Consulting, Coaching & Chatter

[Continued from "Tomorrow's Church Today - Pt. 1." The first half of this post was first published in the Mar-Apr 2010 issue of Net Results magazine.]

The technology used in the service would have been astounding to see in many churches, and yet nothing being used isn’t already a part of the culture’s fabric. Even the most traditional church is filled with members who are immersed in screen technology – television, movies, and computer screens grace their lives, so it is hardly surprising to find screen technology fully employed in the worship center. Multiple screens display much more than just the words to the music and the outline of the sermon. Videos illuminate, illustrate, and touch the core of the congregation’s emotions. Supporting and ancillary materials and suggested links flash on the screens to encourage deeper study and reflection – even during the service. Images, both static and animated, invite viewers to reflect, meditate, and contemplate the sermon’s teaching, like the stained glass of old opened windows of understanding in the great cathedrals of Europe. Dotted throughout the worship center are participants using laptops, iPads, smart phones, and cell phones to do further research; to find and consider alternative views; to provide additional material on the church’s wiki of the week; to exchange comments, thoughts, and opinions on the congregational forums and chat rooms; and even to communicate their questions, confusions, and affirmations to the speaker. What seems amazing is that the speaker is able to clarify points, explain concepts, and even answer relevant questions that are being delivered digitally live from the participants – and the speaker makes those adjustments on-the-fly. Clearly, the speaker isn’t just familiar with the sermon topic, but is well versed, well read, and therefore well received.

When the service is over, it’s clear that the service isn’t over. Although there are a few who race to the parking lot to beat the restaurant lunch rush, most of the participant appear to be in no hurry to leave. There is much conversation, and again we see clusters of people praying for each other. Many of the participants make their way to what must have been a fellowship hall at one time, but has been converted to a cozy cafè. Food and beverage services are available and soon many of the tables are filled with conversational groups most who seem to be discussing the service’s teaching. Floating throughout the room are hosts who drift between groups fulfilling hospitality needs from refilling coffee to answering questions, to clearing tables to facilitating conversations between table groups. The service’s speaker does similarly and engages several of the groups in further discussions.

All in all, though, the church of tomorrow doesn’t immediately appear to be all that different from a number of what some call “contemporary” or “alternative” churches today. However, peeling back the veneer of the weekend service reveals a couple of core differences. Whereas most churches today seem to exist for the weekend service, the church of tomorrow uses that service to enable, equip, and deploy the participants into the real world. During the week, we find the majority of the participants are connecting with one another informally. Some meet in multiple small groups where they are encouraged in their faith walk (and held accountable for their faith practices and behaviors). Others get together for meals, coffee, after work, or whenever they can “get away” to connect. They too find their faith habits and general conduct receiving attention from their Christ-following peers.

As “flies on the wall,” we can oversee these folks putting their faith to work in their vocational callings during the week. We see spontaneous, silent prayer breaks throughout the day and especially just before meetings and when decisions must be made, even before those that seem to be minor or banal decisions. But silent prayer is only the beginning. These men and women spend more time listening to faith stories than they do talking about why their coworkers should come to their church or consider their brand of faith. And when they hear accounts of dispair, pain, frustration, or fear, they offer to pray – and they do so then and there. Hand on shoulder, hushed pleas and quiet thanksgivings. Nothing elaborate or showy – indeed, it seems that few even notice the brief interchange. But the effect on the coworkers is profound.

When we look under the hood, so to speak, it seems clear that the weekend services play a distant second to the discipleship and ministries that seem to bloom spontaneously during the week. But we all know better, don’t we? All those weekday manifestations are part-and-parcel of a comprehensive commitment to life changes that surpass just head changes. It begins with a vision, not of a transformed church, but of a transforming process that invites and encourages all, from the most cynical unbeliever to the most entrenched church-goer, to take a first step in exploring a faith that demands more than just an enlightened mind. Knowing more about faith, about God, about theology, and even about expectations is good. But there’s a bottomless crevice between knowing and behaving. Our culture knows this – and has generally castigated Christianity because of that gap. The church of tomorrow not only knows this – it is intentional in creating processes to engender personal transformation. It encourages seekers and pilgrims alike to embark on that journey.  And it expects those who claim the name to live accordingly.

[The following post is from the Editor's Foreward in the Mar-Apr 2010 issue of Net Results, North America's most experienced church growth and evangelism magazine.]

