Eight issues that can be confusing for church boards

 Church board leadership is always a challenge. And, often boards or individual members are confused on the role of the board. If these areas of confusion can be resolved, the work of the board becomes far easier. Here are eight issues that often cause confusion on a board.

1. What are we actually trying to accomplish?
This sounds like a simple question but the truth is that a majority of church boards cannot answer the question with any specificity. They have a mission but apart from that general statement which generally reflects the Great Commission (more believers and better believers), there is often no objective target that the church is pursuing and without a target there are no metrics to gauge one's progress. 

It is the board's responsibility, working in conjunction with staff to clearly determine what the church is trying to accomplish and then to assign metrics to the target so that it can evaluate its progress.

2. Who is responsible for what?
When there is ambiguity between the responsibilities of the senior pastor (and other staff) and the board there is in the worst case scenario conflict and in the best case confusion. If there is not a written document clearly delineating the responsibilities of both there will be issues that create frustration for both parties. The role of a board is governance while the role of the staff is the day to day ministry. Wherever you draw those lines, be sure you draw them so that there is both clarity and accountability.

3. How does the board interact with the church staff?
The short answer is that boards interact with staff only through the senior pastor. Staff can have only one supervisor and boards are not in a position to supervise or tell staff (apart from the senior leader) what they should or should not be doing. This does not mean that board members cannot have relationships with staff members but it does mean that they cannot direct the work of staff.

4. What is the senior pastor empowered to do on their own and in what areas do they need board approval?
None of us like micro management but this is what happens with many senior pastors who are never sure what they are empowered to do and what decisions they can make and alternatively what issues they need to bring to the board for approval. Constantly needing board approval is demeaning and demotivating for leaders. 

It is incumbent on the board to make clear the leadership parameters of the senior leader so that they are free to lead but are still aware of the boundaries that the board has established. It is the difference between a permission withholding culture and a permission granting culture.

5. What is the board's job description?
In the absence of a clearly written description of the responsibilities of the board every board member has their own definition of their role. That means there are multiple definitions of the board's role. And, it creates confusion and even conflict on the board. Furthermore, it is not possible for the board to evaluate its own work in the absence of a clear job description. 

That role description should include the fiduciary and legal pieces of their responsibility along with the responsibilities delineated in the New Testament for leaders. If you are not clear on these Biblical requirements ask me for the PDF to my book High Impact Church Boards and I will gladly share it.  

6. What are the board's rules of engagement?
In other words, how does the board operate? How does it make decisions? What happens if a board member disagrees with the majority? Does the board always speak with one voice? How does it deal with rogue board members? Is there a board covenant that spells out how the board operates together?

Because many board do not have that clarity, there is a great deal of dysfunction on church boards. This need not be the case but the board must clarify its roles (number 5 above) and how it operates. Without clearly defined guidelines, confusion and conflict will emerge.

7. Who does the board represent?
Many board members believe that they represent their particular ministry interest or constituency in the church. This can easily lead to divided boards especially if there are factions within the congregation that board members see as their job to represent. This view of church leadership has more to do with how we think about American political polity than it does a Biblical theology of leadership. 

Board member do not represent any constituency in the church. Rather they are called Under-Shepherds of the Chief Shepherd - Jesus Christ. Jesus is the head of the church and church leaders lead on His behalf (1 Peter 5:1-4). This does not mean that board members ignore the concerns of the congregation but their leadership is a sacred trust given by the Chief Shepherd. Church leaders lead the congregation where they believe Jesus wants them to go.

8. How do your choose and engage new board members?
Too many congregations do not have a process in bringing new board members on that is designed to set the board up for healthy leadership. Furthermore, in the absence of clarity on 1-7 above, there is no objective way to acclimate new board members to their role as it has not been clarified. 

The most powerful group in most churches is not the board but the committee or group that chooses board members. For a healthy board it is critical to guard the gate of leadership. Only healthy board members can contribute to a healthy board. 

