Consulting, Coaching & Chatter

Just a quick post while I’m on the road. A colleague of mine and I were talking about appropriate follow-up plans for first-time visitors and I referenced a recent thread on the Easum, Bandy & Tenny-Brittian Community Advanced Leadership forum about what was considered a “valuable” gift. I had written about the pastor taking a gift to a first-time visitor within 24 hours of their visit in an earlier blog post and mentioned a coffee mug as a gift. In the “valuable” gift thread, I echoed Tom Bandy’s sentiments that a gift taken to a guest should reflect something of value … and folks, coffee mugs just don’t make it much in that realm. Why, even the local garage and the banks give away mugs and though they can be a “nice” gift, very few people marvel at the gift of a mug from a Realtor, let alone a church. A gift of value is something that sets you apart from the crowd … it makes an impression.

So, back to the convesation with my colleague. We were talking about “valuable” gifts and I mentioned that in some locales, a plate of homemade cookies (with a fridge magnet for posterity’s sake) would be more memorable than a mug. That sparked an insight. Turns out that one of the churches there in Jefferson City has a bee keeper and first time visitor leave the worship service with a small jar of honey. On the following day, a member of their follow-up team takes the guests a loaf of hot homemade bread to go with their honey. I thought … what a good idea!

But their program could be made even more effective with two additions. First, I love the idea of sending them home with honey. That’s a nice way to get visitors to identify themselves and give up their contact information. Second, I love the idea of taking them hot homemade bread … but the pastor should be the one taking it, and s/he should be taking it that day. But there’s still one thing missing. Permanency. Once the bread’s gone and the honey’s gone, there’s nothing but a memory. It’ll be a good memory, but they may or may not remember where the great gift came from six months from now when a crisis hits and they seek both God and a church in earnest.

So I did a very brief Google search and came up with this: a small honey pot to go with the bread and honey ($2,70 each). Someone with a steady hand could add the name and contact info of the church on the honey pot (or a ceramic’s group could actually make them and decorate them by hand) and then the valuable gift has everything … it creates good will, it makes an impression, and it has permanency to preseve the memory. And if this church (or yours) did this, first time visitors would be telling their friends about the church they visited that helped them feel valuable too.

I heard it again today. “Youth are the future of the church.” Whenever I hear that I realize the person saying that means that if we don’t win the youth over to the faith that the future of the church is bleak. It’s a noble thought, but it’s not particularly accurate. Youth programming seldom grows a church with very few exceptions. First let me mention the exceptions and then I’ll elaborate on why youth don’t grow churches.

The primary exception for youth growing a church is when the church’s PRIMARY signature ministry is their youth program. What this means is that the youth programming is so well funded and so well known in the community that if you asked a pastor of any church in town “What church is known for it’s life-changing youth program?” that church is the one instantly named. Churches with youth as their signature ministry typically purchase or build a youth center off of the church’s campus and it is staffed daily and into the late evenings. The church would sponsor sports, concerts, and so on in the youth facilities. In addition, those that work with the youth ministry are focused on youth and family ministry, in that they are connecting intentionally with the youths’ families to help walk them into the larger church’s ministries. Typically, churches with less than 500 in weekly attendance and a 100% commitment to youth ministry (over any other ministry) are the only ones who can successfully use their youth program to significantly grow their church.

Before I go on, I need to clarify what I’m going to say next with this. I’m NOT saying that youth ministry isn’t important. I AM saying that it is a “mission” of the church that will drain resources, sort of like most men’s ministries. I’m not saying don’t do youth ministry … I am saying that it won’t grow the church. Youth ministry is not a growth strategy. An expected ministry of all programmatic churches, yes. A strategy to grow the church, no.

Here’s the reality. Youth programs are expensive in terms of funding and staffing if they’re done right … and honestly, even when they’re done poorly. The vast majority of churches provide youth programming to round out their family programming and the youth ministry primarily serves the youth members of the church. Few churches are able to compete with local non-church events and activities in terms of attractional qualities and so the local unchurched youth don’t even consider church events as a viable option. Providing pizza and Coke is no longer an attractive come-on for youth. They simply have better and more entertaining things to do.

