Consulting, Coaching & Chatter

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.

It happened again recently. I was in a large group of mainline church leaders who professed their interest in church transformation. We were all milling around the room waiting for the convener to launch the meeting and the conversation was pensive. Then the “transformational church leader” stood up, thanked us for coming, and said, “We’re gathered here to talk about church transformation … just us who are on the front lines … no church consultants.” There was a spontaneous spattering of applause, vigorous nods of heads, and a collective sigh of relief. No church consultants … you know, those men and women who have not only dedicated their lives to helping transform the church, but who have invested research, education, observation, and ongoing training to their vocation.

The conversation continued with the convener helping the members of the group get to know each other and their respective strengths. “What I want to do, is start a grass roots movement where we pool our resources to bring about church transformation. For instance, Pastor XYZ has a great worship service, so if you need help working through worship issues, you should call him.” And so it went until the room was introduced to a pool of “resources” who were decidedly not consultants but who knew a bit out one specialty or another.

Sounds good, doesn’t it? Perhaps it could be the foundation for a new economical transformational movement.

But it’s not new. Denominations, middle judicatories, and the frustrated masses have been trying this model of church transformation as long as I’ve been alive … and research says it’s been happening way longer than that. And what have been the results of these grass roots movements?

I’ve wrestled with how to put this gently, but the above story has been repeated in my life too many times to be “nice.” As nice as the people were in that room, and as well intentioned as the convener was, the fact is that pooled ignorance does not transform churches. For instance, Pastor XYZ really does do a nice job in worship. But Pastor XYZ’s church is in decline nonetheless. In fact, there didn’t appear to be a representative breakthrough church in the room.

There is more to church transformation than a great worship, awesome children’s programming, or even effective conflict resolution. Although each of these is needed for a successful church turnaround, they are not the core of a turnaround. Ask any consultant.

But wait … there’s more. Some time ago I offered a word of coaching on an open listServ on church growth. Even if I say so myself, the advice I presented was spot on, but within a few minutes of my post came a response, “Although I appreciate what you may have to say, I’m really looking for advice from someone who’s ‘done it,’ not just a consultant.” Of course, the writer had no idea whether I’d ever “done” it or not, but since I was a church consultant I was immediately suspect.

Now, let me say that there is some wisdom in the writer’s words. There are indeed consultants and coaches out there who made the move because it seemed easier than working in the church, but who have no transformation experience whatsoever. However, most church consultants have a bit more integrity than that … and significantly more experience.

But when it comes to calling a pastor who’s “done it,” let me remind you that just because someone has transformed a church doesn’t mean they can coach, consult, or indeed replicate what they’ve done. I’m reminded of the great sports players in my life. Bart Starr was my childhood football idol: quarterback for the Green Bay Packers and if memory serves me, still holds a couple of records. Later on, he was hired as Green Bay’s coach. There is really only one word to describe his work there: disaster. Then there’s Michael Jordan, one of the greatest basketball players of all time, but as coach of the Wizards? Dismal. Here’s the reality. Some players go on to become fabulous coaches, but there’s a HUGE difference between a player and a coach.

A mainline pastor who has led his/her church into transformation has done a marvelous thing – and has accomplished something that ends in failure in 80 percent of our churches (and the number appears to be closer to a 90 percent failure rate in the mainline). I want to say up front that any church leader who has led the transformation of a church is my personal hero. Period. But as much of a hero as they are, as talented and gifted as they are, in many, if not most cases, their success was built in a particular context in a particular time with a particular congregation. Put that church leader in another church – in fact, in most churches – and they’ll be battling the 80 percent average. Don’t get me wrong, there are few folks out there who have been successful at multiple transformations. Indeed, I only personally know of one – and he’s an unsung hero who hasn’t written five paragraphs of how he’s done it … yet (I’m after him for a Net Results article, but he’s pretty busy with his current “project”).

Now, I’m not suggesting that you shouldn’t be getting input from a church leader who’s led a successful transformation. By all means, go have lunch with him/her. Listen to their story and seek their advice. But before you jump into a transformation effort based on what they’ve done, let me remind you that neither you nor I are a Schuler, Hybels, Kalstadt, Warren, Slaughter, Olstein, Easum, Chan, or McManus. You and I are who we are and trying to duplicate someone else’s success formula will almost certainly put a congregation in the 80 percent group.

There’s a difference between an experienced and trained coach/consultant and someone who’s “done” it: Experience and Training. Whereas the local church leader who’s accomplished the near-impossible has the experience of a success, an experienced consultant comes with a broader perspective (which is also one of the drawbacks of most judicatory staff consultants – they may have experience with multiple congregations, but they have limited experience with the broader scope of church transformation). For instance, when Bill Easum is called to work with a congregation, he comes with a span of experience that’s broader than virtually any other practicing consultant. He’s worked with scores of denominations and has personally consulted with hundreds of congregations (nearly a thousand) of all shape, sizes, locations, etc. In my own case, I’ve led transformation work as the lead pastor in three mainline denominations (UMC, PCUSA, CCDOC) and done church planting in three (SBC, CCDOC, and non-denominational). Plus I’ve worked with dozens of churches as a coach, consultant, and in transformational leadership training.

The second difference is training. Let’s be perfectly honest here. Seminary training does not prepare a church leader for transformation. PhD training does not prepare a church leader for transformation. And few DMin programs prepare a church leader for transformation. Now, I’ll agree that book-study hardly prepares someone for much, and any consultant who finishes his/her DMin in coaching or transformation and hangs out a shingle without an apprenticeship or internship with an experienced church consultation firm is, in general, ill-prepared for the job. On the other hand, I know far too many “consultants” and “coaches” who have taken a course or two and immediately began circulating proposals and fine-looking brochures to judicatory offices and started working their networks to establish themselves in the field. Give them enough time and experience they may do alright, but I know of too many congregations that have been left bereft in the name of experience of some of these “consultants.” In this economy we’re seeing a lot of these folks having to return to the parish because they just couldn’t get the experience and the traction in their new career path they’d counted on.

