RESIDENCE IN MINISTRY
God is doing great things through North Alabama’s ordination process. The entire probationary process has been changed. Commissioned probationers are now Residents in Ministry and the probationary process is now called Residence in Ministry (RIM). Mentors are trained coaches. Instead of seeming to be a series of hoops to negotiate, the group process will actually have purpose, meaning and consistency.
Each year of the residency process is now organized around a specific theme chosen for its practical application and usefulness in the professional development of new clergy. The first year of the residency process is built around workshops and seminars focused on ministerial identity. The focus in the second year of residency is ministerial leadership – all those skills pastors wish they had learned in seminary. The focus of the final year of residency is on integration and building a bridge that connects the experience of residency with the life of an ordained pastor.
IMPRESSIVE
North Alabama wants more effective clergy. We want our clergy to be more than just prepared and available for service. We want and need clergy who produce a deep, striking or vivid impression.
An example of pastors who are more effective is the recent urban/rural mission trip organized by two of our younger clergy. The youth of two different races and cultures (i.e. inner-city Birmingham and rural Appalachia) served together in each other’s neighborhoods. They not only did mission but grew in their understanding of “who is my neighbor” as well as made friends with some unlikely people. Go to
(http://www.northalabamaumc.org/news_detail.asp?PKValue=193) to read the full and vivid story.
WHY HERE?
Why in the world would anyone want to come to North Alabama to serve as an ordained minister? Sure you get to serve under Bishop Willimon. But the best reason (sorry Bishop!) is because God is doing great things here!
WHO I AM
If you have either read this far or skipped down to the last part of the blog, then you may wonder to whom Bishop Willimon would be willing to turn over his blog. Well, my name is Amelia Sims and I have been given the wonderful opportunity to be the director of this new RIM program. As an ordained elder, I have been through the process as well as the have authority and experience to make this the best RIM program that will positively impact the effectiveness of ministers, churches and Christians in North Alabama.
God is working in North Alabama. Impressive ministry is happening here. You may be intrigued or want to know more. Maybe you are struggling with a call to ministry. Perhaps you are in the midst of college or seminary and are unsure where God is calling you to serve. You may see your own gifts, graces and strengths as needing a place to thrive and become impressive. If you want to know more about God’s work in the most and least likely places in North Alabama, just drop me an email at asims@northalabamaumc.org.
In Christ, Amelia Sims
Tuesday, July 31, 2007
Great Managers
The Cabinet and I have read a book together. The book is published by the Gallup Organization and is the result of a massive study of middle level managers and how they contribute to effective organizations. Seen from one perspective, District Superintendents are middle level managers. First Break All the Rules is a guidebook for how managers can help their employees be more successful. I thought that you might enjoy seeing my notes on the book, which I distributed to the Cabinet at one of our meetings.
(Marcus Burkingham and Curt Coffman, First, Break All the Rules, Simon and Schuster, 1999, the Gallup Organization.)
Talented and gifted employees need good managers. (Substitute “District Superintendent” for “Manger” in this book. I think it works amazingly well.) How do the world’s greatest managers, find, focus, and keep their most talented employees? The manager is more important than any other factor in building a productive work place. It is better to work for a good manager in a bad company than to work for a bad manager in a good company.
Basic Questions by the employee that reveal the quality of management: Do I know what is expected of me at work? Do I have the materials and equipment I need to do my job right? Do I have the opportunity to do what I do best everyday? In the last seven days have I received recognition and praise for good work? Does my supervisor care about me as a person? Is there someone at work who encourages my further development?
Every manager wants to get a positive response to these questions with every employee.
Great managers honor the unique differences with different individuals. Rather than bemoan those differences, they try to work with them, to try to accentuate their virtues, rather than work against them. People don’t change much. Don’t waste time trying to take out what was put in, rather strengthen what was put in. The manager reaches inside each employee, one employee at a time, and releases that employee’s unique powers. The manger’s role is a catalyst role, the one who speeds up the interaction between various substances in a situation. The manager becomes a catalyst to enable this situation in which an employee finds herself to be a learning and growing situation. Good managers become catalysts in four ways: they select a person, set expectations, motivate the person, and develop the person. These are the manager’s most important responsibilities.
You select a person. This demands clear-headedness. You must know how much of a person can you change. You must know the difference between talent, skills, and knowledge. You must know which one of these can be taught, and which cannot. You must know how to ask the questions that cut through a candidates desire to impress and reveal his or her true talents.
You must set performance expectations. You must balance the need for standardization, with the organization's need for creativity and flair.
You must be able to motivate. The main thing you have to invest is your time. You should spend as much time with your best people as your strugglers.
You must be able to develop the employee. We need to be masters at teaching and growth. You must combine closeness with sobriety of judgment about the person.
These are the four core activities of the catalyst role. If managers get distracted from these main activities, the organization will suffer.
Those of you who know the role of managers (District Superintendents) in United Methodism can see the possible connections with this book. Forgive me for saying, in a book a few years ago, that the United Methodist Church is “over managed and under led.” Leaders tend to be strategic thinkers, they look outward, look at the competition, look beyond today. Managers tend to look inward, toward the performance of the organization, in unleashing each employee’s ability to perform. Managers are absolutely essential. Without managers, the all-important catalyst role will be neglected.
I thought you might enjoy these insights from a management book and that you might join us in our rethinking of the role of the District Superintendent.
William H. Willimon
(Marcus Burkingham and Curt Coffman, First, Break All the Rules, Simon and Schuster, 1999, the Gallup Organization.)
Talented and gifted employees need good managers. (Substitute “District Superintendent” for “Manger” in this book. I think it works amazingly well.) How do the world’s greatest managers, find, focus, and keep their most talented employees? The manager is more important than any other factor in building a productive work place. It is better to work for a good manager in a bad company than to work for a bad manager in a good company.
Basic Questions by the employee that reveal the quality of management: Do I know what is expected of me at work? Do I have the materials and equipment I need to do my job right? Do I have the opportunity to do what I do best everyday? In the last seven days have I received recognition and praise for good work? Does my supervisor care about me as a person? Is there someone at work who encourages my further development?
Every manager wants to get a positive response to these questions with every employee.
Great managers honor the unique differences with different individuals. Rather than bemoan those differences, they try to work with them, to try to accentuate their virtues, rather than work against them. People don’t change much. Don’t waste time trying to take out what was put in, rather strengthen what was put in. The manager reaches inside each employee, one employee at a time, and releases that employee’s unique powers. The manger’s role is a catalyst role, the one who speeds up the interaction between various substances in a situation. The manager becomes a catalyst to enable this situation in which an employee finds herself to be a learning and growing situation. Good managers become catalysts in four ways: they select a person, set expectations, motivate the person, and develop the person. These are the manager’s most important responsibilities.
You select a person. This demands clear-headedness. You must know how much of a person can you change. You must know the difference between talent, skills, and knowledge. You must know which one of these can be taught, and which cannot. You must know how to ask the questions that cut through a candidates desire to impress and reveal his or her true talents.
You must set performance expectations. You must balance the need for standardization, with the organization's need for creativity and flair.
You must be able to motivate. The main thing you have to invest is your time. You should spend as much time with your best people as your strugglers.
You must be able to develop the employee. We need to be masters at teaching and growth. You must combine closeness with sobriety of judgment about the person.
These are the four core activities of the catalyst role. If managers get distracted from these main activities, the organization will suffer.
Those of you who know the role of managers (District Superintendents) in United Methodism can see the possible connections with this book. Forgive me for saying, in a book a few years ago, that the United Methodist Church is “over managed and under led.” Leaders tend to be strategic thinkers, they look outward, look at the competition, look beyond today. Managers tend to look inward, toward the performance of the organization, in unleashing each employee’s ability to perform. Managers are absolutely essential. Without managers, the all-important catalyst role will be neglected.
I thought you might enjoy these insights from a management book and that you might join us in our rethinking of the role of the District Superintendent.
William H. Willimon
Sunday, July 29, 2007
Rules of Transformative Leadership (Continued)
Last week I introduced Tony Robinson’s Rules for Transformative Leadership. A number of you report that Tony’s rules have provided some helpful insight into your own pastoral leadership style. This week I list the final five of Tony’s rules for pastors who would be more than mere managers:
1. Don’t overvalue consensus. Pastors tend to want to bring everyone along with all congregational moves. But intransigent individuals should be given the dignity of not approving of and not participating in every ministry of the church. Not everything needs to be put to a vote. Sometimes we need to ask members who have grave reservations about some course of action to trust those who want to move. Things can be evaluated later. If we wait until everyone is on board, we disempower those who are ready to take risks, and risk takers are usually in short supply in most churches. There may even be rare, difficult times when a pastor must be willing to split a congregation, be willing to let dissident, obdurate members disaffiliate with the congregation. Pastors are called to a ministry of reconciliation and peace making, yes. But we are also called to ministries of transformation, rebirth, and renewal. In order for something to be transformed, its old form must give way to the new, and that can be painful but the pain must be endured, expected, even welcomed, if there is to be new life.
2. Count the yes votes. We sometimes worry too much about those who are not yet ready to move, or may never be ready to move than we worry about those who are bored, frustrated, and disheartened when too little takes too long to happen in the church. I confess that I tend, as a preacher, to hear the voices of the two sermon critics long after I have forgotten the praise of the dozen who like my sermon. Sometimes we need to let the enthusiastic lay leaders go ahead, counting the yes votes. Rarely will a majority support a new ministry from the first, particularly if the new ministry requires risk. One caveat: never launch into a church building program if the vote is 52-48!
3. Create a new working group for a new job. Established structures tend to protect the status quo. Established boards love to say, No. If there is a new ministry to be done, you probably ought to create a new committee, composed of those who feel called to this work, to do the job. Ask the established boards not to stand in the way of new movements within the congregation, promising them an opportunity to help with later evaluation of the initiative.
4. Change by addition, not subtraction. It is easier to get approval to begin a project than to kill an established ministry. Why mobilize the supporters of the established program against you by declaring it dead and ready for burial? Go ahead with new initiatives. If the new program succeeds, people will gradually rally around it. People are more likely to let go of the old if they have something new to embrace.
5. Be persistent. Change, no matter how obviously needed, inevitably provokes resistance. Resistance, particularly where the matter is our devotion to and service of God, can be deep and unrelenting. Constancy is one of the essential virtues for Christian ministry, as we shall underscore in this book's last chapter. Robinson advises, “Don’t give up too soon.” Studies indicate that it takes about five years before a pastor has gained the trust of a congregation to make significant, threatening change. For many women pastors, it seems to take even longer. Count on a couple of more years before you see significant fruit. In a mobile society, where transiency is the norm, pastors must be in for the long haul if they are to be truly transformative leaders. Those of us (United Methodists) who cherish a proud tradition of pastoral itinerancy may need to admit that a long pastorate has become a countercultural witness in a culture where everyone is on the move.
In visits to countless congregations, and in my own pastoral experience, I have come to the rather frightening conclusion that pastors are a decisive element in the vitality and mission of the church. To be sure, as we have said repeatedly, the pastor is not to assume all ministry in the church. The baptized are the chief ministers in the name of Christ. Pastors are to lead through service rather than dominance. The Holy Spirit is the source of all ministry. But having said all that, we still must say that the pastor is decisive. The pastor's mood and attitude sets the tone for the congregation, conveys hope and energy to the people, hurts and heals, binds and releases. Sometimes, as a pastor, I wish it were not so, but it is. What Jesus wants for the church must become incarnate in a pastor or, in my experience, it does not happen.
