The One Minute Manager Builds High Performing Teams

By Ken Blanchard, Donald Carew, & Eunice Parisi-Carew

The people we manage are our most important resources. Never before in the history of the workplace has the concept of teamwork been more important to the functioning of successful organizations. Today’s leader must be an enabler of people and a facilitator of teams – not only as an effective team leader but as an effective team member as well. We need managers who can foster teamwork, facilitate group problem solving and focus the group’s attention and enthusiasm on continuous improvement. In today’s world, group productivity is more important than individual task accomplishment. The success of individual managers should depend on how well the manager’s team improves in quality and productivity on a continuous basis. Managers must have a great deal of control to their people. When that occurs, a feeling of team ownership is created and the team develops pride that comes from producing high quality accomplishments.

When groups are operating effectively they can solve more complex problems, make better decisions, release more creativity and do more to build individual skills and commitment than individuals working alone. Today’s leader must be an enabler of people and a facilitator of teams. All groups are dynamic, complex, ever-changing, living systems that – just like individuals – have behavior patterns and lives of their own. The characteristics of high performing Teams are: Purpose and Values, Empowerment, Relationships and Communication, Flexibility, Optimal, Performance, Recognition and Appreciation, and Morale. An effective team starts with a clear purpose and a set of values. The hoped-for end results are optimal productivity and good morale. The means to those ends are empowerment, relationships and communication, flexibility and recognition and appreciation.

The first thing an effective leader needs to do is create a common purpose that helps point the team in the right direction. The team also needs to agree on a set of values that will guide the team’s choices and determine how the team pursues its purpose. The whole process of developing a high performing team involves three major skills on the part of the team leaders and team members as well: Diagnosis, Adaptability and Empowerment. Diagnosis, understanding the dynamics and the behavioral patterns that exist in groups is essential if you want to facilitate the team’s development and productivity. Perhaps most important is the skill of observing the team in action. Content describes what was done at a meeting, while process depicts how the group functions. Unfortunately, we often pay little attention to process, yet it is critically important because process affects outcome.

What to observe in groups: Communication and Participation are about who talks to whom? Who is left out? Who talks most often? etc. Decision making involves how a group goes about selecting a course of action – majority rule, consensus, lack of response, etc. Conflict is inevitable and necessary in reaching effective and creative solutions for problems. How is conflict handled in the group – avoidance, compromise, competition, collaboration, etc. Leadership is all about who is influencing whom. To be effective a team must be clear on its roles (who does what?) and goals (what are they trying to accomplish?). Norms are the assumptions or expectations held by group members that govern the kinds of behaviors that are appropriate or inappropriate in the group. They are the ground rules which regulate the group’s behavior. Effective problem solving involves identifying and formulating the problem, generating alternative solutions, analyzing consequences, action planning and evaluation. Group climate refers to the feeling or tone of the group – how pleasant it seems.” And finally individual behavior focuses on what team members are doing to help accomplish the task(s) and/or help the group functioning. All group leaders, and group members as well, need to practice the skill of being a participant observer. That means being fully engaged in the content or the agenda, whatever it is, and yet being able to step back and observe the dynamics which are occurring in the group at the same time.

Stage 1 – Orientation (This is the stage when the team needs to develop a team charter that creates a solid foundation for the future work of the team and makes sure that all the needs will be satisfied.) The Characteristics of this stage are: Moderate eagerness; High, often unrealistic expectations; Anxiety about roles, acceptance, trust in others, demands on them; Tentative, polite, conforming behavior; Lack of clarity about purpose, norms, roles, goals, structure (how they will work together); and Dependent on authority for direction and support; Some testing of boundaries. The Needs are: A common understanding of the team’s purpose; Agreement on values and norms for working together; Agreement on roles, goals and standards; Agreement on decision-making authority and accountability; Agreement on structure and boundaries – how work will get done and by whom, timelines, tasks and required skills; Information about available resources; and Knowledge about each other to utilize diverse talents and build personal connections. Finally, the Issues are: Personal well-being; Acceptance; and Trust.

Stage 2 – Dissatisfaction (Although this stage is characterized by power struggles and conflict, it also is the seedbed of creativity and valuing differences.) The Characteristics of this stage are: Discrepancy between expectations and reality, Confusion and frustration around roles and goals, Dissatisfaction with dependence on authority, Expression of dissatisfaction, Formulation of coalitions, Feelings of incompetence, confusion, low confidence, Competition for power, authority and attention, Low trust, and Some task accomplishment. The Needs are: Clarification of big picture, Redefinition of purpose, roles, goals and structure, Recommitment to values and norms, Development of team and task skills, Development of communication processes including active listening, the exchange of nonjudgmental feedback, conflict management and problem solving, Valuing of differences, Access to information and resources, Encouragement and reassurance, Recognition of accomplishments, Open and honest discussion of issues including emotional blocks, coalitions and personality conflicts, and Mutual accountability and responsibility. Finally, the Issues are: Power, Control, and Conflict.

Stage 3 – Integration: The Characteristics of this stage are: Increased clarity and commitment on roles, goals, tasks and structure, Increased commitment to norms and values, Increased task accomplishment – moderate to high, Growing trust, cohesion, harmony and mutual respect, Willingness to share responsibility, leadership and control, Understanding and valuing of differences, Use of team language – “we” rather than “me,” and Tendency to avoid conflict. The Needs are: Integration of team and individual roles and goals, norms and structure, Continued skill development, and Encouragement to share different perspectives and to disagree in order to further develop problem-solving skills. Finally, the Issues are: Sharing of control and Avoidance of conflict.

Effective leaders adjust their style to provide what the group can’t provide for itself. You have to change your leadership depending on the stage of development the group is in and the goal is to get the group to the point where they are not only accomplishing the task efficiently but operating effectively as a team. In the Orientation Stage, team members bring enthusiasm and commitment to meetings, but little knowledge, so they need direction. In the Dissatisfaction Stage, team members are struggling with the task as well as how to work together so they need both direction and support. In the Integration Stage, team members have the skills to perform well but still need to build their confidence or morale so they need support and encouragement. Finally, when the team reaches the Production Stage they have high skills and morale so the leader can stand aside or join in and let them work with minimal interference. The most important function of a leader is to help the group move through the stages of development.

Empowerment involves gradually turning over the responsibility for direction and support to the team. Empowerment involves managing the journey from dependence on a leader or some outside sponsor to interdependence, from external control to internal control. People in general resent tightening up on leadership style. You will never, never, never have an empowered, self-directed team unless the leader is willing to share control. The words “leader” and “educator” are synonymous. As a leader you are a teacher. Your job is to help all team members develop the skills and knowledge so they become self-directed and to provide an environment where they feel willing to risk, to grow, to take responsibility and to use their creativity. To be fully contributing, individuals and groups have to feel free to do so. Teams feel empowered when they are involved, contributing and productive. Real empowerment comes from sharing. Not just with each other, but with members on every team. Being a good team leader is much harder tan being an autocratic leader. Empowerment is all about letting go so that others can get going.

HIGH PERFORMING TEAM

---

Rating Form

Purpose and Values

1. The team has a clear commitment to a common purpose. Team members know what the team’s work is and why it is important.
   
2. Common values and norms promote integrity, quality and collaboration.
   
3. Specific team goals are clear, challenging, agreed on and relevant to the purpose.
   
4. Strategies for achieving goals are clear and agreed on.
   
5. Individual roles are clear, and their relationship to the team purpose and goals is understood.

Empowerment

6. Values, norms and policies encourage initiative, involvement and creativity.


7. All relevant organization and business information is readily available to the team.


8. The team has the authority, within understood boundaries, to take action and make decisions.


9. Direction, structure and training are available to support individual and team development.


10. The team is committed to the continuing growth and development of all team members
    

Relationships and Communication

11. Different ideas, opinions, feelings and perspectives from all team members are encouraged and considered.


12. Team members listen actively to each other for understanding, not judgment.


13. Methods of managing conflict and finding common ground are understood.


14. Cultural differences including race, gender, nationality, age, etc., are valued and respected.


15. Honest and caring feedback helps team members to be aware of their strengths and weaknesses.
    

Flexibility

16. Team members share responsibility for team development and leadership.


17. The team is able to meet challenges using the unique talents and strengths of all team members.


18. Team members shift from behaviors that provide direction or support as needed.
    
19. The team is open to exploring different ways of doing things and adapts to change.
    
20. Calculated risks are supported. Mistakes are seen as opportunities for learning.

Optimal Performance

21. The team constantly produces significant results; the job gets done.
    
22. The team is committed to high standards and measures for productivity, quality and service.
    
23. The team is committed to learning from mistakes and to continuous improvement.
    
24. Effective problem-solving and decision-making skills overcome obstacles and promote creativity.
    
25. The team coordinates efforts with other teams, vendors and customers as appropriate.
    

Recognition and Appreciation

26. Individual and team accomplishments are often acknowledged by team leaders and team members.
    
27. Team members have a sense of personal accomplishment in relation to task contributions.
    
28. Team contributions are valued and recognized by the larger organization.
    
29. Team members feel highly regarded within the team.
    
30. The team celebrates successes and milestones.

Morale

31. Team members are confident and enthusiastic about the team’s efforts and are committed to success.
    
32. The team encourages hard work, as well as having fun.
    
33. There is a strong sense of pride in and satisfaction with the team’s work.
    
34. There is a strong sense of trust and team spirit among team members.


35. Team members have developed supportive and caring relationships and help each other.
    

An Executive Book Summary prepared by

Thomas L. Law, III, DoM
Tarrant Baptist Association
Fort Worth, TX

(For more than 200 more reviews by Dr. Law, go to www.TarrantBaptist.org)

Antagonists in the Church

By Kenneth Haugk

Sooner or later most congregations experience some degree of destructive conflict caused by antagonism. Such conflict, though caused by so few, has the potential to disrupt, even to destroy, the mission and ministry of Jesus Christ through the people of God. Antagonism can obliterate a sense of the presence of God’s love in individuals and in the faith community. Perhaps antagonism most frequently tears into the lives of church staff members. There are those who wantonly, selfishly, and destructively attack others.

