I just arrived back in Miami from Cuba. I had the privilege of working with a large denomination there that is actively planting churches, both traditional and house churches (thousands of these) and doing ministry in a very transformational way. It was most encouraging to see that the Gospel is prospering in a very difficult environment. The Christian population is greater than 10%.
One of the things that impressed me was the sacrifice made by those who pastor these congregations. Most must work full time in addition to their ministry. Jobs are hard to come by, the economy is very difficult and unemployment may be as high as 30 - 40%. Yet there is an optimism and a deep commitment to see individuals and communities transformed with the Good News. One leader I met has planted 40+ churches in a new community and oversees their ministry.
As an aside, Cuba is a beautiful place and the people very friendly. And, the response to the Gospel is an indication that there is a hunger for deeper meaning in life. Pray for Cuba and the church there. They are committed to loving on their country in order to see God bless their nation.
(Posted from Miami)
Saturday, April 5, 2014
Friday, April 4, 2014
Leadership friendly environments
I asked a group of church leaders this week, if it was easy or hard to make decisions. They said "hard." What they were really saying without knowing it is that they do not have a leadership friendly environment. This not only makes it hard to lead but it robs good leaders of a lot of joy and it keeps leaders from being more effective. Their answer is an indication that their structures or ethos need to change.
This scenario is all too common in the local church where the ethos is more often than not a permission withholding structure rather than permission granting. Some like it that way as it prevents leaders (staff or lay) from making decisions. But the end result is that ministry opportunity is left on the table and the missional agenda is compromised.
What does a leadership friendly environment look like?
1. Leadership is valued as important to the organization. In many Christian organizations and ministries it is not! In fact, many churches don't want to support leaders on the mission field (they don't do real missions) even though they would never think to have staff with no leader or accountability in their own organization.
2. The structures and ethos are such that it is easy to make decisions. This allows the organization to move quickly when it must and empowered within appropriate boundaries at all times. Generally this means that leaders have appropriate authority to act with clear boundaries without getting additional permission. bureaucracy is kept to a minimum.
3. There is room to fail. Not all decisions get us to where we want to be and not all strategies work. The tendency when something does not work is to become even more cautious, pull our heads into the shell and get blamed for the "failure." Yet, if there is not room to fail, innovation never takes place. Leadership friendly organizations allow for failure which is why they see innovative thinking.
4. New leaders are regularly mentored and released. No organization is truly leadership friendly if it is not training the next generation of leaders. Leadership that does not train the next generation is selfish leadership while those that do display an unselfish leadership. The intentional development of new leaders makes it clear that leadership is a priority for the organization.
5. Leaders have both authority and responsibility. One of the most disempowering actions is to give someone responsibility without the requisite authority to accomplish it. This is not leadership at all but is rather an abdication of leadership. In addition, leaders who are regularly second guessed by their superiors after they have made decisions with due process are likewise disempowered and kept from leading well.
6. Good leadership is modeled and lived out at the top of the organization. Senior leaders always set the tone for what leadership will look like within the organization. Poor leadership at the top is always an indicator of a leadership unfriendly environment.
How leadership friendly is your environment and how leadership friendly do you allow others to be?
(Posted from Havana Cuba)
This scenario is all too common in the local church where the ethos is more often than not a permission withholding structure rather than permission granting. Some like it that way as it prevents leaders (staff or lay) from making decisions. But the end result is that ministry opportunity is left on the table and the missional agenda is compromised.
What does a leadership friendly environment look like?
1. Leadership is valued as important to the organization. In many Christian organizations and ministries it is not! In fact, many churches don't want to support leaders on the mission field (they don't do real missions) even though they would never think to have staff with no leader or accountability in their own organization.
2. The structures and ethos are such that it is easy to make decisions. This allows the organization to move quickly when it must and empowered within appropriate boundaries at all times. Generally this means that leaders have appropriate authority to act with clear boundaries without getting additional permission. bureaucracy is kept to a minimum.
3. There is room to fail. Not all decisions get us to where we want to be and not all strategies work. The tendency when something does not work is to become even more cautious, pull our heads into the shell and get blamed for the "failure." Yet, if there is not room to fail, innovation never takes place. Leadership friendly organizations allow for failure which is why they see innovative thinking.
