How’s It Going? Part 5: Pitfalls

Man stepping in gum on the street If you are gung-ho and ready to go, I want to help you avoid some landmines. Below are two common pitfalls. Avoiding them will save you much frustration.

Unintended side-effects

One of the major problems with setting anything up are the unintended side-effects that sneak up on us. That is just as true when considering how and what you measure. Why? Because people can’t help but play to the numbers. So, make sure your numbers have balances in place, and explain the rationale of each metric to those engaging with it.

For example, if we decide that maturity is best developed through one-on-one discipleship meetings, we may set the goal of getting all our people into meetings like this. We assign this to our ministry staff team, and decide that the way we will measure their performance in this area is by asking, “How many one-on-one discipleship meetings have you had in the last month?” One possible side-effect of this is that the team will drastically lower the quality of their meetings so they can churn out more meetings. And according to your scorecard, they’re doing great.

Measuring the wrong point of the process

Another problem is measuring at the wrong point. It is possible to assess an outcome when you are really wanting to figure out the impact of your actions on factors which influence the outcome. So, make sure you identify which stage of a multi-stage process you are wanting to measure.

For example, let’s say giving is currently down in your local church and your leaders have decided that, if the situation hasn’t changed by a given date, specified actions will have to be taken. They’ve appointed someone to attempt to get things back on track by then. When that person jumps in, they take a shotgun approach to seeing the needle lift on the total income graph – perhaps even throwing in a few unethical approaches for good measure. Now, if they are successful (or unsuccessful), how do you critique what they did and if they created the kind of change you wanted? Because of what we failed to measure – whatever impacts the end result [1] – we have to assume they did everything right (or wrong).

What other pitfalls have you noticed?

Read part 6 (on building your own) here.

——-

[1] Perhaps the percentage of members who are giving and the percentage of new members who have received teaching about finances. Knowing the answers to those questions will give you far more insightful and actionable information than if you limited your attention to the bottom line.

How’s It Going? Part 4: A common objection

Confused dolls wondering who is winning and who is losingI want to address a common objection at this point.

One of the most thrown around lines in management blogs is “What gets measured gets managed”. This is held alongside “Measure what matters”. The idea is that we work to impact the numbers we are held accountable for, and so good leaders ensure people’s attention is focused on the right numbers. Some circles within the church respond to this by saying that the things that matter for us can’t be measured, because they’re invisible, bringing everything I’ve said to naught. How can you assign a number to an increase in love, or servant heartedness, for example?

Don’t miss the wood for the trees

The first thing to say in response to this is that, just because some things can’t be measured, doesn’t mean there isn’t a lot within the church that can have a number assigned to it. Many of these aspects are important, and can be measured with basic metrics.

Know your role and focus on that

The second thing to say is that it is sometimes better to measure the inputs we are responsible for, rather than the results God is responsible for. Since love is something God is responsible for producing in Christians, something we have no direct influence on, we are better off measuring whether we are providing an adequate context for growth in that area. That would be the difference between saying, “We want our members to be loving” and “We want our members to have worked through teaching about love, to be part of a smaller fellowship group, to have a close friend in the church, etc”. This approach sometimes turns that which doesn’t seem measurable around.

Be realistic and creative

Lastly, there are times that what we are aiming at is our responsibility, but it is still subjective. For example, we could say we want our members to serve according to their gifts. Then we take the following approach: we ask a sample set of people to score a statement on a spectrum; something like, “My ministry involvement matches my gifts”, or “I see many people at our church whose ministry involvement doesn’t match their gifts”. That will give us an aggregate rating across a spectrum. Asking that same question, in the same way, over a longer period provides a temperature gauge. As soon as the temperature changes (when it deflects from the historical norm), we are moving closer to or further from our goal.

So, how can you put a number to the intangibles? Well, a few ways. Can you think of anything in church life my suggestions above wouldn’t cover?

Read part 5 (dealing with pitfalls) here.

How’s it going? Part 3: Why are external measures important?

Frustrated man in front of whiteboardThose of you who have made it this far may be having two responses: firstly, this sounds like a lot of work and, secondly, I’m not sure it’s worth the effort.

The reality is that most ministers serve in churches where they have intimate knowledge of almost everything that goes on in the church, from fire hydrant services to pastoral situations. Most information goes through them, and they are the clearing house for most decisions. Because of this, when they make decisions they are able to intuitively weigh more factors than even the most advanced system of analysis. I imagine it is from them that this hesitancy will come.

So, why introduce a system that slows you down? I want to suggest three reasons.