Antagonism should not be confused with mere criticism or healthy conflict in the church. Antagonism is unhealthy conflict, and antagonistic behavior is not honorable. Antagonists are individuals who, on the basis of nonsubstantive evidence, go out of their way to make insatiable demands, usually attacking the person or performance of others. These attacks are selfish in nature, tearing down rather than building up, and are frequently directed against those in a leadership capacity. You can learn to recognize antagonism, prevent antagonism, and deal with antagonism.

When one individual assumes the whole burden of dealing with an antagonist, the result is rarely healthy. The obligation to deal with the situation properly resides in the corporate leadership of the congregation and, to a lesser extent, in the congregation as a whole. Remember that conflict with an antagonist is an attack by hostile forces on the very life of the church. All must work together to repel the attack, though by the very nature of their function, leaders will generally assume a more active role than others.

Church antagonism is that disruption in a congregation caused by an antagonist. Antagonists initiate trouble; they do not wait for trouble to come along. Antagonists are never satisfied. Their implicit goal is control, no matter what the cost may be to others. It should also be noted that everyone acts antagonistically at times. Without excusing such behavior, you can be sure of this: isolated antagonistic behaviors do not make an antagonist. What is missing, among other things, is that insatiable quality that drags problems out interminably.

Conflict is a fact of life throughout society, including the church. Speed Leas distinguished five levels of conflict in congregations. According to Leas, what differentiates the various levels are the objectives of those involved and their use of language. The objective of those operating at Level I, Problems to Solve, is to work out a solution to the problem, whatever it is. At Level II, Disagreements, the objective becomes colored with a need for self-protection. At this level, individuals move away from dealing with specifics and tend toward generalizations. Those operating at Level III, Contests, view conflict from a “win/lose” perspective. What matters is winning, putting one’s opponents “in their proper place.” Parties operating at Level IV, Fight/Flight, have the objective of hurting their opponents in some way, getting rid of them, or both. Leas described Level V, Intractable Situations, as “conflict run amok.” The objective of individuals in conflict at this fifth level is purely and simply to destroy opponents, irrespective of cost to self or others. The bulk of church conflict takes place at healthy, normal levels. This book is a resource for dealing specifically with those who engage in conflict on Level III, IV, and V.
Antagonists are antagonistic by nature. Antagonists frequently exhibit the psychological defense mechanism known as displacement, in which the focus of behaviors is shifted to someone other than the individual who first elicited them. Church antagonists displace their angry and hostile behaviors onto people in the congregation who too often are easy, available, vulnerable targets. Antagonists tend to attract followers. It is the assistance of these followers that accounts in part for the escalation of antagonistic conflict in congregations. Antagonists have an uncanny ability to find power voids, which they subsequently rush to fill. Too often people have felt that antagonists had to be placated. Because congregations are often relatively small, they are ideal places for antagonists to gain the attention they crave.

There can be no doubt that Christians are called to minister to all people. A Christian is to minister to an antagonist no less than to a saint. Deciding how to deal with antagonists is difficult. You may never be entirely comfortable with your decision. This is as it should be. It indicates that you are a caring human being who hurts when a fellow human being hurts. But painful decisions are part of life. Dealing with antagonists is never easy. No matter what is done, someone will feel pain, be it the antagonist, the congregation, or yourself. But bear in mind that the right kind of pain can also be a precursor of healing.

Distinguishing those who are true antagonists from those who are not is essential. Otherwise there is a serious risk of misjudging the actual level of conflict confronting you. Antagonists tend to display distinctive combinations of clustered personality traits and psychiatric syndromes. Antagonists frequently evidence at least several of five personality characteristics: negative self-concept, narcissism, aggression, rigidity, and authoritarianism. Two factors distinguish these characteristics as they appear in antagonists; first, antagonists usually display at least several of them; second, antagonists exhibit them in extreme forms. An individual with a negative self-concept frequently views the world with excessive pessimism. Antagonists try to build themselves up by tearing others down. Narcissistic individuals who are antagonists are extremely reluctant to admit wrongdoing. In addition to manifesting an excess of the above personality characteristics, antagonists commonly possess one or both of two clinical syndromes: paranoid personality and antisocial personality. Most antagonists fall into the middle and upper portions of the paranoid spectrum. Marks of a paranoid personality include persistent, unwarranted guardedness and mistrust of others; delusions of grandeur; lack of genuine emotions; and hypersensitivity. Most antagonists suffer from more than one disorder.
A second syndrome accompanying and aggravating paranoia in many antagonists is an antisocial personality (alternatively known as psychopathy or sociopathy). People with antisocial personalities suffer from a significant lack of moral development, accompanied by an inability to live within the limits of socially acceptable behavior. They are also manipulative and guileful, treating others as objects for accomplishing their own ends. As a result of inadequately developed consciences, antagonists with antisocial personalities experience little guilt or anxiety over the pain they inflict on others. Antisocial antagonists are adept at putting up a good front in order to obtain the admiration and support of others. Their extreme likability enables them to put others at ease almost effortlessly. All these traits exist to some degree in everyone. What distinguishes nonantagonists from antagonists is that these characteristics do not dominate the personalities of nonantagonists.

The data indicates that those with antagonistic track records tend not to reform. Individuals who behave antagonistically in other arenas of life are prime candidates to become active antagonists in the church. When someone offers you a word of criticism and adds, “There are X number of other people who feel the same way,” chances are excellent that you are talking with an antagonist. Beware of those who denounce your predecessor and praise you at the same time. Antagonists will characteristically spend much time and effort probing you and trying to become intimately acquainted. Later, their inquisitiveness will turn to the proverbially cool contempt bred of familiarity. Those who lavish effusive, gushing praise on you now will often be equally generous with their criticism later. Beware of those who try to catch you in error. Beware of smooth individuals who seem to have no foibles. Beware of those who consistently move from congregation to congregation. A liar is someone who may be a potential antagonist.
Antagonists tend to use means that are extreme, unethical, combative, or any combination of these. Anyone who conspicuously uses money has better than average potential to be an antagonist. Inappropriate note takers are often budding antagonists. Antagonists occasionally make a practice of carrying impressively stuffed portfolios to demonstrate that they possess evidence for their charges. An individual who consistently uses sharp, cutting language is a viable candidate for the position of antagonist. Beware of those who conspicuously resist established policies, insisting on doing things their own way. People who first appear to be simply pests may later prove to be thoroughgoing antagonists. There appears to be a correlation between individuals who promote causes and those who behave antagonistically. It is nevertheless startling to note how many antagonists have had to fight their way up. Antagonists are particularly apt to flaunt their struggle. You may want to pay a bit more attention to congregational members who lose on a particular issue, especially when the level of conflict approached that of “contest” or above. Individuals who wave these red flags merit close scrutiny.

Antagonists also exhibit warning signs that telegraph their intentions to begin an attack. By alerting yourself to the earliest stages of an antagonist’s attack, you gain a distinct advantage. You can minimize the damage done by dealing effectively with the individual before major problems erupt. When a person who is exhibiting red flags changes his or her manner of relating to you, beware. As an antagonist begins activity, he or she might pay you a visit or send you a letter of “concern.” A red-flag person who expresses “concern” typically means “angry.” You find yourself feeling nettled as the antagonist becomes a constant fly-in-the-ointment. To wage an effective campaign, an antagonist must gather support and create discord, conflict, and doubt. Another sign of imminent onslaught is a potential antagonist meddling in areas that are not his or her concern. Finally, you might detect growing resistance and independence from a red-flag person. The six warning signs presented so far usually come early—like the hush before a storm.