4. New leaders are regularly mentored and released. No organization is truly leadership friendly if it is not training the next generation of leaders. Leadership that does not train the next generation is selfish leadership while those that do display an unselfish leadership. The intentional development of new leaders makes it clear that leadership is a priority for the organization.
5. Leaders have both authority and responsibility. One of the most disempowering actions is to give someone responsibility without the requisite authority to accomplish it. This is not leadership at all but is rather an abdication of leadership. In addition, leaders who are regularly second guessed by their superiors after they have made decisions with due process are likewise disempowered and kept from leading well.
6. Good leadership is modeled and lived out at the top of the organization. Senior leaders always set the tone for what leadership will look like within the organization. Poor leadership at the top is always an indicator of a leadership unfriendly environment.
How leadership friendly is your environment and how leadership friendly do you allow others to be?
(Posted from Havana Cuba)
Thursday, April 3, 2014
Is your ultimate focus on Scripture or Jesus?
I do not worship Scripture, doctrine or theology. I worship Jesus and there is a big difference! It is easy to substitute the word of God for the person of God even though the word points to the person. The word without Jesus and His transformative work is dead and can lead to little else but legalism. The word understood and Jesus worshiped leads to freedom and life.
In my years of consulting with churches some of the most damaging and dangerous people have been those who knew the Scriptures the best. They could quote Scripture (and used it against other people), knew fine theology (and loved to show it) and often were the most rigid and legalistic people in the congregation. To say nothing of the lack of grace. These individuals worshiped the Scriptures at the expense of worshiping Jesus.
The word is designed to lead us to a living Lord and the transformation of our lives through the Holy Spirit. It does so only when we engage with Jesus (John 15) and are organically attached to Him. Jesus did not tell us that the Scriptures were the vine and we the branches but that He is the vine and we are the branches. It is as we remain in Him that we find life.
The word is truth about God but it is not God. Furthermore, without the Holy Spirit working in our hearts the word cannot transform our lives but only add to our intellectual knowledge and lead to a dead orthodoxy (if one can call it orthodox without the living Lord).
I love Scripture and read it through almost annually. But I love Jesus more and worship Him. He is my savior, not the Scriptures. He gives me life while the Scriptures help me understand him better and align my life with His.
Never substitute the word of God for the person of God. The first can lead us to the second but it is the second that gives us life. Together His person and His truth are a powerful combination for life transformation.
(Posted from Havana, Cuba)
In my years of consulting with churches some of the most damaging and dangerous people have been those who knew the Scriptures the best. They could quote Scripture (and used it against other people), knew fine theology (and loved to show it) and often were the most rigid and legalistic people in the congregation. To say nothing of the lack of grace. These individuals worshiped the Scriptures at the expense of worshiping Jesus.
The word is designed to lead us to a living Lord and the transformation of our lives through the Holy Spirit. It does so only when we engage with Jesus (John 15) and are organically attached to Him. Jesus did not tell us that the Scriptures were the vine and we the branches but that He is the vine and we are the branches. It is as we remain in Him that we find life.
The word is truth about God but it is not God. Furthermore, without the Holy Spirit working in our hearts the word cannot transform our lives but only add to our intellectual knowledge and lead to a dead orthodoxy (if one can call it orthodox without the living Lord).
I love Scripture and read it through almost annually. But I love Jesus more and worship Him. He is my savior, not the Scriptures. He gives me life while the Scriptures help me understand him better and align my life with His.
Never substitute the word of God for the person of God. The first can lead us to the second but it is the second that gives us life. Together His person and His truth are a powerful combination for life transformation.
(Posted from Havana, Cuba)
Tuesday, April 1, 2014
When supervisors go south on you
In a healthy workplace it is unusual but in any workplace it can happen: a supervisor takes out his or her frustration on those who work for them in an unfair or unhealthy way. It may be in the form of public criticism or a biting email. Whichever, it leaves the staff member feeling disempowered, demoralized and sometimes angry.
What should one do?
