Eight confusing church board issues

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. 

Need an outside perspective for your board issues or challenges? I am available to meet with church boards and dialogue with them on the challenges they face and possible solutions. With zoom technology, this can be done easily at low cost to you. If interested, you may contact me at tjaddington@gmail.com. 

AddingtonConsulting.org

Who are you listening to?

I had a fascinating conversation recently with a senior executive of a well known company. Like many sales organizations, there is a headquarters staff of 300 but the sales are generated by sales teams around the country. Of those in the main office, there are only three individuals who have had experience in the field: working with customers; selling product and seeing the projects they sell completed.

My friend, in his position has regular access with the president who is making daily decisions and in his and the sales staff's view these decisions are out of touch with customers and the realities of the business. Why? Because the president listens to those in the main office but not to those who have regular contact with the customers. In the process he is pricing the product out of the market resulting in declining sales. He is frustrated along with the large sales force. 

His experience can be replicated in organizations, churches and ministries everywhere: leaders who are listening to the wrong people resulting in a myopic leadership paradigm.

The problem? To lead well we must listen to people at all levels of an organization, know their challenges and issues as well as talking regularly with the constituency they serve. When leaders listen primarily to other senior leaders without listening to those at other levels of the organization they do not get the information they need  to make helpful and wise decisions. 

Peter Drucker was a writer and consultant on management who knew an extraordinary amount of information on a wide variety of businesses. How did he get that information? Each morning he would call line managers in various industries to find out what was actually going on. He didn't call the senior executives, but those who dealt with the nuts and bolts of the business. They knew things that the senior staff often did not know. 

In my work with churches and non-profits I watch senior leaders talk to each other but not to those who make the ministry or non-profit what it is - those at all levels of the organization who have a closer relationship with the realities, challenges and views of the constituency, therefore, hurting their ability to make the best decisions. 

If you lead, ask yourself the question: Who am I listening to? Am I listening primarily to senior leaders or am I spending significant time listening to those at other levels of the organization along with constituents who can give me a much more unvarnished view of reality?

The best leaders know where they will get their best information and are disciplined in making the time to listen to all levels of the organization (along with constituents). They know that good decisions depend on good information. Who are you listening to? Are they the right people?

Creating cultures of excellence
AddingtonConsulting.org

Negotiating Church Conflict

One of the observations I have made in working with churches who are experiencing conflict is that we generally don't do it very well. Conflict itself is not bad if it involves differing ideas as to how to accomplish our mission. The issue is always how we handle the conflict, or our differences. It is poor handling of differences that get us in trouble, not the differences themselves which are merely differing perspectives on what should be done. That being said, here are some principles that can help us negotiate conflict or differences in a healthy manner.

One: Disagreement and expressing that disagreement is not wrong. Some are afraid to share their opinions because they have been told that to do so is gossip. It is not. All of us have the right to share our views in the church with the caveat that we do it in a healthy manner. It is unhealthy to try to shut down discussion in the church. It is OK to talk. It OK to express our views. It is OK to differ with others.

Two: Gossip is sin. Gossip is "idle talk or rumor, especially about personal or private affairs of others" (Wikipedia). Gossip is different than sharing our opinion for it goes to the motivations or actions of others and is generally destructive in nature. Scriptures are clear that gossip is wrong. Gossip includes questioning the motives of others, passing along third party information as fact, and denigrating others. Disagreement or stating our views is not gossip, it is simply defining what we are thinking.

Three. Robust dialogue is healthy. Robust dialogue means that we can put any issue on the table with the exception of personal attacks or hidden agendas. There are differing views in congregations on any number of issues. It is good to talk about those things but to do so without personal attacks, hidden agendas or language that inflames rather than informs. Healthy leaders invite healthy dialogue and listen to those who speak.

Four: Unity in diversity is critical. Unity within the body of Christ is a high value in Scripture. Congregations are made up of different views, opinions, social and ethnic backgrounds but it is the Holy Spirit that binds us together as one. Each of us has the same Holy Spirit in his or her heart and that spirit is a spirit of love, joy, peace, patience, kindness,goodness, gentleness, and self control. If we live in His Spirit we can have differences and still remain united as one body. As Paul put it in Ephesians 4:3, "Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace."

Five: Being able to disagree and stay in relationship is good Emotional Intelligence and demonstrates the work of the Holy Spirit. Each of us has preferences and opinions on many things in the church. What we want to be able to do is to state those positions but remain in fellowship and friendship with those who hold a differing position. This is not always easy but it is Biblical.

Six: By extension, marginalizing or demonizing those who disagree with us is bad Emotional Intelligence and does not reflect the Holy Spirit. It is one thing to disagree with someone. It is another to believe that they are bad people because they believe differently and to allow our differences to shatter our relationships, trust or to see them as evil. This does not reflect the will of the Holy Spirit.

