Churches, like individuals, can be either selfish or generous. Selfish congregations have a vision for themselves while generous congregations have a vision that extends beyond themselves and is Kingdom focused.
What is a vision that extends beyond you? Here are some indicators to consider:
When we are willing to actively cooperate with other like minded evangelical congregations regardless of their brand to bring the Gospel to our community we are thinking beyond ourselves.
When we have a vision to multiply ourselves through church planting we have a vision that is larger than our own congregation.
When we actively bless other ministries in the community we have a vision beyond ourselves.
When we minister to the marginalized, forgotten, people with disabilities or the poor we have a vision beyond ourselves. Any time we minister to those who are not like us we have a vision beyond ourselves.
When we are intentionally generous with our finances and energies for local, regional and global ministries, our vision extends beyond ourselves.
Generous congregations are Kingdom focused. They love to bless others for the sake of Jesus. They love to bless those who cannot bless them back. They are not brand centric but Kingdom minded and their efforts are therefore not simply focused on what will help them grow numerically or financially but what will contribute to the spread of the Gospel and lift up the name and reputation of Jesus.
I work with many generous congregations. They possess vision, faith and a spiritual vibrancy that selfish congregations don't. For them, ministry is about Jesus rather than themselves. How would you rate your congregation?
Thursday, October 11, 2012
Wednesday, October 10, 2012
Legacy: thoughts on my dad
It is hard to watch brilliant minds fade. A civil engineer, Divinity school graduate, Medical Doctor, surgeon, Doctor of Ministry degree, author, father, missionary, hospital founder (Hong Kong), great grandfather and mentor to many who found Jesus through home Bible studies, Sunday School teacher, church planter, Chief of Staff at United Hospital, theologian and the list could go on. All of that is today forgotten by him but not by the many people he touched over the years. Many will be in heaven because of my parents ministry.
It is a reminder that legacy is not about money, name or fame. It is about lives touched. I was once going through the security line at the Minneapolis airport and the TSA agent looked at my licence and name and asked if I was related to Gordon Addington, the surgeon. I said yes. He told me that my dad had invited him over for Christmas one year when he was a janitor at United Hospital. He never forgot that act of kindness for one in the hospital hierarchy who was very low on the scale. But not to dad.
As a youngster I helped him do surgery when trained assistants were hard to find in Hong Kong. We camped and took trips to Macau and explored the hills of Hong Kong. Above all he was consumed by knowing and serving Jesus.
The grandchildren had a wonderful relationship with Dad. He loved them and they loved him.
I look at this photo taken by one of the grand kids and I see a frail, tired, unsteady man. Not long, perhaps for this world. But most of all I see a picture of legacy. A legacy that will last through family and through those he ministered to. I hope that when my feet are unsteady and my mind fading that I too leave behind a lasting legacy.
Tuesday, October 9, 2012
Less is often more
Perhaps the greatest challenge leaders and teams face is coping with the multiple demands for our time, attention and energy. We have expectations for ourselves that are high. But there are many others who also have expectations for us that leave us with little margin.
There are several principles that if lived out can help us to be highly effective without being overly busy.
Second, we need to understand that doing less actually allows us to do more. In our busyness we miss out on the most important practice that would allow us to both be less busy and more effective. That is time to think, reflect, and pray. The more time we take to think deeply, pray and reflect, the better handle we develop on our priorities, schedules and strategy. In fact, the higher the level of leadership, the more critical this discipline is. How much time do you have in your weekly and monthly schedule to think, reflect and pray.
Third, whenever we take something new on it is critical that we leave something behind. We cannot continue to accumulate activity and responsibilities without ending up with an out of control life, fatigue and the leakage of necessary energy. Every year I ask myself the question, what are the things I am doing that I can give up - that someone else can do 70% as well as me.
Finally, we need to realize that the success of our work does not simply depend on us but on the team that we put together. The better the team you develop, the more possibility there is that there are others on the team who are gifted to do what you are not gifted to do - and probably better.
The best leaders I know are not living on fumes because they are running too fast. Rather they look relaxed rather than harried, schedule into their weeks think time as a priority, say no to opportunities more than yes so they can say yes to the key areas that they are called to.
Remember, less is almost always more.
Monday, October 8, 2012
Not ready, proceed slow, lets go: When leaders resist change!
I was in a fascinating meeting recently. I would guess that there were at least sixty people present and the topic was organizational change (very much needed). The outside facilitator asked everyone present to put a post it note on one of three large sticky pages. The first was labeled "Not Ready for change," the second, "proceed slow with change" and the third, "lets go with change."
Not one post it note was put on the "Not ready" sheet. Yet, when the discussion turned to change there was very significant resistance in the room to doing anything by a good number. What some did not want to admit is that they didn't want change at all, even though all the evidence pointed toward a deep need for change.
I often face this resistance when working with church boards or ministry organizations who call me in to help them solve problems. They know problems exist and they know that what they have in place is less than adequate if not out of date and inadequate but there is still resistance to change. Some will not admit it but they are just resistant to change no matter why it is needed.