The following section describes characteristics of active antagonists at later stages. Antagonists often use one or more emotionally laden slogans to spread troublesome dissension. Antagonists frequently bandy about one or more accusations. In more or less obvious ways, an antagonist may begin to spy on you. Antagonists frequently distort reports of incidents, leaving grains of truth to maintain credibility. Antagonists frequently misquote the Bible to provide proof that their campaigns or behaviors are legitimate. An antagonist is likely to tell the person he or she is attacking, “I am your friend, but this is something that I just have to do.” A troublemaker might wear an inappropriate smile or a cocky grin when he or she encounters the person under attack. Antagonists sometimes pester church leaders. Antagonists frequently send letters or other communications. Acknowledge these at first—with a brief phone call or a postcard. One of the most counterproductive courses of action would be to respond with a lengthy, single-spaced letter. Antagonists often portray themselves as champions of the underdog, or as underdogs themselves. Antagonists frequently lobby with small groups in the congregation to create doubt about one or more leaders.

The disproportionate share of attention antagonists demand (and often get) makes it immensely worthwhile for leaders of a congregation to create an environment that is as unfavorable as possible for antagonism. A good way to prevent antagonism is for everyone to follow the established policies and procedures of the congregation. Procedures are safeguards against antagonists. Two-way, open communication needs to exist between leaders and members. To facilitate this, leaders must clearly tell the congregation what the appropriate channels of communication are, and reiterate them frequently. When clearly spelled out means of response are available, an antagonist who blatantly disregards them is more easily detected and exposed. Clear job descriptions create an unfavorable environment for antagonists. A strong, broad base of authority can do much to thwart antagonistic attacks. When an antagonist realizes that power is carefully distributed among a group of people, then he or she will think twice before instigating trouble. Functional disciplinary measures are also essential to maintaining an anti-antagonist environment. Change must be gradual and must be accompanied by a great deal of loving commentary. Abrupt change can awaken antagonists. Church staff and lay leaders must maintain a united front, with no room for backbiting or unhealthy friction. A healthy support group for church staff is extremely helpful in creating a generally uninviting environment for antagonists. A group of this sort keeps the staff in touch with the congregation. It helps minimize unhealthy criticism directed at church staff and further a growth that is beneficial to all.
Education indeed equips people to do what must be done, no matter how uncomfortable the task—and few tasks are more uncomfortable than dealing with antagonists. The goal of general education is to communicate an understanding of the dynamics of antagonism and ways to handle it effectively. The first purpose of general education is prevention. The second purpose is to provide a foundation for specific education when or if it becomes necessary. Specific education means education about individuals who are beginning to behave antagonistically. Specific education should begin where there is a problem and after some leaders have begun to experience discomfort. General education should be available to as many leaders as possible, so they can be aware of the dynamics and treatment of church antagonism. Specific education is for those leaders who bear legitimate responsibility for the problem. A group or particular individuals from a group that might benefit from specific education is a nominating committee seeking qualified candidates for congregational or committee leadership. It is better to leave a post empty than to fill it with an antagonist. Specific education should proceed slowly and inductively from effects to causes.

The proper, timely use of authority is good and serves as a strong preventive measure against the development of antagonism. When a congregation is struggling with antagonism, leaders who overly indulge their need to be liked can bring about damaging repercussions. People may not like strong leaders, but they hate weak ones. There are two types of authority: authority of person and authority of office. Authority of person ultimately stems from your own feelings of worth and ability. By virtue of an office you hold in the congregation, you may possess additional authority. When antagonism interferes with the mission and ministry of the congregation, your anger should embolden you to use every ounce of your authority to end the situation.

Relate to an antagonist very, very carefully whether they are active or inactive. Your exact strategy and response will vary depending on the level of antagonistic behavior, but in all cases you will need to be on your guard. Professional behavior is a plus for anyone at any time, and is particularly vital when you relate to antagonists. You might think that your reserved behavior will anger antagonists. It might, but there is a greater probability that they will learn to respect you, as a result reducing the chance that they will harass you. Don’t run from antagonists, but avoid inviting them to sit at your hearth; the vestibule or foyer is close enough. Antagonists are delighted by opportunities to prove others wrong—even slightly—and will seize any chance to catch you in an error. Avoid reinforcing the inappropriate behaviors of antagonists. When you know an antagonists is gearing up for action, tighten your grip on the reins. Try to discourage nomination of an antagonist to a position of leadership. A leadership role can provide a springboard for the antagonist to create trouble more easily.

In relating to a potential antagonist, do not throw down your gauntlet too soon. Learn to hold your tongue even when an antagonist is provoking you. Responding too soon to antagonists’ attacks can be counterproductive. The truth won’t hurt you unless you let it. Don’t seek sympathy from others. Don’t request a special committee to handle the accusations of the antagonist. Don’t call for a vote of confidence. Your attitude should be one of blithe self-confidence, presuming that you have the support of others—and helping to ensure that you do have support. Defend yourself against a potential antagonist’s behavior by brushing it off as a petty annoyance—or better, no annoyance at all. You can operate from strength early on, dealing with antagonists calmly and nondefensively, or you can react later, when the situation mushrooms out of control, threatening to damage you and the whole congregation. An ounce of prevention now is worth more than a pound of confrontation later.

As you collide with an antagonist and struggle with a pile of problems collapsing on you, you can receive invaluable assistance to another who might be taking the brunt of such an attack. A confessor-confidant is someone with whom you can share feelings, thoughts, and strategies for coping with an antagonistic situation. Healthy people realize that God did not make us to be strictly independent. I usually advise pastors, in particular, to find a confessor-confidant outside the congregation. A good confessor-confidant relationship will include a certain amount of education. A confessor-confidant affirms the other as much as possible. Affirmation from the heart builds and strengthens the other’s whole person, renovating what the antagonist has tried to tear down.

Be the best possible leader you can be, and continue to do your job effectively. Don’t panic or bring other activities to a screeching halt while you wait for the antagonist to reveal him- or herself. Don’t go on a fact-finding mission or expend large amounts of energy searching out the trouble and its source. Accept the fact that it is not critical to precisely identify the antagonist or antagonists. Act confidently. Remember the operating rule when dealing with antagonists: weakness invites and prolongs attacks; strength repels it. Note the locations of tension and disturbance. A final recourse when you don’t know the source of tension is to live with it. Invisible antagonists—unseen either by you or by others—present you with an opportunity and a challenge. The opportunity is to get on with the work of the church. The challenge is that you need to maintain vigilance and be ready to respond when the antagonist begins to come forward.
Responding forcefully but responsibly to someone who is waving numerous red flags of antagonism is what this chapter is all about. The characteristics of antagonists demand firm, assertive behavior when you interact with them. To act otherwise is to court failure. Who should guide the interaction is the key question in dealing with antagonists, because control of you and the situation is what the antagonist is after. The primary focus in this chapter is not on how to handle antagonists, but how to handle yourself. The ability to take charge of yourself is essential in one-to-one interviews with antagonists. If possible, avoid meeting with the antagonist at all. If there is to be a meeting, it should be at the antagonist’s initiative. The location of a meeting with an antagonist is another critical factor. Be firm in our intention to meet in a place of your choosing. A meal creates an unwanted atmosphere of intimacy that will work against you. The time for you to establish control is when you set up the meeting, not at a busy eating establishment.

Sometimes an antagonist will call with an air of urgency and ask (or demand) to meet with you right away. Don’t do it. Along with not meeting immediately at an antagonist’s request, it is inadvisable to meet at any other specific time the antagonist suggests, even when this might be possible for you. Antagonists tend to think they have the right to take liberties with your schedule. By specifically mentioning that you plan to meet for an hour, you are establishing a structure for the meeting from the start. The dogged persistence of antagonists tends to wear people down. Meeting with an antagonist at length weakens your resistance, aiding and abetting the antagonist’s cause. Let the antagonist speak first. Saying little and maintaining a solid presence (steady eyes, good posture, minimal fidgeting) is far more beneficial than words. Be an attentive listener, but not an active listener. Take notes at every meeting with an antagonist. Do not tape-record and interview with an antagonist. Antagonists frequently ask questions to try to trick you into saying something that they can use against you. Remember that you have no obligation to answer unfair or irrelevant questions. Be firm with antagonists, but avoid challenging or arguing with them. Take care also not to bait antagonists. You may need to bite your tongue, but a sore tongue is better than added fuel for an antagonist’s fire.

Confidentiality always applies in counseling-related situations. If an antagonist has been in a helping relationship with you in the past, you must keep that information to yourself—even if it could help explain the antagonist’s present behavior to others. Confidentiality applies less strictly in situations other than specific helping or counseling relationships. Since antagonists usually wage campaigns that are public, the matter of confidentiality is nearly always irrelevant. If you have the slightest doubt whether a communication from an antagonist is confidential, ask the antagonist for permission to share what he or she has just said. The antagonist most likely will be happy to grant you permission. You might also want to inform an antagonist ahead of time that all conversations with you are exempted from confidentiality. Using channels of public communication to combat antagonism gives the antagonist attention and recognition, reinforcing the negative behavior. Using channels of public communication to combat antagonism could be perceived as taking unfair advantage of your position; can create doubt where there was none before; creates an unhealthy atmosphere for the whole congregation; you can appear to be weak; could make you come across as an ogre; and violates the use for which these channels were intended.