I recall a distinguished church growth consultant who, in a workshop on congregational development, spent more than an hour listing all of the factors that were relevant to the vitality and growth of a congregation. There must have been more than two score of such factors listed. Then he led us in discussion. The first person to speak was a layperson who asked, "But don't you think the pastor is a key factor in all of this?"
The consultant replied, "Oh, certainly. If the pastor's leadership is lacking, you can discount everything that I have listed on the board. All of these factors contribute to growth. But if the pastor is inadequate, none of the factors that I have listed make any difference."
William H. Willimon
1. Don’t overvalue consensus. Pastors tend to want to bring everyone along with all congregational moves. But intransigent individuals should be given the dignity of not approving of and not participating in every ministry of the church. Not everything needs to be put to a vote. Sometimes we need to ask members who have grave reservations about some course of action to trust those who want to move. Things can be evaluated later. If we wait until everyone is on board, we disempower those who are ready to take risks, and risk takers are usually in short supply in most churches. There may even be rare, difficult times when a pastor must be willing to split a congregation, be willing to let dissident, obdurate members disaffiliate with the congregation. Pastors are called to a ministry of reconciliation and peace making, yes. But we are also called to ministries of transformation, rebirth, and renewal. In order for something to be transformed, its old form must give way to the new, and that can be painful but the pain must be endured, expected, even welcomed, if there is to be new life.
2. Count the yes votes. We sometimes worry too much about those who are not yet ready to move, or may never be ready to move than we worry about those who are bored, frustrated, and disheartened when too little takes too long to happen in the church. I confess that I tend, as a preacher, to hear the voices of the two sermon critics long after I have forgotten the praise of the dozen who like my sermon. Sometimes we need to let the enthusiastic lay leaders go ahead, counting the yes votes. Rarely will a majority support a new ministry from the first, particularly if the new ministry requires risk. One caveat: never launch into a church building program if the vote is 52-48!
3. Create a new working group for a new job. Established structures tend to protect the status quo. Established boards love to say, No. If there is a new ministry to be done, you probably ought to create a new committee, composed of those who feel called to this work, to do the job. Ask the established boards not to stand in the way of new movements within the congregation, promising them an opportunity to help with later evaluation of the initiative.
4. Change by addition, not subtraction. It is easier to get approval to begin a project than to kill an established ministry. Why mobilize the supporters of the established program against you by declaring it dead and ready for burial? Go ahead with new initiatives. If the new program succeeds, people will gradually rally around it. People are more likely to let go of the old if they have something new to embrace.
5. Be persistent. Change, no matter how obviously needed, inevitably provokes resistance. Resistance, particularly where the matter is our devotion to and service of God, can be deep and unrelenting. Constancy is one of the essential virtues for Christian ministry, as we shall underscore in this book's last chapter. Robinson advises, “Don’t give up too soon.” Studies indicate that it takes about five years before a pastor has gained the trust of a congregation to make significant, threatening change. For many women pastors, it seems to take even longer. Count on a couple of more years before you see significant fruit. In a mobile society, where transiency is the norm, pastors must be in for the long haul if they are to be truly transformative leaders. Those of us (United Methodists) who cherish a proud tradition of pastoral itinerancy may need to admit that a long pastorate has become a countercultural witness in a culture where everyone is on the move.
In visits to countless congregations, and in my own pastoral experience, I have come to the rather frightening conclusion that pastors are a decisive element in the vitality and mission of the church. To be sure, as we have said repeatedly, the pastor is not to assume all ministry in the church. The baptized are the chief ministers in the name of Christ. Pastors are to lead through service rather than dominance. The Holy Spirit is the source of all ministry. But having said all that, we still must say that the pastor is decisive. The pastor's mood and attitude sets the tone for the congregation, conveys hope and energy to the people, hurts and heals, binds and releases. Sometimes, as a pastor, I wish it were not so, but it is. What Jesus wants for the church must become incarnate in a pastor or, in my experience, it does not happen.
I recall a distinguished church growth consultant who, in a workshop on congregational development, spent more than an hour listing all of the factors that were relevant to the vitality and growth of a congregation. There must have been more than two score of such factors listed. Then he led us in discussion. The first person to speak was a layperson who asked, "But don't you think the pastor is a key factor in all of this?"
The consultant replied, "Oh, certainly. If the pastor's leadership is lacking, you can discount everything that I have listed on the board. All of these factors contribute to growth. But if the pastor is inadequate, none of the factors that I have listed make any difference."
William H. Willimon
Tuesday, July 17, 2007
Rules of Transformative Leadership
In previous emails I have noted that we pastors must conceive of ourselves as transformers rather than mere managers. Fidelity to Christ means a willingness to change, to be transformed. Pastor Anthony Robinson helpfully lists ten “rules of leadership” that are particularly applicable for pastors who serve congregations where people are resistant to change. [i] They are a good list of working principles for pastors who want to be transformative leaders within the congregation. I’ll list five of Tony’s rules this week and five in next week’s email:
1. Give responsibility back. When a layperson says, “Somebody ought to be doing this,” Robinson says he learned, as a pastor, to say, “That sounds like just the thing God may be calling you to do.” We must, in our pastoral leadership, help the laity reclaim that baptismally bestowed ministry.
2. Expect trouble. Too many pastors see themselves exclusively as peacemakers, reconcilers. Most of us pastors like to be liked, enjoy pleasing people. But conversion is inherently part of the Christian faith. The call for relinquishment of one belief and the embrace of another can produce conflict. People do not give up power easily. Sometimes, the congregation is dependent upon the pastor to ignite needed changes within the congregation. I vividly recall a morning after an unusually stormy board meeting. I sat in my study wondering what went wrong. Had I pushed too soon? Should I have been more patient? Ought I to have been more careful in my advocacy of a controversial position? Then I turned to the work at hand, preparation for next Sunday’s sermon from the Gospel of Mark. As is typical of Mark, the text was a story of conflict. Jesus preached. The congregation reacted in anger and rejection. It was as if a light went on in my brain, as if a voice from the text which asked, “Now what about your situation do you find surprising? Jesus encountered trouble. Are you a better preacher than Jesus?" Trouble comes with the territory when the truth is involved.
3. Value small steps. It is a virtue to have a long range vision, but it is essential for the pastor to realize that one gets there by a series of many small steps. There appears to be something inherent within the nature of the gospel that values small things - the widow’s coin, the pearl of great price, the few seed that fell upon good soil - small things that the world regards of low account. Robinson urges us to remember -- as we have the one-to-one conversation, as we teach the only two children who showed up for Sunday School, or visit the one sick person -- that the Exodus from slavery began with one step toward the Promised Land.
4. Plan. If you do not know where you are going, almost any road will take you there. Laity complain about the wasted time and dissipated energy that result from having no long range vision for the congregation, no means of holding ourselves accountable, no way to know when we have actually accomplished something and ought to celebrate. Planning helps keep a church on course, enables a pastor to prioritize pastoral time and focus energies in a commonly conceived direction.
5. Identify the vital few. Who are those who like to get things done? Who in the congregation can be counted upon to make things happen? You may not be able to rely on the officially elected leaders in order to initiate transformation. Sometimes the traditional leadership structure has too much at stake in preserving the status quo. Don’t tackle too many things at once; stick with the few things that are essential and possible. Give the congregation a few victories to celebrate rather than risk constantly being overwhelmed with many defeats.
Next week I’ll list Tony’s final five rules of transformative pastoral leadership. Let’s each of us measure our ministry by Robinson’s rules and rate our own effectiveness as pastoral leaders.
Willimon H. Willimon
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[i] Anthony B. Robinson, “Lessons in Leadership,” Christian Century, (December 15, 1999), pp. 1230-1231.
1. Give responsibility back. When a layperson says, “Somebody ought to be doing this,” Robinson says he learned, as a pastor, to say, “That sounds like just the thing God may be calling you to do.” We must, in our pastoral leadership, help the laity reclaim that baptismally bestowed ministry.
2. Expect trouble. Too many pastors see themselves exclusively as peacemakers, reconcilers. Most of us pastors like to be liked, enjoy pleasing people. But conversion is inherently part of the Christian faith. The call for relinquishment of one belief and the embrace of another can produce conflict. People do not give up power easily. Sometimes, the congregation is dependent upon the pastor to ignite needed changes within the congregation. I vividly recall a morning after an unusually stormy board meeting. I sat in my study wondering what went wrong. Had I pushed too soon? Should I have been more patient? Ought I to have been more careful in my advocacy of a controversial position? Then I turned to the work at hand, preparation for next Sunday’s sermon from the Gospel of Mark. As is typical of Mark, the text was a story of conflict. Jesus preached. The congregation reacted in anger and rejection. It was as if a light went on in my brain, as if a voice from the text which asked, “Now what about your situation do you find surprising? Jesus encountered trouble. Are you a better preacher than Jesus?" Trouble comes with the territory when the truth is involved.
3. Value small steps. It is a virtue to have a long range vision, but it is essential for the pastor to realize that one gets there by a series of many small steps. There appears to be something inherent within the nature of the gospel that values small things - the widow’s coin, the pearl of great price, the few seed that fell upon good soil - small things that the world regards of low account. Robinson urges us to remember -- as we have the one-to-one conversation, as we teach the only two children who showed up for Sunday School, or visit the one sick person -- that the Exodus from slavery began with one step toward the Promised Land.
4. Plan. If you do not know where you are going, almost any road will take you there. Laity complain about the wasted time and dissipated energy that result from having no long range vision for the congregation, no means of holding ourselves accountable, no way to know when we have actually accomplished something and ought to celebrate. Planning helps keep a church on course, enables a pastor to prioritize pastoral time and focus energies in a commonly conceived direction.
5. Identify the vital few. Who are those who like to get things done? Who in the congregation can be counted upon to make things happen? You may not be able to rely on the officially elected leaders in order to initiate transformation. Sometimes the traditional leadership structure has too much at stake in preserving the status quo. Don’t tackle too many things at once; stick with the few things that are essential and possible. Give the congregation a few victories to celebrate rather than risk constantly being overwhelmed with many defeats.
Next week I’ll list Tony’s final five rules of transformative pastoral leadership. Let’s each of us measure our ministry by Robinson’s rules and rate our own effectiveness as pastoral leaders.
Willimon H. Willimon
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[i] Anthony B. Robinson, “Lessons in Leadership,” Christian Century, (December 15, 1999), pp. 1230-1231.
Monday, July 09, 2007
Leadership Is About Change
Lovett Weems has written a helpful book on leading change in the local church -- Lovett H. Weems, Jr., Take the Next Step: Leading Lasting Change in the Church (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2003). Over the next few weeks, I will focus on some of his insights that are of relevance to pastoral leadership. Here are some highlights from his book that grabbed my attention and stimulated my thinking about pastors as leaders of change in the congregation:
Leadership is about change. However, change is also one of the toughest tasks that leadership faces. “People don’t want change. They just want things to get better,” says R. M. Kanter. Though organisms can adapt, they adaptation is very slow, and there is an actual inclination of all groups to resist change.
However, as people of faith, we have no option but to change, because change is part of God’s will for us. We believe in conversion. One of the attractions of religious institutions is that they help people to change.
Nancy T. Ammerman says, “The most common response to change, in fact, is to perceive as business as usual.”
Radical change is rare. Today’s management experts say that leaders need to reject revolution in favor of more gradual change. If change-oriented leaders are not careful, they can impose more stress on an organization than they can bear, and end up destroying what makes that organization viable. Leaders must emphasize continuity and constantly monitor just how much change an organization can bear, even as they are leading for change.