All of this comes down to good clarity. A lack of clarity in these eight areas create confusion. Clarity allows you to move forward in greater health. If you desire help in any of these areas, contact me at my email below. 

Religious Terrorism at Record Low, Government Persecution at Record High - CT and Pew

 

Pew: Religious Terrorism at Record Low, Government Persecution at Record High

Twelve characteristics of healthy church leaders

 

If we desire healthy church boards, we need to ask: "What are the characteristics of an effective church leader?" The fact that 80% of churches are plateaued or in decline would indicate that this is an important issue. When I consult with troubled churches is it not unusual to find that those in leadership are poorly equipped to lead. Consider some of the ways churches have traditionally filled leadership roles:

• We look for Godly individuals.
• People who have 'power' in the church get the nod.
• We try to balance 'power blocks' in the church by making sure there is representation of the various blocks on the board. This is one of the most destructive strategies as it sets the board and the church up for ongoing conflict. 
• There is an unofficial system that rotates key leaders through the leadership spots.
• We choose those who have been in the church a long time.
• Congregations simply nominate people; if they have the votes, they end up on the board regardless of gifting or qualifications.
• Leadership slots are filled even when there is a lack of qualified candidates. Priority is given to filling slots rather than ensuring leadership 'fit.'
• In many instances there is no job description or list of competencies for prospective board members.

Clearly, none of these methods is likely to result in a board of great effectiveness or impact. Nor are these methods likely to be 'leadership friendly' - motivating those with true leadership skills to serve.

The way we choose leaders and our understanding of what good leadership looks like goes to the heart of church health and ministry impact. Who you choose to lead will determine the impact of your congregation.

I would suggest that the New Testament implicitly or explicitly describes the kind of individuals who we should place in church leadership.

Exhibits godly character and lifestyle
This is the most critical, non-negotiable characteristic of a church leader. We are called to lead on behalf of Jesus Christ, as shepherds accountable to the Chief Shepherd (1 Peter 5:4). Paul made it clear in First Timothy and Titus that, above all else, a leader's life must be in the process of being transformed into the likeness of Christ. Only those deeply committed to personal transformation and authenticity can lead others in that direction.

Has a deep passion for Jesus
The church is about Jesus! He is its leader. We serve as leaders under Him. Thus, only those with a passion for Him are qualified to lead His people. Those we lead will be influenced by whatever passions drive us. It is painfully obvious when church leaders are more interested in power, ego or their own agendas than in leading Christ's people where He wants them to go. Remember, few congregations rise above the spiritual level of their leaders.

Displays personal humility
Leadership in the church differs in two significant respects from how it is practiced in other arenas. First, it is a leadership of service rather than power. As Peter wrote, "Overseers should be 'eager to serve: not lording it over those entrusted to you.'" Second, this leadership already has its agenda set by the Lord of the church. Our agenda has been set, and our leadership priorities are Christ's not our own. Without humility people are unlikely to bow to the will of the majority and far more likely to push for their agenda rather than God's agenda. 

Genuinely loves people
Ego-driven individuals love themselves, not others. Humble godly individuals love others as Christ loves them, and their leadership is fueled by genuine spiritual concern. The driving characteristic of God's pursuit of us has been unexplainable, powerful, unrelenting love, bathed in mercy, compassion, forgiveness and grace.

Is a lifelong learner
Leaders are learners. They are hungry to understand the leadership task. They are driven to lead well to become more effective. Nowhere is it more important for leaders to be lifelong learners than in the context of the local church. Healthy leaders are learners of God, of effective ministry options and methods and of leadership. Once leaders give up learning as a high value, their effective leadership days are over. Learners are flexible and teachable. They are willing to change their methodology to meet their mission as long as it is healthy and Biblical.

Understands and agrees with God's leadership assignment
I often ask leadership boards if they can clearly articulate their responsibilities. Invariably the answer is no, apart from generalities. It is my belief that God has given leaders specific responsibilities and every leadership board should be able to define its responsibilities. If you cannot define those responsibilities for your board you have a problem as it becomes every leader's opinion against another's rather than a shared understanding of God's leadership assignment.

