Archives For church staffing

Everyone.

However, we’ve really messed up this concept. We don’t hold people accountable in ways we should, and hold people “accountable” in counterproductive ways. Here are six ways to insure accountability is a blessing rather than too sparse or merely a different word for control.

1. Recognize and the “intrinsic” accountability already present–and align ministry there. For instance, when hiring a new staff member, there is intrinsic accountability built into the results of the hire that insure the “hirer” will do a thorough job–if the “hirer” is the Senior Pastor. They will need to work with that person on a daily basis, manage them, and be responsible for transitioning that person if they don’t work out. Any egg on the face will be theirs. They will have to do with fewer financial resources because of the hire. So, there are a lot of built-in reasons for them to do a thorough job with the hire. Accountability is intrinsic.

Not so with a committee. They have no stake at all in the hire, and tend to underestimate the true damage a bad hire can cause because they’ve never suffered the results first-hand. This is why, in my opinion, committees are helpful in an advisory capacity, but not a “voting” capacity in the hiring process. They aren’t accountable, and have no real skin in the hire. Ministry hires are nuanced in ways business hires aren’t–and vice-versa.

2. Build in accountability for everyone, and especially those in power. I said in my class on leadership at the Pepperdine Bible Lectures (affiliated with Churches of Christ) something that stung, but got a lot of nods. “Churches of Christ are built to protect against the autocratic minister. However, they have little or no immune system to protect them against autocratic or unhealthy elders.”

I’ve never seen a true autocratic minister in a Church of Christ. However, autocratic elderships are quite common. One reason is there is no accountability mechanism for those who hold the most power. This is so dangerous. In other tribes, it’s a Deacon Board or Senior Pastor for whom there is zero accountability. In every case, in every tribe, it’s a bad thing. Whether it’s a rotating elder system, a differentiated ministry system, a by-law or policy governance accountability system–choose wisely and make sure there is some accountability for those with the most power. This is especially true for matters of character.

3. Make sure accountability and responsibility match. People should have responsibility for that which they will be held accountable for…and be held accountable for decision they actually make. If the elders, for instance, make a poor decision and fire the preacher for the results–this is both unfair and assurance of future mistakes. After all, the pastor has changed, but those who made the mistake haven’t–and there’s an invincibility quotient that is likely to factor into future decisions. If the elders grant freedom to the minister and they abuse the power given, they must be held accountable for responsible use of the power granted.

4. Don’t allow accountability to disguise attempts at control. Or, we should just call it “control.” Accountability is a good word that carries with it the connotation of doing what’s best for those involved. Accountability is something healthy people seek rather than avoid. Control is a different concept–and loves to wear the banner of “accountability” in dysfunctional situations. One of the worst things a church can do is give people legitimate reason to fear “accountability” by asserting inappropriate or unnecessary control.

5. Pay Attention to the “Shots on Goal Principle.” In baseball, a .300 batting average is considered quite good. This is in part due to the fact most advantages belong to the pitcher and it’s graded over 162 games and 600 at-bats. In basketball, shooting 30% from the free-throw line is terrible. Why? Because you’re shooting with no one guarding you, standing still, from a short distance. A good free-throw shooter needs to hit at least 75% of their free-throws. The percentage of “misses” one is allowed by a coach depends on the shot taken and the number of shots taken.

Here’s the point: The harsher your “accountability” processes are, the less risk your staff is likely to take. Fewer mistakes don’t make someone a better minister. It means they make fewer mistakes–though they are likely making the key mistake of never stretching their ministry. Highly “accountable” ministry means fewer catastrophic mistakes, but it means you’ll score fewer points as well. Your most effective minister isn’t necessarily the one making the fewest mistakes. It might be the one who misses more because of the kind of shots they take and how often they shoot. Make sure you’re clear about how many and what kind of shots you want people to take–and hold them accountable for results based on that “style of offense.”

As a rule, we at New Vintage save our highest accountability for character matters.