Firstly, you’re already doing it. Whether you like it or not, metrics pervade your world. When you decided where to work, what career to pursue, or even who to marry, you used metrics to make the decision. When you choose to buy an ice cream on the beach, or join a gym after your ice cream binge, you used metrics. When you evaluate your latest sermon, or consider how well your mid-week group is doing, metrics inform and shape that evaluation. God has made us as rational creatures, and metrics are just the pieces of info we pull on as we go about rationalising towards an end. So, I’m not asking you to do something you aren’t in some way already doing.

Secondly, I’m not saying you need to develop an advanced and cumbersome feedback system of endless spreadsheets and piles of paperwork. I’m suggesting you get clear on where you are heading and how you will know if your plans to get there are succeeding or failing. Now, that can happen in your mind. However, from those I’ve listened to and read, putting it in writing forces you to be clear and decisive in a way that we usually aren’t in our heads. Scheduling time to frequently review what we’ve written down, and evaluate how things are going, has the added benefit of providing a ballast when the waves of busyness come our way. Temporarily slowing down in this way can prevent the additional effort required when we wake up one day and realise we’ve drifted off course. It can also increase our effectiveness by helping us more clearly see the things that we need to say “no” to.

Finally, the New Testament envisages team leadership in the form of a plurality of elders. These elders are the guardians of God’s flock, and God will hold the group responsible for where the flock wanders. It is wise to listen closely to the senior minister (or rector, pastor, bishop), based on their insights into the situation on the ground, but it is unwise for the rest of this group to abdicate their role in being a guardian of God’s people by deferring completely to them. This is especially true of the church’s future. The senior minister will be wise to keep in step with the rest of the team by having a clearly articulated and agreed upon picture of where the church is heading – and a scoreboard, so it is clear how things are going.

I hope these three reasons go some way to convincing you that clear vision and regular review will assist you in being a more effective and faithful minister for our Lord Jesus.

Read part 4 (dealing with a common objection) here.

How’s It Going? Part 2: We need a scoreboard

Dart in the bullseyeI’m of the opinion that improving in how we evaluate our ministries can help us be better stewards of the resources God has given us, helping us better meet His intended ends. To do that, we need to set up a scoreboard and figure out the score.

Please don’t misunderstand me. I don’t believe we have the freedom to adjust God’s mission, or what maturity and faithfulness mean. These are fixed by the apostolic witness. But we do need to know how we’re doing in relation to His standards. And we do need to do the hard work of figuring out how we will go about meeting, and preparing others to meet, those standards. We also need to figure out whether our various methods and tactics are bringing us closer to, or leading us further away from, God’s goals for His church. To pull that off, we need to constantly be evaluating. Unless we want to calcify, there must be some form of feedback loop that keeps us reforming how we do things on the ground.

What I’m suggesting is that we can do better than evaluating ministry by sitting around a table with our ministry heads, asking each in turn, “How’s your ministry going?” and then being content with them either pointing to the attendance stats, or giving a subjective rating.

What that requires of us is to

  • clarify what our ideal situation is,
  • figure out what structure best supports that situation,
  • determine the best indicators of whether we are moving towards or away from that desired future state, and
  • choose milestones at which you need to take any actions.

We can then assess where we stand in relation to these indicators, which can be done at a macro level (looking at the whole church) or the micro level (zooming in on one aspect of church life), and adjust our tactics based on that feedback.

Establishing our ideal situation and structures is no small task. They will be informed by the Bible, our context, our moment in time, our tradition, and the collective desires of those whom God has gathered in your local church. Getting clear here is incredibly important, but for another day. We’re going to focus in on indicators.

The indicators (or metrics) are feedback devices that act as co-pilots, guiding us towards our destination. So, the more vivid that destination is, and the more appropriate the indicators, the better placed our group of local church leaders/guardians is to be setting the agenda and faithfully shepherding.

My bet is most of us have some form of what we’d love to see already buried in our heads. And the reality is that, if you do, that is what you are drawing on in your responses to whatever feedback you get. My question to you is this: how confident are you that those you serve alongside share the same mental picture of the future?

Read part 3 (on why external measures are important) here.

How’s It Going? Part 1: An alternative to beating up on numbers

Close of man reviewing a reportSoon after I finished studying at theological college, I was hit with some bad news: my father had fallen terminally ill. He’d invested a lot in me so, when he approached me to help with a succession plan for his company, I was only too willing to help. I got on board and got stuck in. I was unaware of it at the time, but rubbing my theological training up against a business environment flagged a big gap in my formal training: leadership and management. So, when I saw Graham touching on ministry evaluation I got excited.