Bill Shore says, “Leadership is getting people to a place they would not get to on their own.”
Unfortunately, I fear that most of us pastors think of ourselves as caregivers to the congregation, maintainers of the status quo, rather than agents of change. Weems is calling us to another perspective on our vocation, a perspective that is informed by our theological commitments..
William H. Willimon
Leadership is about change. However, change is also one of the toughest tasks that leadership faces. “People don’t want change. They just want things to get better,” says R. M. Kanter. Though organisms can adapt, they adaptation is very slow, and there is an actual inclination of all groups to resist change.
However, as people of faith, we have no option but to change, because change is part of God’s will for us. We believe in conversion. One of the attractions of religious institutions is that they help people to change.
Nancy T. Ammerman says, “The most common response to change, in fact, is to perceive as business as usual.”
Radical change is rare. Today’s management experts say that leaders need to reject revolution in favor of more gradual change. If change-oriented leaders are not careful, they can impose more stress on an organization than they can bear, and end up destroying what makes that organization viable. Leaders must emphasize continuity and constantly monitor just how much change an organization can bear, even as they are leading for change.
Bill Shore says, “Leadership is getting people to a place they would not get to on their own.”
Unfortunately, I fear that most of us pastors think of ourselves as caregivers to the congregation, maintainers of the status quo, rather than agents of change. Weems is calling us to another perspective on our vocation, a perspective that is informed by our theological commitments..
William H. Willimon
Monday, July 02, 2007
MEASURING AND MANAGING CLERGY EFFECTIVENESS
One of the most frequent questions I get is, “You say that we must do a better job of evaluating clergy effectiveness. How is it possible to define ‘effectiveness’"
I believe that those of us who are charged with the ministry of administration must get better at evaluating and rewarding clergy effectiveness. Thus the book that was read by the Cabinet, Marcus Burkingham and Curt Coffman,First, Break All the Rules (Simon and Schuster, 1999, the Gallup Organization), stimulated our thinking. One of the most important responsibilities of managers (read: District Superintendents) is to evaluate performance. Here are some of my notes from the book:
Managers make a mistake to believe that some outcomes defy definition.
A manager wants to turn talent into performance: There must be accuracy, standards must rule, don’t let the creed overshadow the message.
Focus upon each person’s strengths, work around his weaknesses, and don’t try to perfect them. Conventional wisdom says that “you can be anything you choose to be, there is a real you awaiting to be discovered and developed, within you.” This conventional wisdom is wrong. Conventional wisdom then says to identify your weaknesses and fix them. You can waste a lot of precious time on this. A bad relationship is not one in which your partner does not know you, it is one in which your partner knows you quite well and wishes you were utterly otherwise. The less effective manager believes that he or she is a mentor. This means that he is constantly in the role of a critic, a rearranger. Great managers help an employee to identify talents and then to develop those talents. They manage by exception. They spend most of their time with their best people.
Managers identify talents by watching an employee’s behavior over time. They want to manage the talents, to the requirements of the role. An aggressive person is matched to a role that requires someone who lights a fire.
We must manage by exception. Beware of all application of rules. Treat each employee according to his or her needs. New managers invest in their best. They spend most of their time with their best people. If you spend too much time with your strugglers, it is a sign that you are into control, rather than coaching and teaching. The manager’s best role is that of a catalyst, turning talent into productivity. Try to figure out better ways to unleash the distinctive talents of the person.
What about fairness? Fairness does not mean treating everyone the same. The better performance, the more time the manger spends with that person. This becomes an incentive. You cannot learn about excellence by studying failure. Be as good about describing excellence as you are about describing failure. Observe your best people and learn!
Poor performance must be confronted, directly and quickly. Sometimes there is poor performance because of “mechanical causes” – the employee lacks certain tools to get the job done. Personal causes are also a problem. Both are difficult to solve. Some performance problems are more difficult to identify and rectify.
Is the performance problem trainable? Once a weakness is perceived in an employee there are only three possible courses of action: Devise a support system, find a complimentary partner, or find a different role. Manage around the weakness so the employee can focus on his or her strengths.
You succeed by trying to capitalize on who you are, not by trying to fix who you aren’t.
The Peter Principle.We promote someone up to their level of incompetence. The Peter Principle believes that the way to reward someone for good performance in a role is to promote them out of that role! Every signal we send tells the employee not to stay in the same role too long. It doesn’t look good on the resume. Keep taking the “next step” this is the way you “get ahead,” and “get respect.” Sooner or later he steps into the wrong role. He can’t go back without great humiliation.
This system is built on false assumptions: Each rung on the ladder represents a slightly more complicated version of the previous rung, it creates conflict by limiting prestige to the next rung, what about alternative career paths. Create meaningful prestige on every rung of excellence. It assumes that varied experiences might make the employee more attractive.
Excellence in each role this requires a distinct set of talents. Good performance in one role does not guarantee good performance in another. Talents must not be confused with skill. The notion that “higher is better” is a damaging distraction. Legions of employees trying to scramble on to increasingly smaller rungs.
Create heroes in every role. Make every role a model. Anyone performing in an excellent way needs to be publicly recognized. There must be graded levels of achievement.
(I think this is a major challenge for our church. Too often we think that the only way to award effectiveness and achievement is to move effective clergy to bigger churches and higher salaries. But our closed appointment system is limited in its ability to ‘advance’ everyone. We have got to create incentives and rewards at every level of clergy deployment.)
The most effective people are those who look in the mirror at themselves, discover their talents, and learn to match those talents to their role. They are not those who look to the organization, climbing up the ladder, give them their job satisfaction.
The employee is the star. It is up to the employee to take charge of his or her life and career, make choices accordingly, and find the sources of satisfaction. The manager can’t do this.
(I fear that our system sometimes encourages clergy to think of the District Superintendent as the key to ‘advancement’ and job satisfaction, rather than satisfaction being a gift of God and a gift of knowing that you are doing God’s work wherever you are serving.)
Prestige must be spread throughout the organization. Therefore the employee is more free to pick roles that will bring lasting satisfaction.
Performance feedback sessions are important. These help the employee think about style, about talents and non-talents. There should be four of these a year. If you can’t do four a year, you have too many employees! It is important that some time alone be spend with each of your people.
People should be evaluated on the basis of performance outcomes.
Removing an employee from a role is one of the hardest of jobs. We need to get to know our employees, to risk friendship. It is hard to give bad news to a friend, but friendship is a good way to really get to know someone. There must be an uncompromising focus upon excellence, with a genuine need to care. Tough love.
Any performance is unacceptable which merely hovers around the average with no movement forward. The notion of talent frees the manager from blaming poor performance on the employee. Not all behaviors can be changed. Not all poor performance is the employee’s fault, due to laziness or lack of engagement. It is a matter of miscasting.
“This isn’t a fit for you, let’s talk about why.” Or, “You need to find a role that better matches your talents.”
“To care” means to set the person up for success. This is how firing can be a caring act.
Each human being is different, and those differences are the power that can be harnessed in an organization, and the manager is the means of doing it.
- Notes by Will Willimon
I believe that those of us who are charged with the ministry of administration must get better at evaluating and rewarding clergy effectiveness. Thus the book that was read by the Cabinet, Marcus Burkingham and Curt Coffman,First, Break All the Rules (Simon and Schuster, 1999, the Gallup Organization), stimulated our thinking. One of the most important responsibilities of managers (read: District Superintendents) is to evaluate performance. Here are some of my notes from the book:
Managers make a mistake to believe that some outcomes defy definition.
A manager wants to turn talent into performance: There must be accuracy, standards must rule, don’t let the creed overshadow the message.
Focus upon each person’s strengths, work around his weaknesses, and don’t try to perfect them. Conventional wisdom says that “you can be anything you choose to be, there is a real you awaiting to be discovered and developed, within you.” This conventional wisdom is wrong. Conventional wisdom then says to identify your weaknesses and fix them. You can waste a lot of precious time on this. A bad relationship is not one in which your partner does not know you, it is one in which your partner knows you quite well and wishes you were utterly otherwise. The less effective manager believes that he or she is a mentor. This means that he is constantly in the role of a critic, a rearranger. Great managers help an employee to identify talents and then to develop those talents. They manage by exception. They spend most of their time with their best people.
Managers identify talents by watching an employee’s behavior over time. They want to manage the talents, to the requirements of the role. An aggressive person is matched to a role that requires someone who lights a fire.
We must manage by exception. Beware of all application of rules. Treat each employee according to his or her needs. New managers invest in their best. They spend most of their time with their best people. If you spend too much time with your strugglers, it is a sign that you are into control, rather than coaching and teaching. The manager’s best role is that of a catalyst, turning talent into productivity. Try to figure out better ways to unleash the distinctive talents of the person.
What about fairness? Fairness does not mean treating everyone the same. The better performance, the more time the manger spends with that person. This becomes an incentive. You cannot learn about excellence by studying failure. Be as good about describing excellence as you are about describing failure. Observe your best people and learn!
Poor performance must be confronted, directly and quickly. Sometimes there is poor performance because of “mechanical causes” – the employee lacks certain tools to get the job done. Personal causes are also a problem. Both are difficult to solve. Some performance problems are more difficult to identify and rectify.
Is the performance problem trainable? Once a weakness is perceived in an employee there are only three possible courses of action: Devise a support system, find a complimentary partner, or find a different role. Manage around the weakness so the employee can focus on his or her strengths.
You succeed by trying to capitalize on who you are, not by trying to fix who you aren’t.
The Peter Principle.We promote someone up to their level of incompetence. The Peter Principle believes that the way to reward someone for good performance in a role is to promote them out of that role! Every signal we send tells the employee not to stay in the same role too long. It doesn’t look good on the resume. Keep taking the “next step” this is the way you “get ahead,” and “get respect.” Sooner or later he steps into the wrong role. He can’t go back without great humiliation.
This system is built on false assumptions: Each rung on the ladder represents a slightly more complicated version of the previous rung, it creates conflict by limiting prestige to the next rung, what about alternative career paths. Create meaningful prestige on every rung of excellence. It assumes that varied experiences might make the employee more attractive.
Excellence in each role this requires a distinct set of talents. Good performance in one role does not guarantee good performance in another. Talents must not be confused with skill. The notion that “higher is better” is a damaging distraction. Legions of employees trying to scramble on to increasingly smaller rungs.
Create heroes in every role. Make every role a model. Anyone performing in an excellent way needs to be publicly recognized. There must be graded levels of achievement.
(I think this is a major challenge for our church. Too often we think that the only way to award effectiveness and achievement is to move effective clergy to bigger churches and higher salaries. But our closed appointment system is limited in its ability to ‘advance’ everyone. We have got to create incentives and rewards at every level of clergy deployment.)
The most effective people are those who look in the mirror at themselves, discover their talents, and learn to match those talents to their role. They are not those who look to the organization, climbing up the ladder, give them their job satisfaction.
The employee is the star. It is up to the employee to take charge of his or her life and career, make choices accordingly, and find the sources of satisfaction. The manager can’t do this.
(I fear that our system sometimes encourages clergy to think of the District Superintendent as the key to ‘advancement’ and job satisfaction, rather than satisfaction being a gift of God and a gift of knowing that you are doing God’s work wherever you are serving.)
Prestige must be spread throughout the organization. Therefore the employee is more free to pick roles that will bring lasting satisfaction.
Performance feedback sessions are important. These help the employee think about style, about talents and non-talents. There should be four of these a year. If you can’t do four a year, you have too many employees! It is important that some time alone be spend with each of your people.
People should be evaluated on the basis of performance outcomes.
