Monday Meanderings on Church and Leadership XIII

My young adult group at church has just kicked off a study for the summer on David Platt's book, "Radical".

There is certainly a tension between Jesus' version of discipleship and our American version of discipleship. This book is about that.

The phrase that is sticking with me from this first chapter is 'the cost of non-discipleship'.

Time and time again in the Gospels, Jesus refers to the cost of discipleship.

It's high. Read Luke 14:25-33. It causes you to

hate your family.
hate your own life.
carry a cross.
count the cost.

For many in our churches, the cost of discipleship is that it makes you spend an hour or two on your precious Sunday morning at a building, paying God His dues. For some, the cost of discipleship is when the church is behind financially, we put in a few extra bucks.

The cost of discipleship is more than that. It demands my very life. My affections, my relationships, my time, my money, my ambitions, dreams, hopes, everything.

But if Jesus is who he says he is and rejecting Him does what He says it does, then the Cost of Non-discipleship is even higher.

If you don't lose your life in small consistent ways now. You will lose your life in drastic, irreversible ways later.

He must increase, but I must decrease. John 3:30.


What has to die in you today?

Monday Meanderings on Church and Leadership XII

The Tension is Good.

Believe it or not, it is true. A body that is at rest tends to stay at rest.

So sometimes the tension is not only good, but neccessary in order for your organization, company or church to grow.

The difficult job of the leader is figuring out what tension is healthy and unresolvable and what tension needs irradicated.

Good tension leads to creativity, collaboration and momentum. The leaders around you will embrace and engage the tension and work together to break through to new growth and new possibilities.

Bad tension leads to staleness, independence and stagnancy. Generally this tension thrives on high negativity. If leaders shy away from addressing and resolving this type of tension it will become the parasite that debilitates or destroys your organization.

So, for some, this truth is liberating...you don't have to resolve every tension you encounter in leadership.

For others, it is a call to accountability...you're leading your organization toward irrelevance and you need to own up and act now before it is too late.

Are you being liberated or held accountable right now?

Monday Meanderings on Church and Leadership XI

Shaina and I went away for the weekend to New York. It was good to break routine. All in all the New York portion of the weekend was lousy. My buddies came to play rounds of golf on Saturday and Sunday. Unfortunately, Saturday was a perpetual drizzle, mixed with moments of downpour. We played, but my hands were so wet that at one point I swung a six iron on a par three tee, and lost the club on the downswing (the ball didn't move!) Sunday was even worse, terrential downpour. But, a bad weekend away is better than a weekend stuck in the grind.

Perhaps the best leadership lesson I know of came from a guy in seminary quoting Rick Warren. This is a mantra I desire to live by.

Divert Daily...I should be having my cup filled by Jesus in intentional ways every day...not out of obligation but out of desire and neccessity.

Withdraw Weekly...A sabbath day keeps the assylum away. You can't accomplish in 7 days on your own, what God can accomplish in you in 5 or 6 days. So disconnect. Have a day that is off limits that your email piles up...that your text messages go unanswered.

Quit Quarterly...Your Church or organization should not fall apart when you leave it for a weekend. If it does, you're failing as a leader. Your marriage needs a weekend away. Your soul needs a weekend away. Even if it rains!

Abandon Annually...Vacation. No phone calls. No emails. Just complete, unapologetic disconnection. Sometimes this can be hiding out in your home. Sometimes...you have to get out of dodge. Your mind needs to shut off. Whenever I have vacation, I pick up some book to read that is fictional flub. It won't help my leadership. It won't solve systems problems. Its just something I can mindlessly fall into in order to stop thinking/dreaming/processing.

Looking at the big picture of 2011. Which of these four steps is toughest for you? For me, I am feeling the pressures of ministry and see my time being gobbled up on a daily basis. So diverting daily has been irregular lately.

With that said, I'm going to get a shave and a shower, grab a Bible and head to the coffee shop for a bit before our leadership seminar this afternoon.

Monday Meanderings on Church and Leadership X

One of the most important paradigm shifts that you can make in any organization, but specifically and particularly a church is something I heard from Craig Groeschel.

It is the shift from saying "our people won't _______" to "we haven't led them to ______"

Our people won't worship? No, we haven't led them to worship! Our people won't give generously? No, we haven't led them to give generously! Our people won't serve? No, we haven't led them to serve.

Many churches, businesses and organizations find themselves in tight financial straights right now. Whether you need more generosity for your not-for-profit to function or you have to cut expenses in your business by reducing wages/salaries, good leaders model it before they implement it.

If you're a multi-staffed church, are you joining together around the table saying that it's time to count the cost? If your organization is evidence that 20% of the people do 80% of the work, then how can you model sharing the responsibility? How can you model sacrificial living?