Grapples with the future
To lead is to be out in front of others. True leadership is primarily about the future and secondarily about the present. While this may seem obvious, most leadership boards spend the majority of their time dealing with present-day rather than future issues. Healthy leaders are always looking toward the future. You can lead the status quo, you can lead crisis or you can lead into the future.

Focuses on the team
Warning: Never elect or appoint to leadership an individual who cannot graciously work in a team setting - and publicly and privately support decisions that the team has made. Leadership teams require team players. Those who cannot function as a healthy member of a team will destroy the unity necessary for a leadership team to lead (remember humility). Mature, healthy leaders choose to subordinate their egos to the will of the group and deeply value the perspectives and input of others and the collective decisions of the board.

Leads willingly
Good leaders are willing leaders (remember 1 Peter 5). Willing leaders are ready to make the sacrifices necessary to lead, without inner resentment and frustration. It is a mistake to coerce individuals to serve in leadership positions. When we push people to serve before they are mature enough to handle the difficulties of leadership (such as conflict), they often have experiences that cause them to avoid future leadership. In addition, unwilling leaders can often lead harshly without patience and grace. 

Positively influences others
Real leaders have influence over others, whether they are in positions of leadership or not. This is the key: When considering individuals for leadership, ask the following questions: "Do they already have a positive influence over others? Do people look to them for leadership? Do they lead people closer to Christ and in positive ministry directions?"

Has an action bias
Leaders do things. They have a bias toward action and away from the status quo. They don't always know what to do but they will try things and see what sticks, what works. Leaders are never content with how things are but dream of how they could be - continually looking for ways to accomplish mission more effectively. Their focus is not the status quo but the future.

Is a purveyor of hope
Leaders are optimistic about the future and convey that optimism and hope to those they lead. They believe that positive things can and will happen because they understand that it is God who empowers and it is He who has promised to be with the Church until the end of the age. Pessimists are not leaders! Pessimists telegraph caution and see all the reasons why things cannot happen. Just read the epistles of the Apostle Paul. Always optimistic based on the power of God. Always expecting the power of God to prevail.

Rarely will a church rise above the personal, spiritual and missional health of its leaders. Who you select is a key either to mediocrity or to health. No one has all of these characteristics in equal measure but they are key questions to ask about those whom you put into leadership.

This one practice will set you apart from other leaders

Most leaders are over-committed and run with very little margin. We say yes too often, no too seldom and don't evaluate our commitments against our true calling and purpose. 

The net effect is that many of the most important things don't get done on time or well. We are too busy working in our business (and pleasing others) and don't have time to work on our business. There is not time to reflect, think clearly and allow our minds to roam freely where creativity flourishes. 

Ironically, we are so busy leading that we often don't lead nearly as well as we should. The key term here is busy. That busyness depletes our minds, energy and spirits. And, it keeps us from leading well. Many leaders don't even have time to go on vacation!

It need not be this way. There is a practice that can bring life to your spirit, renewed energy to your calling and set you apart from other leaders who are caught in the leadership treadmill. 

Most leaders will say they cannot afford the time to commit to this practice. However, if we cleared our calendars of all the things that were not truly mission critical or focused on what we need to do as leaders, we would have time for this practice. And that is simply a matter of discipline!

What is the practice I am referring to? It is to take one hour a day focused solely on your own development, thinking time, blue sky time and personal development. That is about one tenth of the hours most leaders work each day. Think of it as a tithe on your time. This has always been critical but it is even more critical in the post Covid world where all the rules have changed and it is going to take the best of our thinking to move our organizations forward.

