Net Results Online

Helping churches transform from an organizational to an organic type of structure with empowered members has produced some surprises as well as confirmed some suspicions. Each church is unique and produces different results.

In the Ellis Baptist Association, churches interested in transformation go through a process called “RePurposing the Church.” In this process for becoming a purpose-driven church, the staff equips the ministers (members) to serve Christ through empowered teams. We have learned many things while leading churches in transformation.

1. Transformation takes time. When we tell church leaders it will take two or three years for them to begin functioning in a new way, they usually want to hurry it up. Once the process begins, the leaders realize that it will take more time than they hoped. It requires three to ten years to transform a church. In some cases it takes more time because major problems arise. One church has taken a two-year pause to deal with a dissenting controller. Pushing too fast will result in unnecessary conflict.

2. Transformation exacts a cost. In one church the cost was that a staff member had to leave. In another situation some people left the church because they disagreed with the teams concept. In another church, the pastor went through burnout during the process. Pastors need to have a large amount of trust built up in their “trust bank” before beginning transformation. They must be able to make some withdrawals and still have a positive balance. Most new pastors do not have enough trust built up to lead transformation without soon developing a negative balance. A negative balance will push the pastor and/or the church into severe conflict. Additionally, a church already in conflict should not attempt transformation until the conflict has been settled. It is not always possible to know the cost in advance. However, failing to go through transformation can result in the high cost of plateau or decline.

3. The church must have a clear need to change. The reasons for change will vary from church to church. Two of the churches declined in attendance while the population grew around them. Various disagreements caused these churches to focus inward. The glory days of these churches had passed. In another church its slow growth signaled a need for change. Domineering deacon leadership had stifled the growth of this church.

4. The pastor and leaders must be committed and involved. The leaders must understand the need for transformation. This part of the process may emerge as one of the most important. Quite often, the pastor and staff will attend church growth conferences and develop an understanding about what needs to be done. They become champions for change. However, the process will have problems if a guiding coalition is not developed. A guiding coalition should include the influencers of the church’s various groups.

One major step in the process is to help the guiding coalition understand how the church could be different. The guiding coalition then becomes responsible for bringing about the critical mass necessary for change. In one church the strategy team leading the transformation spent a great deal of time reading books about church growth and health. During the first strategy session the assignment was to write a purpose statement. One seventy-year-old lady said, “You know, six months ago I felt our church was doing fine, but now we must do something.” She realized her church could be far more effective than sitting on its status quo. Church members are not ignorant when given the options.

5. Transformation must be a consensus-building process. Even though a small group of people must be empowered to lead the group, it is important to include the whole church in the process. The church as a whole should have an opportunity to read what the strategy team reads. Team members must make reports periodically about the ideas and plans being considered. The goal should be to implement a strategy without having to vote on its adoption. Transformation can be highly controversial in a church. Nothing should be done to set up a win/lose situation. Resistance will develop if the leaders plan in secret.

6. Church members need to be asked their opinions. Most churches do not openly ask for input from their members. Members have opinions they will discuss in a negative manner with other members, but usually only in their small group, over the phone, or in a private conversation. If given an opportunity, they will share their feelings somewhat positively.

One church began a focus group for discussing worship. One older lady complained about talking by the youth prior to the morning worship. She felt that the pre-worship time should be quiet and contemplative. During the discussion she returned to this issue twice more. A teenager then spoke up, indicating it was important for her to talk with her friends because they did not get to see each other at school. This exchange did indeed indicate a difference of opinion. However, it was the first time they talked to each other instead of about each other.

7. Church members want to be empowered. Church members want involvement in real ministry, not just in determining ministry policy. This means each church must have a method to help individuals find out about God’s call for ministry for their lives. This should, at the minimum, include discerning spiritual gifts and personality. An excitement develops when members are encouraged to lead out in ministry. In one church in transition, a long-term member asked the question, “You mean now I can serve on the mission team? I have wanted to serve there for years and have never been asked.” The obvious answer to her question was yes. She was delighted to be able to fulfill the call to ministry God had given her.

8. Setting the foundation is extremely important. The entire process depends on developing a clear purpose statement, determining guiding principles (core values), and determining basic beliefs (doctrinal statements). Vital signs are measures by which one assesses a church’s health. When a person becomes sick and goes to the emergency room, the doctor will check temperature, blood pressure, and pulse and do other tests to determine a course of treatment. In the church it is important to discover the vital signs for health and to monitor them regularly. Then adjust the plans accordingly.

