Self-understanding and dealing with personal weaknesses

The senior leaders of our organization recently went through a very helpful exercise designed to help each of us think honestly and accurately about our strengths and our areas of weakness.

Specifically we asked each leader to give a synopsis of their strengths (we do a lot of testing to help individuals understand their strengths). We then asked them to identify areas of weakness and how those weaknesses impacted their ability to lead well. Finally we asked them to share how they compensate for those weaknesses because weaknesses have an impact on ourselves and on those we lead.

After each one shared we invited colleagues to ask questions and make observations from their perspective.

An exercise like this requires a great deal of trust because it only works with a high level of self-disclosure about those areas we struggle with - areas we often try to hide from others in our desire to look strong.

I will not share the analysis of others but will share my own for purposes of illustrating how this kind of exercise can help us grow as leaders, in self-knowledge, in honest disclosure and in having a plan to compensate for known weaknesses.

We know, by the way, that weaknesses will never be a strength so trying to make our weakness strengths is a non-starter. God blessed each of us with areas of strength and it is up to us to figure out how to compensate for weaknesses so that our leadership is not compromised by it.

My strengths revolve around communication, strategy and vision, building teams and releasing other good leaders and envisioning the future. In many ways, my greatest value to an organization is helping determine the needed architecture, spiritual, organizational and strategy wise in order to meet our desired objectives. I am then the chief evangelist or communicator of that direction.

Not that is all well and good, but almost everything else are weaknesses that need to be "managed" so that they do not hurt the very organization I lead.

For instance, since it is easy for me to envision the future, it would also be easy for me to push the organization into that future at a pace that is not sustainable or healthy and which would create a backlash to what otherwise is a good direction. So it becomes important for me to have beside me an expert in process and I have that in my co-leader of the mission. If I am the architect, he is the wise contractor determining the pieces, the timing and the key subcontractors, (other leaders) that we need.

In my personal desire to get things done for maximum ministry impact I face two real challenges: the temptation to say "yes" to too many obligations which dissipate the power of my strengths and to not be as discriminating as I should be as to what I agree to take on. Now the strength of maximizing ministry is great but the shadow side described along with it is not.

Thus I almost always run significant opportunities past my wife, who is impacted by my schedule, and two colleagues who work closely with me and know me well, Lindsay and Gary. And they tell me what they think, sometimes without my even asking. And it is a blessing because it helps keep me in the most productive place possible rather than getting into good things at the expense of the most critical things.

As a matter of practice, I never make key decisions by myself without talking them through with key advisers and the senior team of the organization I lead. I am thoroughly convinced that the collective wisdom of a group of wise leaders is far better than the solitary wisdom of any one leaders.

I could list many other weaknesses and my strategy for dealing with them but I think you get the picture. Understanding both the up side and down side of our wiring and abilities is critical to the self-knowledge necessary to lead and the ability to find ways to compensate for weakness which have the potential to hurt our leadership.

It is an exercise you might think about trying with your team.

The Activity Trap

One of the most strategic things each of us can do - and insist from our staff is that we not fall into the activity trap. Simply put, the activity trap is the mistake of believing that activity is synonomous with results. Nothing could be further from the truth!

Think for a moment about people you know. Some of them seem to be always busy but the results from their work are, well, meager. Others, may or may not seem busy but the results of their work are significant.

I have watched senior leaders and even CEO's fall into the activity trap, endlessly busy with "important things" but truly meager in terms of the results of their work. Often if it were not for some good folks around them they would be seen as the "emperor without clothes." Sometimes they can fool outsiders who see the activity but insiders have a hard time figuring out what they really produce.

What makes the difference between those who see meager results and those who see significant results?

The difference is that those who see the best results understand that activity does not equal results. Activity is simply being busy. But if that activity is not carefully focused on specific outcomes one is simply left with activity.

General or unfocused activity yields general and unfocused results. Specific and focused activity will yield specific pre-determined outcomes that help the organization realize its objectives. In the first case the activity is focused on activity while in the second, the activity is focused on outcomes. It is a critical difference.