Consultants that match their personal experience with an apprenticeship/internship and training are virtually always better prepared to walk with churches through the transformational, church planting, and transformational leadership training mine fields. Besides a DMin in Church Planting Movements, as the Managing Editor of Net Results I’ve been in the student seat for a lot of years. Both Bill Easum and I are regular attendees at national church planting and transformational training events – often as speakers, but we also attend workshops and seminars to keep up-to-date with the broadest possible opportunities.

So, the next time you hear someone say, “I want to hear the opinion of someone who’s done it,” bear in mind that the speaker hasn’t really thought through their comment. It’s good to hear from someone who’s done it, but it’s better to hire someone who both has done it and has a breadth of knowledge and resources well beyond the reach of the 20 percenters.

I got a note the other day from a church pastor who asked me to explain to him and to his congregation why they should engage in an on-site consultation. His church is struggling with breaking the 200 barrier, has a large endowment fund that they’re unwilling to touch, and are living as if they’re broke. In other words, they’ve found themselves in “Survival Mode” and are panicking about their decline. In this transitional economic climate this is becoming a norm for many congregations today. And so I thought I’d share my response. Perhaps it will trigger some conversation in your context.

1. We’re no longer living in a culture where church is a part of the cultural conversation, whereas the church generally lives under the false presumption that, with the exception of progressive technology, people are still people and if they would just understand what the church is all about and what we have to offer they would line up to become Christians. People under 40 don’t think that way and we can’t reach them using the old standbys like “Pack a Pew” Sunday, revivals, or even crusades. Good marketing can gather a crowd, but the crowd will primarily be church shoppers who already believe. If the church is going to be serious about being the church, it has to come to terms with the reality that they generally don’t know what they need to know reach their communities. That’s where we come in (Easum, Bandy & Tenny-Brittian). We work coast to coast and understand the national ethos, the changing culture, and what it takes to help a church transform its thinking to become relevant and effective. An on-site consultation gives us the opportunity to adapt and apply what we know nationally to the local context and to help communicate that in ways your congregation can hear.
2. Eighty percent of church transformations fail in the US and the most difficult transformation of all is to break the 200 barrier. To break the 200 barrier a congregation has to move from a Pastoral organizational model to a Program organizational model. A consultation, when coupled with post consultation coaching, increases the odds of success by taking the pressure off the pastor to say what needs to be said. The move from Pastoral to Program is fraught with political implications because it necessitates the relinquishment of power, control, and management by the selected few in order to create a new system that facilitates growth. Few congregations and pastors understand the process and fewer still are able to negotiate the reorganization and behavioral changes. That’s why, at best, 20 percent of transformational attempts succeed. We’ve worked with over 1,000 churches to help them face issues like this one.
3. In tight economic times such as these, churches tend to “hunker down” to weather the storm. They take a look at their dwindling income and the escalating costs of keeping a building open, paying utilities, salaries and benefits, and they begin to wring their hands and make cutbacks, beginning with the church’s program (one of the few line items that appears discretionary). However, this is the one area by which a church is measured by a visiting guest. Cut the program budget in your church to your bane. One of the advantages to an on-site consultation is that we experience and evaluate your programming first hand – and because we’re in churches nationwide, we can offer creative suggestions that can bolster your programming to make it both effective and attractive to those in your community.
4. Most churches in the under 200 category are older … and churches over 40 years-old are in the steepest decline in the US. Further, these older churches have older members. If you create a graph and put the age of the congregation as one axis and time as the other, the escalating age of the congregation in relationship to time has a significant impact on membership. The graying of our congregations does not bode well for the future and many churches we work with discover they have only ten to fifteen years left to make whatever changes are necessary to be relevant to a younger, unchurched audience. Sadly, many of these congregations call us when it’s frankly too late … they need a miracle and we’re not miracle workers. Transformations take time. Significant time. Even a highly motivated congregation will be faced with several years of foundational work. Turning an ocean tanker around takes many miles and much time. An established church with your attendance tends to behave more like a tanker than a speedboat – it won’t turn on a dime. An on-site consultation creates an opportunity for conversations and the great Aha! moments that are necessary before a congregation is willing to invest heavily in their future.
5. Finally, when a congregation is faced with the reality of their graying and decline, they often fall into panic mode and begin to behave as if the Titanic is going down. Church leadership is faced with having to make changes, but they don’t have the experience nor resources to make timely and relevant decisions. Creativity is the first thing that disappears when panic sets in, and yet creativity is the only hope for most congregations. In panic mode, they’ll work harder at what they used to do, at what they have experience in, hoping that their renewed energy will grow the church. But what worked even ten years ago seldom works today. One of the fallacies of many churches is that they’ll send leadership to a conference or two or three that’s produced by large and successful churches. And though these events are motivational, the ideas they present work well for large churches, but rarely can be applied to churches with less than 500 in average worship. The ministry ideas were created for a Corporate organizational church model and though they sound good, they seldom transfer. We’re in hundreds of churches of all sizes and denominations every year, keeping our eyes open, and learning what’s working today in a variety of contexts. When we do an on-site consultation, we bring a breadth of knowledge that few have access to.

When you’re backed into a corner, it’s difficult to see options. That’s true for individuals and it’s true for organizations as well. If your congregation is in that boat, if the only option seems to be cut the program budget, try and do more of what you’ve already done, and if you’ve talked yourself blue in the face trying to communicate that to your congregation, it might be time for something a bit different. Maybe.