However, let’s suppose for a moment that the handful of youth a congregation has as “members” or children of members/participants are willing to be evangelists for the youth program. Those of their youth friends that do attend rarely bring their families in tow. If the worship service appeals to their parents, it is unlikely to appeal to the youth and vice versa. Unless youth programming is offered simultaneously to worship, it’s difficult to provide worship opportunities that appeal to both. And so, with all that put together, almost no church that puts their church growth dollars into the youth programming will see a positive return. Are there exceptions? There are ALWAYS exceptions, but if you’re about to put all, or even many, eggs into the youth basket thinking you’ll be one … well, it’ll probably be a very expensive lesson.

At this point in our culture, only two “programs” grow a church. Incredible over-the-top worship in the language, style, and technology of the target audience. And incredible children’s programming. But if you don’t have #1, putting a lot of work into #2 will grow a church with a revolving door because the parents won’t hang around after the children are youth because they won’t be personally invested beyond their children’s needs.

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.

I’m not much of a bettin’ kind of guy. I played the ponies once in the UK … I won and decided to keep my winnings and never played again. Did the same at a casino playing the slots. I won and walked away. When it comes to gambling, I’m a been there, done that aficionado. And yet, the fact is, if you’re in the church leadership biz, whether you’re a pastor, a deacon, a board chair, Sunday school teacher, or bench warmer, we’re all playing a gambling game.

I’m not talking about whether there’s a heaven or a hell. It’s not whether or not there’s a God that your betting on (if you are, then let me try to put your mind to rest … there is and there is). Those are sure things. The gambling you’re doing is betting that your congregation’s strategic focus will transport you and your congregation into the future.

You may remember the dire predictions: 100,000 churches will close by the end of the decade (that rumor’s been going around for over 15 years now, according to Olson in The American Church in Crisis -p 118). The real numbers hover around 32,000 churches that closed in the past decade. That’s about 1.1%. On the other hand, in none of the 50 states did church planting and church growth keep up with the population. The good news is that the average size of church in USAmerica has risen from 54 to 124. The bad news is that it appears the reason for the “growth” isn’t because the smaller churches are growing, but because the smaller churches are ceasing to exist and the mega-churches are offsetting the losses and raising the stats significantly.

But I digress. If you’re a church leader of any stripe you should be scrutinizing whatever strategy your congregation’s is using to meet your mission (you DO have a viable mission, right?). And here’s the gambling part … few churches even think in terms of key strategies. Instead, most churches employ an almost random practice of bouncing between one tactic and another in hopes that something will carry the church into the future and reach the community for Jesus Christ.

I was reading in the September 2008 issue of the Harvard Business Review and came upon a sidebar that lists six questions every company should ask. The one that caught my eye included an interesting anecdote.

Would we bet on it?

Gordon Bell, a prominent investor who funds start-ups, is very blunt with executives of firms in his portfolio. For instance, when someone makes predictions for company performance, Bell will zero in on one number and ask the CEO, “Wanna bet? A side bet, you and me, for $1,000.” If the CEO gulps, Bell knows he or she has doubts. At least once, when an underperforming CEO didn’t take the bet, Bell had him fired.

Well, church leader … willing to make a bet that your congregational strategy is going to achieve your goals? (No goals? See The Growth Debate for why you need them.) If you haven’t developed a strategy yet, that may well be your next step. If you don’t know how (or what) a strategy is, check out the blog entry on Completing the Missing Genetics of the Congregation’s DNA. And if you have both … would you stake $1,000 of your own money that you’ll meet your predictions by, say, the end of the year?

I had a conversation recently with a small group of mainline pastors and the conversation naturally turned to church transformation and church growth. When I asked how they measured whether their churches were growing, plateauing, or declining I started getting the typical excuses and defensive posturing I so often hear.