I am not indicating that those who live with unfocused activity are not doing good things. The question is whether the activity is focused on the good things that will yield the results they are after.

A problem with typical job descriptions is that they actually are a list of activities rather than a description of necessary results. That is why I believe it is far better to have job descriptions with Key Result Areas which are the outcomes wanted for the position than to have a list of activity. With Key Result Areas any activity included in the job is actually focused toward a few definable results that spell success for the job.

One of the ironies is that those who choose to do less often actually accomplish more because they are more focused than those running at a heavy pace.

To avoid the activity trap we should be able to answer these questions:

Do I know what specific results I want from my work? For instance I have five Key Result Areas that spell success for my work. Can you define what spells success for you?

Is my daily, weekly and monthly activity focused on achieving the specific results I have identified?

Do I have a strategy for making sure I stay focused? After all it is very easy to drift and a strategy for staying focused is important.

If you are a supervisor, can your reports answer these questions?
For further exploration, take a look at these blogs:
Connecting the Compass with the Clock
Your Annual Roadmap
What Spells Success for You
Intentional Living

For frustrated pastors and church leaders

Are you ever frustrated by how much bureaucracy you face either as a pastor or a leader in trying to make decisions for the church?

Yesterday I had an extended conversation with a pastor of a church of nine hundred. The leadership structure of the church is "leadership by committee" and nothing is supposed to happen without the approval of the elder committee. They literally feel that they have the right and the prerogative of dealing with every issue in the church - even though the church is a large church of 900 people!

Imagine the frustration of a pastor who has strong leadership skills but cannot lead. Imagine the frustration of several board members who understand good governance but whose hands are tied.

My guess is that this pastor will end up leaving to the missional loss of the church.

I contrast that with the story I shared recently of a church that has empowered its leaders and has seen huge ministry success. In one church leaders are empowered to lead - in the other they are not.

What is sad is that the church of 900 above could easily lose its pastor due to his high frustration factor - affecting not just him but a large congregation who love him and his direction. And, the church is leaving a huge amount of ministry effectiveness on the table - unused because the committee of elders cannot get its act together but insists that it must control the pastors.

What is wrong with this picture?

First, these leaders are leading like the church was led when it had 100 people and today it is a church of 900. It does not work! When church governance does not reflect the size of the Church the ministry hits a ceiling and stalls out. Who gets hurt? Those who are no longer led well and those who are not reached because of ministry paralysis.

Second, these leaders clearly do not trust their pastor. When a board insists on controlling their staff they are clearly communicating mistrust. An interesting concept when the New Testament talks about a culture of trust among God's people.

Third, these leaders do not have the humility to listen to others and to learn new ways of leading. They insist that there way is God's way and no counsel regarding leadership principles is listened to - hubris - and foolishness.

The sad thing is that this is all too common in the church. But it does not and should not be that way. If you face these challenges, take a look at these blogs:

The Payoff for healthy church culture

Avoiding Board Traffic Jams

Institutional verses Missional: A cautionary Tale

A Leadership Fable

Rethinking the meaning of congregationalism

Checks and balances in church leadership

Church leadership and trust

Church structure matters

Executive Limitations: Defining the boundaries and creating freedom

In the governance world there is a concept called "Executive Limitations" which describe those things that the Senior leader, whether pastor, or CEO of a ministry cannot do without board agreement. It is a concept which actually provides great freedom to the senior leader because there is clarity on their scope of authority and freedom to do what is not specified as a limitation.

Executive limitations when combined with an annual ministry plan (not the subject of this blog) give the senior leader freedom to lead in those areas that are not defined as an executive limitation.