6. Remember grace. “Accountability” isn’t best when it’s punitive. People are going to make mistakes, and we serve a gracious Savior who is the only true Head of the Church. So, while upholding His standard, we must remember grace. Elders, pastors, committees, volunteers–they all make mistakes. Coaching, correcting, adjusting and forgiving is usually the best approach.

Thoughts? What else might you add?

Some leadership teams believe a new staff hire needs to spend time “earning trust” before they are given significant freedom to lead. I addressed the reasons I believe such is usually (not always) a counterproductive posture to take at the Pepperdine Bible Lectures. When I asked the class how long it took to “earn trust,” the consensus was, five years.

Five years.

Churches are willing to get less out of a minister for five years so they can protect against them doing the church harm either practically or spiritually? Why hire such a person if they deserve such suspicion? Who would jump at the opportunity to serve in such a system? Does this all make sense?

At one level, it makes none at all–given the average pastoral tenure is less than that. In addition, new elder selection processes reset the trust clock with at least some. Furthermore, frustrations relating to freedom to do ministry usually run toward the top of the list. In addition, how is a minister supposed to earn trust based on competency when they aren’t allowed to do what they’re capable of?

Ironically, churches choose people as elders they believe are trustworthy. In most cases, full regard for their input and authority is granted from day one. However, this doesn’t happen at the staff level–which is why both systems–elders and staff–struggle to work together.

I obviously believe absolutely EVERY minister should be trustworthy. However, I also believe the infamous “earning trust” phase is self-defeating–leading to lower productivity and higher turnover than would otherwise.

Why not just hire people you trust?

Don’t spend five years paying someone to be, largely, a professional trust earner. Besides, every elder and church member may have different criteria for what earns their trust. For some, it will be competency. For others, it will be not rocking the boat. Others will have totally different “trust earning” criteria.

This system doesn’t work.

Hire people you trust, and trust them until there is some reason not to–remembering grace if/when they make mistakes. Let’s not choose five years of suspicion and caution instead of five years of ministry together based on trust. The best way to do that is to hire well, with a clear picture of “trustworthy” looks like as you hire.

As New Vintage Church, we look for these four things.* (The first three are from Bill Hybels in Courageous Leadership.)

  1. Character. They pursue a growing relationship with Christ and live a life of integrity.
  2. Competency. They are able to lead their area of ministry with excellence.
  3. Chemistry. They get along well with others in leadership and the congregation as a whole.
  4. Fit. They fit our staff culture–creative, excellence-oriented, flexible, fun-loving, and buy into our ministry philosophy.

If we know (as best we can) they have these four things, it’s not hard to trust such a person.

Question: What does it take for you to grant trust to someone you work with?

“The single most important thing great companies did that good companies didn’t was make superb people decisions.” That was from Jim Collins at the Catalyst West conference last week. Collins is one of my favorite…OK, my favorite, author on leadership from a business perspective. The research his team has done over the years has changed even the everyday language of leadership for many.

While not everything Collins says from a business perspective should be used in churches, that statement can. At a strategic level, nothing matters more than using good judgment in people decisions. So, I’ve compiled a list of five huge staffing mistakes either I or people I know have made. Avoiding these will help your church immensely:

Continue Reading...

Here are some things on my mind this Friday morning:

  • Would you rather have a cup of cheap, fresh coffee or overcooked, high-quality coffee. I’m going cheap and fresh. Burned Starbucks coffee tastes like I’m drinking the contents of a microwaved spittoon.
  • KFC just started offering gravy as a dipping sauce. This is sheer brilliance. The world would be a better place if more restaurants offered a side of gravy with things…
  • Like cereal.
  • I’m embarrassed to say this, but out of all the conferences I’ve attended, I’ve never been to a Catalyst conference. Next week, I get to go to Catalyst West with the NVC staff. I’m really looking forward to it.
  • On the sports front, Emily and I just happened to have attended a certain baseball game between the Dodgers and Padres last night. How entertaining…
  • I do think Zach Greinke hit Carlos Quentin on purpose. There are many reasons, here are a few:
  • 1) The pitch high and tight to Matt Kemp in the 4th was the instigator. 2) Greinke’s reaction when he hit Quentin…not exactly dust and ashes. He cursed at Quentin. 3) The catcher lined up low and away. Greinke threw high and in. You don’t make 17 million because you miss spots that badly. Plus, his mechanics completely changed on that pitch. 4) Vin Scully, in his live call, seemed to think it was retaliation for the earlier pitch. Trust in Vin. 5) Matt Kemp’s reaction–totally illogical…unless Greinke got hurt trying to avenge you. 6) There is a history between Quentin and Greinke. 7) The count and game situation actually mean you can hit him without getting tossed–that’s why it’s perfect. People who think pitchers don’t throw at anyone when the game in the line don’t get the code. Roger Clemens threw at Mike Piazza in a tight World Series game. This is a throwaway game in the early part of a 162 game season. 8) Quentin has been hit by a pitch more than any active player (116 times), and Greinke has hit more batters. Quentin has never charged the mound…until last night. He knows when he’s targeted vs. one that got away. 9) Randy Johnson blames Greinke…and RJ was one of the greatest bean-ballers of all-time. He knows who did what there.
  • Having said that, Quentin shouldn’t have charged, and I don’t like that Greinke broke his collarbone.
  • Having said that… Kemp really talked and strutted a lot. He threatened much and did nothing. His parking lot “confrontation” and going after Bud Black (the Padres Manager) was weak. I think Kemp ordered the Code Red, and was freaking out because it got out of hand and now Greinke’s out for a minimum of 8 weeks.
  • Don Mattingly was disingenuous in the press conference–and that hurts me to say–he was my childhood hero. I understand being frustrated, but you can’t say Quentin, a two-time All-Star and Stanford man is too mentally dim to understand the game if he thinks Greinke threw at him. Mattingly played in the 80′s, when bean-balling was made an art form. He knows better. Having said that, I’d probably take up for my player, too.
  • Now, the Dodgers-Padres series at Chavez Ravine starting Monday has become must-see TV.
  • Many in our church have been praying the hours this week to cultivate a more prayerful life. It’s been a huge blessing.
  • The discipline of praying on the hours might have helped Carlos Quentin with his anger management issues.
  • I used to watch American Idol religiously. I’ve hardly noticed it’s been on this year. I get the sense I’m not the only one. In hindsight, I think they’ll look at hiring Nicki Minaj as the beginning of the end.
  • When a church is looking to hire a minister and calls looking for names before describing their church, that’s a red flag.
  • When they aren’t interested in discussing the long-term vision of the church (even when asked) because they want names, that’s another red flag. It suggests both a lack of captivating vision, and a low view of staff. This is intrinsically also a low view of the church.
  • Microsoft and Google are in a spat, and as a result, Microsoft no longer supports Google Calendar and vice-versa. It’s a losing cause for Microsoft in my opinion. Microsoft’s product is superior, but Google’s is more popular and has a larger platform.
  • Meanwhile, despite massive stock value loss, Apple hibernates like a sleeping Grizzly. Watch out for them.
  • One takeaway from coaching girls softball this year–you can push players (even 9 and 10-year-old girls) really hard and have a good time. However, they must know you love them, and you must mix in some fun. There is a lesson here for those leading staff teams.
  • A & E better hurry up and give the Duck Dynasty crew their raise. I’m almost done watching season three and will go through serious withdrawals if I stop.
  • I might even go Carlos Quentin on an A & E executive. Give Si his raise!
  • That’s all for this week, Jack!

What’s on your mind this Friday morning?

Hire People You Like

April 10, 2013 — 6 Comments

It isn’t enough to simply do what you’ve been asked to do. That’s a given. Ministry staff teams must be cohesive units that execute ministry’s calling. I’ve observed that some churches emphasize “getting the job done” without looking at how to get the job done in a way that reinforces other church objectives…like cultivating team chemistry or building godly character. There’s no reason “getting the job done” has to be the only thing that happens when staff works on something–ever. The job will get done better and more consistently if those on a staff team like each other.

Continue Reading...