Use this time to:

• Evaluate all your commitments (before you agree to them) and ruthlessly eliminate any that don't fit directly in your leadership purpose (that one discipline will save you many hours a month)
• Think strategically about your leadership, looking for how you can focus your efforts in the most important areas and how your team can develop a laser like focus around their purpose and work.
• Study the changing marketplace or ministry space you are in to understanding changing dynamics and trends. Better to be on the front of the wave than on the backside.
• Think deeply about what could give your organization or team greater momentum toward its mission. Not all strategies are equal but only those who think deeply will figure that out.
• Read widely. Often our greatest insights come from those who are not in our work space but one crucial insight can change everything for you.
• Evaluate your staff and how they are doing. What do they need from you and how can you increase their effectiveness.

All of these items and there are many more that could be added are about working on the business and on yourself so that the business or ministry you lead can go to the next level. Ironically, you will find margin for yourself as you evaluate your own commitments, will lead better and more wisely and ensure that the investment you are making in your leadership role is the very best it can be. 

It is a matter of continual focus!

It only takes one person to hurt a team

 One of the realities of teams is that it takes only one individual who is not in alignment with the rest of the team to significantly impact the unity of the team. This can be a result of any number of issues. For instance, they:

• may not be in agreement with the direction of the team or organization
• do not pull their own weight in terms of productivity and results
• may have attitudes that are counterproductive to a healthy team: cynicism, sarcasm, lack of trust, or some other unhelpful attitude
• may like to do their own thing and are not committed to working as a productive team member
• may have Emotional Intelligence (EQ) issues that disrupt the health of the team
• may not be teachable or coachable
• may be very smart and successful but will not cooperate with others
• may be a team leader who does not know how to lead

Here is the reality. It takes only one member of the team (paid or volunteer) to pull down the rest of the team and take a huge emotional toll on the other team members.  All of this hurts the overall missional effectiveness of the organization and creates discouragement among team members.

Ministries often ignore these situations in the name of "grace." We hope they will go away, but they rarely do without intentional and direct intervention. When we do not resolve these negative behaviors, we unfairly punish the rest of the team, who must live with the unhealth of one member, and we hurt the missional effectiveness of the organization.

If you have a situation where a team member is not in sync and is hurting the team, consider these options.

Provide very direct and immediate feedback in person and follow up in writing indicating the problems and the necessary changes that are necessary if they are to continue to play a role on the team and in the ministry. Be direct, honest, and defining. Indirect communication is unlikely to work in these situations.

Establish time parameters in which the issues must be resolved, or they will be placed on a probationary status. If they need additional coaching during this time, provide it and always give honest, direct feedback verbally and in writing.

If there is not adequate progress, place the individual on a probationary status (in writing - always document) with the understanding that if there is no appropriate resolution, they will not be able to continue on the team or with the organization.

Be willing to let them go and transition them out of the organization if they do not meet the requirements of the probationary period.

Your willingness as a leader to take appropriate steps in cases like this sends a powerful message to the rest of your team that you care about their health and the health of the organization. When one does not take these steps, the opposite message is sent - and clearly read that our organization does not take health seriously. Other staff have reason to be unhappy if unhealthy, emotionally unwell, or unproductive team members are left in place. What it says to the rest of the team is that they are not valued. Lack of action also fuels cynicism toward leadership and their unwillingness to deal with situations that are at odds with organizational values.

The emotional and energy toll that is paid for allowing an unhealthy team member to continue is higher than we realize until the issue has been resolved and we finally realize the price we paid. Don't allow one individual to pull the rest of the team down.

responses to change

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

Resisters. Like the laggards on the bell curve, these are people who will actively resist change because they are simply wired that way. This is the individual who 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. This does not mean they are bad people. It does mean that they don't do change, and you cannot have them in a place of leadership - ever!

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 was the individual who told me and many others that the changes I was bringing to the organization I was leading at the time that I was destroying the organization. 

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

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

Change agents. These individuals not only support proposed changes but 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 are the champions of change who publicly and privately live the change out, help others understand and get there and advocate for the new direction.

In my experience, it is the realists, change agents, and evangelists who will help drive change, while the 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 regarding who you hire, who you put into leadership, and who you ask to serve on a board. One church leader, after hearing these descriptions, 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 leadership positions and influence! 