I guarantee that if you will make this paradigm shift and start addressing the Leadership problems instead of the people problems, you will see breakthroughs.

What is the one thing you've been saying about the people of your company or your church that needs to be said about your leadership and/or the leaders around you?

Monday Meanderings on Church and Leadership VIIII

The Bible says that God's Word is a lamp unto our feet, not a floodlight beaming to our destination.-Steven Furtick, 'Sun Stand Still'

Why do we think God is going to concern himself with our lives 3, 5, 10 or 20 years from now if we won't seek to be faithful and obedient with where He wants us to go in the next 3, 5, 10 or 20 days?

Yes God takes us to the Promised Land, but He also spends 400 years with his people enslaved and 40 years with his people in fear, in order to shape them to be ready for the day they cross the Jordan.

Your journey is more important than your destination...and God help us if we're in the wildnerness.

What's the thing you need to be faithful with now to be entrusted with a next step later? Forgiving someone? Stopping the lazy, self-indulgent life? Going back to church regularly? Tithing? Reading your Bible regularly? Caring for the single mom on your street? Answer God's nudge to a specific ministry?

Monday Meanderings on Church and Leadership VIII

Read this post by Tony Morgan and thought it was interesting.

I've been in the process of writing about how big churches are continuing to get bigger and highlighting some of the reasons why I believe that's happening. In this post, I'd like to talk about the leadership factor.

I'm in the camp that believes leadership is a spiritual gift. Romans 12:8 tells us, "If God has given you leadership ability, take the responsibility seriously." One of the distinctives of large, growing churches is that they value leadership development. That's not the case in small, declining churches.

In small churches, leaders are controlled. This typically happens through the way churches are structured. Instead of giving pastors and other ministry leaders the freedom to make decisions and make ministry happen, churches will add layers of boards and committees, rules and processes to prevent leaders from doing just about anything on their own. The smaller the church, typically, the more complex the structure.

In growing churches, what I usually find is that leaders have been released to lead. Boundaries are established to create a framework for decisions and actions, but within those boundaries is the freedom for leaders to leverage their spiritual gifts. Unfortunately, many churches are willing to embrace shepherds, teachers and pastors, but they're unwilling to embrace leaders.

Churches who understand the leadership factor share these characteristics:

* They are staff-led and not committee-controlled.
* They empower the senior pastor and the spiritual authority of that position.
* They see leadership as critical not only at the very top of the organization but in every layer of the ministry.
* They know that leadership is a gift, and it must be developed.
* They understand that not everyone is a leader and they're intentional about moving people into ministry that best fits their gifts.
* They embrace both staff and volunteer leaders. Paid staff are not the only people with the leadership gift.
* They recognize leadership isn't just for men over the age of 40.
* They are careful to prioritize the character over the skill of a leader.

The bottom line is that it's impossible to grow a healthy church and have an environment that values control over empowerment.

Monday Meanderings on Church and Leadership VII

Great post on Leadership from Dr. Tim Elmore:

Two Paradoxes Leaders Embrace*
By Tim Elmore
Why do intelligent, emotionally healthy people need leaders? Wouldn’t you think that a group of fifteen people who are all reasonably smart could figure out the best direction to take without someone telling them?
On paper, this makes sense. It sounds great. It just doesn’t play out in life.
Think about leadership from a philosophical standpoint. People need leaders not because they are stupid. In fact, quite the opposite. It may be because all team members are brilliant that they need leaders. Historically, the primary need for leadership is to galvanize and steer. Leaders galvanize multiple minds and steer multiple gift sets into one, clear direction.
I remember being on a team several years ago. Everyone on the team was sharp; in fact, most of us had served in leadership roles in the past. We didn’t need a leader for information or inspiration. We all knew as much as our leader did. However, someone needed to step forward and furnish clarity. We needed one clear direction and we needed someone to determine how our talents best fit together. The team members didn’t lack ideas—our problem was we had too many of them. Our leader brought clarity and synthesis.
The first role a leader must embrace is to be the focal point for a season. This doesn’t mean that the cause is all about the leader. (It should never be about the leader.) It means this person must be alright being the point of focus at first to eradicate sideways energy. Someone has to help people say “no” to the many good things they could do, and “yes” to the one, best thing they could do. Even the most reserved, and quiet leaders must initially embrace this attention and prominence.
The journey doesn’t end there, however. If a person has led well, he or she arrives at a destination precisely opposite this initial role. Effective leaders eventually create momentum, then slip into the shadows. They stay out of the way of good talent and teamwork. To use a cliché, they work themselves out of a job. They eventually become unnecessary if they have done their job well. I think of Herb Brooks, the coach of the 1980 U.S. Olympic Hockey team. He had incredibly talented young players who desperately needed his strength and focus in the beginning. There was too much energy, and egos going too many directions. In the end, however, once the Americans had won the gold medal, he slipped into a hallway and sat on the floor. He said the moment was about the team, not him. In reality, it was about something even bigger than the team. That gold medal did something for the U.S. at the time. We defeated the invincible Soviet team. The cause was nationwide morale and hope. David had beaten Goliath. The cause should always be bigger than people.
So, leaders actually embrace two paradoxical ideas. First, they must be OK with being the prime focal point. Talent and intelligence need focus. In the end, they must embrace obscurity. They chuck their ego—and point everyone toward the bigger picture. This is a rare paradox—which makes it beautiful when it happens.