“Numbers aren’t important.”
“Numbers don’t really tell the story.”
“You can’t measure what’s really important.”

Yada yada. Excuses, every one of them. It’s clear that numbers are important enough to God that there’s even a biblical book named after them. And they’re important enough to Jesus and the apostles that they knew there were 12 apostles, 70 sent forth to preach, 4,000 fed, 5,000 more fed, 120 in the first Church meeting and 3,000 men baptized after the first public altar call. Oh, and just in case there’s any question about that was then … there are 144,000 marked and sealed saints in the Revelation.

Numbers count. Not because the size of the church is important. Jesus said that he shows up whenever two or three are gathered together (oh wait, those are numbers too). But numbers are important because each one of those numbers is a person who desperately needs the living God.

So, numbers are important. The question is which numbers? Well, IMHO the most important number of all is the number of the unchurched (define “unchurched” however you’d like - they’re all important). In most communities that number is about 83 percent of the population (if you thought the figures were more like 60 percent, make sure you take a gander at Olson’s The American Church in Crisis). So, if you live in a community with 100,000, as I do, then figure there are about 83,000 people outside the church. Now that’s an important number.

But let’s talk about numbers of the church. How can we faithfully and honestly measure growth or decline? What should we be measuring? I attend a church regularly that does a large number of baptisms and it’s membership rolls are swelling … but it hasn’t actually seen any growth in worship for almost a decade. They’re growing, but are they? And then I’ve worked with a number of churches that are quite large and have a growing worship attendance, but when the leadership has significant conversations with the attendees, they discover that the worshippers aren’t growing spiritually. So what can we measure?

Well there are any number of measurements that we could take, but there are seven key indicators that are the most helpful in measuring the growth or decline of a church. These indicators include (1) Average Worship Attendance; (2) Adult Baptisms (3) Small Group/Faith Development Participation; (4) Per Capita Giving; (5) Mission Involvement; (6) Personal Discipleship Practices; and (7) Reputation (I’m indebted to the Rev. Dr. Kris Tenny-Brittian of middle judicatory fame for quantifying this last measurement).

If there’s interest, we can talk about these more fully later, but let me conclude this post with a brief description of each of the Seven Key Indicators of Growth.

• Average Worship Attendance: How many people show up for worship services. Count ‘em all or just count adults - just be consistent.
• Adult Baptisms: Yes, officially any baptism counts, but adult baptisms measure conversion growth … or how many of that 83 percent you’re actually reaching. Biological growth is important, but as church leaders we don’t have much control over this one.
• Small Group/Faith Development Participation: How many adults regularly attend a small group or faith development group. Taking one course in Christianity doesn’t indicate mastery of the subject. The key is ongoing participation and attendance.
• Per Capita Giving: To find this number, divide your offering plate receipts by the average worship attendance. There’s an old saying that the last part of a person to be converted is their checkbook. If this number is increasing, that’s a good thing.
• Mission Involvement: How many in the congregation are involved in some hands-on mission work outside the church. It doesn’t matter if that involvement is with Habitat for Humanity or the local food bank. The question is … is the average person attending your church getting more involved in mission because of their faith or not.
• Personal Discipleship Practices: This measures whether the congregants are engaging in developing their personal spiritual practices such as Bible reading, dedicated prayer time, faith sharing, faith encouragement, and so on.
• Reputation: What is your church’s reputation in the community? The only way to find out is to ask - if you guess, you’ll be wrong. Most churches might be surprised to discover that if they suddenly closed and locked their doors, almost nobody in the community would even notice. Is your church’s reputation getting better or worse?

Well, that’s the seven measurements of a growing, plateaued, or declining church. Any one of those indicators doesn’t really tell you much … but taken in specific combinations, it will tell you plenty.

I’m in the midst of a fantastic conversation with a pastor of the Reformed persuasion and the topic of targeting worship for particular demographics, micro-cultures, etc. came up. He suggested that some consider targeting to be less than okay and that he “resists” the target terminology.