Lets, take an example of a church of 400 and consider what might be examples of executive limitations of the senior pastor:

The Senior Pastor cannot:

-engage in any illegal or unethical behavior or allow staff to do so

-exceed the annual budget

-engage in the sale or purchase of property

-hire or fire staff without board consultation

-make major programming changes without board consultation

-Violate or change the mission, guiding principles, central ministry focus or culture defined for the church

-Violate policies determined by the board

-Allow any conflicts of interest among staff

The size of the church would determine the kinds of executive limitations placed on its senior leader. It is far easier to state what the senior leader cannot do than to list all that they can and are expected to do. Thus, the leader is given freedom within the bounds of the ministry philosophy of the church to lead apart from whatever executive limitations are placed on them by the board. Those issues are reserved as board prerogatives.

The list of executive limitations can be added to or subtracted from depending on the size of the church and issues that come up. The goal with executive limitations is to clarify the authority of the senior leader to lead. In many areas the senior leader has the authority to lead as they see fit. In other areas, the board limits the authority because those issues are "board issues."

There is another category that is critical for a healthy board/senior leader relationship and that is the whole host of things that the board should be appraised of - even if it has not limited the authority of the senior leader. No board likes surprises, see my previous post, and the better the senior leader keeps the board appraised of their thinking, plans and intentions, the better the trust and understanding between board and senior staff.

Executive limitations must always be coupled with a clear job description of the Key Result Areas that define success for the senior leader. KRA's define the proactive job of the leader and executive limitations define the prerogatives of the board and require board approval.

There should be a board job description that lays out the purpose, ground rules and job of the board. That further clarifies what issues are the responsibility of the board and what are the responsibility of the senior leader.

Are You an Open Book?

One of the greatest gifts we can give to those around us is to be an open book. It is both a life of authenticity open to the scrutiny of others and it is one where we have no need to pretend we are something we are not or to hide the struggles we face. It is a "what you see is what you get" approach to life.

Authenticity is an all too rare commodity in the Christian world where we often feel a need to present a public face to others which looks like what we think Christians should look like. Simply listen to the level of candid conversation in many local churches and ask yourself - are people really being open with their joys, sorrows, struggles and challenges?


This past year has been an interesting one for our family as thousands have prayed for us in the aftermath of my forty two day hospital stay last December and January. Our extremely candid disclosure of our needs and situation was forced upon us by events beyond our control. But, it has been interesting how many people have thanked us for being transparent.


It seems to me that transparency is a gift we give to others because people can relate to real life struggles much more than they can to the facade that we can so often put up. I think that it is also a gift to unbelievers who can watch Christ-followers struggle with real issues of life balanced by imperfect but genuine faith.


Pastors give a gift to their congregations when they are transparent about their own struggles, fears, and doubts and how they integrate faith and followership with real life.


As a listener I can relate to that. I think that is the great attraction of the Psalms. When you read the Psalms you get the real David with his joy, fear, anger, discouragement and faith. Sometimes is is raw and uncomfortable but it is real life. And it is the Psalms that people go to more than any other place in Scripture when faced with difficulties. In the Psalms you find genuine transparency.


The more transparent we are the more approachable we are. And the more approachable we are the more true influence we will have with those around us. The cost to us is admitting that we are not perfect, that our families are not perfect, that we don't have it all figured out and that we need others. Of course, all of that is true anyway.

Give the gift of being an open book. You will be surprised with the response.

What spells Success?

Do you know what success looks like for your church, team, ministry or organization?

Being able to clearly define success can be a huge factor in an organization's effectiveness. In my experience, however, most leaders and their staff cannot clearly answer the question. And, many times, the factors that we believe would spell success actually do not - and we are chasing the wrong things.

For instance. Many mission agencies define success by the number of missionaries they have and the number of countries they operate in. If you doubt that, just look at their materials. The problem is that those two statistics have nothing to do with effectiveness or results.

And, that definition can have negative unintended consequences which include bringing people into the organization that are not really qualified (because we are enamored by numbers) or starting ministries in new places where we do not have the necessary infrastructure or leadership.

In a similar fashion, local churches often simply believe that it is about numbers and one can get numbers by participating in the shuffle of believers from one church to another. Reading the New Testament one does not get the impression that numbers are the final indicator of success, rather life change is.
What is interesting is that there are actually two factors in defining success.