Monday Meanderings on Church and Leadership VI

Any organization, when given the option, will choose to settle. It is both human and organizational nature to get to a place of comfort and stay there.

But comfort and settling are antonyms for growth and transformation.

In order to experience breakthrough, sometimes we have to change the way we do things.

For instance, the church that I serve in hit a growth barrier at around 350-400 people in attendance 7 or 8 years ago. This is a common plateau point for organizations, particularly of churches.

And business as usual will create business as usual.

There are barriers at 75 people, 150 people, 350 people and more on down the road that demand a culture shift in order to breakthrough to new growth. Churches who settle will plateau and then decline.

Here are a few culture shifts that I think are vitally important at the 350 person barrier.

-You have to be willing to move from a family oriented church to a mission oriented church. You no longer can concern yourself with making sure everyone knows everyone in the church. You need to have a God given Mission and Vision and it needs to drive everything you do.
-Your leader has to move from a pastor to a preacher/visionary. This transition can be hard for either the people in the church or the pastor. The people have to go from a mindset of "I'm in the hospital...Pastor better visit me" to "I'm in the hospital and my small group will care for me." The people need to want their pastor not to come see them for minor, routine surgeries. Equally as difficult is the pastor's transition to a new role. The pastor must be constantly visioncasting and dreaming of where the church needs to go and spending the bulk of their work week designing worship that will inspire and empower people to live their lives for Christ. The pastor has to let go of being the point person for every committee, group and team. The pastor has to let go of the pressure they feel to be the pastoral care for every church member (those who are fully committed and those that are on the fringes of commitment). And the pastor has to defer and refer to others for the majority of counseling. If people in the church want to meet with the head pastor...the head pastor has to think "No" first. Not that the person isn't important, but that the vision and mission is more important. The people who get this will be glad the lead pastor says no and be glad to pursue other church staff who can offer counseling and care.

You want to settle where you're at and so does your church. And when you cease to live with purpose and risk, you will become stagnant and eventually head towards death.

Monday Meanderings on Church and Leadership V

I heard an interview with former Browns coach Eric Mangini towards the end of the 2009-2010 season. The Browns had struggled to a 1-11 start before rallying off four consecutive wins to finish the season (including a win over Pittsburgh to dash their playoff hopes).

Mangini was asked how to get the guys to play for him after a 1-11 start. He said something along these lines...Its times like these when you learn who you want to be in the fox hole with when the battle is the thickest.

I have no idea why that has remained in my head for well over a year, but it has...and the question for leaders is who they can trust and count on in the trenches when the war rages most fierce.

There aren't many more important questions than this. Here's where leaders mess up.

1. They go Rambo...Rambo couldn't survive in Church Leadership with his solo flying style...Many leaders wonder why the war seems to be coming in from every direction...And part of that may be because he/she is trying to go it alone

2. They are in the trenches with Fools...Nothing worse than getting shot at from your own trench. Sometimes church leaders allow the wrong people into the battle...hint...if they complain and bash the church more than they pray and serve the church...they should not be in your fox hole!

3. They are in the wrong trench...Leaders get confused and sometimes they alienate the Mission and the Vision for something less meaningful. (People Pleasing /Politics/Personal Agendas). When this happens, these leaders start firing at some of the key people in the organization and it will almost certainly end in death...of the leader and the organization.


Led Leaders find the trustworthy, God-abiding people who are ready and willing to go to battle for the hope and future of the church and those people hold up the leaders arms so that the battle will be won.

Monday Meanderings on Church and Leadership III

Stomp and The Challenge of Leadership

Shaina and I went to see Stomp this past Friday night in Columbus. It was a lot of fun. And the talent of the percussionists was ridiculous.

One thing that happened that had me thinking about leadership (yes, some people are nerds), was that at different points in the show, individuals from the Stomp Cast would engage the audience in keeping the rhythm. It was almost always very basic. The guy would clap twice and we'd echo it. Then, he might clap three times and we'd echo it. The simpler his clap was, the more precise the crowd's echo was. However, at the very end of the show he tried to get 4 different sections keeping four different beats going. It was an absolute train wreck.