Removing an employee from a role is one of the hardest of jobs. We need to get to know our employees, to risk friendship. It is hard to give bad news to a friend, but friendship is a good way to really get to know someone. There must be an uncompromising focus upon excellence, with a genuine need to care. Tough love.
Any performance is unacceptable which merely hovers around the average with no movement forward. The notion of talent frees the manager from blaming poor performance on the employee. Not all behaviors can be changed. Not all poor performance is the employee’s fault, due to laziness or lack of engagement. It is a matter of miscasting.
“This isn’t a fit for you, let’s talk about why.” Or, “You need to find a role that better matches your talents.”
“To care” means to set the person up for success. This is how firing can be a caring act.
Each human being is different, and those differences are the power that can be harnessed in an organization, and the manager is the means of doing it.
- Notes by Will Willimon
Wednesday, June 27, 2007
It's Easier To Take Out Than To Put In
Two weeks ago, I mentioned a book that the Cabinet and I read together last year, Marcus Burkingham and Curt Coffman, First, Break All the Rules, (Simon and Schuster, 1999, the Gallup Organization). The Cabinet is charged with the deployment and development of our pastoral leaders. First, Break All the Rules makes the rather surprising assertion that people are not equally talented and that it is easier to match people’s talents to specific job responsibilities than to teach people to do things for which they have no talent. In other words, it’s easier to develop the talents that are there, than to put in qualities in a person which God has not seen fit to give them. We found all of this challenging so I give you a synopsis of some of the ideas we’ve been discussing:
Talent is what managers look for in an employee. Talent is defined as a pattern of thought or behavior that can be developed and productively applied to the good of the organization. Talent involves recurring behavior. Behaviors you find yourself doing all the time. (Ability to remember names, ability to think on your feet, etc.)
Seniority systems tend to think that experience is what makes the difference, maturity, rather than talent. Some people say that brainpower makes a difference. Smart people just do better than others. Or sometimes people think that willpower, determination and hard work make the difference. Grit. Now all of this is true. But the right talents are the prerequisite for success in any role. You cannot teach talent. You can only select talent. Talents are the driving force behind an individual’s job performance.
The cardinal principle is that people don’t change that much. Rather than trying to put in what is not there, try to develop what has been put in. Although you cannot teach talents, you can teach skills and knowledge. Good managers try to teach skills and knowledge. There are two kinds of knowledge, factual knowledge--things you know. And experiential -understandings that you have picked up along the way. (For instance, I think I have a talent for love of worship, for transforming moments, the acquisition of new skills).
There are relating talents, collegial talents.
Two of the most pervasive management myths are: Talents are rare and very special. But this isn’t true. Talents are recurring patterns of thought, knowledge, and behavior. Your job is not to teach people talent, but to match their unique talents to the role. You have to pay attention to the unique aspects of the role. You must never assume that some roles are so simple that they require no talent, that is the second management myth.
As a manager you need to know exactly which talent you want. You need to be adept at recognizing talent. When you are interviewing someone, he or she will represent his or her talents to you in the rosiest way possible (she will say she is “ambitious” rather than “aggressive”).
There are temptations for the manager. One is to believe that we can make perfect people out of people’s normal imperfections. Managers must resist their attempt to come up with rules and attempt to control people’s imperfections. They must match imperfections well with the role and help turn those imperfections into virtues. Managers sometimes make mistakes into thinking that anybody can perform a given role. They don’t realize the unique qualities that are acquired by the role. They therefore hire the wrong people
I think these management thoughts, from the world of business and commerce, have implications for those of us who are called to management and the ministry of administration in the church. I’ll let you draw out the implications that you see. The Cabinet and I have found these thoughts most challenging.
William H. Willimon
Talent is what managers look for in an employee. Talent is defined as a pattern of thought or behavior that can be developed and productively applied to the good of the organization. Talent involves recurring behavior. Behaviors you find yourself doing all the time. (Ability to remember names, ability to think on your feet, etc.)
Seniority systems tend to think that experience is what makes the difference, maturity, rather than talent. Some people say that brainpower makes a difference. Smart people just do better than others. Or sometimes people think that willpower, determination and hard work make the difference. Grit. Now all of this is true. But the right talents are the prerequisite for success in any role. You cannot teach talent. You can only select talent. Talents are the driving force behind an individual’s job performance.
The cardinal principle is that people don’t change that much. Rather than trying to put in what is not there, try to develop what has been put in. Although you cannot teach talents, you can teach skills and knowledge. Good managers try to teach skills and knowledge. There are two kinds of knowledge, factual knowledge--things you know. And experiential -understandings that you have picked up along the way. (For instance, I think I have a talent for love of worship, for transforming moments, the acquisition of new skills).
There are relating talents, collegial talents.
Two of the most pervasive management myths are: Talents are rare and very special. But this isn’t true. Talents are recurring patterns of thought, knowledge, and behavior. Your job is not to teach people talent, but to match their unique talents to the role. You have to pay attention to the unique aspects of the role. You must never assume that some roles are so simple that they require no talent, that is the second management myth.
As a manager you need to know exactly which talent you want. You need to be adept at recognizing talent. When you are interviewing someone, he or she will represent his or her talents to you in the rosiest way possible (she will say she is “ambitious” rather than “aggressive”).
There are temptations for the manager. One is to believe that we can make perfect people out of people’s normal imperfections. Managers must resist their attempt to come up with rules and attempt to control people’s imperfections. They must match imperfections well with the role and help turn those imperfections into virtues. Managers sometimes make mistakes into thinking that anybody can perform a given role. They don’t realize the unique qualities that are acquired by the role. They therefore hire the wrong people
I think these management thoughts, from the world of business and commerce, have implications for those of us who are called to management and the ministry of administration in the church. I’ll let you draw out the implications that you see. The Cabinet and I have found these thoughts most challenging.
William H. Willimon
Pastors as Visionary Leaders
Lovett Weems lists the phases of thriving and declining organizations: original vision, growth and building the organization, maintenance, decline, recognized decline, crises or death. I feel that in the United Methodist Church we are in the period of at last recognizing our decline. I hope this leads to a crisis that provokes change and growth.
Vision is not created, but it is discovered, or more truthfully discerned.
“The genius of visionary leadership is in recognizing those clues, putting them together with other clues, and then testing those clues with others to make sure that one is seeing and hearing correctly or that one is putting the different clues together in a manner that makes sense.” (p. 84).
The leader listens to everything in order to get clues and information, fact, opinion, and gossip are all helpful. The leader is willing to listen to negative clues, as well as positive clues. One must build a future on more than negative clues. One must foster enough stability within the congregation, stability that is beyond stagnation and rigid status quo, so that one can have a base from which to move creatively and experimentally. (p. 90).
Every church must have a mission--that is what God calls the church to do, the overall purpose of the church, its reason for being.
And derived from that must be a vision, that to which God has called the congregation to do in the near future to advance that mission. Vision is “What is God calling this church to do next?” We take identity, assessments of our internal context, as well as our external context, to move mission towards vision.
We must identify three to five key values that are essential part of the visionary work of the congregation. These must be defined in writing, with some definition of what these values mean to the life of the congregation. And then they are to be prioritized, because they have degrees of importance.
In order to take the next step, we must understand change.
“If the goal is to write a new chapter in the congregation’s story, that it is essential that the story be thoroughly understood and respected, and that the new chapter pick up and advance the plot.” (David Clewell p. 112).
Weems gives “seven unchangeable rules of change.” People do what they perceive to be in their best interest. The change must have positive meaning for them. People thrive with creative challenge, but wilt under negative stress. People are different, there is not one single key to all change. People believe what they see and previous deceptions can lead to present suspicions. The way to make effective long-term change is first to visualize where you want to go, and then go ahead and inhabit that vision till it comes true. Change is always an act of imagination. (p. 114).
All change is easier when people think it is their idea. Too much change within a short period of time can lead to explosion. Change is disturbing when it is done to us, but it is exhilarating when it is something done by us.
Great leaders are good storytellers. Most of what leaders do is to communicate--to preach, to tell stories, to keep reminding people of the best of their history, and not to worry about repeating themselves or being redundant. Good leaders must talk a vision, before their vision can be lived. Finally, good leaders must persevere. It takes time for a vision to become reality, and one of the most difficult times is the mid-point, right before the vision blossoms. Good leaders are those who persevere.
-- Lovett H. Weems, Jr., Take the Next Step: Leading Lasting Change in the Church (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2003).
William H. Willimon
Vision is not created, but it is discovered, or more truthfully discerned.
“The genius of visionary leadership is in recognizing those clues, putting them together with other clues, and then testing those clues with others to make sure that one is seeing and hearing correctly or that one is putting the different clues together in a manner that makes sense.” (p. 84).
The leader listens to everything in order to get clues and information, fact, opinion, and gossip are all helpful. The leader is willing to listen to negative clues, as well as positive clues. One must build a future on more than negative clues. One must foster enough stability within the congregation, stability that is beyond stagnation and rigid status quo, so that one can have a base from which to move creatively and experimentally. (p. 90).
Every church must have a mission--that is what God calls the church to do, the overall purpose of the church, its reason for being.
And derived from that must be a vision, that to which God has called the congregation to do in the near future to advance that mission. Vision is “What is God calling this church to do next?” We take identity, assessments of our internal context, as well as our external context, to move mission towards vision.
We must identify three to five key values that are essential part of the visionary work of the congregation. These must be defined in writing, with some definition of what these values mean to the life of the congregation. And then they are to be prioritized, because they have degrees of importance.
In order to take the next step, we must understand change.
“If the goal is to write a new chapter in the congregation’s story, that it is essential that the story be thoroughly understood and respected, and that the new chapter pick up and advance the plot.” (David Clewell p. 112).
Weems gives “seven unchangeable rules of change.” People do what they perceive to be in their best interest. The change must have positive meaning for them. People thrive with creative challenge, but wilt under negative stress. People are different, there is not one single key to all change. People believe what they see and previous deceptions can lead to present suspicions. The way to make effective long-term change is first to visualize where you want to go, and then go ahead and inhabit that vision till it comes true. Change is always an act of imagination. (p. 114).
All change is easier when people think it is their idea. Too much change within a short period of time can lead to explosion. Change is disturbing when it is done to us, but it is exhilarating when it is something done by us.
Great leaders are good storytellers. Most of what leaders do is to communicate--to preach, to tell stories, to keep reminding people of the best of their history, and not to worry about repeating themselves or being redundant. Good leaders must talk a vision, before their vision can be lived. Finally, good leaders must persevere. It takes time for a vision to become reality, and one of the most difficult times is the mid-point, right before the vision blossoms. Good leaders are those who persevere.
-- Lovett H. Weems, Jr., Take the Next Step: Leading Lasting Change in the Church (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2003).
William H. Willimon
Fruitfulness
At this year’s Annual Conference, Dale Cohen, our Director of Connectional Ministries, gave us a great look at the work of our Conference by focusing on some of our statistics, particularly in the light of his leadership in our Natural Church Development work.
"You only count what’s important and whatever you count becomes important,” is one of our guiding principles. We Wesleyans are inveterate collectors of numbers. In fact, the Annual Conference was invented by John Wesley, in great part, to focus upon numbers. Wesley didn’t call it “statistics.” He called it “fruit.” The numbers show how well (or how poorly) we are allowing God to use us to produce fruit for the Kingdom.
We ended the year of 2006 with a membership of 151,792. This represents a net decrease of 1,864 members; however, there’s more to the story!
3,067 people were removed by action of their charge conference, which means that most of those people have not been active in worship in three years or more. Another 766 withdrew their membership. 2,220 people were removed by death. These three areas total 6,053 persons removed from the membership of our Conference.