What really fascinates me in Christian organizations is the ability of change resistors to spiritualize their reasons for not changing structure as if structure is a spiritual issue. It is not. Structure is simply a way of organizing to serve the mission of the ministry. The mission may be spiritual but the structure is not. Good structure is simply good structure. Inefficient structures are simply structures that no longer serve the mission well and therefore need to change. It is not a spiritual issue.
When I hear soliloquies about how God led our forefathers to organize in a certain way so we cannot change, I immediately know that we are no longer talking about the purpose of organizational structures but about resistance to change, for whatever reason. Someone uses this line of reasoning almost ever time church bylaws are revised. What people forget (often conveniently) is that what got us to here got us to here but it won't get us to there. In many cases those forefathers are not even living anymore. They led in a different generation with different issues and in different times.
Organizations do not simply grow. They change. No organization is the same organization that it was ten years ago and the structures that serve the mission must be adjusted at regular intervals to ensure that they are serving well. I am always amused that church bylaws are so hard to change. We will violate scripture on any number of issues but don't touch the (sacred) bylaws. Really?
When we resist changing our structures, they often end up actually hurting and hindering the mission whether in churches, denominations or other ministries. Organizational structures that served the mission in one era can hinder the mission in a different era. That is why antiquated governance structures in local churches must be dealt with or the congregation is likely to plateau or move into decline. The same is true for other organizations as well.
Here is my challenge to leaders. When it comes to change, "not ready" is not acceptable. Yes we may need to "proceed slow" or be ready to go but not ready or to be more blunt, not willing is not a sign of leadership but of non-leadership. Our world is changing at a rapid pace. Those who are in leadership positions must be ready and willing to change practices and old ways in order to meet the challenges of a new day. And the proof is not what we put on the sticky paper but whether we are willing to seriously engage in change discussion, not matter how uncomfortable that might be to us personally.
Not one post it note was put on the "Not ready" sheet. Yet, when the discussion turned to change there was very significant resistance in the room to doing anything by a good number. What some did not want to admit is that they didn't want change at all, even though all the evidence pointed toward a deep need for change.
I often face this resistance when working with church boards or ministry organizations who call me in to help them solve problems. They know problems exist and they know that what they have in place is less than adequate if not out of date and inadequate but there is still resistance to change. Some will not admit it but they are just resistant to change no matter why it is needed.
What really fascinates me in Christian organizations is the ability of change resistors to spiritualize their reasons for not changing structure as if structure is a spiritual issue. It is not. Structure is simply a way of organizing to serve the mission of the ministry. The mission may be spiritual but the structure is not. Good structure is simply good structure. Inefficient structures are simply structures that no longer serve the mission well and therefore need to change. It is not a spiritual issue.
When I hear soliloquies about how God led our forefathers to organize in a certain way so we cannot change, I immediately know that we are no longer talking about the purpose of organizational structures but about resistance to change, for whatever reason. Someone uses this line of reasoning almost ever time church bylaws are revised. What people forget (often conveniently) is that what got us to here got us to here but it won't get us to there. In many cases those forefathers are not even living anymore. They led in a different generation with different issues and in different times.
Organizations do not simply grow. They change. No organization is the same organization that it was ten years ago and the structures that serve the mission must be adjusted at regular intervals to ensure that they are serving well. I am always amused that church bylaws are so hard to change. We will violate scripture on any number of issues but don't touch the (sacred) bylaws. Really?
When we resist changing our structures, they often end up actually hurting and hindering the mission whether in churches, denominations or other ministries. Organizational structures that served the mission in one era can hinder the mission in a different era. That is why antiquated governance structures in local churches must be dealt with or the congregation is likely to plateau or move into decline. The same is true for other organizations as well.
Here is my challenge to leaders. When it comes to change, "not ready" is not acceptable. Yes we may need to "proceed slow" or be ready to go but not ready or to be more blunt, not willing is not a sign of leadership but of non-leadership. Our world is changing at a rapid pace. Those who are in leadership positions must be ready and willing to change practices and old ways in order to meet the challenges of a new day. And the proof is not what we put on the sticky paper but whether we are willing to seriously engage in change discussion, not matter how uncomfortable that might be to us personally.
The value of being circumspect
Circumspect: thinking carefully about possible risks before doing or saying something. (Webster)
Wise leaders understand the value of circumspection. They are not risk adverse or afraid of trying new things. In fact, their willingness to do so is what allows them to think outside the box and embrace new ideas. However, they do so only after considering the possible risks, unintended consequences and carefully weighing the costs.
Circumspect leaders are thinkers. Deep thinkers. They are not adherents to the idea of the month, don't readily jump on the popular trends and don't accept common wisdom as necessarily wisdom. They solicit the views of many on critical issues before making a decision. This is not about being cautious but about being wise - and understanding the ramifications of a proposed course of action.