Seven: Taking on the offense of others is foolish and wrong.My best friend has an issue with someone in the church so out of friendship I take up their offense and allow their issue to become my issue. This is foolish and wrong because I have allowed my friend to alienate me from others when I have no personal reason to do so. Nor can I resolve an issue that is not my issue. It happens in families and congregations and it contributes to greater conflict.

Eight: The church is the Bride of Christ and therefore we must display the attitude of Christ toward one another even when we differ from one another. The church is not like any other organization for it is the Bride of Jesus and His chosen instrument to reach the world. We of all people need to be His people in good times and in hard times. Paul writes in Philippians 2:4, "Each of you should look not only to your own interests, but also to the interests of others." 

Nine: Forgiveness is often needed when we have conflict. We need not apologize for having differing views and perspectives but we do need to apologize when our words, attitudes or actions get the best of us and we say or do things that are not pleasing to God. I have often had to apologize in times of conflict. God is pleased when we keep short accounts and forgive those who need forgiveness and seek forgiveness when we need it.

Ten: Pray diligently! When we focus on ourselves we want to be right and win. When we focus on God we start to see those who differ with us in a different light and desire God to win. In prayer, our hearts are often softened and changed, our humility is increased and our desire for a Godly solution is heightened.

There will be conflict this side of heaven. Lets do all we can to handle it well.

 

Creating cultures of excellence

AddingtonConsulting.org

Quick results verses long term sustainability in ministry

We are a people in a hurry.

We want results (and we should) but we want them now and often rather than ensuring that we do something well and sustainable, we opt for what we think will be the quick solution which usually fails in the long term.

We run ministry campaigns but can neglect the harder ongoing training in stewardship and generosity. We want people in groups but don't provide a long term sustainable model that keeps them there or grows their leaders. We want growth and put great energy into appealing services but don't close the back door through meaningful engagement of those who come - and thus many leave. We desire to train new leaders and design programs but don't mentor them through the process and give them opportunities to lead and grow and receive feedback.

Why do we so often neglect long term sustainability in our ministry efforts? Sustainability takes a lot more time and we want results now. Sustainability means that we know what we are going after, are committed to doing it well, have done our homework, thought through the issues, have someone who will lead the effort and are willing to start small and let it grow. In the short run it produces less but in the long run it produces exponentially more than going after quick results.

Take groups as an example. Almost every church values groups but most struggle to make it happen. They run programs to get them going and then they fizzle out and a few years later they try another tact. Yet there are churches (even very large churches) that have up to 75% of their adults in groups on a regular basis. In the first instance, the desire for quick results circumvents long term success. In the second instance, leaders have done their homework, built a sustainable model and are dogged in pursuing it for long term sustainability and success.

The next time you tackle a ministry initiative, ask this question: Am I going after quick results or do I have a paradigm for long term sustainability?

Helping individuals and organizations go to the next level of effectiveness.
AddingtonConsulting.org

When vision is perfectly designed to take you nowhere

Vision is a funny thing. Lots of people (and leaders) have vision but many cannot deliver on that vision because they cannot develop a realistic strategy that will allow them to accomplish the vision. That is why a vision without a workable strategy is hallucination: an unfulfilled dream, a false hope and an empty promise. Many so called visions for the future are perfectly designed to get you nowhere except in the mind of a leader. 

The problem with this is that vision usually comes from leaders and leaders have followers and staff. It is staff who have to live with the unmet dreams of their leaders and the implications of chasing a vision that they know is a foolish dream. I remember a leader I once worked for who hired a staff member to accomplish a specific task that was vital to the organization. 

As I listened to the vision of that new staff member and his strategy for how he would accomplish it I knew in my heart that "this dog won't hunt" but I was not in a position to do or say much as I was lower in the organizational chain and this was a senior level hire of a senior level executive. Nor was I asked my opinion.

In this case we wasted three years of effort, built a staff we had to eventually let go and lost one million dollars in the process. And I had to pick up the pieces when it fell apart and the staff member was let go. Not only did we pay huge "dumb tax" for the foolish expectations and their results but the senior leader lost great credibility in the eyes of his staff for leading us down a path that resulted in organizational damage and could have been avoided. The Walter Mitty vision of the senior leader was an hallucination.

It is not that this leader (the one who hired) and the staff member (the one who was hired) did not have a strategy to reach their vision. Their problem was that it was not a workable strategy. It was built on false assumptions, optimistic rather than realistic thinking which did not even move the ball down the field a bit but rather went the wrong direction entirely.

How does one avoid moving mistaking vision for dreams or hallucinations? A key is not to develop vision by oneself. Senior leaders should work the visioning process with other senior staff who must help deliver on the vision. That includes a reasonable, workable strategy for how the organization will accomplish its vision. Usually that will mean changes in the current paradigm or strategy that the organization is using. After all, the current paradigm got you to where you are but was not designed to get you to where you need to go next. 