In 2006, we transferred out 3,423 with only 1,134 people transferred to another denomination--less than one third of the total transfers; two-thirds of the transfers out went to a United Methodist Church. This speaks to a sense of loyalty to the United Methodist Church.
Despite the net loss, the North Alabama Conference is growing! We received 2,341 members from other United Methodist Churches and 2,069 members from other denominations -- a thousand more members from other denominations that we lost to other denominations. Another 581 people sought membership by restoring their previously withdrawn membership. This means we brought 4,991 existing Christians into the membership of the North Alabama Conference.
In 2006 the number of Professions of Faith rose to 2,621, which is 89 more than in 2005. These are NEW Christians brought into the work of Christ’s Kingdom. Our efforts to make MORE NEW disciples are having results!
A total of 7,612 people were added to the membership of the churches in North Alabama.[1]
There are two other statistics that demonstrate a positive trend. Some argue that worship attendance is a better indicator of growth than membership. If this is true, then we are growing because the average weekly worship attendance in the North Alabama Conference increased by 2,359 persons. A large portion of this increased attendance was in our newest congregations.[2]
Even more exciting is that we saw an increase of 10,500 people who were participating in Christian Formation opportunities in our local churches. More people are making themselves available for discipleship training and we should see the impact of this increase in three to five years.[3]
My joyful conclusions from the Numbers: Growth Is Happening. The Cabinet’s initiative to stress increased attendance, Dale’s work with NCD, Dick’s work with New Church Development is working. God is giving us fruit!
We Just Need to Step Up the Pace of Growth. We’ve got to have every pastor and every congregation moving in step with our priorities. Let’s make this coming year the best ever!
Will Willimon
P.S. Do you know what your congregation's vital stats are? Click here to search for your congregation's statistical table and get a picture of your fruitfulness.
[1] If you backed out the 3,067 people removed by charge conference action we would have shown an increase of 1,203 members. We need to keep paring down our rolls and even though this may lead to continued losses on our “books,” the statistics are promising in that we’re seeing growth in those areas that will lead to membership growth on down the line.
[2] Dick Freeman indicates that the number of people worshiping in our new congregations that are not yet constituted (and therefore not counted in membership totals) would more than compensate the 1,864 net membership loss.
[3] The numbers don’t just indicate more people but also more ministry. This year we had the highest amount contributed to the work of our Conference than in any year past. Mission is the fruit of fruitful efforts to make more disciples!
"You only count what’s important and whatever you count becomes important,” is one of our guiding principles. We Wesleyans are inveterate collectors of numbers. In fact, the Annual Conference was invented by John Wesley, in great part, to focus upon numbers. Wesley didn’t call it “statistics.” He called it “fruit.” The numbers show how well (or how poorly) we are allowing God to use us to produce fruit for the Kingdom.
We ended the year of 2006 with a membership of 151,792. This represents a net decrease of 1,864 members; however, there’s more to the story!
3,067 people were removed by action of their charge conference, which means that most of those people have not been active in worship in three years or more. Another 766 withdrew their membership. 2,220 people were removed by death. These three areas total 6,053 persons removed from the membership of our Conference.
In 2006, we transferred out 3,423 with only 1,134 people transferred to another denomination--less than one third of the total transfers; two-thirds of the transfers out went to a United Methodist Church. This speaks to a sense of loyalty to the United Methodist Church.
Despite the net loss, the North Alabama Conference is growing! We received 2,341 members from other United Methodist Churches and 2,069 members from other denominations -- a thousand more members from other denominations that we lost to other denominations. Another 581 people sought membership by restoring their previously withdrawn membership. This means we brought 4,991 existing Christians into the membership of the North Alabama Conference.
In 2006 the number of Professions of Faith rose to 2,621, which is 89 more than in 2005. These are NEW Christians brought into the work of Christ’s Kingdom. Our efforts to make MORE NEW disciples are having results!
A total of 7,612 people were added to the membership of the churches in North Alabama.[1]
There are two other statistics that demonstrate a positive trend. Some argue that worship attendance is a better indicator of growth than membership. If this is true, then we are growing because the average weekly worship attendance in the North Alabama Conference increased by 2,359 persons. A large portion of this increased attendance was in our newest congregations.[2]
Even more exciting is that we saw an increase of 10,500 people who were participating in Christian Formation opportunities in our local churches. More people are making themselves available for discipleship training and we should see the impact of this increase in three to five years.[3]
My joyful conclusions from the Numbers: Growth Is Happening. The Cabinet’s initiative to stress increased attendance, Dale’s work with NCD, Dick’s work with New Church Development is working. God is giving us fruit!
We Just Need to Step Up the Pace of Growth. We’ve got to have every pastor and every congregation moving in step with our priorities. Let’s make this coming year the best ever!
Will Willimon
P.S. Do you know what your congregation's vital stats are? Click here to search for your congregation's statistical table and get a picture of your fruitfulness.
[1] If you backed out the 3,067 people removed by charge conference action we would have shown an increase of 1,203 members. We need to keep paring down our rolls and even though this may lead to continued losses on our “books,” the statistics are promising in that we’re seeing growth in those areas that will lead to membership growth on down the line.
[2] Dick Freeman indicates that the number of people worshiping in our new congregations that are not yet constituted (and therefore not counted in membership totals) would more than compensate the 1,864 net membership loss.
[3] The numbers don’t just indicate more people but also more ministry. This year we had the highest amount contributed to the work of our Conference than in any year past. Mission is the fruit of fruitful efforts to make more disciples!
Friday, June 08, 2007
It's About The Mission!
This week, we’ve had our Annual Conference. We tried to have a greater focus on our vision statement and priorities in order to stress our mission:
Tom Bandy, in his new book, stresses that we must keep the mission of the church ever before us, that the mission gives significance to our work as church leaders, and that the mission puts us in our place. It’s so easy, in the church to lose sight of the mission, to get distracted by attentiveness to the clergy, or by other factors. By keeping focused on the mission, everything else of importance stays in focus, says Bandy:
Over the centuries of Christendom and modern living, people have gotten the false impression that it is the holiness of the individual that gives authenticity to the mission. In both ancient and contemporary times it is the other way around. It is the authenticity of the mission that gives holiness to the individual. The sacrament is not a sacrament because the priest is a priest, but the priest is a priest because the sacrament is a sacrament.
The fact that modernity has gotten it backwards is the reason why clergy today are both deified and vilified at the same time. On the one hand, modern Christians glorify the clergy, believing that their moral perfection and spiritual purity guarantees the efficacy of God’s power. On the other hand, the inability of clergy to live up to impossible standards is easily blamed for the corruption of society and pervasiveness of sin. No wonder modernity can’t recruit clergy! Who wants to be glorified and vilified all in the same day, seven days a week?
The more you persist in thinking that your calling is all about you, the more you set yourself up for this double deceit of clergy glorification and clergy vilification. You will never survive it, my friend! At the very beginning, you need to understand it never has been about you in the first place. It is simply about God’s mission, and for better or worse you happen to be in the way of it. So if you have low self-esteem, you had better get over it if you want to be in Christian ministry. If God has chosen you, then God is giving you high self-esteem whether you like it or not. The last thing God’s mission needs is somebody like you alternately strutting like a peacock and then lamenting “Poor me, poor me”!
I suppose that is why I have always liked John Wesley’s covenant. It is reminiscent of the covenant of ancient pilgrims, medieval monks, and postmodern spiritual entrepreneurs. At the conclusion of his Watch Night liturgy, he writes:
I am no longer my own, but thine. Put me to what thou wilt, rank me with whom thou wilt. Put me to doing, put me to suffering. Let me be employed by thee or laid aside for thee, exalted for thee or brought low for thee. Let me be full, let me be empty. Let me have all things, let me have nothing. I freely and heartily yield all things to thy pleasure and disposal.
If you can say those words without feeling a rush of self-esteem, then the problem is not that you do not like yourself very much but that you do not really like Jesus very much.
Unfortunately, covenants like these have been honored by intentional neglect. Modern churches have done everything possible to guarantee that clergy will be ranked with the best, never suffer, always have income, never be empty, have the closest parking spaces to the entrance … and also be responsible for every visit, blamed for every mistake, and crucified for every triviality. Avoid the heartache by getting this through your head: It’s not about you in the first place. It’s about God’s mission.
Excerpts from Mission Mover, Beyond Education for Church Leadership, Thomas C. Bandy, Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2004, pp. 39-40.
Will Willimon
“Every Church challenged and equipped to grow more disciples of
Jesus Christ by taking risks and changing lives.”
Over the centuries of Christendom and modern living, people have gotten the false impression that it is the holiness of the individual that gives authenticity to the mission. In both ancient and contemporary times it is the other way around. It is the authenticity of the mission that gives holiness to the individual. The sacrament is not a sacrament because the priest is a priest, but the priest is a priest because the sacrament is a sacrament.
The fact that modernity has gotten it backwards is the reason why clergy today are both deified and vilified at the same time. On the one hand, modern Christians glorify the clergy, believing that their moral perfection and spiritual purity guarantees the efficacy of God’s power. On the other hand, the inability of clergy to live up to impossible standards is easily blamed for the corruption of society and pervasiveness of sin. No wonder modernity can’t recruit clergy! Who wants to be glorified and vilified all in the same day, seven days a week?
The more you persist in thinking that your calling is all about you, the more you set yourself up for this double deceit of clergy glorification and clergy vilification. You will never survive it, my friend! At the very beginning, you need to understand it never has been about you in the first place. It is simply about God’s mission, and for better or worse you happen to be in the way of it. So if you have low self-esteem, you had better get over it if you want to be in Christian ministry. If God has chosen you, then God is giving you high self-esteem whether you like it or not. The last thing God’s mission needs is somebody like you alternately strutting like a peacock and then lamenting “Poor me, poor me”!
I suppose that is why I have always liked John Wesley’s covenant. It is reminiscent of the covenant of ancient pilgrims, medieval monks, and postmodern spiritual entrepreneurs. At the conclusion of his Watch Night liturgy, he writes:
I am no longer my own, but thine. Put me to what thou wilt, rank me with whom thou wilt. Put me to doing, put me to suffering. Let me be employed by thee or laid aside for thee, exalted for thee or brought low for thee. Let me be full, let me be empty. Let me have all things, let me have nothing. I freely and heartily yield all things to thy pleasure and disposal.
If you can say those words without feeling a rush of self-esteem, then the problem is not that you do not like yourself very much but that you do not really like Jesus very much.
Unfortunately, covenants like these have been honored by intentional neglect. Modern churches have done everything possible to guarantee that clergy will be ranked with the best, never suffer, always have income, never be empty, have the closest parking spaces to the entrance … and also be responsible for every visit, blamed for every mistake, and crucified for every triviality. Avoid the heartache by getting this through your head: It’s not about you in the first place. It’s about God’s mission.
Excerpts from Mission Mover, Beyond Education for Church Leadership, Thomas C. Bandy, Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2004, pp. 39-40.
Will Willimon
Tuesday, May 29, 2007
Good To Great
When I came to the North Alabama Conference three years ago, I knew that I was coming to one of the leading Conferences in United Methodism. I did not then know what I do now -- we are leading the church in some vital areas of renewal. The Cabinet and I read Jim Collins' Good to Great as part of our work. While our Conference has a number of areas of ministry that need much work and attention from us, I'm pleased to report that we have more areas where it can be said we are moving "from Good to Great." I think of the following areas where we are doing some great work:
1. New Communities of Faith: Dick Freeman was already leading us in ground-breaking work in planting new churches. Now we lead the United Methodist Church in this effort. 33 new congregations planted in the last decade, 25 more new congregations in the works, including congregations in some of the more neglected areas in our cities.