The role of the church is changing. Whether we like it or not, whether we’re ready for it or not, or whether we believe it or not. Back “in the day,” the church was the center of community life. I’m not old enough to remember that, but some readers might be. Back in my younger day, the church was a respected institution that had significant impact on society, but I’ve watched that respect and influence crumble around us. Today, by and large, the church is a cultural non-entity, and for most North Americans, the church is little more than a safe haven for yesterday’s yesterday.

Today, the “worship” service is still the central focus of the church. More of our time and effort is spent creating and developing meaningful content for the weekend service than on any other single task. And though most churches strive to create meaningful, participatory worship services, the actual experience tends to be more of a presentation to a passive audience.

Today’s teaching model for our worship services is a longstanding practice, and indeed the primary role, of the church since the rise of the Enlightenment. Tomorrow’s church will have to bridge the widening gap between “knowing” the truth (cognitive assent) and “practicing” the truth (behavioral modification). However, as Einstein pointed out, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. In other words, continued preaching about how Christians need to behave isn’t going to close the gap between what we know and what we do.

Over the years, I’ve seen several solutions for helping “believers” become “practicing” disciples of Jesus batted about. Ultimately the answer will have to be more holistic than particular. The role of the church itself has to change from being a repository of doctrine to being a people and place that nurtures faith. The church will become an incubator of faith.

Take a quick tour with me as we visit a weekend service in tomorrow’s church – in a faith incubator.

Stepping inside the church of tomorrow is like stepping into the presence of royalty on a good day. The spirit hovering in the worship center, can only be described as a mixture of peace and excitement, kindness and warmth. Even the most sensitive empath or intuit is hard pressed to sense conflict in the air. Clearly, the congregation takes accountability and reconciliation seriously and disagreements are handled both agreeably and immediately.

As we look around, we notice that, like almost any church we’ve ever visited, there are numerous conversations going on here and there. However, on closer examination we watch a number of floating members who move from one person to another having conversations – some brief, some protracted. No one is overlooked by these hosts and kind words of welcome with genuine interest and concern are expressed. Perhaps what is most astounding is that during this informal gathering time, we witness people pausing to pray for one another in the midst of conversations. A hand on a shoulder; bowed heads; hushed pleas and quiet thanksgivings.

The worship service is significant in its interactivity. Throughout the service there is an instructional air, as if in a classroom. But it’s a different kind of classroom than those we have grown accustomed to in a church service. Instead, the teachings begin with the premise that all are striving to attain and maintain the most basic tenets of the faith. Nothing is presumed. Little is taught that can’t be directly applied. No lofty theologies that can’t be reflected in life-giving deeds and words that support and encourage. Interspersed within the teachings are opportunities for conversation and questions and even pushback. Indeed, it’s clear that there are guests who are exploring Christianity and are wresting with deism, syncretism, and pluralism, and their doubts, skepticisms, and even the occasional cynical expressions are taken is stride – as if this is not only expected, but welcomed as part of a process.

See Part Two …

I received a thoughtful note from a Church-Talk listener. He contended that the church has fallen under the spell of the culture’s understanding and practice of leadership. He went on the say that the church must follow the leadership of the Holy Spirit rather than fallen mortal man. I thought he was pretty perceptive in his observation – but that there’s more to the story. So, below is my response.

It is true that in the New Testament the word for Leader or Leadership occurs rarely – in fact, only eight times, and five of those times it has less to do with church leadership and more with leading households or leading in “good works” (see http://www.jbc.edu/college/images/churchrelations/churchlink/PDFs/Linton-Prohistemi.pdf).  On the other hand, the word “pastor” only occurs once – and that in the list of church “offices” in Eph 4:11 – though there are other words used to describe those in church “leadership” such as elders/presbyters/bishops.

And though the words “leader” and “pastor” are notably absent in the New Testament, the focus on Followership is predominant. Jesus repeatedly called one person after another to follow him. Later, Paul took up that mantle and on repeated occasions (and five quite blatantly) he says “Follow me” – including once when he instructs “Follow me as I follow Christ.”

However, that brings up an important distinction. By definition, a leader is someone who has followers, and although the New Testament focus is on “following,” followers by definition are following a leader (formally or informally).

Jesus was expressly clear that those who lead (in the church?) should not “lord it over one another as the Gentiles do” (Mat 20:25-26). Leadership in the church, when it’s finely exegeted and understood in context, is a lot more about mentoring, modeling, and serving and a lot less about barking orders.

Which is the paradigm we work from in Net Results, Church-Talk, and the 21^st Century Strategies: effective leaders lead as mentors and models of discipleship. Further, we firmly believe that poor leadership in mentoring and modeling are the primary reasons the church in North America is in serious decline. Far too many pastors and church leaders are involved in management and administration rather in disciple-making and conspicuously living the faith.

