Congregational and Diocesan Development Issues

The purpose of this blog is to promote discussion of some ideas which I think will promote the development of first world churches, and through debate to improve those ideas. To follow the flow of my logic, read forward from the first entry; entries which form the cornerstones of my thought are flagged with "KEY--", and are listed below with a short summary of the key idea. Kindly share your suggestions and improvements with me, and I will adjust the contents accordingly. Thank you for your participation! (Direct email contact is also welcome.)

• KEY--Why are congregations weak?
  (Mostly due to defects in the culture of the judicatory: unclear mission/vision, ineffective structures, misaligned incentives, and lack of support, all of which lead to a low quality "product".)
• KEY--Correcting diocesan weaknesses
  (A summary explanation of what is involved in correcting those defects.)
• KEY--Correcting the weakness of congregations
  (How to move away from a "laisser faire" leadership style at the diocesan level in a way that has organisational legitimacy.)
• KEY--Setting Targets (Overview)
  (Dioceses now measure mostly finances and attendance, if they measure anything. Some suggestions on better measures which should have a cause and effect relationship towards wholistic growth, a Balanced Scorecard.)
• KEY--Sample Benefits from a Balanced Scorecard
  (Illustrating what wholistic growth would look like: much more than just more money or more people in church!)
• KEY--Cause and Effect for Laurentian Congregational Revitalisation
  (Shows the linkage between the different strategic activities in Laurentian churches, and growth in organisational, spiritual, financial and participatory health.)

The essence of correcting the weakness of congregations is a) moving away from a "laisser faire" leadership style at the diocesan level, and b) doing so in a way that has organisational legitimacy.

A study on the state of congregations in Québec by the Partnership for Church Development found that the laisser faire style was common throughout the Roman Catholic and Protestant mainline denominations, and I have no reason to believe that this is not the case in the rest of Canada, and perhaps in the US as well. When taking this approach, diocesan leadership takes a "hands off" approach to much of the work of congregations, other than supervising the broad strokes of diocesan policy. It provides minimal support for pastoral staff (leading in some situations to a high rate of burnout and other disability claims), and certainly little encouragement for growth or improvement in congregations.

Laisser faire management is likely, at least in part, a reaction to past forms of leadership which have been autocratic, arbitrary or otherwise lacked legitimacy. When a diocese has a clear and broadly-accepted vision or mission, however, it also has the legitimacy needed to begin to implement changes in culture and congregational expections, providing they are aligned with the diocesan mission.

In this context, working to encourage healthier congregations involves several basic steps, which will be outlined in later posts; we believe that this work is best done in deanery or archdeaconry groups, because it re-inforces the relationship of responsibility and accountability from Bishop to Archdeacon (to regional dean/supervisor?) to clergy to congregation :

1. Assessment of the potential of each congregation
1. Internal potential (including perhaps a rating of mission, finances and leadership)
2. External potential (market potential: how many people in the target population which this congregation is trying to reach are there who are not yet affiliated with a congregation? What is the current normal "market penetration" that can be expected?)
2. Formulation of the SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats) at work in this region
3. Some structured prayer and discernment by the local clergy and lay leaders, and likely the congregation as a whole, leading to a decision: are we willing and committed to growth?
4. Establishing some realistic but challenging "stretch targets"
5. Planning for growth (based on the regional SWOT and data on each congregation):
   
1. What are the highest priorities?
   
2. What are the cause and effect relationships which will lead to the desired results (stronger, more faithful and effective congregations; see later posts on the Balanced Scorecard)
3. What changes will produce the greatest results in the shortest time?
6. Aligning the regional and diocesan culture and rewards system to reinforce progress towards the targets which have been set, and nowhere else
7. Regular evaluation and re-adjustment
1. The whole purpose of this process is to produce a learning organisation which knows how to produce the results for which it exists (its mission)
2. There must be benefits for all levels of the organisation: new members benefit from the Gospel; old members benefit from new life and new leadership; the congregation as a whole benefits from increased attendance and higher revenues (as a start; see the later post KEY--Typical Expected Benefits); the region has increased vitality and greater investments; the diocese has greater vitality, a larger pool of potential leaders, and higher revenues. (There are, of course, costs, and there will naturally be resistance, but that is a secondary, albeit important, change-management issue)