2. Natural Church Development: We now have a tested, proven program for revitalization of churches, particularly our small, rural, older congregations. Led by Dale Cohen, we now have 80 congregations in process with Natural Church Development and dozens more on the way. The results of this effort among our congregations are amazing.
3. Superannuate Homes: We have long had the leading program for retired clergy housing in the nation -- 133 homes for our honored retired clergy and spouses. This year we begin, under Don Neal's leadership, the Retired Clergy Network to keep our retired clergy connected, supported, and in ministry with us.
4. The Methodist Foundation: Charlie Carlton has created an amazing resource for stewardship with current managed assets of over 35.8 million. This year the Foundation has brought Rick Owen into its capable staff to work with congregations and pastors on financial management, stewardship, and fund raising for mission. The Foundation is one of our great success stories in North Alabama.
5. New Disciples: This past year we made over 3000 new Christians! That's our highest number in recent years. Our emphasis on Sunday attendance, on reaching out to the unchurched, and making our churches more hospitable to visitors is reaping this wonderful result. Our growth in discipleship is one reason that (while we have much progress to make in our giving record) we raised more money for mission and benevolences than in any year past!
6. Institute of Clergy Excellence: Larry Dill led us to secure two million in grants from the Lilly Endowment. This has enabled us to continue and greatly expand our model program for clergy continuing education -- ICE. Building on the long tradition of creative clergy growth and development that was begun by grants from the Dixon Family some years ago, ICE has quickly become a nationally recognized model for clergy education.
7. Residency in Ministry: The Board of Ordained Ministry has spent the last year devising a remarkable pilot program for new clergy recruitment and development. The program will be led by Amelia Sims. Now our three year probationary program will provide our newest clergy with an extensive, demanding, and full plan of mentoring, monitoring, and development. Already numerous Conferences are inquiring into the possibility of enacting the Residency in Ministry in their Conferences. Once again, we are leading the way.
8. Mission: Paulette West continues the great tradition of mission in North Alabama. She trains and sends dozens of Volunteer in Mission teams each year. Our Disaster Response Team, led by James Hassell has become a national model. Our Conference-wide support for mission through the United Methodist Women and our local churches is amazing. Each year dozens of our churches join our missionaries in the field in their work. Thomas Muhomba, whose family was brought to Christ in Zimbabwe by North Alabama Conference missionary, Mildred Taylor, now leads us in our newest mission field -- North Alabama!
At this year's Annual Conference, amid all the work that we have yet to do, let's celebrate all the amazing things that God is doing among us, making our Conference a gift of God to the people of the world. In Christ's name, we are moving from Good to Great!
Will Willimon
1. New Communities of Faith: Dick Freeman was already leading us in ground-breaking work in planting new churches. Now we lead the United Methodist Church in this effort. 33 new congregations planted in the last decade, 25 more new congregations in the works, including congregations in some of the more neglected areas in our cities.
2. Natural Church Development: We now have a tested, proven program for revitalization of churches, particularly our small, rural, older congregations. Led by Dale Cohen, we now have 80 congregations in process with Natural Church Development and dozens more on the way. The results of this effort among our congregations are amazing.
3. Superannuate Homes: We have long had the leading program for retired clergy housing in the nation -- 133 homes for our honored retired clergy and spouses. This year we begin, under Don Neal's leadership, the Retired Clergy Network to keep our retired clergy connected, supported, and in ministry with us.
4. The Methodist Foundation: Charlie Carlton has created an amazing resource for stewardship with current managed assets of over 35.8 million. This year the Foundation has brought Rick Owen into its capable staff to work with congregations and pastors on financial management, stewardship, and fund raising for mission. The Foundation is one of our great success stories in North Alabama.
5. New Disciples: This past year we made over 3000 new Christians! That's our highest number in recent years. Our emphasis on Sunday attendance, on reaching out to the unchurched, and making our churches more hospitable to visitors is reaping this wonderful result. Our growth in discipleship is one reason that (while we have much progress to make in our giving record) we raised more money for mission and benevolences than in any year past!
6. Institute of Clergy Excellence: Larry Dill led us to secure two million in grants from the Lilly Endowment. This has enabled us to continue and greatly expand our model program for clergy continuing education -- ICE. Building on the long tradition of creative clergy growth and development that was begun by grants from the Dixon Family some years ago, ICE has quickly become a nationally recognized model for clergy education.
7. Residency in Ministry: The Board of Ordained Ministry has spent the last year devising a remarkable pilot program for new clergy recruitment and development. The program will be led by Amelia Sims. Now our three year probationary program will provide our newest clergy with an extensive, demanding, and full plan of mentoring, monitoring, and development. Already numerous Conferences are inquiring into the possibility of enacting the Residency in Ministry in their Conferences. Once again, we are leading the way.
8. Mission: Paulette West continues the great tradition of mission in North Alabama. She trains and sends dozens of Volunteer in Mission teams each year. Our Disaster Response Team, led by James Hassell has become a national model. Our Conference-wide support for mission through the United Methodist Women and our local churches is amazing. Each year dozens of our churches join our missionaries in the field in their work. Thomas Muhomba, whose family was brought to Christ in Zimbabwe by North Alabama Conference missionary, Mildred Taylor, now leads us in our newest mission field -- North Alabama!
At this year's Annual Conference, amid all the work that we have yet to do, let's celebrate all the amazing things that God is doing among us, making our Conference a gift of God to the people of the world. In Christ's name, we are moving from Good to Great!
Will Willimon
Monday, May 21, 2007
CHURCH AS THERMOMETER OR THERMOSTAT:
WORDS FROM BIRMINGHAM JAIL
To an acculturated and accommodated church, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. wrote these words. He wrote them to us in Birmingham, from our jail, fifty years ago but the words ring true in the church today, perhaps in the church of any age, so let us reflect upon them again in our own day. Let us prayerfully reexamine our church on the basis of Dr. King’s eloquent rebuke of the church that has stopped being an outpost of the Kingdom of God and a sign of Jesus’ politics and instead has become merely the “sanction of things as they are.”
There was a time when the church was very powerful. It was during that period when the early Christians rejoiced when they were deemed worthy to suffer for what they believed in. In those days the church was not merely a thermometer that recorded the ideas and principles of popular opinion; it was a thermostat that transformed the mores of society. Wherever the early Christians entered a town the power structure got disturbed and immediately sought to convict them for being “disturbers of the peace” and “outside agitators”. But they went on with the conviction that they were a “colony of heaven,” and had to obey God rather than man. They were small in number but big in commitment. They were too God-intoxicated to be “astronomically intimidated.” They brought to an end such ancient evils as infanticide and gladiatorial contest. Things are different now. The contemporary church is often a weak, ineffectual voice with an uncertain sound. It is so often the arch supporter of the status quo. Far from being disturbed by the presence of the church, the power structure of the average community is consoled by the church’s silent and often vocal sanction of things as they are.
-- Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” in A Testament of Hope: The Essential Writings of Martin Luther King, Jr., edited by James Melvin Washington (San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1986), pg. 300.
William H. Willimon
Please pray for our Annual Conference that meets on June 1-2 at ClearBranch United Methodist Church.
To an acculturated and accommodated church, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. wrote these words. He wrote them to us in Birmingham, from our jail, fifty years ago but the words ring true in the church today, perhaps in the church of any age, so let us reflect upon them again in our own day. Let us prayerfully reexamine our church on the basis of Dr. King’s eloquent rebuke of the church that has stopped being an outpost of the Kingdom of God and a sign of Jesus’ politics and instead has become merely the “sanction of things as they are.”
There was a time when the church was very powerful. It was during that period when the early Christians rejoiced when they were deemed worthy to suffer for what they believed in. In those days the church was not merely a thermometer that recorded the ideas and principles of popular opinion; it was a thermostat that transformed the mores of society. Wherever the early Christians entered a town the power structure got disturbed and immediately sought to convict them for being “disturbers of the peace” and “outside agitators”. But they went on with the conviction that they were a “colony of heaven,” and had to obey God rather than man. They were small in number but big in commitment. They were too God-intoxicated to be “astronomically intimidated.” They brought to an end such ancient evils as infanticide and gladiatorial contest. Things are different now. The contemporary church is often a weak, ineffectual voice with an uncertain sound. It is so often the arch supporter of the status quo. Far from being disturbed by the presence of the church, the power structure of the average community is consoled by the church’s silent and often vocal sanction of things as they are.
-- Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” in A Testament of Hope: The Essential Writings of Martin Luther King, Jr., edited by James Melvin Washington (San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1986), pg. 300.
William H. Willimon
Please pray for our Annual Conference that meets on June 1-2 at ClearBranch United Methodist Church.
Monday, May 14, 2007
Thoughts on "The Jesus Enterprise"
I'm concerned about a book about the church that uses the word enterprise in the title, a word borrowed from business. But I sure want to reach the unchurched. Thus I read The Jesus Enterprise: Engaging Culture to Reach the Unchurched (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2004), by Kent R. Hunter. Here are some quotes from the book that caught my attention:
Landa Cope, in her excellent book Clearly Communicating Christ, says it this way:
Is it just me? I find all of these statements extremely problematic in the light of the biblical witness. True, I've taken these out of context but they seem to me to be dangerously, exasperatingly out of touch with the Christian faith. We are to reach people, not just in order to sign the up for our volunteer organization, but we reach people in the name of Christ, reaching them to be part of a countercultural, divinely initiated community called church. The purpose of the church is not friendliness, or meeting my needs, the church is not a means of getting what I want but Gods appointed, created means of getting what God wants.
The church is God's enterprise, if you must use that language. It is not the result of our savvy communicative technique but a work of a triune God who is determined to have a people.
William H. Willimon
Landa Cope, in her excellent book Clearly Communicating Christ, says it this way:
[A] dynamic aspect of [Jesus'] communication was His servant
approach.
At some point in history the Church forgot this. We became focused on
our message rather than on serving our audience. The burning question wasn't,
"Where are people hurting? How can we apply the Gospel to meet those needs?"
Instead it became, "Are we being faithful to Scripture? Is that the exact
meaning of those words? Are we communicating in balance with the whole of the
Bible?"
...Jesus didn't come to defend the message. The message of God's
eternal truth is just fine, thank you. It stood before the creation of the
earth, and it will stand when all heaven and earth have passed away (Matthew
24:35). It's people who are in danger! God so loved the world.
pp. 30-31
[The gospel is not simply about meeting my felt needs. Sometimes Jesus
gives me needs I never had until Jesus met me!]
...When asked why they return to a church they visited, most people respond that they did so because it was a friendly church and the worship services seemed relevant.
...On the front end, they are more interested in knowing if Christianity
works. In other words, they want to know if God makes a difference in your life.
p. 32
[Friendliness? A faith that works? Is this all that Jesus
Christ is Lord means?]
An enterprise ministry can be
defined as: identifying and meeting felt needs in the culture, genuinely caring
for others, building relationship bridges, and communicating the gospel in a
relevant way.
p. 33
[Sometimes the gospel sounds as if it is 'irrelevant' when it is simply
true. We live in a culture of deceit so sometimes we don't know what's
'relevant' until the gospel tells us. We are not the ones to judge what our real
needs are or what's truly 'relevant' to our lives. That's God's business.]