The leaders of a congregation will take the brunt of an active antagonist’s attacks. Therefore leaders must prepare themselves both tactically and strategically for dealing with antagonists in group situations, for presenting a united front, and for the difficult decisions associated with disciplinary measures. If you preside over a meeting in which an antagonist creates trouble, you are in a strong position to deal with the situation. To do so most effectively, it is imperative that you thoroughly understand the level of authority that is vested in you. An informed, courageous, and conscientious committee member can make a significant impact on controlling antagonism in group situations. A well-chosen word delivered from a respected advisor can go far to preserve good order. Good communication among leaders will serve as your best shield against an antagonist’s attempts to divide. When specific disciplinary actions are called for, the leader’s responsibility is not to equivocate or bend the regulations, but to carry them out. Antagonists tend not to change. Both clergy and lay church leaders spend entirely too much time castigating themselves when attacked by antagonists, as they transform fear of being judgmental into ruthlessness towards self.

In the midst of your personal dealings with an antagonist and the accompanying furor, you should strive to minimize the damage an antagonist causes. Before any problem arises, you should search out and learn your denomination’s own way of handling matters such as antagonism. As a rule of thumb, always try to handle the problem at the congregational level. Notify early, but request help late. Judicatory officials want to know when a storm is beginning to brew, not when all they can do is help a congregation clean up the wreckage. In communicating with judicatory officials, be specific.

Experiencing an attack from an antagonist can crush your spirit, diminish your sense of personhood and self-worth, and even threaten your attachment to the church. You may have a spectrum of feelings ranging from anger, frustration, confusion, and depression. These feelings might lead you to wonder, “Should I leave or stay?”. I encourage you not to resign prematurely, or for church members, not to leave too quickly. In most cases there are very good reasons for seriously considering “hanging in there.” When a church leader relinquishes his or her position, the solution is often temporary. Once a replacement arrives, the problem begins again. You might well have more support than you realize. As Ulysses S. Grant said, “There are always more of them until they are counted.” The antagonist is generally the offending party. The antagonist is a congregational problem that affects the whole congregation. Consider personal and family needs. Deciding to vacate your position also involves questions of moral responsibility. You may be the one destined to put an end to the antagonistic problem, and resigning may be running away from God’s will.

Your success as a leader depends largely on your ability to be self-directed and God-directed, rather than depending exclusively on feedback from others. Although resignation is usually unnecessary, it is still one alternative. The basic issue for you to consider is whether or not you have lost effectiveness as a leader in your church setting. Consider resigning if you have made many serious mistakes or committed great (and actual) offense. Consider resigning when a significant majority is against you. Even if you weathered the storm and came through with majority support, resignation may be the expedient and caring action. Your presence might simply bean unpleasant reminder of that time of strife. But do not give up too soon. You might be surprised by the recuperative powers of individuals. If the unrest increases as time passes, then perhaps you should move on. Consider resigning when staying poses a risk to your physical or emotional health. Consider resigning when one or more judicatory officials in all love and honesty recommends it.

When you have considered these factors well, and if resignation seems proper to you, here are some possible ways to proceed. Your honesty can educate your constituency. Your frankness may well have an overall healthy effect. Do all you can to smooth the transition to a new leader. Arrange for an exit interview with appropriate leaders. If you were the victim, resign your office according to a schedule that suits your convenience. Apologize sincerely if, in any way, you are to blame for what has transpired. Resignation almost always seems to be the lesser of evils, but most of the time it creates more problems than it solves. It is never an easy choice, and calls for a great deal of prayer, thought, and personal struggle.

In the aftermath of an antagonistic situation, there are many who need care. Certainly the other leaders on the front line of attack have emotional sores that require prompt, caring treatment. What they probably need as much as your listening ear is encouragement. Offer care to the confused, innocent bystanders, members who might be at a loss to understand what happened. It is important to match the varied needs with the proper amount of caring. The followers who fell in with the antagonist also require care. First, give them ample opportunity to express their guilt. Once they have worked through their guilt and other emotions, then offer the soothing balm of forgiveness that assures full acceptance back into the fold. Finally, the ones who reacted to the stress by becoming inactive desperately need caring ministry, but the difficulty of caring for those who left is that their trust level is low. After an antagonistic ordeal, you need to experience healing as well. Now is also a good time for leaders to learn more about the whole area of antagonism. The aftermath of an antagonistic attack will find congregational leaders especially willing to learn. Your goal should be to create an even healthier congregation. You need to forgive, but your forgiveness must not be blind. An antagonist can be compared to a volcano. In dealing with a dormant antagonist, be every bit as careful as you would in dealing with a volcano that erupted a year or two earlier.

A synopses prepared by
Thomas L. Law, III, DoM
Tarrant Baptist Association
Ft. Worth, TX

(For more than 200 book summaries by Dr. Law, go to www.tarrantbaptist.org)

Breaking the Missional Code

By Ed Stetzer and David Putman

You can be equally called, gifted, and passionate and yet experience different levels of success due to the model of ministry being used. In other words, the way you do things does impact your ability to reach your community effectively. Breaking the code means discovering the principles that work in every context, selecting the tools most relevant for your context, and then learning to apply them in a missionally effective manner. Evangelism is telling people about Jesus; missions involves understanding them before we tell them. Missional thinking focuses on doing missions everywhere.

Breaking the code means that we have to recognize that there are cultural barriers (in addition to spiritual ones) that blind people from understanding the gospel. Our task is to find the right way to break through those cultural barriers while addressing the spiritual and theological ones as well. One of the biggest cultural barriers we face is the emerging “glocal” context. Most churches chose to keep its culture and lose its community. The world has changed and we live in a world that has transitioned from the modern era to one that is “post.” Postmodernity is the rejection of the modern view of life and the embracing of something new. It is important to note that the shift to postmodernism has not happened everywhere—it has not yet impacted many in the church culture because the church culture acts as a protective shield, unmolested by a secular culture’s music, literature, and values. Our churches need to decide whether they will be outposts of modernity in a new age or embrace the challenge of breaking a new cultural code. For many, evangelicals have become a voting block rather than a spiritual force.

In general, the church’s influence is declining both in the culture and among its own people. Our growing cultural diversity requires a church within the reach of every people group, population segment, and cultural environment if we are to be faithful to the Great Commission. As more and more North Americans identify themselves with ethnic or national backgrounds, the story is about more than just the broader culture. In addition to the many unreached people groups or ethnic groups that now call North America home, people can be identified and segmented into many population segments. People are bound by common experience. It is this common experience, when significant enough, that becomes a foundation for long- term social bonding and interaction. We must also consider cultural environments as part of our missionary mandate if the gospel is to be planted effectively among all people. We must recognize that while the broader culture has changed, most evangelical churches have not.

The spiritual landscape of North American culture is falling apart and coming together again at the same time. Spirituality is up, while church attendance is at an all-time low. Breaking the code answers the question, “Why are certain churches and ministries experiencing phenomenal success and massive growth in the midst of the apparent crisis within the North American church?” Many code-breaking churches are having a phenomenal impact. These leaders represent a new breed of pastors in North America. They have the ability to read the culture and translate ministry into a biblically faithful and culturally appropriate expression of church. Any genuine attempt at missional effectiveness begins with a calling from God. Above all else, we need to be called by God to a certain people. The call to people is essential because it helps us escape the trap of technique. The key to breaking the code of a community is to have the heart of the Father for that community.

In order to break the code, you must seek to understand the culture before you chose your model. As you decipher your own community, you may discover similar methods and models that have been used effectively in other like-minded communities. We have discovered that when the growing core of leaders, the pastoral leadership, and the community are from the same tribe, then the potential for impact is significant. A second principle relates to the similarity of certain population segments from one geographical area to another. In other words, wherever there is a people group, population segment, or cultural environment that is like the original church or ministry, then the methods, models, and techniques are often transferable. Every church must find its unique call and vision. For most churches, this happens accidentally. Churches that break the code seek to communicate the Word and connect through worship with local people and culture. If a church does not regularly examine its culture, it ends up as a culture unto itself.

Jesus gave four directives that outline the missional mandate of the church. We are sent on mission by God (John 20:21). We are exhorted to be on mission where God has placed us now, and our job is to “break the code” wherever we are. Being a code-breaking church means that often we are called to engage a culture that is not our own preferred culture. Our job is to take the gospel to each community, not hold on to our preferences. When we are functioning as God’s church sent on mission, we will go into different cultures, contexts, and communities. We will proclaim a faithful gospel there in a culturally relevant way, and we will worship in a way that connects in that setting. Jesus’ instructions mean that we must go to all the people groups in the world (Matthew 28:18-20). The word peoples represent every ethno-linguistic people group around the world, all the different ethnicities present in our cities, and even the different generations that live in our communities. No longer can we see them simply through the lenses of ethno-linguistic people groups, but we must adjust our sight to see them through the lenses of people groups, population segments, and cultural environments. Jesus said that we are sent to all peoples (Acts 1:6-8) and we are sent with a message (Luke 24:46-48). It is not about us! It is about Jesus saying,”As the Father has sent Me, I am sending you” to “Go and make disciples of all different kinds of people” with a message of “repentance and forgiveness of sin” as a people who have “received the Holy Spirit.”