In your organization or your church there are going to be a select few who are All In. They are talented, operating in their strenghts and gifting, on board with the vision and mission and just ready to go at it with all they've got.

But then there are the masses. They are perhaps in it for the paycheck, or in it because that's what they've always done, or in it for a myriad of self-serving reasons.

The challenge in leadership is to figure out how far you can take that audience in imparting the vision and delegating authority.

Many will not trust the masses and give them little to no piece to the vision/authority. This will keep the onus squarely on the select few to 'perform' and keep the machine running. This may work for a while but losing one or two cogs in such a machine will be devastating.

Some will try to give vision away, imparting it to the masses in large quantities and then wondering why its been sabotaged, or why there was revolt, or no buy in, or a rhythmic train wreck.

Good leadership must find the balance between these two extremes, because when the whole organization makes beautiful music, it is powerful.

Monday Meanderings on Church and Leadership II

Within a couple minutes, I read all these blog posts by Seth Godin. As far as I know, Godin has little to know affiliation with church. But he weighs in on leadership in some pretty compelling ways. These were timely for me:

Insurgents and incumbents
Incumbents compromise to please the committee and bend over backwards to defend the status quo.
Insurgents have the ability to work without a committee and to destroy the status quo.
The game is stacked in favor of the insurgents, except--
They're under pressure from boards, investors and neighbors to act like incumbents.
It takes guts to be an insurgent, and even though the asymmetrical nature of challenging the status quo is in their favor, often we find we're short on guts. ... and then the incumbents prevail.

That's not the way we do things about here
Please don't underestimate how powerful this sentence is.
When you say this to a colleague, a new hire, a student or a freelancer, you've established a powerful norm, one that they will be hesitant to challenge.
This might be exactly what you were hoping for, but if your goal is to encourage innovation, you blew it.

Making meetings more expensive
...might actually make them cost less.

What would happen if your organization hired a meeting fairie?

The fairie's job would be to ensure that meetings were short, efficient and effective. He would focus on:

•Getting precisely the right people invited, but no others.
•Making the meeting start right on time.
•Scheduling meetings so that they don't end when Outlook says they should, but so that they end when they need to.
•Ensuring that every meeting has a clearly defined purpose, and accomplishes that purpose, then ends.
•Welcoming guests appropriately. If you are hosting someone, the fairie makes sure the guest has adequate directions, a place to productively wait before the meeting starts, access to the internet, something to drink, biographies of who else will be in the room and a clear understanding of the goals of the meeting.
•Managing the flow of information, including agendas and Powerpoints. This includes eliminating the last minute running around looking for a VGA cable or a monitor that works. The fairie would make sure that everyone left with a copy of whatever they needed.
•Issuing a follow up memo to everyone who attended the meeting, clearly delineating who came and what was decided.
If you do all this, every time you call a meeting it's going to cost more to organize. Which means you'll call fewer meetings, those meetings will be shorter and more efficient. And in the long run, you'll waste less time and get more done.

So which hits home? Insurgents/Sacred Cows or Meaningful Meetings?

Monday Meanderings on Church and Leadership

20% Rule

I can't remember if I've blogged about this or just thought about this a lot.

I think it was Seth Godin at Catalyst this year who presented a business model that Google uses with its employees that is essentially a 20% model. One day a week, employees are encouraged to stop with the typical day to day operations and dream, think, and create something that could enhance the business. If there is an inefficient area, concentrate on new solutions. If there is an area that has not been tapped into that could revolutionize the business or maximize earnings, dream on that...The only catch is that at the end of 8 hours you have some tangible way to show what you've been working on. Some of Googles best features have been born out of this model.

If you delegate tasks, you create followers and you prevent intensified buy in.

If you delegate authority, you create leaders and you become an entity that people desperately want to be a part of.

So, if you want to get the best out of the people you lead, you have to first find people you trust and then you have to demonstrate in significant ways that you trust them. Let them solve problems. Let them create. Let them dream and run with things.

Generally, the people on the ground, who are in the grind know better than you what is working and whats not. So it is both ignorance and poor leadership that prevent you as a leader from consulting them and empowering them to fix inefficiency.

As this translates to church leadership...The way its always been done will not work as it always has. Allowing (Trusting!) leadership to dream and create is the best way to create buy in around your mission and vision. The more we are stuck in week to week survival mode (Sunday is coming again next week!), the less we are in creative mode.

So if you're a leader, how can you implement a 20% rule for those you lead? If you're being led, how can you fight for your leader's time and space to dream?