Is it just me? I find all of these statements extremely problematic in the light of the biblical witness. True, I've taken these out of context but they seem to me to be dangerously, exasperatingly out of touch with the Christian faith. We are to reach people, not just in order to sign the up for our volunteer organization, but we reach people in the name of Christ, reaching them to be part of a countercultural, divinely initiated community called church. The purpose of the church is not friendliness, or meeting my needs, the church is not a means of getting what I want but Gods appointed, created means of getting what God wants.
The church is God's enterprise, if you must use that language. It is not the result of our savvy communicative technique but a work of a triune God who is determined to have a people.
William H. Willimon
Tuesday, May 08, 2007
Christ Means Change
Easter keeps happening, even though we are now four weeks after Easter, every time someone is converted to Christ. The Christian life comes neither naturally nor normally. Little within us prepares us for the shock of moral regeneration that is occasioned by the work of Christ among us. What God in Christ wants to do in us is nothing less than radical new creation, movement from death to life. This means that ministry among the baptized tends to be more radical, disruptive, and antagonistic than we pastors admit. We are awfully accommodated, well situated, at ease in Zion , or at least disgustingly content with present arrangements. We reassure ourselves with the comforting bromides of a lethargic church: Everyone in Mainline Protestantism is in decline, everyone has become geriatric, even the Baptists are losing members, people can’t change, you can’t teach old dogs new tricks. Sociological determinism has got us. What's to be done?
Despite our settled arrangements with death, as an African American preacher friend of mine puts it, the gospel means, "God is going to get back what God owns." C. S. Lewis spoke of his life before his conversion as "before God closed in on me." Conversion, being born again, transformed, regenerated, detoxified, is God's means of closing in upon us, of getting God's way with the world, despite what that reclamation may cost God, or us.
Deep in my Wesleyan once warmed heart is a story of how a priggish little Oxford don got changed at Aldersgate and thereafter. John Wesley’s life was well formed, well fixed by a host of positive Christian influences upon him before the evening on Aldersgate Street. Yet what happened afterwards has led us Wesleyans to see his heart “strangely warmed” as nothing less than dramatic ending and beginning, death and birth, a whole new world.
Such a story, fixed deep in our souls, challenges a church that has become accommodated to things as they are, the cultural status quo. It stands as a rebuke to a church that has settled comfortably into a characterization of the Christian life as pleasantly continuous and basically synonymous with being a good person.
Scripture enlists a rich array of metaphors to speak of the discontinuous, discordant outbreak of new life named as “conversion.” “Born from above,” or “born anew” (John 3:7; 1 Peter 1:3, 23), “regeneration” (John 3:5; Titus 3:5), “putting on a new nature” (Eph. 4:24; Col. 3:10), and “new creation” (2 Cor. 5:17). Paul contrasts the old life according to the flesh with “life according to the Spirit” (Rom. 8:1-39). Baptism tries to tell us that the Christian life is at times discordant, dissonant, and disrupting. When one joins Rotary, or the League of Women Voters, they give you a membership card and lapel pin. When one joins the Body of Christ, we throw you under, half drown you, strip you naked and wash you all over, pull you forth sticky and fresh like a newborn. One might think people would get the message. But, as Luther said, the Old Adam is a mighty good swimmer. A conversionist faith is so disconcerting, particularly to those for whom the world as it is has been fairly good. Those on top, those who are reasonably well fed, fairly well futured, tend to cling to the world as it is rather than risk the possibility of something new. For all these economic, social, and political reasons we pastors tend toward the maintenance of stability rather than the expectation of conversion.
New Creation
Paul was stunned by the reality of the resurrection -- the way God not only vindicated Jesus by raising him from the dead, but also thereby recreated the whole kosmos. In Easter, an old world had been terminated and a new one was being born, so Paul was forced to rethink everything that he had previously thought, including ethics. Much of what Paul says about Christian behavior was formed as his testimony to the resurrection, an event that he had experienced within the dramatic turn around in his own life. Whereas Jesus did Easter at the empty tomb, Easter happened to Paul on the Damascus Road.
So if anyone is in Christ, there is a new creation: everything old has passed
away; see, everything has become new! All this is from God, who reconciled us to
himself through Christ, and has given us the ministry of reconciliation. (2 Cor.
5:17-18)Verse 17, in the Greek, lacks both subject and verb so it is best
rendered by the exclamatory, “If anyone is in Christ - new creation!”
Certainly, old habits die hard. There are still, as Paul acknowledges so eloquently in Romans 8, “the sufferings of the present time.” It makes a world of difference whether or not one knows the resurrection. Thus, making doxology to God (Rom. 11:33-36), Paul asks that we present ourselves as “a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God” by not being “conformed to this world” but by being “transformed by the renewal of your mind” (Rom. 12:2). All of this is resurrection talk, the sort of tensive situation of those who find their lives still in an old, dying world, yet also now conscious of their citizenship in a new world being born. Our lives are eschatologically stretched between the sneak preview of the new world being born among us in the church and the old world where the principalities and powers are reluctant to give way. In the meantime, which is the only time the church has ever known, we live as those who know something about the fate of the world that the world does not yet know. And that makes us different.
Crucified Jesus has been raised from the dead - and in our continuing conversion, he takes us along with him toward new life.
William H. Willimon
Monday, April 30, 2007
LESSONS WE CAN LEARN FROM JACK WELCH
The Cabinet and I have been pondering our role as personnel officers of the church. It is our job to recruit, evaluate, and to place clergy. We believe that there is much that we can learn about personnel matters from those in business or other organizations. Hal Nobel, Superintendent of the Northwest District, has recently read Jack Welch’s book on leadership, Winning. Welch is the turn around king of American business. Hal shared with me some of the insights that have relevance for our Superintendents and as pastors:
Think of yourself as a Gardener, a watering can in one hand and fertilizer in the other." This is what I am doing here in my District and I understand you to be saying in Cabinet meetings. There are some great metaphors about gardening, watering, fertilizing in the scriptures. And then there’s Jesus’ parable of the unproductive fig tree that speaks of grace as cultivating, watering, fertilizing one more year, and then if there is not fruit, cut it down.
These are the one-liners in the book that excite me:
1. Leaders relentlessly upgrade their team, using every encounter as an opportunity to evaluate, coach and build self-confidence.
2. Leaders make sure people not only see the vision, they live and breathe it.
3. Leaders get into everyone's skin, exuding positive energy and optimism.
4. Leaders establish trust with candor, transparency and credit where credit is due.
5. Leaders have the courage to make unpopular decisions and gut calls.
6. Leaders probe and push with curiosity that borders on skepticism, making sure their questions are answered with action.
7. Leaders inspire risk taking and learning by setting the example.
8. Leaders celebrate the achievements of others in the organization.
Here are some quickies from the sub-heading "On Hiring-Inspiring"
Think of yourself as a Gardener, a watering can in one hand and fertilizer in the other." This is what I am doing here in my District and I understand you to be saying in Cabinet meetings. There are some great metaphors about gardening, watering, fertilizing in the scriptures. And then there’s Jesus’ parable of the unproductive fig tree that speaks of grace as cultivating, watering, fertilizing one more year, and then if there is not fruit, cut it down.
These are the one-liners in the book that excite me:
1. Leaders relentlessly upgrade their team, using every encounter as an opportunity to evaluate, coach and build self-confidence.
2. Leaders make sure people not only see the vision, they live and breathe it.
3. Leaders get into everyone's skin, exuding positive energy and optimism.
4. Leaders establish trust with candor, transparency and credit where credit is due.
5. Leaders have the courage to make unpopular decisions and gut calls.
6. Leaders probe and push with curiosity that borders on skepticism, making sure their questions are answered with action.
7. Leaders inspire risk taking and learning by setting the example.
8. Leaders celebrate the achievements of others in the organization.
Here are some quickies from the sub-heading "On Hiring-Inspiring"
- Hiring good people is hard. Hiring great people is brutally hard. Yet nothing matters more in winning than getting the right people on the field, then guiding them on the right way to succeed and get ahead.
- Before you even think about assessing people for a job, they have to pass through three screens:
1. Integrity - People with integrity tell the truth
2. Intelligence - Candidate has a strong dose of intellectual
3. Maturity - The ability to handle stress and setbacks, and enjoy
success with equal parts of joy and humility.
- Then the passion - a heartfelt, deep and authentic excitement about work.
- When you actually interview somebody for a job, make sure every candidate is interviewed by several people. Over time, you will find that some people in your organization have a special gift for picking out stars and phonies.
Will Willimon
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
KIERKEGAARD ON PASTORS WHO ARE SERVANTS OF THE TRUTH
One of our talented young candidates in ministry, Christopher Barnett, is at Oxford University writing a dissertation on Soren Kierkegaard. Kierkegaard, the “Solitary Dane,” had some tough things to say about pastors of his day. He firmly believed that pastors are not called to run errands for members of the congregation or to be the freelance therapist for everyone in need. Pastors are, in Kierkegaard’s words, primarily “servants of the truth.” We must cultivate an attachment to the truth, which is Jesus Christ, and to speak that truth no matter what.
Here are some of S.K.’s demands for pastors. I’ve been meditating upon them this week and have found them helpful, and sometimes painful!
Here are some of S.K.’s demands for pastors. I’ve been meditating upon them this week and have found them helpful, and sometimes painful!
- Pastors who can split up the “crowd” and turn it into individuals.
- Pastors who are not too much occupied with study and have no desire whatever to dominate.
- Pastors who, though able to speak, will be no less able to keep silent and be patient.
- Pastors who, though they know people’s hearts, have no less learned temperance in judgment and condemnation.
- Pastors who understand how to exercise authority, through the act of
sacrifice. - Pastors who have been prepared, trained, and educated in obedience and suffering so that they will be able to correct, admonish, edify, move, and also constrain not by force, anything but that, but rather through their own obedience; and above all will be able to put up with all the rudeness of the sick person without letting it upset her any more than a physician allows herself to be disturbed by the curses and kicks of a patient during an operation.
-- Soren Kierkegaard, The Journals of Soren Kierkegaard, trans. Alexander Dru (San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1959).
Monday, April 16, 2007
THE MAIN THING
“The Main Thing is to keep your eye on The Main Thing.” That’s what I heard a distinguished business leader say awhile back. It is so easy, when you are in a leadership position, to be overcome, swamped with trivialities and distractions and to lose sight of “the main thing.”
How do we keep at ministry, amid the myriad and deep demands of the pastoral ministry? I think there is only one way - with a deep conviction that God really is present in our ministry, doing more than we can think, say, or do. Bill Easum confirms this with this affirmation of the need to keep our pastoral focus on “the main thing” - the mission of Jesus Christ in the world.
My experiences with the “deeps” have taught me much about myself and how God works. What really separates authentic leaders who soar from those who do not is a vision or mission worth dying for. Those who have this kind of vision or mission are able to go in the face of impossible odds. They are able to focus on the goal so fully that it must happen.
My experiences with the “deeps” have taught me much about myself and how God works. What really separates authentic leaders who soar from those who do not is a vision or mission worth dying for. Those who have this kind of vision or mission are able to go in the face of impossible odds. They are able to focus on the goal so fully that it must happen.
My “deeps” have taught me that my little successes in life have little to do with me and a lot to do with the gracious gift of a mission from God. The mission is what saves us and drives us on - not our ability. The mission is what both drives us down and brings us up. People with a vision don’t burn out, they just keep on going and going and going in spite of it all.
-- From Put on Your Own Oxygen Mask First: Rediscovering Ministry, Bill Easum, with Linnea Nilsen Capshaw, Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2004
p. 18.