That raises the question of whether the organization and its leaders are ready and willing to refocus their efforts, personnel and resources toward the accomplishing of the new vision? Adopting a new vision without refocusing the organization toward that new vision is also an hallucination. Refocusing may well mean that some staff who were key in the past will need to be let go in order to accomplish the new. It may well mean that other staff will need to be refocused and even organizational structures changed to meet the needs of a new vision and a new day. It is a grave mistake to assume that your current ministry paradigm will get you to a new vision and the next level.

Here are the kinds of questions that need to be addressed if a vision is going to be more than a dream:

• Is this a realistic vision and is it the right vision for us as an organization?
• Do we have buy in from senior staff toward a new vision and what is our plan to create a guiding coalition within the organization to move in a new direction?
• Do we have a realistic and workable plan to accomplish the vision?
• What are the unintended consequences of moving in our new direction?
• How do we need to restructure staff, budgets or organizational structure to focus on the new vision?
• How will we know if we are being successful and how do we monitor progress?

Vision is a wonderful and necessary element of leadership. But, a vision without a workable strategy is simply a hallucination.

Creating cultures of excellence
AddingtonConsulting.org

Why many churches are unsuccessful in finding and retaining high quality volunteers

All churches talk about volunteers and what they can contribute to ministry but many find it difficult to find and retain high quality volunteer staff. The following factors contribute to this problem but all of these can be overcome if we take them seriously.

When we treat volunteers as “second rate staff” rather then treating them like staff we send a message  that they are not as appreciated or important as paid staff. When you think about that you realize how crazy that is when these volunteers are willing to contribute their gifts and talents for free. If we truly want their expertise and involvement we need to give them the same appreciation, information and asking for the same input as they do staff.

When we are not willing to invest the same energy into helping volunteer staff grow and flourish in their ministries as we do paid staff we also send an unwanted message. I would argue that we ought to offer a level of growth and building into their lives that they would greatly value the opportunity to serve Jesus and be thankful that they are being built into. Just as we want to help staff understand their wiring and gifts and grow in faith and EQ, we ought to want the same for our volunteers who will often be the future leaders of the church.

When we are not willing to give volunteers responsibility commensurate with their gifting and experience - as we would with paid staff we desensitize them from continuing with us. After all, if they carry significant responsibility in their non church life and we ask them to fill slots that are below their interest or experience they may become easily bored. Of course some volunteers just want to help and they don’t care much where they end up. Others want to lead or contribute their knowledge and skill in a ministry setting and we should get as close to their heart passions as we can.
After all we are about releasing people into ministry (Ephesians 4:11-12) in light of their God given gifts (Ephesians 2:10-11).

When we don’t listen to our volunteers the way we would listen to staff we lose their trust. Volunteers bring a unique perspective to staff because they can see ministry from the outside in rather than the inside out. Both are important perspectives but too many church leaders are more interested in their own perspective rather than the perspective of the outside in. Listening to only one perspective limits our understanding of reality. Listening to both perspectives not only gives better perspective but it values both groups equally.

Finally many churches lose volunteers when they only focus on ministries inside the church. There are many believers who long to see the gospel penetrate their communities but find little interest on the part of church leaders to do so. When this happens mission driven individuals will follow their passions. And the church loses!

TJ Addington of Addington Consulting has a passion to help individuals and organizations maximize their impact and go to the next level of effectiveness. He can be reached at tjaddington@gmail.com.

Creating cultures of organizational excellence

Living a generous life

A Generous life is one where we see all resources as given by God to be put at the disposal of God. This includes our money, gifts, time, abilities, skills, help and whatever is in our library of resources. Generosity allows us to leave a legacy as we share what we have with what others need. 

When we think of generosity we often think of money and financial resources. The truth is that there are many kinds of generosity. It is often said that the most precious thing we have today is our time. In fact, it is often easier to give money rather than to give our time. Yet, it is often our time that people need. In an added irony, giving others our time gives us much greater opportunity to influence others and leave a legacy with them as most influence is life on life. 

Included in a willingness to give our time is a willingness to share areas of expertise that we have. A generous individual is ready and willing to share their expertise because it allows them to contribute something of value to an individual or a cause that we care about. 

In one of the organizations I consult with there is an extraordinary woman whose office is often filled by those who need some encouragement, a listening ear and wise advice. She willingly shares her time and encouragement and is loved because of it. In doing so she is living a generous life. And ironically, what she can give away is needed by many in the organization. Another individual in this organization loves to stop by and pray for you. He has a gift of faith but is also generous with that gift of faith and willingly shares that gift. 

What can you give away? What can you be generous with?  All it takes is a willingness to share what God has given to us.