That’s not an uncommon notion in the church today. When I suggest that a worship service become more focused in its approach to reach a particular segment of the community, or when an additional worship is warranted and I recommend a missionally focused service, there’s regularly some pushback. There are a number of ways church leaders have expressed why they think targeting is wrong, but ultimately it comes down to the fear that targeting is exclusionary.

I get that. I really do. In fact, I get that all the time. But the fact is, I’ve yet to attend a worship service that wasn’t targeted. Oh sure, some are more broadly targeted than others, but every worship service I’ve ever attended has, in fact, been exclusionary.

Take for example a “traditional” worship service. By traditional I mean that hymns are sung from hymn books; traditional instruments (or no instruments) are used; there may be responsive readings; traditional language is used such as doxology, invocation, and benediction; and prayers are often written rather than extemporaneous. Of course there are alternative practices that could be listed, but you probably get the idea. These traditions, as wonderful as they may be, presume a congregation that is both familiar and comfortable with them, in other words, a “churched” audience that has significant history of being churched. When a thirty-something family with no church memory shows up in a church like that, it’s not unlike dropping into your local Greek Orthodox church or a Mosque and then trying to figure out what’s going on, what’s being said, and then wondering how to worship in that setting. Everything would be foreign to us and the chances of us experiencing the wonder of worship in that setting would be slim.

But at least our traditional service is presented in the mainstream culture … the average person could understand it, at least. That’s not necessarily so. Traditional services often use words, traditions, and rituals that make no sense at all to the typical unchurched person who almost certainly hasn’t memorized the Lord’s Prayer and doesn’t even know enough to ask “Sins, debts, or tresspasses?” Today’s “mainstream culture” is media and image driven. That’s how people learn today, but the traditional worship is print and auditory driven. Today’s music (actually for at least the last 50 years) is beat driven. Traditional hymns are lyric driven. The differences can go on and on.

The point isn’t that traditional worship is outdated and ought to be ended. By no means. There is an important place for traditional worship and when a congregation is filled with those who appreciate and love traditional worship (not always just seniors), a lot of energy should go into producing an excellent traditional service. But let’s not fool ourselves: Traditional Worship Is Targeted.

What about a “blended” service? There are the exceptions (and almost every pastor who’s wedded to traditional churches think their congregation is one of them), but in the vast majority of cases, a blended service tries to please everyone and ends up pleasing no one. Regardless of the micro-culture that attends a blended worship service, virtually everyone is going to have to compromise their own proclivities to experience worship. Those who live and die by the organ are going to despise the guitar and keyboard. Those who value the freedom of expressive worship will resent the explicit order of service. Etc. Blended services try to target everyone but ultimately discovers there is no “everyone.”

Let’s be honest here. The Bible is exclusionary in its inclusivity. Even Jesus said that he’d come for the Israelite … but then he made sure that there were provisions made to reach each one. No single congregation can reach everyone, and they weren’t called to. The “Church” (capital C) is called to reach everyone, but we have to realistically share the load with one another. Targeted worship simple recognizes the reality that not everyone is going to relate to the style, methods, music, language, etc. of a particular worship service. As Paul said, therefore, we must become all things to all people that by some means we might reach some. That may mean we keep our traditional worship service - maybe even make it more traditional - and start something “new” that missionally targets a different micro-culture.

I had a GREAT conversation with the pastor of one of the churches I mentioned in my post Churches That Don’t Want to Grow. It probably won’t take you long to guess which of the pastors contacted me, since only one even had any way to know that I was there!

So, this pastor emails me and invites me to lunch (he hadn’t read the blog entry yet) and we had an excellent conversation. There’s a lot to admire in this young pastor who has planted this church. He’s young (did I say that already?), he’s clearly an entrepreneur, and he’s already wise before his years. The conversation came around to the church’s follow up practices and I shared my experience and what we’ve learned over the years with both research and consultations with over 1000 churches (and yes, some of those were even with young congregations). I wasn’t surprised at his response. It’s not verbatim, but here’s the gist. “We don’t do the visitation follow-up to their homes. We have a younger crowd (they do … mostly twenty and thirty somethings) and we don’t want them to get the impression that we’re a boomer mega church.”

