some of the largest congregations in the country.

Staff turnover reflects dysfunction within the staff environment and its leadership. Healthy churches have low staff turnover and, interestingly, greater retention in the congregation. Where turnover is high, someone needs to pay attention and ask why. There are always reasons. 

The lesson: As it goes on staff, it goes to the congregation. Pay attention to your staff culture. That culture will ripple on the rest of the community in good ways and bad. Problems within the staff culture may also indicate problems in the congregation. Your culture is your brand.

Five ways a calendar can revolutionize your life

A critical principle each of us must learn is the value of time. Time is far more valuable than money because you can never get it back. Money comes and goes, but time just goes. Every time we place an obligation on our calendar, we write a "time check" that we cash on the day and time it is written for. What we often forget is that our calendar is a fabulous tool to help us use our time most wisely.

Here is something to think about. A calendar is not just a "time to do list" to remind us of everything we have committed to. But that is how we often use it. We dutifully put our obligations on our calendars so that we don't forget them, but that is not the primary purpose of a calendar. That is simply a to-do list with a time and place attached to it.

A Calendar, rightly used, is far more than this. It can be a fabulous tool to help us achieve our calling in life, our responsibilities at work, our marriage and family commitments, and all of those things that are of importance to us. It is not a "time to-do list." It is a sophisticated tool to help us achieve our goals in life. Let me explain.

Organizing our time
At its most simple, calendars help us organize the elements of our lives that are all time-constrained. Like the filing system for our email, a calendar helps us to organize our time because we believe that time is valuable. Anything of value is handled with care and stewarded. If time is valuable, we need to handle it with care and organization.

Prioritizing our activities
Not all activities are of equal value. But how do we ensure that we are focused on those activities of the greatest value? Here is a simple principle: Those things that are most important always go on our calendar before other things are added. This is true in our work, our family, our marriage or any other part of our life. This is far different than a "time to-do list." It actually helps us schedule our priorities first because we want to live intentionally rather than accidentally.

Evaluating our spending
Not monetary spending but "time" spending. Think of your financial decisions. An analysis of our bank statement can tell us not only where our money is going but also whether we are using our finances to achieve our financial priorities. If retirement is important, but we are putting only a small amount into our fund, our spending does not reflect our priorities. In the same way, our calendars tell us in real-time if we are actually spending time in a way that reflects our priorities. Thus, our calendar helps us to evaluate our lives and commitments.

One way to use your calendar to determine your "time" spending is to color code your commitments so that you have a visual picture of where you are spending your time. It is visual management for your life.

Aligning our time with our values
Values represent what is important to us. My marriage, for instance, is important to me. That means that my time commitments to my wife and the health of my marriage should be reflected on my calendar. If it is not, I need to realign my time priorities to align with my values.

Because our time commitments should reflect our values, wise people read their calendars often, and as they do, they ask themselves the question, "Am I spending my time in ways that reflect my values?" And "Where do I need to realign my "time" spending? It is helpful to take scheduled time each month to examine one's calendar and ask these important questions.

Choosing to say yes or no
How often do we have a problem saying no? When we should! Your calendar can help you determine whether you ought to say yes or no to commitments that come your way. A great way to do this is to develop the habit of saying, "Let me check my calendar and see if it fits" when asked to add something to your calendar. Don't answer on the fly. Rather, take a day or two, look at the time commitments you have, and give yourself the freedom to agree or say no on the basis of how it fits into your priorities. Don't cash time checks you don't want to!

One final thought. There is a video from Bill Gates making the rounds entitled "Busyness is the new stupid." I agree. Yet we fill our schedules to overflowing and, in the end, get too little rest, think time family time, and live with fatigue and frustration. Use your calendar to manage your time so that you don't live in the tyranny of the urgent - at least most of the time!