9. Team training enables people to learn new skills. Most church members have only served on committees. New behaviors will not happen because you change the label from “committee” to “team.” It takes training to help members understand their empowerment to determine a course of action they will complete without direct supervision. The training should include helping each team write its purpose statement as well as determining the expectations of the team. Writing goals and action plans helps the team move into action. Action is the basis for teams. Teams also need training in basic meeting skills. Holding each other accountable for the team expectations and determining a tentative agenda for the next meeting will help speed the process in assigning to individuals the action items designed to help a team accomplish its purpose.

10. Develop a plan for transitioning to the new structure. Many details need to be worked out. At this point, leaders begin to answer the questions of what’s going to happen to me, my program, or my interests? It is too easy to overlook some aspect of the church’s ministry. When a question arises, an answer should be given as soon as possible in dealing with members’ concerns. Failure to deal with these issues will cause concerns about the whole process. The plan should indicate where existing ministries will be located in the new structure. Once the plan is somewhat solidified, then the constitution/bylaws should be revised to match the new structure. This revision should happen late in the process rather than first. (Controllers will want to get the controls in any revised document and will use this method to resist change if the church adopts new documents early in the process of transformation.) The constitution/bylaws should be written to encourage members to do ministry and staff to equip these members for ministry.

11. Most churches need to have their transformation process led by a consultant. Most pastors do not have the calling or the skills to bring about transformation in their church. Unfortunately, too many staff members view their responsibility and calling to do the ministry of the church rather than lead ministry. A part of the process for both the pastor and the members must be the pastor’s change from minister to equipper. Both the staff and the members must see the role of the staff to be equippers in giving away the ministry to the true ministers of the church—the members.

The following is a comment from the Net Results Online Seminar “Creating the Servant Empowering Organization” led by Tom Bandy. This selection comes from a chain of conversation related to transforming declining churches into thriving, growing ministries.

COMMENT: Tom, What you have raised has really got me stimulated mentally.

I recognize the need to raise up a critical mass of people committed to ongoing spiritual development. I also believe that there is a genuine spiritual hunger among the people, but it is unformed and undisciplined. However, without some initial experience of the benefits of spiritual growth, it’s hard to gain a commitment from them.

The main problem that I run into again and again is the simple logistical problem of gathering people together in one place at one time. I have found it almost impossible to, for example, have consistent small group attendance over a 6 or 8 week period. People are well-intentioned but work, travel and illness make it practically impossible.

What about this:

I train 10-12 people to be mentor-guides, able to coach others in inductive Bible study and prayer.

We elicit commitments from a significant number of people to engage in a process of spiritual growth over, say, the next 6 months.

I prepare and distribute a monthly cycle of selected readings, questions for reflection and options for prayer.

We give people the choice of following the material individually and/or meeting with others according to availability or affinity (“Those available Wednesday 3-4 p.m. meet in the Library”; “Single moms meet at Mary’s house on Tuesday evenings.”)

Whatever option(s) people settle on, request that they covenant to be faithful to it.

Once a month, mentor-guides connect with 6-8 people for sharing and accountability. They make use of questions designed to elicit further growth and interest.

Once a month, mentor-guides meet with me for mutual accountability and sharing.

We make use of e-mail, the church website, telephone and fax, as well as face-to-face meetings.

We provide lots of options—different levels of challenge in the material provided, different media of communication, different sizes and affinities of groupings; but always with the expectation that when people settle on the right options for them that they follow through.

What do you think? Is it too complicated? Does it cater too much to people’s unwillingness to make a commitment?

--Paul Miller (Grantham United Church, St. Catherines, Ontario)

REPLY: Paul, This is exactly the idea . . . affinity based, multiple options in size and location, a cadre of trained leaders that mutually supports each other. Here are some additional things to consider:

1) Leaders find their own group and establish their own covenant: Groups tend to grow best when they are “bottom up.”

2) Train leaders in two “flows”: relationship-building and faith-building.

3) Shorten the time limits of groups, but transition them to other groups.

4) Use the Internet for both groups and leaders.

Paul is focusing on methodology and application, but he is alive to the issue at stake. The servant empowering organization is impossible unless you create a ferment of adult spiritual growth in the church.

--Tom Bandy