The church is one of the few organizations in the world that does not exist for the benefit of its members. The church is the instrument and the vessel that God has chosen to use to reach your community. Today, we live on a mission field made up of all kinds of people—and they do not respond to the same approach. Insightful pastors will seek to lead churches as missionaries. The missional church is not just another phase of church life but a full expression of who the church is and what it is called to be and do. Being missional means to take the gospel into the context where we have been called … and to some degree, to let the church take the best shape that it can in order to reach a specific culture. You can’t be missional and pick what you like at the same time. Moving beyond preference requires a new motivation and outlook. Rather than providing methods to grow a church, missional thinking helps the church leader to wrestle through who God has called him or her to reach.

Change always happens, and most change is out of our control. What we can control is our response to a changing culture. The most important thing we could do was not to present the newest program or idea but to seek to understand the people we were called to reach and develop processes to reach them. Churches are recognizing that they need certain processes to help them accomplish their purposes. Those processes are universal the purposes are universal, but the plan to accomplish them varies from place to place. A church that implements processes recognizes that the local congregation should function just like a human body. Every part is influenced by every other part. Pastors are spending more time asking why the people in their community have not yet responded. They are deciphering their communities and bringing the unchanging gospel to each community. Instead of importing styles and models, more pastors are genuinely asking the same questions that missionaries do. Christology (our understanding of Christ) should shape our missiology (our understanding of his mission) and should our ecclesiology (our expression of church).

Leaders that break the code are recognizing that “nonrelational evangelism” is a contradiction. They are moving from attracting prospects to incarnating the gospel in their context. A church that is incarnational is interested more in the harvest than in the barn. People are realizing that God is using many different kinds of methods and models to reach different kinds of people. The answer is not to make all of our churches look alike. The answer is to have everyone seeking the same thing: to glorify God by being an indigenous expression of church life where they are. The most important qualifications for leaders are God’s call and a changed life. Church leaders who break the code have decided that the most important thing is to empower and release their church family for kingdom impact. These churches give themselves away rather than serve their own needs. The size of our churches is less important than the transformation of community, nation, and world through church multiplication—not just people gathered, but people sent.

You cannot separate evangelism and discipleship. We need missional churches that are focused on serious disciple making, not just leading people to make a decision. As the evangelical church matures, it is beginning to understand that all healthy things reproduce. Some churches are realizing that giving themselves away for multiplication is better than just constantly trying to gain a few additions. There is never a “good” time to send money, people, and energy somewhere else. Nevertheless, it is the only true way to engage in God’s work of exponential expansion of his kingdom. There have been few true people movements to Christ and his church in North America. It seems that our culture tends to turn movements into monuments before they spread too far.

Breaking the code is not about programs; it is about values. Code-breaking leaders think differently, and this results in churches that make a difference. For each leader and their churches, breaking the code includes spiritual formation discipleship, reaching the unchurched/unreached, evangelism, culturally relevant expressions of church, and spiritual warfare. Values of leaders and churches that break the code spring from the firm knowledge that following Jesus is a way of life that transforms us to be the incarnation of Christ in every culture. There are at least six areas that intermesh with leadership effectiveness: leader’s calling, character, competency, comprehension, commitment, and courage. They are motivated by the need and a sense of calling to a certain people or place. They throw themselves at the challenge of creating environments where the gospel can be planted and flourish. They lead out of a high sense of moral authority. When people observe this kind of character over the long haul, they become willing to invest themselves in the leader’s vision and dreams. As a leader takes risks and either succeeds or fails, he learns from each situation and uses that information to plan for the future. Each experience helps build a new level of confidence and competence. Leaders do whatever it takes to learn and prepare for success and significance.

Breaking the code is hard work and requires an incredible amount of commitment. Leaders who break the code have a high level of courage in regard to making the tough decisions. Those who break the code are committed to developing processes, raising up leaders, and building organizational structures that produce true disciples. Therefore, breaking the code involves understanding what it means to make and multiply disciples and then being able to apply it to one’s context. As a disciple, we too are to model life as Jesus did. We are to invite people to come follow us as we follow him. Loving like Jesus loved is a commitment we must have toward all people, regardless of their relationship to us. Love is passed on as they see us demonstrate it in all kinds of environments and situations, in spite of our circumstances. Those who break the code are not only committed to making disciples; they are committed to multiplying disciples.

Churches that focus on the unchurched/unreached often create a degree of discomfort among some churched/reached. The more effective we are at removing image and cultural barriers the more effective we will be at reaching the unchurched/unreached. Those who break the code are committed to culturally relevant expressions of evangelism. We can no longer just appeal to people to come “back” to an institution of which they do not remember being a part. Asking people to literally change their world-view after simply hearing the gospel, with no previous exposure to a Christian worldview, is usually unrealistic. The gospel has and always will continue to travel best along relational lines. Churches that break the code focus on building environments in both large and small groups, both on and off the campus, where the gospel can thrive. Churches that break the code put a high premium on experience. In a missional context, individuals often begin the discipling process long before conversion. This takes place as they actively experience community and participate in the ministries of churches that are breaking the code. While there are places where you only want believers and church members to serve, there are many paces you can plug in those who are on the journey. We have found that when people are involved in ministry, something happens that speeds up the process of their spiritual journey. When we develop churches that speak the language of their community and at the same time hold true to the changeless truth of Scripture and the gospel, we become successful at breaking the code. Our churches become truly indigenous to their context, and the gospel is able to flow unhindered by cultural barriers.

Contextualization of the gospel is needed in every culture, but it seems to be in particular need in the West today. The idea behind indigenization is that a church should spring forth out of the soil in which it is planted. It is indigenous in that its leadership, expressions, forms, and functions reflect that of the context. At the same time, it serves as a transforming agent in the very culture that sustains it. We have found that when the pastoral leadership, core of the church, and community all line up, the potential for the church to take on an indigenous form is significant. By far the most controversial point of this whole discussion is the way the message is communicated. We may start in a different place, but the context of the message needs to be Christ and the fullness of Scripture. If there is no point of connection, the message is simply meaningless facts rather than life-changing truth. In our highly spiritual world, we must look for cultural bridges that we can cross in order to carry the good news to a spiritually hungry people. Worship must take on an expression that reflects the culture of the worshiper if it is to be authentic and make an impact. When it comes to worship, a good starting point is to determine the purpose of worship. As God works in the lives of men and women, they have already begun their spiritual journey, and conversion is one step, albeit the most important one of all. Worship gatherings are designed to create space where people can experience God and progress at their own pace. In addition to recognizing that conversion is only part of the disciple-making process, it is important to note that churches that break the code are serious about conversion and make a big deal about people going public with their faith, and they recognize the importance of continuing spiritual growth.

When churches seek new ways to reach their communities, it means they are open to seeing God at work in fresh new ways. As churches have sought to break the code in their contexts, they have considered multiple expressions, locations, or venues as a key to their strategy. There is a tremendous increase in interest in house churches among evangelicals. A house church, it is not part of a larger church; it is a church. As it grows, it will multiply, not enlarge. Finally, the house churches often exist in networks; they are not isolated, independent groups of Christians. They are related to other house churches in a regional area. These churches often meet together for fellowship with other house churches, but it is not usually on a weekly basis.

Part of going is relational not the memorization of certain presentations and strategies. There is nothing more important related to fulfilling the Great Commission than a church which understand that this commission is central to its mission, has structured its ministry around the centrality of this mission, has created an environment that welcomes outsiders into this mission, and deploys insiders in fulfilling this mission. There are two conversions-one temporal and one eternal. The first conversion is the conversion to community. With few exceptions, people come to Christ after they have journeyed with other Christians-examining them and considering their claims. Unbelievers can and should be invited into the community, but they cannot be part of the church. A person becomes part of the church with the second and eternal conversion, the conversion to Christ. The church must become a safe place for people to experiment with and experience different aspects of the Christian faith. As such, follower of Christ must have a heart for engaging and loving people of different values, experiences, and worldviews. They must also be equipped to engage people who are both far away and near to Christ. In most cases, secular people are ignorant of the gospel. God is at work in the lives of those outside the church and invites us to join him. People are incredibly open to engaging in spiritual practices and having spiritual conversations. Those outside the church are most often reached relationally.

Prayer is an essential part of the conversion process for those outside the church. With this awakening of spirituality has come a tremendous openness to prayer. Those outside the church must overcome identifiable barriers in their journey toward the gospel. The way disciples are made is not always linear. The process is much more organic in nature. Searching is the first function. God draws men and women to himself by working in their hearts-drawing them toward himself. The church has an image problem. Common complaints that those wage outside of the church is that church is boring, irrelevant, judgmental, and arrogant. Those outside the church often feel like they have arrived at a convention of aliens when they attend their first church service. They simply do not understand what is taking place. If this follower of Christ participates in a community of faith that makes it is business to engage the lost culture in a relevant way, then a safe place is often provided for him or her to explore the claims of Christ. Without a commitment to being open to Jesus Christ as the one and only way, there can be no true Christian commitment. Churches that break the code have realized that they need to provide culturally relevant forms of church that allow people to progress toward total commitment.