The rest of the conversation was excellent, lively, and I’m impressed overall with this pastor. On my way home - I actually walked because the pre-autumn day here is beautiful today - and I mulled over his words. I was weighing them up thinking, “Well, maybe he’s right” when a couple of things struck me like the proverbial ton of bricks.

First, I’ve been to a LOT of mega churches and have discovered that, in general, their follow-up is just about as bad as most smaller churches. They don’t seem to want return visitors coming to their churches either. They may have been good at it once upon a time (that may be one of the ways they grew to be a mega church), but somewhere along the line, they either got cocky and let their follow up system lapse because they were getting plenty of return visitors (that’s what happens when you have the best show in town … even if the best show is also the most faithful presentation of the Gospel), or they got so big that they didn’t invest in or design a continuing follow up system. Certainly, of the mega churches in Columbia, MO that I’ve been to, and there are a couple and I’ve been to all of them I believe, none appear to be doing effective follow up, so in that regard it’s not likely any of this young pastor’s visitors will be confusing his church with a mega church.

But for me, here’s the clincher. Twenty and Thirty somethings are, in general, two generations from the church. They have little, if any, church background. Sure, there are always a few, but most … nope. And even for those that have, they almost certainly have no idea about mega church (or any other church) follow up practices and programs. It’s only us clergy and church leaders who have been a part of the church for awhile who even know that churches are supposed to be following up.And it’s only us who are steeped in church research who know that the boomer churches practiced front-door follow-up once upon a time.

So, it’s a bit of a distraction to say, “Well, our congregation is so young, we don’t want them to think we’re ____.” These visitors have no church experience … so let’s get real and at least go through the motions that perhaps we’re interested that they visited us. And who knows, when the pastor is standing at the front door of a first-time visitor’s home on Sunday afternoon, ready to hand them a church-branded coffee mug filled with goodies and church literature, s/he might have an opportunity to do more than just say “Glad you were with us.” Someone out there might actually have a question about the service or about a small group or about the children’s programming or ??? that the pastor could answer. And if the pastor’s taking follow up to the next level, and if the first-time visitor shows a modicum of interest, the pastor can always whip out their Blackberry right there on the spot and schedule a lunch or coffee appointment for later on in the week.

Okay, over the years I’ve visited a LOT of churches. Lots of them. And I can’t help it, but when I visit, my consultant hat is always part of my couture. Normally this doesn’t cause me a lot of consternation … sadly, my expectations for most churches is pretty low. My hopes are high, but I’ve been in way too many churches that are more like the Rotary than the body of Jesus Christ in motion.

So I guess I shouldn’t really be surprised that the last four churches I’ve visited seemed apathetic about growing. Oh, they all made some noise about welcoming visitors - “Especially first time visitors” - but their actions, or inactions spoke way more loudly than their words.

I’m just going to mention my last two church visits as examples. Last week I attended a new church start. It was my first visit to the congregation. They’ve been doing public worship for about a year and last week they “relocated” to a theater where they could seat almost 1200 people. There were less than 200 there for the opening worship service, which was a significant increase for them according to the pastor. So far so good.

The worship was fine. They didn’t make the guests stand up or in any way identify themselves. They did the innocuous “Shake hands with those near you” moment and I got to meet another first time guest. The music was authentic and the worship leaders worshipped first and led second. All good stuff.

But when it came to getting guest and member information … well, that was pretty ineffective. There were guest registration cards and pens on every third theater seat. They invited any first-time guests to fill it out and “give it to the pastor or his assistant [hand waved to identify the assistant] when you leave.” The church didn’t “pass” the offering plates so I could drop the completed card into it. Instead, they used an offering basket up front where you could drop your offerings in when you took communion. But we were specifically instructed to give the cards to the pastor or the assistant.