Nothing - until the emotions have cooled. But, once they have it is usually prudent to express one's discomfort with the kind or tone of the communication in a respectful way. This does several things. First, it makes it clear to the supervisor that you are unwilling to be treated in a disrespectful way. Second, it clears the air. Third, the supervisor will usually back down and apologize. If they don't they know that they cannot be careless in their communications.
Supervisors are human and get irritated. We need to give them space and we hope they give us space. But, we need not accept careless behavior on their part toward staff. Respectfully pushing back sends a message that you will not tolerate disrespectful behavior.
(Posted from Miami)
What should one do?
Nothing - until the emotions have cooled. But, once they have it is usually prudent to express one's discomfort with the kind or tone of the communication in a respectful way. This does several things. First, it makes it clear to the supervisor that you are unwilling to be treated in a disrespectful way. Second, it clears the air. Third, the supervisor will usually back down and apologize. If they don't they know that they cannot be careless in their communications.
Supervisors are human and get irritated. We need to give them space and we hope they give us space. But, we need not accept careless behavior on their part toward staff. Respectfully pushing back sends a message that you will not tolerate disrespectful behavior.
(Posted from Miami)
Sunday, March 30, 2014
A must read CT interview with Kay Warren on the suicide of her son one year ago April
Some wounds never heal this side of heaven. The suicide of a loved one is one of those. This interview with Kay Warren should encourage those who have experienced this terrible loss and should teach those of us who have not.
CT interview with Kay Warren
(Posted from Milwaukee)
CT interview with Kay Warren
(Posted from Milwaukee)
Ten common dysfunctions of church governance boards
I want to say this gently but straightforwardly! There is a crisis of leadership in the church as it relates to who we put in leadership, whether we call them councils, boards, elders, deacons, or simply the leadership boards. This crisis is responsible for many of the dysfunctions in local churches. Leadership at this level matters a lot.
Having served for years as a pastor, board member, or board chair, I know it is not an easy task. That being said, it is vital to the health of the church that we have healthy boards. There is much that I could say - my book High Impact Church Boards is an accessible and readable book for boards. But for the moment, let's look at the top dysfunctions of church governance boards.
Not guarding the gate to leadership.
It takes only one or two wrong board members to sabotage the health of a board. See my blog, Eight kinds of people who should not serve on a church board. What this means is that how we select leaders to church leadership matters a lot. There are actually implicit and explicit qualifications spelled out in Scripture that need to be considered. Most churches do not have a safe and effective way of choosing church leaders, and it comes back to hurting the board and the church. See The profile of an effective church leader.
Allowing elephants to exist in the boardroom.
Elephants are the issues everyone knows are there, but no one will name them. They are dangerous precisely because the board is unable to talk about them. And they are issues that usually matter. Dysfunctional boards allow elephants to exist that healthy boards do not, and those issues are usually issues that cause harm to the ministry and church body. Periodically I recommend that you ask the board if any unspoken elephants need to be named. Once named, elephants are simply issues to be discussed.
Allowing known issues to fester way too long.
There is a failure of courage on many boards. Either we don't talk about known issues (elephants), or we talk about them but never resolve them until they finally become big issues that must be dealt with. Passive boards that avoid conflict lead passive churches that will do the same. Peter makes it clear in 2 Peter 5 that church leadership is not easy or for the faint of heart. Many boards don't deal with known issues until that issue has caused a lot of damage in the church. Here is a principle. When you deal with an issue in a straightforward way when it appears, it is fairly easy to deal with. When you allow it to fester for years, it is far messier to clean up.
Substituting business for the spiritual work of leadership.
Boards must do business, but it is not the only work that they do, which is spelled out in the New Testament as keeping the spiritual temperature high; ensuring that the congregation is taught; cared for; developed and released into the meaningful ministry; protected and led well. Most boards I work with have allowed prayer to become a perfunctory way to start and end board meetings rather than a central priority of seeking out the heart of God. Boards that are devoid of significant spiritual life will lead churches of the same nature.
Not doing due diligence on issues.