Christianity is about what God did for man through Christ in order to give us unconditional approval and acceptance. Therefore, as Paul suggests, the gospel is the stumbling block that only the Spirit can eventually overcome-although he uses us in the process. Belonging is an important part of the discipleship process. It is impossible to be in a healthy relationship with God and not be in a healthy relationship with others. Belonging and becoming are obviously interdependent, but at the same time, it is possible to belong and not become. When a person becomes a new follower of Jesus Christ, growth is often certain and fast. Becoming like Christ means to serve others and to give our lives away in doing so for others. In order for people to become devoted followers of Jesus, they must hear and experience the gospel in a context they understand. When the gospel is contextualized, the potential for an indigenous church is maximized. When this happens, exponential growth of believers and churches is possible.

Churches need to rediscover their passion for God and his mission. From a renewed passion for reaching the lost will flow other areas such as: Worship that honors God and connects with the disconnected; partnering with believers and seekers to reach the disconnected in a safe place; connecting new disconnected people to a faith process. Worship cannot be the end of a breaking-the-code strategy, but it is a good beginning. When we create a God-centered and culturally appropriate worship service, it helps us to begin the process of seeking God for other changes that also need to come. Since most people come to Christ today through community, experience and service we must connect them with a meaningful biblical community. It is important that the church sees herself as God’s missional agent in the world, bringing life and community transformation.

Every process, program, and strategy becomes part of what it means to be God’s missionary agent to the world. Missional churches find diverse ways to encourage people to visit and then stay. They invest in their unchurched friends and invite them to consider the church and the Christ of the church. Building a positive image in the community often postures one’s church to be that place in time of crisis or need. Getting people to come takes work, but making them feel comfortable takes a plan. It has been our experience that people form an opinion about their church experience soon after they arrive on campus, most often before our first song or the message is heard. Most people will visit the main worship service before visiting anywhere else. So to connect with people, you have to move them from the worship service to the small group. The best opportunity for getting people to connect exists on campus while they are there in a larger nonthreatening setting. Churches that are having the greatest success assimilating attenders into small groups are providing additional nonthreatening steps. Moving someone from guest to member takes two things: a commitment to Christ and to his church (though not necessarily in that order). Both of these things are best done through a membership class that every person goes through. If we have connected to them to Christ, involved them in a small group, helped them to commit to membership, and offered real and significant relationships, discipleship will occur organically. However, every church needs to be sure that every one of its members has encountered biblical teaching on the key habits of discipleship, reading Scripture, prayer, small group, tithing, witnessing, etc.

Church planters are learning their contexts before choosing their methods. You have to know people before you reach them. They are learning from others without copying them. They are finding new methods and models by learning from their predecessors. The planter must have a clear vision of what God is directing and be able to communicate that vision. More and more today, churches are being planted with teams. Church planters who ultimately get the job done have a capacity for raising the resources necessary for the task. Prior to engaging in a church plant, a planter must ensure that the entire family is on board. Good support systems and healthy, balanced approach are essential to the long-term health of the church planter and his family. One of the criteria for selecting a church planter is his commitment and ability to build a ministry team. By ministry team, we are referring to one or more people who feel called to commit their life and ministry to the church-planting endeavor. You have to have a significant number of team players committed to the church plant before you are ready to launch. They are simply people who have bought into the vision no matter where they are in the process.

Whatever the means, the salary support issue should be settled before church-planting activities get started. In addition to salary support, there are also costs related to start-up. The third resource issue relates to operational budget. Once the church is launched, it is important to begin developing good givers and tithers out of the local congregation. While those on the outside tend to give to salary and start-up expenses, those on the inside will more likely to support the ongoing needs of the church. It is important to understand that it will cost more than you think. When it comes to church planting, we most often have a tendency to underestimate the cost. A good beginning point is to understand that people give to people. Those who are most likely to support your church plant will be people who are closest to you. In addition to people giving to people, it is important to note that big vision attracts big resources. When raising resources outside your relational networks, it is important to understand that money attracts money.

Determining the right place to plant is a key to long-term success. There are certain individuals who have cross-cultural gifts; for most of us, we fit best within our particular tribe. The heart of breaking the code is finding people groups, population segments, or cultural environments where God is already at work planting or developing culturally relevant churches. It is the value of connecting with the unchurched that brings them to a common point and becomes the foundation for cooperation. While vision is way out in the future, the mission is a reality we live in every day. The strategy describes how we are going to accomplish the mission of our church plant. A good strategy defines a process for accomplishing our mission. Results are simply short-range goals that we are committed to achieving. One of the key milestones is creating awareness and identity within the community. When a church plant goes public, it is often synonymous with launching the mission of the church. This public phase is often accompanied by weekly worship gatherings, assimilation, and sending. Putting an assimilation process in place prior to going public assures a long-term impact. Look for creative ways to involve new people in simple tasks. By far one of the most positive means of assimilating people is through small group involvement. By far the best means of assimilation is through relationships. If we are to fulfill the Great Commission, church planting will have to be part of every established church’s vision and strategy.

Some that are breaking the code have started exploring new ways of doing ministry in partnership. Networks have become a major part of church life in North America. These early networks will open a floodgate of church alliances. Ministries also exist that specifically help form and connect such networks. Denominational structures are being (in some cases) abandoned for networks where all the churches are the same style and paradigm. Churches are choosing to network, cooperate, and do missions in a new way. Denominational agencies and leaders are faced with great challenges and opportunities right now. Denominational structures and servants can embrace the present and future of missional church life in North America-by casting a vision for a new tomorrow, lifting up apostolic heroes, conducting relevant research, supplementing the local church in equipping apostolic leaders, networking learning communities and reporting their results, providing financial resources for apostolic leaders, and helping leaders see beyond their own cultures. When denominations are focused on churches, churches will network with them and other partnerships for kingdom impact.

A church is theologically sound and missionally appropriate when it remains faithful to the gospel and simultaneously seeks to contextualize the gospel (to the degree it can) in the worldview container of its hearers. To be biblically faithful and contextually relevant church, the missional church does not reject scriptural commands, only cultural barriers. Serious biblical reflection is required to break the code without compromising the faith. Contextualization means that we present the gospel and live life together in a missionally appropriate manner. When we talk about missional churches we are not referring to a certain form, expression, model, type, or category of church. We are talking about a church that seeks to understand its context and come to express that understanding by contextualizing the gospel in its community. The truest expression of this mission church is that it fully represents Christ in its context, maintaining biblical integrity so that gospel moves unhindered. There are a good number of young (and not so young) leaders who some classify as “emerging” that really are just trying to make their worship, music, outreach more contextual to emerging culture. Although some may consider them liberal, they are often deeply committed to biblical preaching, biblical eldership, and other values common in conservative evangelical churches.

Code-breaking leaders ask the right questions of the right people. The right people are the many unreached and disconnected people now living in North America. Code-breaking leaders understand that the future is already happening. Code-breaking leaders learn their way forward. Breaking the code requires going where few are willing to go. Breaking the code where is has not been broken comes with a huge price. Leaders and churches that break the code understand that it is just plain hard work. Leaders who are willing to leave the security of the familiar must get used to being alone, for it is always lonely on the front end vision. If you are committed to breaking the code, you have to understand that there are going to be times when it is lonely. Perhaps the greatest price one pays is spiritual. Leaders committed to breaking the code must prepare for spiritual warfare. They must take time to surround themselves with prayer and support. They must submit themselves to a high level of accountability. Leaders who break the code seldom if ever do it alone. It is the nature of those who plant churches or desire to plant churches to want to be paradigm breakers. However, this thing of not doing it alone seems to be the decisive difference in those who want to do it and those who actually get it done. Leaders who break the code know how to build a team and achieve a shared vision. They have the gifts, skills, and experience to maximize their team. They are unique in that they can see the big picture, but they can also implement the details through people. Leaders who break the code see the big picture, define the process, and stay focused. Leaders who break the code are constantly sitting back and evaluating their current ministry, work and processes, and envisioning the future.

Before anything else, you must be called to a community. We are convinced that a key problem in many churches and among their leaders is that they have not truly heard from God. We need God-called leaders who are passionate and ready to persevere in the ministry to which God calls them. A healthy code-breaking church or leader loves the people and their community. We need to love the culture where God sends us and not be longing for the way it as somewhere else. You must care about the community if you are going to reach it. You should begin to care about the context in such a way that people in the community see your love and consider you an advocate. Before anything that is truly of God can be born, your own preferences have to die. Until you know your leadership readiness, you will find countless excuses for why you cannot break the code. Get to know and understand the community and the people whom you are called to reach. Part of our job, as we exegete to understand our mission field, is to connect meaningfully with those who already are relationally invested in the community we are seeking to reach. Determine who influences the people that God ahs called you to reach. Make a point of connecting with them and introduce yourself to them. As a code-breaking church leader, your purpose is to discover bridge networks over which the gospel can travel. You must look for people with already existing relational networks. God is already working in your community. Contact churches that are already reaching people in your community. Find out what they have done. The more you discover and learn about people groups and community, the more effective you will become in relating to and communicating with all the people in your area.

