Part Five of A Radical, Modest Proposal for Younger Church Leaders
There are two kinds of ministry results. One is the kind that takes place within our sphere of authority. We like these results, because they can be easily measured and we can take credit for them in presentations and reports. The other is the kind that we initiate and then leave in the hands of God and others. Such results are nearly impossible to measure, much less take credit for.
The past several decades have brought the CEO model of leadership to the church. In this top-down leadership model, the success of pastors is evaluated by measurable statistics such as the number of staff they manage, the number of ministries they oversee, the number of people they actively minister to, and the number of people who attend their classes or services. This model of leadership generally seeks to retain control of ministry, keeping it within the sphere of the pastor’s authority, even if that means (for example) pastoring by proxy through the use of technology. The goal is to centralize and consolidate, because that which is scattered and released can’t be controlled or measured.
Now, I’m not suggesting that many pastors actually think in terms of credit, power, and control. I’m sure that most have the best intentions. The problem is that we have uncritically adopted a business leadership approach that is built on the assumption that bigger is better, that the goal is to “own” more of the market. And while size might give the appearance of strength, the question could be asked whether the whole body is growing stronger or mostly those at the “top.”
The New Testament gives us two significant leadership examples—Jesus and Paul. Neither of these great leaders, to my knowledge, showed interest in measuring their results, building tall organizational structures, or consolidating power to themselves. Instead, they had what might be called a discipleship model of leadership. They gathered disciples, equipped them, and then released and empowered them to do ministry in their own right. They did not create layer upon layer of hierarchy, or a military-like chain of command. In contrast to such vertical organizational structures, they grew the church low, so that it was flexible, intelligent, and able to quickly multiply.
And multiply it did.
I fear that the modern church has been too concerned with measurable results to the point that we try to keep everything under one roof rather than truly equipping and empowering those we lead. If the church is to face less agreeable times in the days ahead, and I believe it might, we have to stop worrying about who reaps the harvest or gets credit for the results. We have to learn to grow low, with minimal, flexible, intelligent, and easily replicable organizational structures.
Continue the series: Grow Long
Originally posted Tuesday, 20 Mar 2012