Dumb things leaders do

Leaders can hurt their leadership by their actions, attitudes or lack of emotional intelligence. In my experience, the following attitudes or practices often cause leaders to lose influence and hurt their leadership.

Complain about their board members

Bad move. First it violates board "rules of engagement," second it will get back to those you complain about and it will destroy trust with those board members and you. I recently heard of a pastor who was actually complaining about a board member of his to staff at another church and it came back to bite him and caused great distress for that board member (as it should) and destroyed any trust that was there. If one needs a healthier board or has issues with a board member, work through the issues on the board but never complain about your board members to others. Just as you would not want them to do that about you.

Create an "us versus them" mentality

This occurs when a leader blames the board for decisions that they or their staff do not like. Wait! The leader is part of that board that made the decision. In fact it is his/her senior team so to blame them is simply not to take responsibility for decisions that they made. In our organization we call this Leadership Default! Any time a leader blames the board for a decision whether subtly or outright he divides the board and the staff and creates an unhealthy us verses them mentality.

Take credit for success

It is a bad thing to do! Yes, organizations need great leadership and the quality of leadership matters. But, the fact is that great leaders create an environment where staff and volunteers can shine and in the end it is everyone involved who was responsible for success. Great leaders always take the spotlight of success off of themselves and put it on all those who made it happen. They are humble, they are appreciative, they thank others and lift others up. They don't have a need to be the one who gets the credit. Where they do, everyone notices!

Blame others for failure

Here is the flip side. When we see success we look out the window at those who created it and lift them up. When we see failure we look in the mirror and take the blame. Great leaders don't blame others but take the responsibility when things don't go well. Hard? Sometimes yes. But then again if we have nothing to prove and nothing to lose and if we are ultimately responsible we do the right thing and take the responsibility.

Are defensive

One of the common sins of ministry leaders is defensiveness. I think of pastors who are not administratively or leadership savvy but won't let qualified lay leaders help. Or leaders who need to be right all the time and have the answers (no one does so we need to get over it). Too many ministry leaders are not teachable, are not approachable, are not willing to listen to truth and in the end hurt themselves and the organization they lead by their hardheadedness. I ran into that buzz saw of defensiveness recently with a leader and it was ugly. Defensiveness and lack of teachability is foolish.

Fail to regularly thank volunteers and staff

We can never thank good people enough for their efforts, their prayer, their financial gifts and their work. Not doing so is a sign of narcissism - obviously it is about us. But ministry is not about us as leaders, it is about unleashing others to be successful whether in a professional or volunteer capacity. Thank people often and with sincerity and you will be loved for it.

Don't develop their staff

One of the top priorities of leaders is to develop those who work for them, to help them become all that they can be in line with how God has gifted and wired them. Why is it foolish not to develop staff or volunteers? Because the success of the organization depends directly on how good our staff are, how well they understand their wiring and strengths and how they are deployed in their sweet spot. And it is what Jesus did with His disciples, and it is what He wants us to do with others (Ephesians 4:12). Leaders who do not develop others do not understand leadership, or think that it is all about them.

Don't set clear expectations
When staff don't know what is truly expected of them, they are in a no win situation. If they move ahead on something and show initiative but it is the wrong initiative (the senior leader was not clear on boundaries) they get dinged. Much staff frustration revolves around unclear expectations or expectations that change unexpectedly - usually because the senior leader is not clear either. Clarity for all is a gift. Lack of clarity is a curse. The number one job of leaders is to communicate clarity for his/her team. The number two job of leaders is to ensure that that missional clarity is delivered on.

Criticize staff in front of others
This is one of the most disempowering and dishonoring things a leader can do. There are certainly times when staff need direct and honest feedback but praise should be public and criticism should be private. It is a matter of honor and respect. Staff rarely resent honest feedback in private but will remember it for a long time if done publicly.

Dictate rather than collaborate
I have a friend who thinks that leadership means telling other people what to do! That is rarely good leadership. Rather, leaders build teams, empower people to use their gifts and wisdom and create a collaborative environment where the team functions together under good leadership. Leaders who dictate, or micromanage do not understand the nature of leadership and will not find or keep quality staff.