I’ve noticed the trend Graham points to, of people offering attendance stats when asked about the ministries they’re involved in, but I wanted to offer a different perspective on why they do that. I’m of the opinion that people do this because they don’t have better tools to evaluate their ministries. Don’t get me wrong, I think most people who read this will have a framework for what makes a ministry distinctly Christian, but I haven’t seen many work that out into something that can answer the question, “How’s it going?” So, we default to the situation Graham describes.

We’re ill-equipped here because our formal training wasn’t trying to prepare us to analyse the complex organism that is the local church. A lot of church leadership requires management skills, and management skills aren’t what a theological college is trying to instil. That’s not to say we’re ignorant of the deficiency – quite the contrary! I think this partly explains why we get so excited when someone like Andrew Heard comes along: he offers a deployable package, in the 5Ms, that holds together theological and practical awareness. Even those who want to argue with him usually do so over whether his theological focus is unbalanced or errant, not whether his approach to managing God’s household is useful or correct.

So, over the next few posts, I want to share a few thoughts on ministry evaluation. What do you think would be worth touching on?

Read part 2 (on the need for a scoreboard) here.

Chris Pratt: The Church’s Responsibility to the Next Generation

Generation AwardAppearing repeatedly on my social media feeds this week was Chris Pratt’s speech, after accepting the MTV Generation Award. What has garnered a lot of attention was his ninth rule for living: if we are willing to accept that we are imperfect then we can experience grace. “Grace is a gift, and like the freedom we enjoy in this country that grace was paid for with someone else’s blood. Do not forget it. Don’t take it for granted.” Putting aside the fact that Pratt accomplished in 15 seconds what Bishop Michael Curry failed to do in 15 minutes at the Royal Wedding, I want to pick up Pratt’s understanding of this particular award and the expectation tied to it. Pratt said, “This being the Generation Award I’m going to cut to the chase and I’m going to speak to you, the next generation. I accept the responsibility as your elder.”

Having recently had our first child, the reality of being responsible for the next generation has become both unavoidable and uncomfortable. I confess it is very likely an indication of my own selfishness that no meaningful thought on this task preceded the arrival of my son, which is to sideline the New Testament model that makes older and more mature Christians responsible for the younger. Pratt seems to understand this call in an age when many Christians only invest in their peers and the nuclear family. In 12 Ways Your Phone is Changing You, Tony Reinke argues that one of the imperative responsibilities we have for future generations is the discerning use of pervasive technology. If we fail in this area those follow us will suffer the consequences. But I want to highlight another responsibility we have towards the next generation, specifically in the church.

God's WordIn the Old Testament book of Amos one of the themes that emerges is Israel’s rejection of God’s truth. As God’s covenant people Israel were entrusted with God’s law and expected to live in accordance with it (2:4-5). His law should have governed their lives and given shape to their worship. Yahweh also sent prophets but Israel silenced them (2:12; 3:7), hating those who spoke God’s truth (5:10). Appropriating Paul’s words in Romans 1, Israel exchanged God’s truth for a lie, for idols, and in order to live independently of God’s rule. How did this happen? As Amaziah said to the prophet in Amos 7, God’s words were unpleasant and uninspiring. They were burdensome, ‘Come on Amos, your unhealthy fixation on sin and insistence on God’s judgment simply isn’t what Israel want to hear. You need to adapt your message for the people, for the culture and their felt needs.’ But listen to Amos’ reply: The LORD took me from following the flock and said to me, “Go prophesy to my people” (7:15). The popularity of God’s truth does not alter its significance.

What is the outcome of Israel’s rejection of God’s truth? Look at Amos 8:11, “I will send a famine on the land—not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the LORD.” He goes on in 8:12 to describe people desperately searching for a word from God without finding or hearing it. D. A. Carson comments on these verses, “The point is that people who do not devote themselves to the words of God eventually lose them. The loss is catastrophic.”

What does any of this have to do with Chris Pratt or the next generation? In the next verse we are told that by abandoning by the words of God and God allowing that decision spells death for the generation to come, “the lovely virgins and strong men” (8:13). Israel’s rejection of God’s truth, his life-giving word, would lead to spiritual death and exile. Part of this tragedy we often miss is that those who came next would suffer a similar fate. The next generation will experience God’s silence and judgment because the current one had abandoned God’s truth. This should jolt us from our complacency and impress on us the responsibilities we have for the next generation in the church. The church that undervalues God’s gospel, contained in his inspired and true Word, brings death on the generations that will follow. The church that undervalues the Bible is not relevant, they are robbing the next generation of hearing from God.