The first is the end product you want. In my organization the end product is spelled out by a mission statement, The EFCA exists to glorify God by multiplying healthy churches among all people. Our end goal is therefore church health, church multiplication and ensuring that the denomination includes all ethnic, and socio economic groups who make up our communities, nation and through missions our world.

Clarity on the mission, however, is only half the equation. The other half is defining the culture, practices and central ministry focus that are necessary to reach the missional goal that has been defined.

First, we need a set of guiding principles which provide true guidance as to how the organization operates. This goes beyond a static set of values to a set of principles which all staff and volunteers (or in the case of a church) members are committed to living out (see here for an example). These principles ensure that your staff are committed to practices that will help you get the results you desire. Without defining those practices you are unlikely to achieve what you desire to achieve.

The second piece is knowing what the central ministry focus must be if you are going to achieve your mission. This is the one thing that your organization must do day in and day out, without which, you will be far less likely to get to where you want to go. (see this post for an example).

The third piece is that of defining the culture you must have if you are going to achieve your mission. The culture of your organization, just like the practices of the organization will either help you achieve your mission or will work against you achieving that mission. For the local church I believe the culture is spiritual vitality. For our mission, it is healthy people, healthy teams, healthy leaders and healthy churches. In other words we know that without a culture of health at all of these four levels we will not achieve our missional goal.

In the book, Leading From the Sandbox, I describe how these four elements of mission, guiding principles, central ministry focus and organizational culture can be communicated in a simple way to all staff, and stakeholders.
The central point is that we must have the correct definition of success for our ministry. But once we have that definition, we must define the practices, central ministry focus and culture that are most likely going to help us achieve that mission - and therefore success.

A sense of Urgency

I am often asked after speaking to our world wide staff, "Why do you have such a sense of urgency?" The question caused me to stop and think.

It is not that I am driven. I believe I have come to the place where I truly have nothing to prove and nothing to lose. I am comfortable with who I am and how God made me. I am glad I can say that at 52.

It is not because I am competing with other mission agencies. There is plenty of work to go around.

It is because without a sense of urgency no church, no business and no ministry organization will be all that it can be. The opposite of urgency is complacency, comfortable, and maintenance of status quo. That is where people will generally live unless someone - a leader - or a crisis - pushes them out of comfortable into urgent.

Any business today that lives in the comfort zone will find itself in a crisis. The rules of the game are changing so rapidly, competition is so fierce, the markets so unpredictable that complacency is frankly death.

It is easy for churches to live in the comfort zone. Most do which is why 80% of the congregations in America are plateaued or in decline. And why conversion rates are terrible and life transformation rare.

Mission agencies have been living in the comfort zone for decades and are just now waking up from a long snooze and realizing that the world changed tremendously in the past thirty years and they did not. Some will not make the transition and will slowly slide into decline.

So what drives my sense of urgency?

First, we have 6 billion people on the face of the earth today. Half the people who have ever lived in human history are alive today (300 years ago there were only 600 million people on the planet). Never before have the stakes for evangelism been so high. Never before has it been easier to reach more people for Christ more quickly than today - if we will sense the urgency and use methodologies that are appropriate for the day in which we live.

Second, It is a matter of stewardship. Like Paul, I do not want to settle for anything less than the best effort, and certainly do not want to rest on the past but press on to the future. Why give myself to anything but the best that I can give - or lead an organization that does the same?

Time is our most precious commodity. All of us are personally running out of time. We need to run the race to the finish and reach the finish line knowing that we absolutely did our best.

Leaders are the ones who create a sense of urgency if there will be one. If there is no urgency in your business or organization, it is a leadership issue. Leaders are also the ones who model a sense of urgency. If I sometimes seem impatient with progress, I am. Without a certain impatience there is no progress.

As Paul wrote so eloquently, "I press on to take hold of that for which Christ Jesus took hold of me...Forgetting what is behind and straining toward what is ahead, I press toward the goal to win the prize for which God has called me heavenward in Christ Jesus" (Philippians 3:12-13).