Treat staff carelessly
Every interaction with staff carries with it a message of respect, disrespect, appreciation or lack of it. It is easy for leaders to treat these relationships carelessly since they have authority. They expect respect but don't always convey it and there is not much staff can do when they don't receive it. Every interaction that is careless, harsh, unkind or sharp costs a leader coinage with staff. Wise leaders treat others the way the desire to be treated.

Ultimately when we do these dumb things we hurt the organization and the staff who work for us. Every once in a while it pays to take a step back and honestly evaluate the quality of our leadership - and perhaps even ask our staff how we are doing.

Creating an ethos of "One Team" on your church staff

Because staff culture matters a whole lot in any organization, the best leaders create a healthy culture that permeates their whole staff. If you don't create a culture you simply get a default culture which often has dysfunction and toxicity within it. Good leadership not only describes the culture but they constantly talk about it and hold staff accountable to live it out.

Here is an example of a church's stated culture for their staff. Think about how the following pieces of culture add up to a healthy set of practices and therefore a healthy culture.

Consider also how this can create "one team" on your staff!

One Team

It’s all about Jesus

Jesus is the center and all ministries point to Him

Robust dialogue

Any issue can be put on the table except for personal attacks and hidden agendas

Progress requires risk

We boldly risk to accomplish the mission

We practice autopsy without blame

When things go wrong, we determine why without placing blame

We empower and release

Our job is to release others into ministry

Dialogue trumps telling

Before we tell we engage in dialogue

Ego is the enemy

Humility reflects Jesus while ego doesn’t

Volunteers are staff

We treat volunteers as staff

Relationships matter

We choose relationships over expediency

When leaders take the risk to release control, staff flourish

Many leaders do not understand the power of moving from high control and a hierarchical structure to a light touch where staff feels empowered rather than controlled. 

Before you say to yourself, "I release staff rather than control them," you might want to check with your staff because, in a majority of cases where leaders believe they empower and release staff, their staff says just the opposite. In fact, when I do culture audits of staff and report back to the senior leader, he/she is almost always surprised when they hear that their staff perceives the culture to be controlling rather than empowering. 

If you want to find out what the staff thinks, consider asking your staff to answer the following three questions: 

"Would you describe the staff culture as controlling - where you need permission to do something, or empowered where you have the freedom to do what you need to do to accomplish your job? Why? How does it make you feel?"

This is a standard question I ask in staff audits, and the responses are revealing and often discouraging, as the majority of staff often report that it is a controlling culture. 

The third question, "How does it make you feel" is an important one. I will often hear responses like:

• "The organization hired me for my ability and expertise, but I cannot do anything without permission. I wish they would trust me rather than to doubt me."
• "I am seriously considering looking for a different job because I feel that my expertise and gifts are not being used here. If I don't do something the way my boss would, I hear about it and often have to back up and do it his/her way."
• "I cannot even spend small amounts of money without permission. That holds things up and is frankly demeaning. If I screw up, OK, tell me, but give me what I need to do the job without having to ask permission."
• "In our organization, decisions need to be made at least twice. First, by me and my team, then I have to go through the same stuff with my supervisor, who feels free to override what our team has worked on. You end up feeling disempowered and wonder why you put all the time and effort into a plan when you are often told to do things differently."

Because I often guide organizations through culture change, I also see the amazing transformation when staff is released from control, trusted to make good decisions, and don't have to ask permission for most of what they do. That transformation is nothing less than amazing - and transformational to the culture.

I hear staff saying, "I cannot believe it. I don't need to ask permission anymore." "I feel much more valued and trusted than I did before." "I feel like I have been let out of my cage, and my self-confidence has increased exponentially." "My happiness factor in my job has gone way up, and I'm not looking to move anymore." "I am waiting to see if the freedom we have will last or if our leaders will try to control us again."

This is all about moving from a permission-withholding organization where you cannot act without permission to a permission-granting organization where there is the freedom to act within established boundaries.

There is another significant advantage to a permission-granting culture. In a permission-withholding culture, staff doesn't have to take ownership of their work. After all, their supervisor is the one who allows or disallows, or modifies their work. If it doesn't work, that is the supervisor's issue since the staff just carried out his/her directives.