William H. Willimon
I hope to see you at the Inaugural Bishop's Lecture in Faith and Ethics at Birmingham-Southern College on Tuesday, April 17 at 11:00 a.m., in the Norton Campus Theater. Dr. Carol Newsom, Charles Howard Candler Distinguished Professor at Emory University, will speak on “Three Ways of Imagining Good and Evil: The Bible’s Internal Conversation”.
-- From Put on Your Own Oxygen Mask First: Rediscovering Ministry, Bill Easum, with Linnea Nilsen Capshaw, Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2004
p. 18.
William H. Willimon
I hope to see you at the Inaugural Bishop's Lecture in Faith and Ethics at Birmingham-Southern College on Tuesday, April 17 at 11:00 a.m., in the Norton Campus Theater. Dr. Carol Newsom, Charles Howard Candler Distinguished Professor at Emory University, will speak on “Three Ways of Imagining Good and Evil: The Bible’s Internal Conversation”.
Sunday, April 08, 2007
The Last to Believe in Easter
Preparing to preach on Easter I note some curious truths. The first to experience Easter, and the first to preach Easter were women (take that, those who think that women preaching isn’t “biblical”!). And to whom do the women preach the resurrection? The disciples of Jesus.
Preachers and lay leaders of the church please note. The disciples don’t believe the women. They think they are hysterical. The disciples dismiss their news as “an idle tale.” As Kierkegaard noted, how curious that those who were closest to this event, those whom Jesus had been carefully preparing - his own inner circle, the disciples -- are the least prepared to believe. Those who were the most prepared, who had a front row seat in the class - Jesus disciples - were as dumb as anyone, dumber, actually.
People who teach in theological schools take note: Even the two Jewish religious groups who at the time were the most sophisticated in thinking about resurrection, who were working the most diligently from the Scriptures to prepare an adequate theological foundation for the resurrection - the Pharisees and the Essenes - missed the whole thing. As Karl Barth once said, when it comes to the gospel, everybody is an amateur, everyone a beginner.
Luke makes the intellectually marginalized - in this case, women who were denied participation in the educational systems of the day - play so prominent a role in perception of resurrection. Mary Magdalene - maybe the most marginal of any of the early followers of Jesus - is the chief resurrection witness and the only person to appear in all four accounts. All we know about Mary Magdalene before she joined Jesus is that she had previously been possessed by “seven devils.” The “seven devils” could refer to an utterly dissolute moral life or to an extreme form of mental illness. Either or both of these pre-Jesus conditions, coupled with being a woman in a patriarchal society, put her at the far edge of marginality.
If you were Luke and trying to convince people of the truth of the resurrection, would you make your chief endorsements come from those whom the majority of people are least likely to believe? Given the importance that we in our society gives to celebrity endorsements, it’s more than a little disconcerting that the main witness to the resurrection is a woman on the margins.
Unless that was exactly how it happened. Here is a God who tends to work the margins rather than the center, who does not limit divine revelation to the “in crowd.” You can’t get much more in the center of the “in crowd” of the church than being a bishop, and a male bishop at that.
I think in this early testimony to the resurrection that we read in the gospels, a parable is here for those of us, all of us in the church, Jesus’ closest friends, the Jesus “in crowd.” We may be the slowest to apprehend the full, frightening, wonderful truth of the resurrection. We may have to listen to the testimony of those whom we don’t consider to be on the “in crowd.” We may have to admit that the resurrection is both our hope and our judgment as followers of Jesus.
Happy Easter. He is risen, he is risen indeed.
William H. Willimon
Preachers and lay leaders of the church please note. The disciples don’t believe the women. They think they are hysterical. The disciples dismiss their news as “an idle tale.” As Kierkegaard noted, how curious that those who were closest to this event, those whom Jesus had been carefully preparing - his own inner circle, the disciples -- are the least prepared to believe. Those who were the most prepared, who had a front row seat in the class - Jesus disciples - were as dumb as anyone, dumber, actually.
People who teach in theological schools take note: Even the two Jewish religious groups who at the time were the most sophisticated in thinking about resurrection, who were working the most diligently from the Scriptures to prepare an adequate theological foundation for the resurrection - the Pharisees and the Essenes - missed the whole thing. As Karl Barth once said, when it comes to the gospel, everybody is an amateur, everyone a beginner.
Luke makes the intellectually marginalized - in this case, women who were denied participation in the educational systems of the day - play so prominent a role in perception of resurrection. Mary Magdalene - maybe the most marginal of any of the early followers of Jesus - is the chief resurrection witness and the only person to appear in all four accounts. All we know about Mary Magdalene before she joined Jesus is that she had previously been possessed by “seven devils.” The “seven devils” could refer to an utterly dissolute moral life or to an extreme form of mental illness. Either or both of these pre-Jesus conditions, coupled with being a woman in a patriarchal society, put her at the far edge of marginality.
If you were Luke and trying to convince people of the truth of the resurrection, would you make your chief endorsements come from those whom the majority of people are least likely to believe? Given the importance that we in our society gives to celebrity endorsements, it’s more than a little disconcerting that the main witness to the resurrection is a woman on the margins.
Unless that was exactly how it happened. Here is a God who tends to work the margins rather than the center, who does not limit divine revelation to the “in crowd.” You can’t get much more in the center of the “in crowd” of the church than being a bishop, and a male bishop at that.
I think in this early testimony to the resurrection that we read in the gospels, a parable is here for those of us, all of us in the church, Jesus’ closest friends, the Jesus “in crowd.” We may be the slowest to apprehend the full, frightening, wonderful truth of the resurrection. We may have to listen to the testimony of those whom we don’t consider to be on the “in crowd.” We may have to admit that the resurrection is both our hope and our judgment as followers of Jesus.
Happy Easter. He is risen, he is risen indeed.
William H. Willimon
Friday, April 06, 2007
The Violent Bear It Away
Maundy Thursday
Tonight we begin the enactment of a story, Jesus’ last hours. I don’t know what most impresses you about the story of the arrest, the trial, the crucifixion of Jesus. What impresses me is its sheer bloodiness, the violence. I pray to God that I’ll never get so hardened of heart, so inoculated to the violence, that I cease to flinch as Jesus is nailed to the wood.
It’s a very violent story. Jesus foretold this night in a parable (Mt. 21). A man had a vineyard. He improved it, built a wall around it, a tower too. He leased his vineyard to some tenants, allowing them to collect and keep the fruit of the vineyard, never charging them rent. One day, he sent his servants to the tenants to collect the rent that was due. The wicked tenants beat the servants, killing one, stoning another half to death. The owner thought, “Unbelievable! This time I’ll send my own son to collect my rent, that will surely shame them, or bring out the best in them.”
The owner failed fully to reckon the depth of wickedness, the potential for violence among the tenants. They say to themselves, “Well, here comes the son, the heir to the vineyard. Let’s bash in his head, kill him, so that it will be ours.”
And Jesus says, the Kingdom of God is just like that. He who never one time used violence, or even self-defense (wouldn’t let us use our swords tonight to protect him), was the cause of violence. He, who embodied the best, brought out in us, the worst. The gospel is a violent story.
So is ours. We are a violent people, we tenants of the vineyard, and most of the stories about us, if they are true, are bathed in blood. Historian Stephen Ambrose says that 1945, the year before my birth, may have been history’s bloodiest year. In every corner of the world, the sight, says Ambrose, of a half dozen teenaged boys, walking down a street, would strike fear among the people. They were armed to the teeth, young killers in uniforms provided by old men in government. I was born one year later, the year of the last lynching in the South, in my hometown. I was conceived in blood.
And weren’t we all? Creation is but six chapters old, says Genesis (6:11), when God notes that something had gone terribly wrong. The earth that God intended to be filled with birds and beasts and humanity, is “filled with violence.”
And hasn’t it always, at least our part of the earth? A few years ago was published a three volume, Violence in America.[1] A brief perusal proves it really is as American as apple pie. We were born in blood, what we call “The Revolution,” others call it the genocide of the natives. 168 people killed by a young man, U.S. Army trained, in Oklahoma City. The crazed Unabomber, a Harvard man. Most of our children have seen something like a thousand TV murders by the time they are ten. And so many of our heroes, Kennedy, King, Lincoln, assassinated by their fellow citizens. I confess I only made it for about twenty of the encyclopedia’s nearly 2,000 bloody pages.
And he gathered us, the night before he was whipped, beaten and nailed to the wood. And taking the bread said, “This is my body, broken, for you.” And then the cup, “This is my blood, shed, for you.”
For you. Because if there were not some blood to it, some brokeness, it wouldn’t be for me, for you.
“We don’t really believe that the cup actually contains the blood of Christ, do we?” he asked. Well, why not? What did you think it meant when it said, on Christmas, that "the Word became flesh and moved in with us”?
“I will, having failed at all else, send them the Son,” said the Father, that will bring out the best in them, shame them, change them, surely.” Well, tonight we see that, he came into the world, the world (in the words of Genesis, “filled with violence”) and brought out the worst in us.
Any Savior who wants to save us, must be willing to get bloody in order to get to us, for our story is one of broken bodies and shed blood.
Earlier, in Matthew’s gospel, when they came and told Jesus that John the Baptist had been arrested and was awaiting execution (Mt. 11:12), Jesus commented that, since the first days of Creation, since Genesis, since John, the kingdom of heaven has suffered violence, and the violent try to take it by force.
What’s new? Well, what’s new is this night, that the kingdom should come to us, the violent, not by violence, but by One willing to turn his cheek to the smiters, to shed blood, body to be broken, for us, for us.
[1] Violence in America: An Encyclopedia, Ronald Gottesman and Richard Maxwell Brown (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 2001).
Monday, March 26, 2007
The Point of Pastoral Ministry: Lay Ministry
Bill Easum, our consultant in ministry in North Alabama, has a provocative word about the need to empower the laity to do ministry:
“You know, one of the issues here is that everyone relies too much on the pastor to do all the ministry.”
Before I could finish the man blurted out, “I’m aware our pastor needs help, but we can’t afford to hire any more staff."
I couldn’t let that one go unanswered, so I responded, “I’ve never met a pastor who needed help. You don’t need more staff. All you need to do is equip your congregation to do ministry.”
For a brief moment the man looked at me dumbfounded and perplexed. Then with a hint of sadness in his voice he uttered the most despicable statement a Christian can make: "But we’re just laypeople. We’re not called to the ministry and we certainly aren’t professionals.” (From Put on Your Own Oxygen Mask First: Rediscovering Ministry, Bill Easum, with Linnea Nilsen Capshaw, Nashville, Abingdon Press, 2004, pg. 14)
One of the regrettable results of our United Methodist stress on careful preparation for, and collegial accrediting for our pastors is that there have been a steady “professionalizing” of ministry. Easum makes the flat, direct statement, “I’ve never met a pastor who needed help. You don’t need more staff.”
We pastors ought to see ourselves, not as the “ministers,” but rather as coaches and equippers of those who are called to the ministry of Christ - the laity, the People of God. Years ago, my friend John Westerhoff said, “If you are a layperson and you are spending more than fifteen hours a week at church, you are wasting your time. That is not your ministry. You are not to run errands for the pastor at church, you are to join in Christ’s ministry in the world.”
Westerhoff continued, “And if you are a pastor who spends more than fifteen hours a week working in the world, you are wasting your time. The work of the laity is too tough for them to do that work without being equipped and enabled to do that work. Your job, as pastor, is to equip them for their baptismal work in the world.”
So that implies that the test for our pastoral ministry is not, “How much have I been able to accomplish at my church?” but rather, “How much have I enabled the laity to accomplish at their church.”
William H. Willimon
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)