As we continue through the book of Nehemiah, one thing is clear: Nehemiah is an
amazing leader. He simply GETS PEOPLE. He understands them and knows how to deal
with them. As we noted this past Sunday, the thing that Nehemiah did so well was to
recognize the importance of, and differentiation between a) visionary thinking (the WHAT we are
trying to accomplish), b) strategic planning (the HOW we will seek to accomplish it), and c) the
tactical day-to-day (where the rubber meets the road and things get done.
An experience of mine illustrates these points really well….
A number of years ago, my friend Rick Hughes and I were leading a workshop for a
church leadership team. This particular church had gone through quite a bit in recent years. A
thriving church 15—20 years prior, their rate of growth had slowed significantly over the past
few years. They had had numerous changes in senior pastoral leadership. A fire had significantly
damaged the church facilities. They were meeting together with another church in town until
repairs on their facilities were completed.
As I moved through the presentation on organizational planning, we discussed at length the
attributes of the innovative congregation, drawing out the contrast to the bureaucratic
congregation. It became quite apparent that the folks in the room were coming from quite
different perspectives in the ways they thought about how church should be done. This looked
and sounded like a fragmented leadership team. They were NOT on the same page.
For example, some of the folks felt their church had gotten stale by not doing anything
new. Others felt that the church needed to stick closer to the traditional ways of doing things that
had helped the church be so influential years ago. Some felt that the movement toward a more
blended style of worship would lead to a ‘watering down’ of the message of the Gospel. Some
felt that worship style change was needed for the church to reach the changing demographic in its
surrounding neighborhood. Needless to say, differing opinions abounded in the room!
Despite what seemed like a disjointedness among the folks in the room, I had a gut
feeling that the church was still one with great resources and significant potential for rekindling much of the passion and energy that had previously driven it to great heights.
Before the session, I understood that this group in attendance was intended to be a
visionary planning team. Knowing that churches have differing definitions of terms relating to
planning, I was a bit skeptical of what the church was really trying to get out of the session.
We had gone through all of the material and were doing Q&A. By this time I had begun to guess
how each of the team members’ perspectives would slot into each of the dimensions of planning
– The WHAT folks, the HOW folks and the Do’ers. After getting a handle in my mind on which
ones were which, I asked Steve, the leader of the group, “How was it determined that this group
of people would be the ones here this weekend as the visionary planning team?” He replied, as if
he knew where I was going, “These were the ones who sent their cards back in.”
Our understanding was that the church was to go through a visionary planning process
and that the folks in this room with us would constitute the group that would lead the church
through the process. But this group was selected not by the way they saw things in terms of
vision, strategy, and tactics. Rather it was more like a lottery approach. The church had sent out
invitations to a multitude of its members. These 15 or so had responded. They were great people,
highly committed to their church and to Jesus Christ. But while I had pegged a couple of them as
potentially visionary thinkers, they certainly weren’t a visionary planning group.
This situation illustrates an approach to planning that is common to many churches. With this
‘open invitation’ approach, churches try to involve as many people as possible in the planning
process, often for the purposes of engaging many opinions and also for the purpose of driving
ownership. The idea is that the more participants, the better the planning process.
A rationale for this open invitation approach is the desire just to get enough people to
participate to justify undergoing a planning process. The idea here is to maximize the pool of
invitees so that out of that pool will come enough who will be able to participate. Apparently,
Steve’s church had taken this approach. A Nehemiah lesson would have helped Steve target and
appropriately deploy the visionaries, strategists, and do’ers.
One of the largest challenges in organizations – particularly churches – is the issue of
getting the right people involved at the right level in the right job. From Nehemiah’s story, we see
that he did it -time and again – and did it well.
As you are looking out for the next Kingdom Advancement opportunity that God has for
you, think and pray about who you will engage with you, and how you will engage them!
Recent Comments