But when you move to a permission-granting culture. Staff develops the plan to achieve the objectives, and therefore they must take responsibility for the success or failure of the effort. In permission-granting cultures, there is far more corporate buy-in and ownership than there is in a permission-withholding culture. Which do you want for your organization?

Here is the great irony. We control staff so that nothing goes wrong. In the process, we disempower staff and create low morale, which translates into less ownership - the exact opposite of what we really need and want from staff. When we release control of staff (within established boundaries), they flourish, are engaged, and take ownership which is what we need and want. 

Those who control loose! Those who empower win!

Why would Christian leaders walk away from their faith?

There have been a number of high profile cases of Christian leaders who have walked away from their faith in recent days. The latest is a songwriter and worship leader for Hillsong Church. The Christian world was already trying to figure out Joshua Harris and his departure from the faith. 

What can we say about these departures? Several observations.

First, it should be obvious that fame, platform and spiritual leadership are dangerous combinations that must be carefully stewarded. Ego is always the enemy of spiritual transformation and these platforms and fame fan the flames of ego constantly. Power does not just corrupt in the political arena. It can also corrupt our spirits, souls and motivations in the ministry arena. 

Even the audacity of some of the statements that have been publicly made by these individuals sound more like ego and pride than they do humility and brokenness. 

Second, it is clear that these individuals did not guard their hearts through a close intimate walk with Jesus. In John 15, Jesus makes it clear that we cannot maintain spiritual health without being connected to the vine (Jesus). People don't walk away from God when they are closely connected. If we one day wake up and no longer love Jesus or want to follow Him it has much to do with the neglect of our inner lives. Period!

This ought to be a cautionary tale for each of us. It is easy to neglect God even while doing ministry in His name. Marry ministry with fame and prominence and it becomes easier and easier to think it is about us rather than about Jesus. The only antidote to this is more personal time with Jesus, not less. More intentional humility not less. The more time we spend in God's presence the more we realize how broken and sinful we are. The more time we spend with those who stroke our egos the more distant we will become from Jesus and the more we will rely on ourselves.

As Solomon said in Proverbs 4:23, "Above all else, guard your heart, for everything you do flows from it." 

Third, I suspect that there is another factor that plays a part in these cases. In many of our ministries and constructs of Christianity we have substituted a system, even a system of theology for a personal relationship with Jesus. There is for instance far more interest in many quarters over slicing and dicing fine points of theology than there is in helping people experience personal spiritual transformation through Jesus. 

If our faith is primarily a construct rather than a relationship the relationship will suffer. Does theology matter? Of course. But our theological construct will never substitute for a heart relationship with Jesus. It was never meant to. As branches we need to be organically connected with the vine. Our systems of Christianity do not fill the heart. Jesus does. Our building of mega churches and social status don't fill the heart. Jesus does.  To the extent that we focus on anything in Christianity more than we focus on our relationship with Jesus we run the risk of developing empty hearts. Jesus says this clearly in John 15. 

Fourth, it is hard to believe that these individuals were living in authentic community with other close Christ followers. Living in community makes for natural accountability. We can be around others but not transparent with others. We can say the right things while drifting from God in our hearts. 

Josh Harris's church was caught by surprise by his developments. That tells me that he was not living in real community or sharing his real thoughts. I suspect that he left the church not because he wanted to go on to higher education but because he was already leaving the faith and therefore needed to leave his ministry. There followed his announcement of his divorce, then his departure from the faith and then his immersion in Gay Pride day in Vancouver. It is hard to see any of this happening if he had been living in authentic community. In the least, those around him would not have been surprised. 

Christian leaders are vulnerable. All who call themselves Christ followers are vulnerable to focusing on the wrong things. That much is clear from recent events. I suspect these three issues were pieces of the sad result. 

What should our response be? Quite simply to stay connected to Jesus. Guard our hearts that are fickle, focus on Him, not on any construct or cause no matter how noble and choose to live in authentic community. 