Further, when you are considering someone for a leadership position, it will be the realists, change agents, and evangelists who will help you get to where you need to go. Don't put someone in leadership who will not actively help you move forward and who is not change-friendly.

Nine things I wish I had known as a young leader

 

I have done some reflection recently on things I wish I had known as a young leader. Here are some of the thoughts.

One: You can relax in the journey. Young leaders are out to take territory and can do so in an aggressive manner. However, important endeavors are rarely rushed endeavors and when we move too fast, we leave people behind. Jesus never seemed to be in a particular hurry - to the consternation of the disciples and others. Nor do we need to be.

Two: You don't need to have the answers. It's OK to say, "I don't know, what do you think?" Our job is not to have all the answers but it is to find the answers and that is usually with other people who think well. It is highly freeing not to need to be the answer person.

Three: It's OK if some folks don't like how you lead. Now it is always a good thing to listen as we might learn something. But, you won't be able to please everyone so stop trying. If as a leader, someone is not happy with you you are not leading.

Four: You will never meet everyone's expectations so don't try. Needing to meet all the expectations of those around us is a trap and it hurts our leadership because it dilutes our focus. Leaders need to focus and in doing so they say no to many options to say yes to the best options. Be gracious but don't fall into the expectation trap.

Five: Don't try to lead by yourself. The best thing I ever did was to find a partner that I could lead with who had skills I didn't have and then to build a team of leaders. When I tried to do it myself I wasn't very successful. With partners I was.

Six: Failure can be a blessing. When you try something and it doesn't work it isn't a ding against you. It means you are trying new things and willing to take risks. Innovation and risk are dancing partners and failure is simply a measure of a willingness to take a risk. Some of your risks will pay off handsomely.

Seven: Always be gracious. Ditch defensiveness and be gracious in as many situations as you can be. You may not agree and don't have to agree but being gracious saves a lot of relational heartaches. 

Eight: When you can, prioritize relationships over expediency. You are on a mission and the mission matters but don't sacrifice the relational component in the process. People matter. In fact, it is the people around you who can help you get important things done. 

Nine: Pay attention to your EQ. Emotional Intelligence and growing in our EQ is key to present and future success. Keep seeking to grow your EQ and have people around you who can give you real time feedback on things you don't see.

The most important items on a board's agendas are the ones that no one wants to talk about

 Here is an ironic truth: The most important things that most boards need to discuss are the very things that no one desires to put on the table because it is too controversial, will open a can of worms or be pushed aside because it is a political or personal hot topic. 

Here is a principle: If a board doesn't want to talk about a certain subject, that is the very subject that they ought to be talking about. First and foremost.

Why? Because those unspoken discussions are the real issues that are impacting your ministry. Everyone knows it but no one has the courage to put it on the table. It is an elephant in the room. But here is the thing about elephants:

Principle: Elephants are only elephants when they remain unspoken issues. Once you name an elephant, it is no longer an elephant. Rather, it is an issue and issues can be discussed.

But since these are often awkward conversations which is why no one wants to raise them, how does one raise those issues in a sensitive manner? The answer is simple: Ask permission.

Principle: When you have a sensitive subject on a board to raise, ask for permission to raise it! It is unlikely to be turned down and it gives people a chance to understand that something sensitive is coming.

For instance, "Folks, I have something I would like to put on the table that I think we all know is there but it is awkward for us to discuss so we leave it alone. Yet it has significant implications for our congregation. Do I have your permission to candidly share my concern?" The answer is almost always "yes, of course, please share." With that permission you have the opportunity to name the elephant which then becomes and issue that can be discussed. Do it gently and honestly and you will have a hearing.

Principle: When there are elephants in the room, most board members want a way to put it on the table but they don't know how. If one courageous and kind board member will put it on the table, others will almost always start to interact and relief takes place that we can at least start a conversation on an important subject.

If there are elephants in your boardroom, be the courageous one who asks permission to put it on the table and starts a conversation. Remember, the elephants that you don't want to discuss are in fact the most important things for you to discuss.