Organizational Gaps: Vision vs. Reality

Those who lead entrepreneurial ministries, or ministries going through change always face a challenge. It is the gap between the organizations vision for who they want to be and where they want to go and the reality of where they actually are.

A healthy organization's vision for itself is never full realized because as it becomes better at what it does the goal line continues to move. Thus the gap between vision and reality is always a reality for healthy organizations.

There are seven common responses to organizational change and to the gap between vision and reality. Understanding how people respond and why they respond the way they do can help leaders negotiate the whitewater of change and deal with the responses that follow from change and the space between current reality and desired future.

The continuum of responses runs from resistors to change to active evangelists of change.

Resisters. Resisters can come in two forms, active and passive. These are the people who don't like change, or are so vested in the past that they cannot envision the future - or don't want to. Active resisters are vocal about their opposition to the future being articulated. There are also passive resisters who pay lip service to the new future but do not bring their actions into alignment with it. They quietly rather than actively resist.

Cynics. Cynics choose to believe that there are ulterior motives behind the change being proposed. Typically, they are deeply cynical toward leadership and therefore transfer their cynicism toward the ideas that leaders propose. They will often see change as the flavor of the month and figure that given time the proposed changes will go away and the organization will go back to what it was. Cynics will often call attention to the gap between where a leader is calling the organization and where it is - using that gap as proof that the vision is either unattainable or foolish.

Loyal followers. These are individuals who like organizational clarity and who appreciate its articulation - whatever it is. They appreciate clear leadership and simply want to know what the direction is and they will follow that direction. While they will not necessarily promote change, they will gladly move in the direction that leaders propose, trusting those leaders in their direction.

Idealists. These are individuals who readily grab on to the vision of the future, embrace it, love it and expect that the organization will be there today. The up side is that they embrace the vision quickly. The down side is that they can easily become disillusioned and critical when change does not happen at the pace or in the way they desire. It is very difficult for idealists to be patient or accept gaps between vision and reality.

Realists. Realists understand both where the organization is trying to go and where it currently is. They understand the challenges of change, will not stand in the way of change and usually are not overly bothered by the gap.

Change agents. These individuals not only embrace the future, understand the past and present but they actively work all the time to close the gap between vision and reality. They take responsibility in their areas of influence and leadership to personally work on closing the gap. They are voices in the organization for the preferred future and work well with leaders who are the evangelists of change. In many ways, change agents are the guiding coalition for leaders seeking to bring change.

Evangelists for change. These are the leaders who are actively engaged in helping the organization move from reality to their preferred vision, and calling others to join them in the effort. They explain change, are architects of the new, and do all that they can to help move the organization from where it is to where it needs to go. They are deeply realistic about what is, deeply passionate about what must be and have the resolve to see the process through.

Two questions present themselves. First, where are you on this continuum in a change process and where are those around you? Understanding your position and that of others helps one understand the various responses to change and attitudes and actions related to change.

The Danger of Inconsistency

One of the traits that builds great trust between leaders and those they lead is personal and organizational consistency: the knowledge that what is said is meant and what is meant is lived out. Inconsistency breeds mistrust while consistency breeds trust.

A lack of consistent direction plagues many ministries. When a pastor suggests a direction to his staff that is different than what the board has decided, one has inconsistency. When leaders change their minds on directional issues on a regular basis there is inconsistency. When a stated direction or conviction is easily changed or violated, there is inconsistency. When people are allowed to violate stated commitments there is inconsistency.

Inconsistency confuses people - breeds cynicism and sends a message that what we say we are committed to is negotiable after all. If a leader can violate stated convictions, why cannot others - and they will. One of the reasons that values and guiding principles are viewed with some suspicion is that people have seen such values written and then ignored all too often. It is better not to write them than to do so and violate them. The same is true for other commitments that are made about who the organization is, what it is committed to and how it intends to move forward.

Many in our organization have heard me state, "Do not underestimate my resolve" around our mission, our values, our central ministry purpose and our preferred culture. Our stated commitments around these four areas which describe who we are are deep and carved in stone. We believe what we say and are committed to getting to what we believe. It is not always done perfectly but we want to do it consistently and send a strong message that these commitments are non-negotiable and will be lived out.

How strong is your resolve around your organizational commitments? Are your commitments and actions in alignment? Are you consistent with your message? Would those you lead be able to articulate what your commitments are? Do they know you are really serious about them? Is your board serious about what they say is important?

Consistency matters!

It's too dangerous

Recently, a church that had committed to working with ReachGlobal in a specific country pulled out because when they checked the State Department web site they discovered there was a travel advisory discouraging travel there. The comment was, "It's too dangerous."

I was fascinated by that response. Do we only go to places that are completely safe to do missions? If the answer is yes, we rule out most of the world! It is a good thing that Paul did not operate by that set of rules, or missionaries in the past 2,000 years.

Make a mental list of places where there is danger in our world and then ask, what would happen if we chose not to go because of a perceived danger?

In discussing this situation with a pastor recently he told me of a conversation he had with folks in his own church who were resisting a mission emphasis in a place that also had some danger.