Wise leaders understand the value of "thinking grey." While others are ready to quickly decide an issue, circumspect leaders often wait for a period of time, evaluating all sides of the issue, being neither proponents or opponents but simply keeping an open mind so that when a decision is made it is a wise decision. It allows them to evaluate with objectivity rather than taking a position. When they do decide it is with the value of having considered all possible angles and outcomes.
Many people believe that the best leaders make quick and decisive decisions. Actually the best leaders make circumspect decisions.
Wise leaders understand the value of circumspection. They are not risk adverse or afraid of trying new things. In fact, their willingness to do so is what allows them to think outside the box and embrace new ideas. However, they do so only after considering the possible risks, unintended consequences and carefully weighing the costs.
Circumspect leaders are thinkers. Deep thinkers. They are not adherents to the idea of the month, don't readily jump on the popular trends and don't accept common wisdom as necessarily wisdom. They solicit the views of many on critical issues before making a decision. This is not about being cautious but about being wise - and understanding the ramifications of a proposed course of action.
Wise leaders understand the value of "thinking grey." While others are ready to quickly decide an issue, circumspect leaders often wait for a period of time, evaluating all sides of the issue, being neither proponents or opponents but simply keeping an open mind so that when a decision is made it is a wise decision. It allows them to evaluate with objectivity rather than taking a position. When they do decide it is with the value of having considered all possible angles and outcomes.
Many people believe that the best leaders make quick and decisive decisions. Actually the best leaders make circumspect decisions.
Sunday, October 7, 2012
Transitions are always opportunities
I have learned that as we build healthy teams we must always hold staff lightly. If God chooses to move them to a different ministry or role we may mourn their loss but we never want to stand in the way of God's will for their life and calling.
Here is something else to remember. While transitions can be hard (if they were really good team mates) there is always an opportunity to go to the next level in some way at a time of transition. In other words, I choose to see staff transitions as opportunities even though they are hard and even though we will miss our colleague.
Often in transition we can refocus the position toward issues that are more urgent today than they might have been in the past. Sometimes you find that you can hire at a higher skill level than the one leaving. Or, it gives you the opportunity to rethink the position itself and ask whether a reconfiguration is even better allowing you to hire for something totally different.
In some cases, the individual leaving has done their job so well that their position may no longer actually be needed. This give one the opportunity to reconfigure and staff for the future, rather than assuming it needs to look like the past. We have had situations where it was not necessary to replace a position at all as the actual needs of the ministry had changed.
In some cases, the individual leaving has done their job so well that their position may no longer actually be needed. This give one the opportunity to reconfigure and staff for the future, rather than assuming it needs to look like the past. We have had situations where it was not necessary to replace a position at all as the actual needs of the ministry had changed.
Having a high view of God's sovereignty, I rest in the fact that He always has a hand in these transitions and that I can trust the one leaving that God has their best interests in mind and I can trust that God also has the best in mind for the ministry I lead. Thus transitions, while often hard, are for me an opportunity to reconfigure for the future.
Saturday, October 6, 2012
Dialogue is the key to understanding
As an author and writer, written words are the tools of my trade - but not in all cases. Organizational leadership can be helped with clear written words. But true understanding of the implications of what is written usually only comes through dialogue - frequent dialogue.
People learn differently. For many, their primary learning method is not reading but hearing. But the most powerful way to learn is that of dialogue together because it is in the give and take of perceptions, ideas, levels of understanding that the best understanding takes place. In addition, one can see the others face, expressions and hear their intonation. Face to face is always better and face to face with mutual dialogue is the best.
Many leaders forget this. They think that because a memo was sent or an all employee email popped in everyone's inbox that people "got it." In fact, they may have "gotten" something very different than what was meant, even by good communicators. In fact they got the memo. They may not have heard what we said. Or understood the implications.
Interestingly, leaders also learn through dialogue. They learn how best to communicate what they are trying to convey. They learn when what they are saying is not clear which changes how they communicate it the next time. And, they are challenged to an even sharper version of what they are sharing. They may even realize there are weak spots in their plans!
There is no substitute for leaders finding time to interact with their staff. People want to understand, not simply hear. Discussion and dialogue is the key. If you lead, how often do you dialogue?
People learn differently. For many, their primary learning method is not reading but hearing. But the most powerful way to learn is that of dialogue together because it is in the give and take of perceptions, ideas, levels of understanding that the best understanding takes place. In addition, one can see the others face, expressions and hear their intonation. Face to face is always better and face to face with mutual dialogue is the best.
Many leaders forget this. They think that because a memo was sent or an all employee email popped in everyone's inbox that people "got it." In fact, they may have "gotten" something very different than what was meant, even by good communicators. In fact they got the memo. They may not have heard what we said. Or understood the implications.
Interestingly, leaders also learn through dialogue. They learn how best to communicate what they are trying to convey. They learn when what they are saying is not clear which changes how they communicate it the next time. And, they are challenged to an even sharper version of what they are sharing. They may even realize there are weak spots in their plans!
There is no substitute for leaders finding time to interact with their staff. People want to understand, not simply hear. Discussion and dialogue is the key. If you lead, how often do you dialogue?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)