One of the greatest leadership issues facing pastors today is leading change initiatives in the local church. It has been said the that seven last words of the church are, “We’ve never done it that way before.” The way a pastor approaches change can make or break his ministry. I want to make a couple of comments about change, and then give a little insight into the way that I approach change in my ministry setting.
First, as pastors, I believe we must develop a theology of change. The essence of the Christian life is heart transformation. The church is no different, it is to be a living, breathing, dynamic organism. As soon as the church becomes an institution it begins the slow and painful process of atrophy and death. Institutions have to maintain life, while living organisms are in the business of reproducing themselves. A solid theology of change recognizes that change is essential for survival. Most of us realize this…but kicker is how do we motivate dead and dying institutions to become living, breathing, reproducing organisms once again.
In my situation I became the pastor of a medium size church that had a ten year history of conflict and decline. It did not take long for me to see several areas where change needed to occur…and after almost 18 months there are still several areas where change needs to occur. But, I immediately started working with church leadership to bring about small and effective changes, with the intention of helping us move towards taking greater strides towards change and ministry effectiveness in the future. The biggest mistake a pastor can make is to think short term. We have to remember that this is Christ’s church. Attempting to mold a church into one’s personal preferences is a big mistake. We need God’s vision for the church, not ours, and it takes time to allow God to disclose His vision.
I call these first set of small, achievable changes, cultural changes. The pastor becomes somewhat of a cultural architect. Change in church culture must happen before deep and abiding paradigm shifts can take place. For example, when I came on board the only full-time staff remaining were two full-time student pastors. Both are great men and talented ministers. The problem was that in a church averaging around 400 we needed a broader ministry focus. The good news was that Lead Student Pastor was wanting a transition, so we were able to move him to associate pastor. Our middle school pastor was a natural fit to become the student pastor. Both moves have turned out to be very positive. This was a no-brainer, yet impactful cultural change. It was one of my first decisions and was a small win that benefited the body.
The second cultural issue that needed a change would be more difficult, but I felt it very important. This was the condition of our facilities. This change was much more intensive, but we are now remodeling about 80 percent of our plant. This is a cultural change, a shift towards excellence. Every time I talk about our remodel I mention that we are creating a warm and inviting atmosphere of excellence. I want people to know that we are changing our culture, from mediocrity to excellence. These are just simple examples of cultural changes. Small, effective wins earn a leader credibility. The more credibility a leader has the easier it becomes to lead those people who are difficult.
Secondly, a leader has identify what I call the tribal chiefs in the congregation. These are simply the lay people that wield influence in the body. It is always wise to bring these people into the loop on any ideas for change that one may have. John P. Kotter’s book titled, Leading Change, is one of the best reads on this topic. He states that when casting a vision for change, one of the first things that must be done is to sell the problem. When you focus on selling the problem with influencers in the church, they will often times begin to search for solutions. When the problem is sold, it is easy to lead towards effective change.
Finally, a solid vision for change is somewhat complex. Tom Rainer gives one of the greatest explanations of vision in his book, Breakout Churches. He says that a pastors vision must intersect with the churches passions and the needs of the community. I thought this was a great way to contextualize vision. Each unique setting requires a uniquely designed vision. I know I rambled on in this post…I welcome any complaints, comments, or suggestions to help us all with this difficult topic.
Great topic,
I’ve been where I’m at for 6 months. I followed a pastor who had been here 27 years. I fought God about this for months but we believe He led us here. I probably made changes too soon. I changed Sunday PM to Discipleship only. People got upset but our attendance doubled. Go figure! Then I started a contemporary service at 8:43 AM in addition to the traditonaly worship service. It is doing well but now some are upset because they don’t see the young people.
I realize that you will never please anyone. I realize as much as I say I love to change–I still buck it sometimes myself. I look forward to reading what more seasoned change agents have to say.
Dan Southerlands book entitled “Transitioning: Leading your Church through Change” was very helpful. His conference was even more helpful.
Tad, your ideas about change are great. This is an important topic.
I have been at my church for 8 years. It was founded in 1908. They were a very traditional and catered almost entirely to our retired, winter guests. When my first summer came, one of the “tribal chiefs” met with me the week before she left for their northern home to say, “Don’t change anything while I am gone.”
One thing that has helped me to enlist those tribal chiefs was to talk about the vision and goals of those who founded the church. I quoted those founders extensively as we talked about being a year around church with a ministry to all ages. That heritage talk helped many people understand that we were not really changing, but were returning to an original vision.
We had some early successes and we built upon those successes. We are still not where we need to be, but the ball has been advanced down the field.