See also,
Christian Rocker Posts Stunning Response to Recent Apostasy of Christian Leaders

7 reasons why so many church leaders are having breakdowns or deconstructing their faith - Premier Christianity

7 reasons why so many church leaders are having breakdowns or deconstructing their faith

Cures for the racially divided church

It is said that the most segregated hour of the week in the United States is Sunday morning church. This need not be but unless there is a concerted effort to change our thinking and practices it will continue. Here are some suggestions to consider.

One. Do the MacDonald's or Wallmart test. When you go to either place, look at who is there. They usually reflect a pretty good cross section of the local community. Or, look up the demographics of your city and you can get accurate information. Because we often hang with people who look like us we often don't realize how diverse our community is.

Two. When you hire, be intentional about trying to build a staff that looks like your community. This will take extra work but businesses have been doing it for a long time. If we only fish in the pools we know this will not happen. If you intentionally find bigger and more racially diverse pools to hire from, you can build a staff that looks like your community. Why is this important? Because when we see someone like "us" (whatever racial group we belong to) on staff at a church, we feel more comfortable and know that the church values diversity.

Three. Be intentional about diversifying your church leadership both in terms of age and those racial groups represented in your community. Until we open our hearts to those unlike us, work and pray with them and allow them to influence our ministries we will not become a racially diverse church. Until we are willing to take this step we should not assume that we will achieve congregational diversity.

Four. Change up your worship to represent different racial groups and their traditions rather than asking them to live with your groups traditions all the time. Every group has a rich tradition in worship. It is in this diversity that we catch a glimpse of what heaven will be like as people from every tribe and nation and language worship together before the Lamb. 

Five. Develop relationships with ethnic churches in your community and find ways to interact with them. Invite them to speak in your church, do community projects together and pray together. Nothing changes our own hearts like friendships across ethnic lines. 

In a nation that is becoming more and more polarized, the church should be the one place where people of all ethnic groups can come together around Jesus and the gospel. It can happen but only if we are intentional about it and possess a kingdom heart.

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

Joshua Harris, former mega church pastor and popular author rejects Christ and Christianity

Author Joshua Harris Kisses His Faith Goodbye: ‘I Am Not a Christian’

Helping individuals and organizations go to the next level

AddingtonConsulting.org

Nancy Beach's response to the Final Willow Meeting

THE MORNING AFTER THE “FINAL WILLOW MEETING"

July 24, 2019

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

Leaders need to stay in their lane too!

One of the things about leadership is that they have the authority to speak into the affairs of others. This can be helpful if they do it judiciously. However, when a leader gets out of their lane and into areas that are the responsibility of others; go around supervisors to give direction; micromanage the work of others or get into areas that are not in their skill set they hurt the organization they are leading.

Leaders have a lane just like others in the organization and they are most effective when they stay in their lane. Many leaders, however, believe that everything that happens is their responsibility (bad assumption) so they feel compelled to poke into the work and strategies of others (bad behavior) and in doing so cause problems for the staff and therefor the organization.

It takes some careful thought to determine what one's lane is, especially in leadership where our authority gives us options. Many of those options are not good options, however, because they do not fit our unique skill set. We need to determine the specific work we will do as leaders given our wiring and the team we have around us. Often other team members can speak into the answer through their observations of what we do well and what we do poorly. Of course this only works if we are willing to listen to feedback about our best play.

I once did a staff audit of a church and almost to a person they pointed to their senior pastoral leader as the one who caused the most dysfunction on staff. He was a great preacher and therefor thought he was good at everything. Actually, he created a highly toxic workplace because he refused to stay in his lane or to listen to his senior staff or board about how he disempowered others. The result was a major exodus of key staff members that was unnecessary had he listened and been disciplined to stay in the lane he was made for.

One of the reasons that leaders are apt to stray from their lane is that they have seen success in some area and assume that they will be successful in other lanes as well. Unfortunately that is a poor assumption. We are generally successful at two or three things that define our lane and much poorer at everything else. Those things that are not strengths (we each have a few strengths) are weaknesses (of which we all have many). Learning to stay in our strengths and out of our weaknesses is a key to great leadership.