Once again, the New Testament, and especially the book of Acts, illustrates what the church “could” look like. The leaders were busy making disciples (both more and more effective) and the “congregation,” that is everyone else, was active in doing direct, hands-on ministries (practicing personal worship, one-anothering, reaching out to the unchurched, and discipleship/holding accountable). And though the leadership of the Holy Spirit is a key feature in Acts, the leading of the Spirit was through the head, heart, and hands of those who served in leadership (particularly demonstrated and seen in the leadership of Peter, Paul, and Timothy).

The problem with the church is that it is, and always has been, made up of fallen people (as if it could be any other way). Whether these people serve as a leader or as a disciple (a fine biblical word that once again implies followership), each is called to hold one-another accountable in the practice of the faith (see Jesus’ model of accountability throughout Matthew’s gospel, e.g., Mat 5:22-23; 18:15-17). But ultimately, a local church without those serving in a leadership capacity (whether we call that office using the New Testament terms pastor, elder, presbyter, or bishop) is a church with a rudder, but one without anyone holding on to it.

From the beginning of 21st Century Strategies, a long, long time ago, we’ve had one driving value: help transform churches. We suspect that pretty much all our readers understand that one of the ways we do that is by offering professional consultation services, church leadership coaching, and congregational training. What many folks may not realize is that when we write books, articles, newsletters, FAQs, ore respond to questions on the Advanced Leadership Forum of the 21st Century Strategies Community, we don’t hold anything back. Everything we do is focused on helping churches – and ultimately, for us, there is nothing more important than that, so we don’t keep back the secrets to success.

All that’s to say, for those willing to do the work, pretty much everything we teach, every recommendation we make, and every “secret” we have is there on our website and in our books. And with that knowledge, there’s really no reason they couldn’t do a respectable and effective Do It Yourself Consultation. With that in mind, let me (us) point the way.

Step One: Data Gathering

The foundation for every consultation we do begins with demographics. Now, before you surf over to the Census Bureau, Percept, or MissionInsite, some of the most important demographics you need to really “know” and “understand” are those of your congregation. And how old and how many and how long and how much and so on is just the start. You’ll want to measure attitudes toward leadership, hospitality, and their aversion to changes – and what specific changes will create the most waves. The forms we use for gathering and compiling all this data is found in The Complete Ministry Audit.

Congregational demographics are only the starting point for understanding your congregation. Next, you’ll need to pull some decadal statistics. You’ll be looking for trends, once the data is compiled, so make sure you pull the statistics for each year so you can plot them. You’ll want to get the information on income and giving; expenditures, including capital, maintenance, program, staff, and missional spending; attendance in each worship service, Sunday/Sabbath school, choir, and any small groups; baptisms, transfer of membership, deaths, departures, and general membership figures. One of the revealing, and often startling and disturbing, trends can be seen when these are plotted on a line graph. In far too many churches, the trend lines trail off and even the least savvy can make an educated guess on when the church will be no more and/or have inadequate funding to sustain even the most basic ministries.

Once you have a true understanding of the congregational, then it’s time to pull community demographics. The boundaries of your ministry area are important, so choose them carefully – and remember, your effective ministry area may not be equivalent to a particular zip code or a simple circle with the church in the center. In addition to the standard demographics, you will want to get a psychographic workup as well so you not only the raw statistics, but will have some understanding of what’s important to those in your community, plus how they spend their time and money and affections.

With the basic data gathered, you’ll be able to find connecting points for reaching into the community, but you’re not even close to ready for that now. The next step is to begin the evaluations.

Evaluating

Data is pretty much black and white, so it can be tempting to start making recommendations immediately. But before effective recommendations can be made, you’ll need to honestly and seriously evaluate virtually everything associated with the church. And though everything we’ve covered up until now can be found in our books, it’s time to mine the 21^st Century Strategies website (ChurchConsultations.com).

Building and Grounds

It’s probably easiest to start with evaluating the physical plant. How much property do you have – and need – for the number of seats you have in the worship center? How is the property divided up and how many parking spaces do you have? What is that state of your property? Is it in good repair, or do you need to resurface the parking lot and paint the church’s shutters? Once you’re done outside, move inside to check the usability, access, and repair of the facilities. How many usable seats are there? Where is the nursery and does it meet minimum hospitality standards? The list can go and on, but literally everything you need to evaluate – and the measures to use – can be found on the website. Here’s a mining tip: most of the information you need can be found in the extensive FAQ section.