I love the word “change.” In fact, I believe most church members love change. I know that’s hard to believe – but I believe it is true. However, I think we must remember this important point. Before we became the pastor there was a pastor before us, and before that pastor another pastor. Most churches have had several pastors in the lifetime of the average church member. Each of those pastors wanted to change certain things. I believe the “theology of change” that you mention must be rooted in why we are changing. If our people do not know why we are changing than it will be very difficult for them to “get on board.” I am the pastor of a small church in Illinois. They have had 32 pastors in their 50 year history. That proves my point – people like change. In order to make the change that I felt necessary for our church – I had to communicate why we are changing. My church members had to realize that we were changing not to look like me – but to look and behave like Christ. This took several months, but eventually we began seeing change. I believe the best question to ask ourselves is this: Why am I making this change? Why do I feel it necessary to change a certain culture that is already established? The answer to that question must and always be – to fulfill the “Great Commission.” Not just the first part, baptizing, but the second part as well, discipleship. No change that we initiate in a church will be effective unless the outcome is to produce genuine disciples of Jesus Christ. I believe sometimes we change things that really have no eternal impact. We focus on changing non-essentials when the things that truly need changed go unmoved.
Kevin:
While I understand the motive to offer diverse worship styles, I think it inherently creates factions in your church — even if they are nice to each other. It isn’t necessarily young/old as a division, either: that split can be between theological moderates and theological conservatives. As a person who has had to lead secular change in large organizations, one of the things I think I can give as good advice is this — there has to be a stable platform of trust upon which to manage change, and the single most destructive enemy of trust is artificial divisions.
My opinion is that the divisions created by split services (split by style, not because the worship center only has 200 seats and you have 400 bodies you;re trying to get in) makes future changes more difficult. And I’ve never been a pastor, so take that for what it’s worth.
Tad –
Dude, you’re so smart. There is no question that church leadership is almost entirely about managing the effects of change on a congregation. Even a stagnant church is changing — because its core membership is aging. The question is if we (well, you, and then the rest of the church) will be victims of compacency in the face of change, or will we leverage the gaps change creates in order to get to the goal — which is, in this case, the Gospel.
Managing change in a church is managing toward Christ-centeredness and Christ-likeness in the body. Christ never changes, so what we are managing is the ways we, as grass and dust, change and must re-orient on Christ.
Frank,
You may be right. However, I’ve been on staff at two churches where it worked well. Also, Saddleback and Lakepoint in Rockwall have added traditional services. Our contemporary service is growning and it is early.
If I had changed the 11:00 service I would have upset a lot of people. If I had blended it-it would have been like blending a fish and ice cream-no one is happy. I think this is the least of my worries.
I’m starting to disciple a few men in the church. I’m doing leadership training with my deacons. I trying to learn as I go.
Brent – A proper theology of change adresses purpose and is rooted in the fact that the church is an organism not an institution. Change should be happinging as a result of what Frank mentions, the spread of the gospel. An organism is either thriving, surviving, or dying. The goal in Scripture is for the body to thrive – this doesn’t translate into cosmetic, programic, or paradigmatic chat all the time. But, my point being, small, sustainable, cultural changes is a great place to start while trying to recaputre a taste for the change that comes when a church truly becomes gospel focused.
Frank – it is so cool to be your pastor!
Kevin – one key I see is this, motivation means something. Your motives are right. The dual styles thing can work and does work. Many times it is a matter of context.
One thing to think about related to change: If God took me out tomorrow would the changes I lead a church to make be sustainable when I am gone. To me this is huge! If the effectiveness of a change relies soley upon me, then I do not think it is a wise move to make the change…there must be a level of “buy” in and commitment from lay leadership.
Also – what are the 5-10 year impact of the changes being made. This helps weigh the pros and cons. Finally – is the change rooted in sound theology. I am a firm believer that we must not only be concerned with orthodoxy, but also orthopraxy. I think there is much creative room within orthopraxy because the NT does not give us many edicts. Whats funny is that the clearest patterns of the NT, such as plurality of oversight, is greatly dismissed.
All this to say – be fiercly biblical, create sustainable and long-term changes, and achieve buy-in from the tribal leaders and those passionate of bringing the change about. If this is done most cultures can accept changes, even radical ones.
Tad –
You say that to all the Finance Commitee Chairmen.
Did Alan rat on me?
Tad,
The search committee said they wanted changes. They have been behind me 100%. In fact the chairman of deacons was on that committee too and has been my biggest supporter. They realize that we have to make changes or we will die.
That being said, changes are hard.
This is not uncommon. Have you read Breakout Churches? This would be a very encouraging read for you. Just so you know – my comments are too the topic in general, not specifically to your situation, as I do not know all the ins and outs.
I haven’t read that book. I did read Transitioning and How to change your church without killing it. I guess I should get it. Thanks,
KB