He knew that these individuals supported the US intervention in Iraq. He asked if the danger and sacrifice of the war in Iraq was worth it. "Of course" they said, "it keeps America safe." "So," my friend said, "it is worth it to go to war in Iraq but it is not worth the risk to share the Gospel in (and he named the country)?"

What is the Gospel worth? What risk is acceptable or unacceptable in sharing the Gospel? And if the State Department Advisories - they are ubiquitous - determine where we do or don't go, what would Jesus or Paul have to say about that? They irony is that the country in question is actually a very safe place to work.

Missions today is about.....

Equipping others rather than doing it ourselves. With a world population of 6.5 billion it is critical that missionaries are equippers of others rather than simply doing it themselves. This is in line with Ephesians 4:12 where the emphasis is on equipping and giving ministry away. This is a change in how many missionaries see their role.

Partnering with others rather than doing it alone. Historically missions have not been very partnership friendly. They have gone it alone and have perpetuated all of the denominational distinctives from their homeland to the rest of the globe. Yet, Jesus did not die for our particular denominational brand but for the church. Working together both with other missions and with indigenous partners where they exist can help us reach greater numbers of people.

Raising up indigineous leaders rather than being the leader. Paul did just this in his church planting strategy. As quickly as possible he raised up, trained and appointed leaders for the church. If we are about equipping others rather than doing it ourselves we need to also give leadership away to those that we develop. That is the only way to start indigenous church movements and to guard against dependencies.

Involving all of God's people, not just some of God's people. Everyone has a stake on world evangelization. In today's world everyone can also play a vital role whatever our background or training. We can give, we can pray, we can participate long term or short term. Travel is cheap and opportunities are huge. Missions is no longer only the purview of those who have Bible School or Seminary training - and never should have been. God calls all of his people to be involved in the great commission and it has never been easier than today to carry that out in the international arena.

Going ourselves, not just sending others. There is no substitute for hands on experiences in missions. It so changes our hearts and perspectives that one church I know of will not allow new elders to come on their board who has not personally participated in their India ministry because they want to guard the missions DNA of their congregation. The more people who experience the world and missions first hand the more the congregation carries a great commission DNA.

Reclaiming the great commission as the call of the church and not the call of the para church. The responsibility and vision for world missions was given to the church, not the para church. Every congregation should be and can be personally involved. Para church mission agencies exist to serve the church in their global vision and not to work independently of the church on the sending or receiving side.

These six changes in how we see missions are really game changers for the global cause of Christ.

The Core Of Leadership

What is the core of good leadership? What makes one leader qualitatively different than another? Why do some leaders seem to lead from the hip while others seem to lead from somewhere deep inside? Why is it that some leaders lead effectively for a period of time while others have a leadership that stands the test of time?

For thirty plus years I have mulled on these and other leadership questions. From age 16 when I became the leader of my youth group at church, to leadership with InterVarsity in College, then leading a congregation as a pastor and for the past twenty two years in senior leadership within the Evangelical Free Church of America in various capacities. I have written on leadership (High Impact Church Boards and Leading From the Sandbox), I have read hundreds of books on the subject, have taught leadership principles and lead an organization (ReachGlobal) of six hundred individuals.

I have worked for good leaders and poor leaders. I have paid enough dumb tax in my own leadership to fill a book. I have consulted with ministry organizations and countless churches. I have written hundreds of blogs on leadership issues. I have learned much from countless people and have often read through Scripture with my leadership lens on since this is one of my life passions.

All that to say that I, like you, care a great deal about leadership and what makes for a good leader. As a leader, I want to lead well. At fifty three I am far more interested in long term leadership development and success than I am in the quick wins and fifteen minutes of fame. I realize that while I was wired to lead as evidenced by the leadership positions I had early on in life, that my understanding of leadership then was immature and undeveloped. It has taken 40 years of leadership in various capacities to understand that becoming a leader of Deep Influence is something that truly comes from great depth in our hearts and minds.

I believe that the answer to the questions above is that the best leaders, those who make the largest impact over the longest period of time. Who lead with the greatest wisdom and discernment for long term results and the building of the best teams lead from deep inside themselves and as a result have deep influence with the organization they lead. And the deeper that influence, the greater the leadership: influence to impact our world in significant ways for a cause greater than ourselves.

Both the Old and New Testaments make it clear that what is deepest in our hearts, souls and minds is that which informs our actions, thinking, priorities and leadership. Consider these examples:
Proverbs 4:24
“Above all else guard your heart for it is the wellspring of life.”
Proverbs 3:5-8
“Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding; in all your ways acknowledge him, and he will make your paths straight. Do not be wise in your own eyes: fear the Lord and shun evil. This will bring health to your body and nourishment to your bones.”
Matthew 15:18-20
“But the things that come out of the mouth come from the heart, and these make a man unclean. For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander.”

Here is a truth about leadership that is often not acknowledged or paid much attention too. We lead from the core of our hearts and minds. The deeper that core is steeped in healthy and spiritual practices, the deeper the influence of our leadership. The shallower that core, the shallower our leadership.