Bringing missions and evangelism together means realizing that the church is the missionary, and it exists on the mission field. Therefore, the mission of the church to fulfill the Great Commission does not get relegated to a program of evangelism, but it becomes intricately woven through the entire fabric of the local church. If it does not speak their language, address their needs, overcome their obstacles, and allow them to experience community and faith over a long period of time, they will likely move on to something other than the church. Therefore, when the church sees itself as the missionary, it calls forth the best of the church in terms of partnership and cooperation. When the church of Jesus Christ functions as the missionary, it will not be content until there is a New Testament congregation within the reach of all people in its given context. The existing church must accept the responsibility for sending out its emerging leaders to pioneer new approaches to reaching their generation. We must empower our own children to become missionaries to their own generation. We must learn to see the hidden people of North America. In order to break the unbroken code, we must send apostolic leaders into the North American mission field to break the code! Apostolic leaders in today’s context are the missionary pioneers of previous days. They force us to redefine the role of the church as a missionary church that is responsible for sending out apostles and lay apostles into the harvest field.

An Executive Book Summary prepared by

Thomas L. Law, III, DoM

Tarrant Baptist Association
Ft. Worth, TX

Well- Intentioned Dragons: Ministering to Problem People in the Church

By Marshall Shelley

This is a book about ministering while under attack. The goal in handling dragons is not to destroy them, not merely to disassociate, but to make them disciples. Even when that seems an unlikely prospect. It is helpful to catalog some of the varieties inhabiting the church. The Bird Dog loves to be the pastor’s eyes, ears, and nose, sniffing out items for attention. The Wet Blanket has a negative disposition that’s contagious. The Entrepreneur is enthusiastic. Unfortunately, in addition to being enthusiastic about the church, he’s equally eager to sell the vitamins, bee pollen, or car wax. Captain Bluster is the person who speaks with an exclamation point instead of a period. He (or she) is right, and everyone else is wrong. The Fickle Financier uses money to register approval or disapproval of church decisions. The Busybody, enjoys telling others how to do their jobs. The Bookkeeper, keeps written record of everything the pastor does that “isn’t in the spirit of Christ. The Merchant of Muck, breeds dissatisfaction by attracting others who know he’s more than willing to listen to, and elaborate on, things that are wrong in the church. The Legalist, whose list of absolutes stretches from the kind of car a pastor can drive to the number of verses in a hymn that must be sung.

The distinguishing characteristic of a dragon is not what is said but how it’s said. Theirs is a spirit quick to vilify and slow to apologize. They destroy enthusiasm, the morale so necessary for church health and growth. They sap the pastor’s energy and, just as damaging, goad them into reacting instead of acting. If the first casualties in dragon warfare are vision and initiative, the next victim is outreach. The worst dragons may be, in the beginning, the pastor’s strongest supporters. Dragons often work overhard initially at befriending you. Dragons usually compare you to their former pastor. Whenever the church office holders, elected or appointed, are different from the unofficial but widely recognized power brokers in the congregation, dragons seem to multiply. Dragons are often bred in counseling. Dragons often sensed a call to the ministry at one time.

In the church, most dragons see themselves as godly people, adequately gracious and kind, who hold another viewpoint they honestly believe is right. Some of the underlying causes of their behavior are: first, people do battle because they feel so strongly. The criticism of a dragon may spring more from anger than differences over the immediate subject. And sometimes the anger is not specifically directed at the pastor but at the situation. Second, despite their sincerity, people cannot overcome their human nature.

Dragons are best known for what comes out of their mouths. The would-be attacker usually begins a covert warfare, the strategy is one of planting questions in people’s minds, raising doubts about the pastor’s competence, credibility, ministry, or motives. When attacked by a dragon, do not become one. Not all attacks by dragons are personal; sometimes the play is for power. Well-intentioned dragons, of course, have good reasons for seeking power, usually because the church is heading a direction they think needs to be changed. The problem is that most church members imagine themselves as basically “nice,” willing to bend to keep the peace. Churches can thus be victimized by people who see being “right” as more important than being “nice.”

When faced with political typhoons, the best chance for survival is facing them directly. Prevent church fights from becoming holy wars. Learn what you can from the opposition. Remember that failure is not fatal. The best way to build an atmosphere of cooperation is to model a positive tone. Pastors who personify a non-defensive spirit of joy and generosity tend not to attract as many dragons. Problems seldom arise from those active in significant people ministries. A ministering laity, not just a busy laity, is a key to suppressing the dragon population. Pastors who develop strong lay leaders have learned to honor those who minister.

Pastors, need to take time to build trust and healthy relationships before initiating changes. Often the pastor gains more influence by being a gentle friend than by grabbing for control. Others pastors let their passion for softball, poetry, or country music be known. Far from isolating them, these interests make pastors more human, more accessible, which often helps in finding common ground with a dragon.

Healthy churches are confident in their own identity. They know their direction and limits. And they’re less likely to be tossed about by disillusioned dragons. Cohesiveness among the spiritual leaders of the congregation is a healthy core for healing the rest of the body and for fighting the infectious attitudes that spring up from time to time. Healthy boards are united in purpose and plan, respecting one another’s differences. If pastors and their boards don’t trust each other, the church will be unhealthy, and chances are, the pastor’s tenure will be brief and unpleasant. A relationship of trust must be attempted, even when it doesn’t come naturally. Always, however, the initiative for trying to develop trust lies with the pastor.

Many pastors have mentioned that a breakthrough came when they began revealing some of their genuine spiritual struggles and their fears for the church. Often board members won’t open up until the pastor gives permission by letting his own humanness and vulnerability show. Personal relationships, mutual respect, and trust are the foundation of a strong working relationship between pastor and board. Healthy boards are built with members selected for their spiritual qualifications, not their money, longevity in the congregation, or strong personality and have common learning experiences. Evaluations, preferably written, not only help pastors synchronize their ministries with the priorities of the board, but they become an excellent defense when the pastor is criticized. The evaluation provides a forum for those criticisms to be fully discussed and defused.

Many pastors let their board members know from the beginning that though they may differ sharply in their meetings, in public they do not dissent but represent the will of the board. The atmosphere of the board meeting itself is an excellent gauge of the church’s health. An unwritten agenda item at every healthy board meeting is “encouraging each other.” Almost all pastors are willing to benefit if the criticism is valid. Here are several tests pastors have identified to help distinguish fair from unfair attacks. The first test is the motivation of the critics. The number of sources making the same criticism is also telling. Consider the spirit in which the criticism is given. Consider hot anger a sign that something more is involved. If the criticism passes the source and spirit tests, then consider it prayerfully. Consider concrete criticisms more seriously. Consider the criticism calmly.

The goal of a pastor is to tame the beast, to prevent further destruction on either side. Dragon taming is not suppressing differences of opinion. A person is not a dragon because of different ideas but destructive actions. Neither is confrontation the silencing of all complainers. Finally taming dragons is not giving in, becoming a doormat, appeasing them so they won’t spew their wrath throughout the church. Pastors have discovered several helpful keys in establishing the right kind of attitude for dragon confrontation. First, everyone involved must be told that disagreements are OK. Each person must be allowed to state his or her position with strength and clarity. No one will be intentionally hurt, nor will anyone be allowed to inflict needless hurt. Second, if possible, reframe the dragons. Third, pray not only about, but for the dragons. Finally, be gentle but firm.

The spirit needed for confronting dragons is not one of fear and withdrawal nor of arrogant power. It is gentleness and firmness - an attitude of smart love. The climate of any encounter with dragons can be an important factor in improving or damaging the relationship. Two important aspects of creating the right atmosphere are timing and location. More people are changed by attention and understanding than correction and coercion. At the point private conversations do not resolve the situation and witnesses become involved, two others cautions should probably be taken: begin taking notes and inform the board.

The only times public action is ever appropriate is for continuing, confirmed, and unconfessed sin. And never unless the leadership of the church support the move. Rather than forcing the issue publicly, often more is gained by learning to minister in an unresolved situation. Survivors of the dragon wars offer three broader suggestions to those facing the mental anguish of unrelenting opposition. Time can bring healing. For new pastors it also often brings an increasing ability to handle dragons. Pastors report four to eight years are often necessary before people begin to accept them. Stay consistent with our vision for the church even if we lose the decisions. But it helps to learn to lose graciously.

In addition to patience, a larger perspective helps. It also helps to remind ourselves of God’s sovereignty. The effects of dragons can linger for years, sapping a church’s strength, unless the leaders demonstrate strong, visible forgiveness. Even in the midst of unresolved tensions, forgiveness must always be offered. True forgiveness, even when forgiving a dragon, is saying, “I don’t completely understand you. I can’t excuse what’s happened, and I can’t forget what you’ve done. But here’s my hand. I want to be your friend again. I still want to work with you. Let’s begin over.”