In my own leadership, it was often the people around me who were best at helping me understand my strengths and my lane. As a leader of a large organization, we talked openly about the unique role I could play and then empowered members of a senior team to play their unique role. Even as the senior leader, I had a lane and we were most successful when I stayed in that lane.

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

The practice of thinking the best of others

This is a discipline because our first instinct when evaluating the behavior of others is often to suspect ulterior motives. In most cases we are working from ignorance since we cannot see into the mind of others. 

The problem with assuming the worst about the actions of others is not only that we are almost wrong, but that it causes us to respond in ways that are not helpful to a good relationship. After all, if I suspect that an individual has poor motives, I will respond with suspicion, distance and possibly even anger. My distancing from that individual in turn causes others to distance themselves as they watch our attitude. We influence others when we assume the worst rather than the best. Sometimes it is not possible to undo the impressions we share with others. 

Buckingham has it right: Find the most generous explanation for each other's behavior and believe it. Doing so allows us to operate from a position of trust and regard rather than mistrust. We don't have to like all the behaviors of others but the reality is that they probably don't like all of ours either. But we always hope that they will assume the best because we intend the best. 

In evaluating the actions of others it is worth considering that we can quickly jump to negative conclusions about them that we would never want them to have toward us. It is a superior attitude rather than one of humility, recognizing our shared humanity. 

Jesus had it right when he told us to "Do to others as you would have them do to you (Luke 6:31)." That includes our assumptions about others and our generosity toward their motives. Jesus said in the same conversation, "Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful (Luke 6:36)." Both are keys to good relationships and to a less judgmental attitude toward others.

Creating Cultures of excellence
AddingtonConsulting.org

The top ten traits of Christian leaders

Leaders come with many different kinds of wiring and lead with varied styles. I celebrate those differences. When hiring or promoting, I care much about how a person leads but I care even more about what lies behind their leadership. There are ten traits that I look for in leaders that are for the most part personal traits that spill over into how they lead.

A Kingdom heart
In ministry settings a kingdom heart is crucial. Our leadership is not about ourselves but about Jesus and what He wants to accomplish on this earth. A kingdom heart is one that understands we are not building something for ourselves but for Him.

Humble
Humble leaders can focus on others and the mission because they are not building a kingdom for themselves. Humble leaders have the capacity to live and lead with personal transparency and have a "nothing to prove and nothing to lose" attitude. They are open and non-defensive when challenged.

Intentional
There are two ways one can live: intentionally or accidentally. The best leaders understand how God has wired them, what He has called them to do (and not do) and organize their lives around the most important rather than simply responding to life. Everything about their priorities and time management is intentional and focused.

Clarity
Clarity is required for intentional living. Clarity about how God has gifted and wired us, clarity in our leadership priorities and organizational clarity all contribute to the ability to be deeply intentional. 

Accountable
Those who lead others and expect them to be accountable must be accountable themselves. To lead one must be willing to follow! Lack of accountability is about hubris while accountability is about humility and a healthy commitment to health. This includes accountability for results

Reflective
The best leaders are deeply reflective people: about themselves, others, the organization, methodology and life in general. They are thinkers rather than simply doers. Their actions come out of thinking and reflection rather than simply responding to events around them. They are thinking, reflective practitioners.

Inquisitive
The best leaders are deeply inquisitive, always asking questions, probing people in their organization and in others, desirous of learning and growing. They ask the question "why" often and don't assume that conventional wisdom is always wisdom. 

Team focused
Healthy organizations are formed around teams that work synergistically together under good leadership with accountability for results. Thus leaders must be willing to work with and through team rather than working independently.

Generous
Leaders give themselves away to help others be successful and the organization reach its objectives. They are servants to those they lead and understand that it is as others succeed that they succeed. Thus they mentor, coach and help others grow with a generous spirit.

Healthy EQ
Unhealthy EQ is the greatest killer of leadership as it creates relational chaos in its wake. No matter how brilliant an individual is, if there are EQ issues, they will not end up on one of our teams. Healthy EQ, on the other hand builds healthy relationships which leads to healthy collaboration and the building of healthy teams.

Creating cultures of excellence
AddingtonConsulting.org

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