I have seen associate pastors fired with no questions from a board on the word of the senior pastor when even a cursory conversation with the affected party would have indicated that what they were hearing was highly skewed and inaccurate. I once interviewed all staff who had left a church over a 12-month period, and they all had the same story of abuse and unfair treatment by the senior leader, yet no one on the board had ever asked and were living in denial. Where there are patterns, pay attention, ask questions, and verify. Numerous times I have encountered boards that knew something was going on but chose not to inquire. In the meantime, people were badly hurt.
Not asking the hard questions.
There is a tendency on boards to avoid those questions that might create conflict or create embarrassment for the senior leader. A good board meeting is seen as one where there is harmony and the avoidance of controversy. This is sad because it is in the hard questions that we get to the heart of issues that exist or ensure that we are covering our bases in the ministry. In fact, the very best board members are those who are willing to ask the hardest questions for the sake of the ministry. Hard questions create the dialogue necessary for a church to improve and get better.
The inability to police their own members.
I am regularly fascinated by the fact that board members want congregants to "behave" and will even sometimes "bully" them into doing so but are unable and unwilling to police their own behaviors. That is a huge disconnect. I tell boards that they operate without a board covenant at their own risk. In some congregations I have worked with, the behavior of the congregation surpassed that of their presumptive spiritual leaders.
Lack of a plan, intentionality, and accountability for results.
Part of the biblical mandate of leaders is to lead. Yet many boards cannot articulate where the church is going and why. That is clearly not leadership but rather babysitting the status quo. Where there is a plan, there is often no intentionality about pursuing it, and few church boards hold staff accountable for real ministry results but simply spiritualize the issue (the Holy Spirit is responsible for results). There is a reason some churches see more results than others: they have a plan, are intentional about the plan, and regularly evaluate how they are doing.
Misusing the authority of a leader.
Some church leaders are frankly bullies and full of themselves because of the title they hold. Most of us have met one. Of course, this goes back to the need to guard the gate on the front end so that people with agendas or a lack of humility don't get into leadership. The predominant job of church leaders is to serve God's people in the spirit that Jesus served people during his life on earth. It is about service more than position, example more than pronouncements, living the Jesus life and pursuing His agenda rather than our personal agendas. I encounter too many leaders who through their weight around rather than serve.
The inability to police their own members.
I am regularly fascinated by the fact that board members want congregants to "behave" and will even sometimes "bully" them into doing so but are unable and unwilling to police their own behaviors. That is a huge disconnect. I tell boards that they operate without a board covenant at their own risk. In some congregations I have worked with, the behavior of the congregation surpassed that of their presumptive spiritual leaders.
Lack of a plan, intentionality, and accountability for results.
Part of the biblical mandate of leaders is to lead. Yet many boards cannot articulate where the church is going and why. That is clearly not leadership but rather babysitting the status quo. Where there is a plan, there is often no intentionality about pursuing it, and few church boards hold staff accountable for real ministry results but simply spiritualize the issue (the Holy Spirit is responsible for results). There is a reason some churches see more results than others: they have a plan, are intentional about the plan, and regularly evaluate how they are doing.
Misusing the authority of a leader.
Some church leaders are frankly bullies and full of themselves because of the title they hold. Most of us have met one. Of course, this goes back to the need to guard the gate on the front end so that people with agendas or a lack of humility don't get into leadership. The predominant job of church leaders is to serve God's people in the spirit that Jesus served people during his life on earth. It is about service more than position, example more than pronouncements, living the Jesus life and pursuing His agenda rather than our personal agendas. I encounter too many leaders who through their weight around rather than serve.
Passivity
This is, perhaps, the most common dysfunction of boards I have worked with. These are boards that, in the face of obvious issues to any outsider looking in, have ignored the obvious for years. They have simply been passive in the face of issues that need attention. I have often wondered why otherwise very smart individuals choose to park their thinking at the door of a church boardroom. Is it because they don't feel qualified to deal with spiritual issues? Is it because challenging their pastoral leader is messing with "God's anointed?" Or is it simply that we are a culture of "nice," and dealing with issues is a threat to that culture? I am not always sure of the reason, but as a consultant, the issues often seem so obvious that I have to ask why they have been ignored. Passivity is not leadership, and it is a sin of many church boards.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)