Developing Christian virtues demands other people—ordinary, ornery people. True love isn’t even learned among friends we have chosen. God’s kind of love is best learned where we can’t be selective about our associates. As Thomas a Kempis would say “It is good that we at times endure opposition and that we are evilly and untruly judged when our actions and intentions are good. Often such experiences promote humility and protect us from vainglory. For then we seek God’s witness in the heart.”

An Executive Book Summary prepared by
Thomas L. Law, III, DoM
Tarrant Baptist Association
Ft. Worth, TX

(for more than 200 book summaries by Dr. Law, go to www.tarrantbaptist.org)

Funding Your Vision

By Gerald H. Twombly

The long-term success of any worthy work is directly proportional to how successful those involved in that work build relationships with others. If you are to be successful in the work to which you have committed yourself, it is essential that you sustain the involvement of others. There will be people who will clearly understand the mission to which you have committed yourself and will choose to support you because of their understanding of that mission. I categorize this group as those with rational relationships. Only the support you receive from those with whom you have rational relationships is sustainable.

The first step is to identify those people with whom you could build a relationship. Every person is surrounded by a group of people with whom he has influence. Market universe is defined as ‘the sum total of the individual universes of everyone who is impacted by your work, either directly or indirectly.’ The second step in the process is to qualify our prospects.

All the prospects you have will fall into one of three broad categories. First, you have those who are directly benefiting from the services you provide. We will call them nuclear. There is another group of your prospects that benefit indirectly from the services you provide. We call them ‘affinity’ prospects. We call the third broad group of prospects fringe. This group has a geographic association with your work. The rule of linkage defined simply is this: the closer someone is linked to you, the more likely they will be to support you.

One of the most important things you will have to remember as you begin to build a program for your work is that it will be very advantageous for you to create linkage among those groups with whom you do not have it naturally. If the only reason you pursue a relationship is for what you can gain from it, then that is manipulation. Relationships are sustainable only when they are rooted in a commitment to someone or something.

The first step in achieving your potential will require that you bring people out of the sea onto the front porch. I call that the entry-level opportunity. Every time someone participates in a program or a project that you sponsor, he comes out of the sea and moves to your front porch. It may have been emotion that brought me to your porch but it will always be rationalism that will bring me into the foyer. And it is only rational support that is sustainable.

Prospects aren’t prospects until you have their names permanently recorded somewhere. The best way is simply to enclose a registration card. Add a couple of boxes on the card that people could check. One might make a qualifying statement like ‘I am a client.’ The next boxes on your registration card are even more important. Say, for instance, ‘I would like to receive your organization’s free newsletter’ or ‘I would like to receive Organizational Updates from you.’ If anyone checks one of those boxes, they have told you that they are interested in you and your work. It’s like I have extended to them an invitation to come off the porch into the house.
First, you will need the name and address of your prospect. You should store other pertinent data like phone numbers, giving details, and other items that will enable you to track a developing relationship. Some of your prospects might match your definition of the ideal perfectly so we’ll call them ‘A’ prospects. Some may match the profile in some ways, ‘B’ prospects, some may match the profile in some ways, ‘C’ prospects, and some may not match it at all, we’ll call them ‘D’s.’ If the facts were known, you could appeal to John Doe for now until the end of time and he would never respond affirmatively. Your goal with John Doe should be to bring him from where he is, a ‘D’ categorized prospect to a ‘C’ categorized prospect. At some point in time you should know where every single person on your database is in relationship to your organization.

In the word AID, the ‘A’ stands for the word ‘attendance.’ The letter ‘I’ for ‘involvement,’ and the letter ‘D’ for ‘donation.’ If you use this guide to evaluate your prospects in relation to your organization, you’ll get a pretty clear picture of where people are. If one of your prospects has attended one of your organization’s activities, has been involved in some way in something you have done, and has made a contribution of either his time or resources, let’ call him a category ‘A’ prospect. If he has done two of the three, let’s call him a ‘B’ prospect. If he has done two of the three, let’s call him a ‘B’ prospect. If he has done one of the three things, let’s refer to him as a ‘C’ prospect, and if he has done none of the three, let’s call him a ‘D.’ Instead of one relationship-building program, I might have three or four going on at the same time and probably more than that. You might have a program designed to bring fringe ‘D’ prospects to ‘C’ prospects, another to bring Affinity ‘D’ prospects to ‘C’ prospects. A special request to a group of Category ‘A’ cultivated prospect might yield a 50% response. Sometimes even more. When cultivation has been successful, solicitation will be successful.

Most are already doing what needs to be done, they simply don’t take advantage of the things they are already doing. Organizations turn every activity into a meaningful event to build relationships. The first step in the process is to identify your prospects, those groups of individuals with whom you could build relationships. The second step in the model is to qualify your prospects. The third step is cultivation. Review your calendar of activities for this year and make a list of those things you are currently doing that you might turn into a meaningful developmental event. Alongside each indicate what you could do to turn that activity into an event.

The fourth step in the relationship-building model is called solicitation. There are a variety of ways that you might ask for that support, but the most effective way is to seek the involvement of people in conjunction with an established program. A program is more likely to be responded to than a straight out appeal. Programs provide people something they can plug into. And they don’t have to be fund-raising in their orientation. Rule of Communication: one on one is best; the further you remove yourself from the ideal, the less likely it is that you’ll get the response you want. The best way to ask people to become involved in my organization is to go directly to them. And the best way to secure their involvement is through a program. A project is anything that you do that tends to elicit an emotional response. A program tends to elicit a rational response. What you are striving for is the sustained involvement of your constituents and that will only occur as they rationally understand and support your mission. Projects should always be used to facilitate relational goals.

Projects should never be thought of as an end in themselves but always a means to accomplish a worthy end. It is not just numbers that will determine your success, it is the quality of the numbers that you have on your database. Some projects are an excellent way to add qualified names to your database, and many can be great entry-level opportunities to bring people out of the sea of prospects onto your front porch. It’s not just the names that are important; it is how many names and the kind of names that are important. Every project should have quantifiable goals. Things like ‘we want to add this many names to our database.’ Or ‘we want to add this many nuclear names or this many affinity names, or this many fringe names. The main emphasis of every organization’s developmental focus should be primarily on programs because they generate rational support.

Every organization has developmental potential. It’s the amount of money that they could raise to fund a capital need. Look at all of income I received and average out what I can determine came from people who rationally gave as opposed to those who may have given for emotional reasons, multiply that number times five. There is a rule in fund-raising that goes something like this. The average donor to a discretionary gifted cause is capable of giving five to ten times his average annual gift if properly motivated in a capital funding campaign. Your developmental potential is based on real giving. Project, or emotional giving, has no bearing whatsoever on developmental potential. An organization that funds its short term needs on a series of funding projects and has done that consistently over a period of many years is not really very healthy developmentally.

There is a rule relating to capital campaigns you should not begin a new capital campaign until five years after the beginning of the previous one. The rule is based on another rule and that is that a developmental generation is five years. If an organization does developmental work consistently, year after year, every five years there will be enough change in your constituency to justify a new campaign. Some organizations choose to move into a capital funding campaign to fund an early phase of the long-range plan. After the campaign is over and people have paid their pledges to you, as I already inferred, giving tends to go up. And, as real support increases annually, so does your developmental potential. It may be practically impossible for you ever to bring your real support to high enough levels to fund your vision through one capital campaign. In that case you should phase in your plan for the future.

If your organization is to experience success in ways that you dream of, you must begin an orchestrated pro-active process of building relationships. There are some very specific things that you must do. You need to identify those with whom you could build a relationship, qualify those people as it relates to your needs and their potential, cultivate them, and eventually come to a point where you provide them an opportunity to share in your work. People have so much to give besides money, and they can assist your developing organization in so many ways.
Your constituents deserve the courtesy of being asked. You shouldn’t just assume that people will help, and you mustn’t presume upon people. You need to work to build a relationship with them and ask them for their help when the need is there and the time is appropriate. People need to be thanked; they need to be acknowledged in appropriate ways for the contributions they make to your success. You have needed them to accomplish your objectives and you will continue to need their active involvement s you build for the future.

People give to people. They don’t give to buildings or necessarily to programs; they give to those people whose lives will be enriched by those buildings or those programs. If you are to sustain the involvement of people, you must acknowledge their current involvement. You must thank them well and you can’t simply drop them; you must continue to cultivate them and seek meaningful ways to engage them in our developing needs.

Define success in the kinds of quantifiable terms that everyone can relate to. The key is objectivity. People need to see progress. It’s the lack of progress that yields despair and apathy.

An Executive Book Summary prepared by

Thomas L. Law, III, DoM
Tarrant Baptist Association
Fort Worth, TX

(For more than 200 more summaries by Dr. Law, go to www.tarrantbaptist.org)