Not the best way to get contact information, but not the best. But, like the compliant kind of guy I am, I saw the assistant on my way out and gave him the card. It’s now one week later … I didn’t return this week … and as far as I can tell the ONLY thing they’ve done with the card is sent me one email newsletter and a card with the pastor’s signature and note about being glad I was there.

No contact with the pastor or anyone else. No phone call. Frankly, no meaningful follow-up.

How many times do we have to say this? Church growth gurus have been saying it for almost two decades … if you want visitors to become returning guests, there needs to be an in-person visit by the church within TWENTY-FOUR HOURS. And currently, the up front pastor needs to be the one doing the visit. The odds of a visitor returning if your pastor isn’t doing this within twenty-four hours drops significantly. And this is a church plant where the pastor has to be the number one net-caster.

The church I visited today made a mistake that is even worse that the one above. Way worse.

They didn’t get my contact information at all. In this case, the church is well established. In fact, they hope to go multi-site within the next year. The worship was fine. They didn’t identify me as visitor in front of everyone. The music was quite good, but the worship leaders were leading first and worshipping second. I didn’t leave marvelling at the incredible spiritual level of the congregation. Common mistake - not a good one, but pretty common. Did I mention I don’t really have high expectations when I visit churches?

Anyway, back to their big mistake. During the shake hands with your neighbor time, the pastor said … he actually said this … “If you’re a first time visitor, if you’ll look around you’ll see some black registration books and pads in the pews. If you’d go get one and fill it out ….”

You’ve got to be kidding me! First, we’ve been preaching that pew registration pads are the very worst for gathering contact information from guests … and frankly, from everyone else. But if you’re going to waste your time using them, at least use them. Don’t ask the visitor go hunt one down. In fact, there wasn’t a registration pad in my pew and frankly, I don’t really want the whole world to know “Hey, there’s a first time visitor - let’s go mob him and tell him how friendly we are,” so I wasn’t going to crawl over my row of chairs to get the one that I could see.

So they can’t even blow it when it comes to follow-up because they have no way of following up. In other words, they’re not interested in growing.

Well, that’s not true. I suppose both churches want to grow, but like the duck, the dog, the cow, and all the rest in the Henny Penny story, no one wants to do any of the hard work it takes to make disciples of Jesus Christ.

So, just for the record … how is your church effectively getting the names and contact information of your visitors, guests, and members? And once you have that information, what are you doing with it? If you have great ideas, we’d love to know.

(back) Becky, Toni, Shannon (front) James (Britt), Katrina

We’re celebrating T-B Day today, although the real date is August 21. T-B Day is the anniversary of the day the adoption for my three youngest children - Katrina, Shannon, and James (AKA Britt) - became final. It’s a special day in our lives and we always try to have a grand time. We’re thinking picnic on the Missouri River for the celebration.

Adoption is one of those important concepts in the church too. Sure, there’s the whole theologic part that says when we become disciples of Jesus then we’re adopted as Children of God (see John 1 if you somehow were wrongly taught that “everyone is a child of God”). Adoption is equally important when it comes to how guests in our churches become part of the tribe. For instance, after a small group has been meeting for over 6 weeks, and in as few as 4, it becomes a “closed” group. That means those members of the group, no matter how well intentioned, have created enough history together in terms of stories shared and events witnessed that it’s difficult, if not impossible, for a guest to “break in” to the circle. Unless … the group as a whole decides to adopt the guest. Then, with adamant intentionality, they recreate themselves as a new group. This re-creation can be facilitated by each member sharing their personal life story within a spiritual framework (such as, their faith story that culminates in how they came to be a disciple of Jesus, etc.).

In a family sized church, i.e., churches typically between 0-50ish, the only way a guest becomes a family member is for an intentional church-wide attempt to adopt them. If only a handful of people engage in the adoption, the guest is unlikely to become part of the family and will drift away from the church. This, by the way, is why so FEW family sized churches ever jump past their size-ceiling. It’s work to adopt someone … whether it’s three young children or a family of guests.