Congregational DNA

Once the building and grounds are out of the way, you may be thinking it’s time to evaluate the programs of the church. Before you can do that, you’ll need to put on your critiquing hat and look over the congregational DNA. Start by evaluating whatever foundational work has been done in the past and consider whether or not the mission statement is even viable. The sad fact is, many are theological and sociological treatises that carry lots of baggage, but little weight. Next, if the congregation has done additional DNA work, carefully evaluate the core values, the bedrock beliefs, the vision, the expected behaviors, and any strategic foci that’s been adopted. Again, you can find evaluation tools on our website – and don’t forget to check out our respective blogs (www.billeasum.com and www.billtennybrittian.com).

Of course, the real evaluation is in whether or not decisions are made based on the DNA, or is it just so much window dressing? The only way to find this out is to check the hierarchical, organization, and decision making structures – and here’s the tricky part, to get a real feel, you’ll have to ferret out both the formal and the ever-elusive informal structures. Once you discover these, then compare the DNA to the way decisions are made. Is the loudest voice more influential than the congregational DNA statements? If so, who are those loudest voices?

The DNA evaluation doesn’t stop with decision making though. The next step is to compare staffing against the DNA and the congregational size/budget. You’ll need to consider whether the current staffing is effectively organized around the congregational mission and vision or are they organized around anachronistic “generalist” or age-graded structures. In addition, you’ll need to consider whether you’re staffed for growth, maintenance, or decline. And of course, there’s the question of budget projections you’ll need to consider as well before you begin the recommendation process.

Programming

Finally, it’s time to evaluate your congregational programming. For sanity’s sake, you’ll want to consider your worship programming separately from the rest of your programming.

Once again, begin your evaluations by comparing everything the congregation does against the congregational DNA – and we’re talking about measuring everything. Start with the obvious programs: Sunday school, small groups, fellowship events, classes, gender and age based groups, ministry and outreach events and groups, and so on. It may be easiest to work from the congregational calendar and ask of everything on the schedule, “Does this specifically support and enhance the congregational DNA?” If you have to think about it for more than a split second, the answer is probably that it doesn’t. Make your list so you’ll be ready to make your recommendations for what programs should get the axe, which should be phased out, which should receive no support (a Do Not Resuscitate order), and which should be embraced and enhanced. Your recommendations will need to include these, along with specific steps for accomplishment while minimizing conflict (you can’t avoid conflict, but you can certainly minimize it).

As you consider each of the congregational programs, you’ll also need to seriously evaluate whether or not they are “doors” for guests to become integrated with the congregation. It’s critical that you identify each open and closed door. For instance, some Sunday school classes may “say” they are open to guests, but in reality guests may find it difficult to become a “part” of the group. This kind of information will be necessary for making effective recommendations later on.

Worship

In most churches today, the worship service is the core practice of the congregation and so demands significant scrutiny. However, this can be difficult for an “insider” to evaluate – but again, mining our websites will offer concrete suggestions.

If your congregation has multiple worship services, you will want to evaluate each separately, unless they are duplicate services. For each service, begin the evaluation by asking yourself, “For whom is this service targeted?” Begin by exegeting the explicit target (heavily churched sixty-year-olds and older; church-lite baby boomers; rarely churched thirty-somethings with families; etc.). Next, compare the actual service to the expectations of that target. It’s not just about music – you’ll need to consider style, formality, language, dress code (including the unspoken code), technology, participation opportunities, music selection, music performance, instrumentation, sermon theme, sermon delivery, presumptive participant foreknowledge, gender/age/dress/appearance of anyone who conspicuously serves, the content and layout of any bulletin/handouts, hospitality, feedback opportunities, level of excellence, and more. In addition, when evaluating the suitability of a service to a particular target don’t forget to check the supporting services such as children’s worship and nursery care.

When it comes to the worship service, you will want to take special notice of hospitality services. Start with the parking lot and work your way in. Are there smiling, friendly, gregarious “never-met-a-stranger” greeters on both sides of the front door? How long after the service starts do they remain in place? Are there greeters at other doors of the church that might be used by a first time guest who didn’t know for sure where the front door is? How about ushers? Are they glorified bulletin dispensers, or do they actually ush? Is there anything in the service that could embarrass a guest who wanted to remain anonymous and unmolested? Don’t forget signage. Is there any place in a hallway, narthex (vestibule/entry way), fellowship hall, auditorium , multi-use room, etc. where a guest would be unable to see a sign that pointed the way to the restrooms, nursery, or worship center?