The preponderance of books on leadership focus on what good leaders do, how they act, or the strategies they practice. Many of these books provide real insight into good leadership principles. But these are neither the most important issues in leadership nor are they were leadership starts. Great leadership starts deep inside us and the best leaders are different than other leaders. Their uniqueness lies not first in their ability to lead but in a set of intentional practices that they nurture - out of which comes a unique, powerful, and deeply influential leadership. Those practices, combined with good leadership ability make the difference between the average leader and a leader of deep influence.

Our world has many leaders but few leaders of deep influence. Much of what passes for leadership is not true leadership but simply a position of authority. True leadership is not about authority. Whenever you hear, “I am the leader and this is what we are going to do,” you rarely have leadership (there are exceptions where that kind of leadership is required, but seldom). You have someone in authority who thinks that leadership is about their telling others what they should do. They are not only wrong but do not understand the call of a leader.

Then there are many leaders who think that if they adopt the latest leadership theory or the style of leaders they admire that they too will lead well. This is often “flavor of the month” leadership which leads to cynicism among those they lead as the leadership practices and philosophy change with the winds. In this case, both the style and substance of the leader is coming from other people rather than from a place deep inside themselves.

Other leaders believe that the core of great leadership is action and they are always on the move, looking for the next strategy or initiative to pursue. Leaders are people of action. But the best action comes out of deep thinking, great understanding and the ability to connect the dots of opportunity, needs, organizational ability and strategy. The question is not whether leaders are people of action but whether their action comes from a depth of understanding that leads to an inner conviction rather than an addiction to action.

Sticky Factor

Many church leaders spend a great deal of time and energy in developing programs designed to bring new people into the church. That is a good thing. However, too few think about the structures needed to sustain the growth that comes. If there are not intentional structures the assimilate new people into the life of the church, what one is left with is a big front door and a big back door.

Larry Osborn of North Coast Church in Vista, CA calls this the sticky factor. He is the author of The Sticky Church. Interestingly, North Coast does not put huge attention on the programs to bring people in. They do put much emphasis on the sticky factor, or the structures that will keep people there once they come. As they have been intentional over the years, they have seen the congregation grow to over 7,000 in multiple venues.

A key structure for assimilating new members is a quality, well led, small group that is focused on relationship, prayer, care and learning together. People crave authentic relationships and personal significance. That is provided in the context of small groups that are well designed and well led. The larger the percentage of adults a congregation has in well designed and well led small groups, the higher the sticky factor for those who come. It is one of the key structures that will keep those who come coming back and integrate them into the life of the church.

Programming without the requisite structures to support growth - numerical and spiritual - are a waste of precious time, energy and resources. More important than the programming designed to bring people in is the sticky factor of your church to keep them if they come. The first without the second is not very productive. The second - even without much of the first - is highly productive.

Dealing With Our Shadow Side

All of us have a shadow side. We often don't like to admit it and don't like to think about it but unless we manage our shadow side, it hurts us, those we lead and can even destroy our ministries.

A sign of good Emotional Intelligence (EQ) is understanding our strengths, weaknesses, temptations, places where we are at risk to sin, and the unhealthy parts of our lives that we hide from others. Unless we pay close attention to our areas of weakness and darkness those areas come back to bit us.

Shadow sides are different for different people but here are some examples:

- Deep insecurities that cause us to need constant affirmation and are responsible for defensive attitudes toward those who disagree with us.

- A need to have our way which hurts team

- Areas of hidden sin that we have not adequately dealt with

- Isolation from others where deep friendships are not fostered, leaving us without people who can speak truth into our lives

- Anger that lies close to the surface

- Arrogance that comes from a measure of success

Essentially our shadow side are those parts of us that are not healthy whether spiritually, emotionally or relationally. No one is exempt - it is part of living in a fallen world.

Shadow sides need to be understood and managed if we are going to be healthy individuals and leaders. It starts with asking some hard questions like, "where am I vulnerable to sin" and "what aspects of my responses and inner life do I not like?" It is also helpful to ask those who know us best, our spouse, a close friend and colleague to identify potential areas of dishealth that they see in us. It is also one of the things we should consult God on - asking Him to reveal to us truth about our hearts that we need to know.

The next step is to regularly evaluate those areas we have identified and to develop strategies for ensuring that our shadow side does not hurt us or those around us. That may mean counseling to better understand ourselves. It may mean candid discussion with a close and trusted friend for a deeper level of accountability. It may be as simple as an awareness of our areas of vulnerability so when we come close to those areas we can deal with them.

Someone has said that we need to spend as much time dealing with our shadow side as we do our strength side. I tend to agree with this because left unacknowledged and unchecked it is the shadow side with comes back to hurt us and can deep six our lives, families, and ministries.

Understanding ourselves and dealing with our shadow side requires the time to think deeply and reflect on who we are, how God made us and where we struggle. Scripture is a great mirror for this reflection as we encounter life as God intends it, hearts as He desires them to be, motives (good and bad) and compare our lives to the holy and healthy life we encounter there. That is why the best leaders are deeply reflective leaders. They have taken the time to understand themselves because who we are as leaders spills out in our lives and leadership. Managing the inner life is the key to managing our outer life.