So, if you want to grow your “family,” I heartily recommend adoption. Whether it’s my three youngest awesome kids (okay, the youngest is 22 now), or a guest in your small group, or a new family is your church … adoption is the answer to many of life’s and church’s little questions.

A couple posts back, I wrote a piece on the PS2 UTube video on training fleas and related it to the church. I spend most of my church consulting hours working with churches that have been banging their heads on an imaginary lid that has kept them stuck at some level. I was working with a church recently that had been unable to break the 200 in worship … for over five years. Another recent church had been stuck at 300 for over a decade. Each one stuck like a flea in a jar: “Leap … boink.”

If your congregation is “stuck” at some level, whether it’s at the 50, 100, 200, or even 350 level … the vast majority of you can jump just a little bit higher … you can break through the imaginary lid that’s keeping your back … by making one shift.

Change your music.

Sounds simplistic, but the “science” and experience behind that statement is virtually indiputable (okay, everthing is disputable, but this axiom has a proven track record). If you want to bump your church to the next level, you’re going to have to get honest with your music.

It all starts with the answer to the question “Who are you hoping to reach.” If your congregation is serious about reaching 70 year-olds, then you’ll want to keep on using the dueling organ and piano and singing Reformation-era hymns. But if you’re trying to reach younger families (and who isn’t these days … they’re the most highly sought-after demographic by the church today), then singing O Worship the King with a pipe organ probably isn’t going to inspire them to come back next week. In fact, if you’re going to reach out to young families today, Come, Now Is the Time to Worship is pretty old school. That’s so … Baby Boomer (which is a fine group to try and attract, but you’ll not be growing your youth group with those grandparents … and Baby Boomers are the fastest growing grandparent demographic today).

What music should you be doing? Here’s a hint. If you are serious about reaching the unchurched for Jesus Christ, then turn off K-Love or XM-32 The Message or whatever Christian radio station you’re listening to and flip through the stations. Are most of them Classic Rock? Pop? Hip Hop? Country Western? Urban R&B? Oldies? Gettotek? Crunk? That wil give you your first indication. If you have seven stations playing styles of hip hop, one classic station, one oldies, three C&W, and Jack FM, then you’ve learned something. You’ve learned that the marketers in your listening area, who have invested many thousands of dollars in demographic research, have discovered that there are a lot of younger folk in your community … a lot, if they’ve got seven hip-hop stations going. Once you’ve got an idea of the general listening genre, call a radio rep from each of those stations and find out who charges the most for a 30 second spot on Friday at 5 (a peak drive time). When you know what station is the most pricey, you’ve just discovered the preferred music style by the largest audience in your community. If you don’t know who’s listening to that music, you can call the station’s advertising rep who will be happy to sit down with you and share everything they know about that audience.

Knowing the music style, though, doesn’t mean it’s going to be a walk in the park. If you’re going to reach a different demographic than the majority of those currently occupying your sanctuary seating, then you’ll not only have to change your music style, you’ll have to do it very well. How frustrated must be the churches that added a guitar and a keyboard to their service and then mistakenly thought that they’d grow their worship service. For music to be attractional, it’s got to be excellent. It has to be done right … and that may mean you have to recruit or even hire musicians and vocalists who know what they’re doing.

Oh, and then there’s this last little tidbit. If you suddenly change your traditional worship service style to … well, anything besides traditional … you may well have a war on your hands. Better by far to add options rather than removing the traditional option. So, go ahead and bite the bullet. Start a new service … but if you’re planning on reaching the under 30s, probably the 8:30 Sunday Morning hour isn’t going to be an attractive alternative. Launch the new service no earlier than 10 AM … and 10:45 is better.

New Music + New Service = New People. New People = leaping past the “Boink” point.

BTW, Tom Bandy and I just did a Radio Show (available as a Podcast) on Worship Wars that covers this topic in depth. Give it a listen here!