Marketing and Follow Up

When embarking on the DIY consultation, don’t neglect to evaluate the systems the church is using to reach out to the community, let them know they’re there, and then follow-up once someone has visited. Check to see how much money the congregation is spending on low-response marketing such as newspaper and Yellow Pages advertising. Check the website for missing critical information or critical information that’s buried deep within the site. If directions or worship times are more than one click from the home page, it may be considered inaccessible by the average web surfer.

Guest follow up cannot be overlooked either. You’ll need to evaluate the church’s effectiveness in getting guest contact information. The next issue to check is to see what they do with that information. How soon after a visit is there an in-person home visit and who makes that visit? You’ll also need to find out how effective the follow-up is by crunching the return rate of first time guests.

Finally, check to see if there’s an intentional integration (assimilation) plan for helping guests connect with those in the church. If not, do guests have to claw their way into the fellowship? You can find out how effective the congregation’s integration programming is by crunching the number of first time guests who remain active in the congregation a year after their first visit.

Evaluate the Main Thing

Although there is much more that can, and perhaps should, be evaluated, there is one more area that is essential when attempting a Do It Yourself consultation. I’ve left this to last not because it’s least important, but because without  making this area a priority in the evaluation, it won’t matter what you recommend: the transformation will fail.

The main thing of the church is discipleship. The question that must be answered is whether or not new people are becoming effective, practicing disciples of Jesus who engage in the spiritual disciplines or not. And the second is like the first – are the church leaders spiritually centered, grounded, and practicing disciples of Jesus who engage in the spiritual disciplines. In any consultation, whether we’re doing an onsite consult or you’re engaged in a DIY consultation, this is the number one, most important, make it or break it question. If the leaders are not model disciples of Jesus who are engaged in the regular study of scripture, immersed in prayer and reflection, sharing their faith with the unchurched and marginally churched, and practicing the one-anothers in every aspect of their lives, then it won’t make any difference what you recommend. Indeed, this was the primary failure of the Church Growth movement of the seventies and the eighties – program without spiritual foundationing.

Evaluating the main thing can be difficult, but you can get a pretty good read on it by measuring the level on ongoing, unresolved conflict and by simply asking some key questions of the leaders (try the Discipleship Development Questions – again, found on the website). If the leaders aren’t modeling discipleship, then it’s a pretty good bet the congregation isn’t. And if the congregation isn’t, then guests will come and guests will go, but it will be the rare guest who is still a part of the congregation eighteen months after their initial visit.

Making Recommendations

When it comes time for making recommendations, there is a specific order – at least at the front end – that is imperative to follow … at least if you want to actually transform the church.  Top on that list is the spiritual discipline practices of the leadership. This, of course, also includes intentionally dealing with unresolved conflict and implementing systems for dealing with conflict as it arises. How you recommend putting this into place is largely contextual, but leadership modeling, integrity, and accountability is core to a successful transformation.

Next on the list would be shoring up the DNA if it’s needed. Since the DNA infuses every aspect of the congregation’s function and form, it’s virtually impossible for a congregation to move forward without  clear, concise, embedded, and modeled mission, values, vision, beliefs, and behavior statements.

Third comes hospitality. In this case, we’re not just talking about greeters and hosts, but everything the church does to engage both those outside the church as well as those inside. For instance, as “friendly” as a church might be when a guest walks through the door, if the music is foreign to their ears; if the language is encoded with Christianese;  if there is an expectation that they are familiar with the Judeo-Christian meta story and/or have memorized the rituals and rites; if the location of the restrooms is the church’s best-kept secret; if the nursery has security, sanitation, or safety issues; or if a newcomer has to commit felony breaking-and-entering to get into a group, then there are hospitality issues.

The rest of the recommendations are pretty much determined by context. Reorganization and bylaw rewrites are rarely more than a miscellaneous item – giving it priority is a rookie mistake since form follows function, not the other way around. Again, virtually every recommendation we’re likely to make can be found on our websites or in our books.

So, there you have it – a veritable step-by-step DIY consultation. If it sounds complicated and complex, it’s because it is. Between us, Bill Easum and I have done hundreds of customized consultation and each one is as unique as your situation. On the other hand, as you’ve no doubt surmised, there’s a method to the work we do and the recommendations we make. Follow the steps in this article, mine the depths of our sites and our books, and you’ll have at your fingertips everything you need to work from data gathering, through evaluation, and ultimately to making church-transforming recommendations.

Final Note

Just in case this all seems like too complex and too much work, I’d be remiss if I didn’t mention that Bill Easum and I both have room in our schedule to work with you and your church. Whether your congregation needs an onsite consultation, you or your leaders need coaching, or there’s a  need for congregational training, we’re committed to helping churches become increasingly effective.