Monthly Archive for February, 2011

67. The Challenges of “Visioning”: Church Board Chairs Beware.

Published by Dr. Larry Perkins on February 28, 2011 in Board, Board Chair, Board Governance, Board Member and Senior Pastor. Closed Tags: , , , .

One of the most frustrating aspects of chairing a church board revolves around the development of the congregational vision. Jesus gave his church a clear mission (Matthew 28:19-20), but the contextualization of that mission into a clear statement of vision is another matter. What is the great dream that God desires your congregation to have so that it will make a kingdom impact over the next decade in your community and other places in this world? Who leads this process? How do you arbitrate among competing visions? Once you decide on the vision, who discerns. develops, and implements the strategic ministries that will enable the vision to become a reality? How will you measure progress and track accountability for specific outcomes? Significant books and web-based resources are available that can help you pray, think, and plan your way through this as a board chair. Your lead pastor or denominational office would be able to help you discern which of these might be most beneficial.

Once your church leadership (which must include both board members and pastoral staff)  has defined a vision that the congregation will own and support, implementation becomes the challenge. Potential exists at this stag to void all of the hard ework done to define the vision. As church board chair you will be able to exercise considerable influence to help the board recognize and deal with these “vision-killers.” It is the board that has to ensure the vision’s goals have an effective, influential life.

Challenge # 1: Key goals get submerged under the weight of normal ministry operations.

Keeping key priorities at the centre a church board’s agenda, and thus a board’s attention, is a battle for any chair. Too many things keep coming in to detract the board’s energies. The chair has to help the board and the pastoral staff exercise careful discipline so that only those decisions which require board approval are in fact brought to the board. If this struggle is not waged in the shaping of the agenda for each meeting, soon the board’s focus will shift or default to the mundane, rather than the significant. A chair’s monthly meeting with the lead pastor becomes a key opportunity to work through what needs the church board’s attention and what does not. If as chair you find the board’s agenda being overwhelmed with decisions that could be made by the administration, then you need to take action.

Remedy:  An annual agenda and clear boundary policies.

When the board meets for its annual strategy session, when it reviews the vision and evaluates progress, the chair should be facilitating a process by which the board members discern the “big rocks” that will define the annual agenda. When these are clearly defined and embraced by the board, then the chair has the mandate to keep these at the top of the board’s agendas throughout the year.

Additionally, as chair you might review the policies that state what decisions the board must make and which it is prepared to delegate and under what conditions. If nothing of this nature exists, then the board agendas will continuously be filled with every kind of issue because the board has not defined who else can make decisions. Let’s be clear — while the church board cannot delegate its responsibility to govern, it can delegate many things so long as there is clear monitoring and accountability.

Challenge # 2: Key leaders get impatient and want to start a new visioning process before the current one is implemented effectively.

Implementing a vision requires discipline over a sustained period of time. The period between conceiving ideas, designing strategies, implementing strategies and evaluating their effectiveness can extend over several years, particularly when it involves ministry. As well, a new, defined vision, usually will require some staff to change their way of working substantially and others at least partially. Adjusting personal patterns always requires time, patience, perseverance, and accountability. Sometimes it will involve some new training or re-training to develop new skills and eliminate habits of work or leadership that are not beneficial. Vision deals with change and we know how resistant human beings are to change, especially when it is personal.

There is another dimension to this. Sometimes leaders responsible to nurture a new vision discover that they are unable for any number of reasons to move it forward. One strategy they might adopt is to become negative towards the current vision, claiming it was flawed, or that circumstances have changed, and so a new vision is required. If this becomes a pattern then it jeopardizes the entire vision process because board members and key congregational leaders will become cynical about the benefit of “vision.” It is better to take the time initially to ensure that the vision is in fact capturing the heartbeat of the congregation.

Remedy:  Requiring ministry plans by staff that advance the vision in specific ways.

Once a vision is adopted and key plans are discerned to support its implementation, then each staff person will have to develop new ministry plans that will enable the vision to go forward. These plans should have specific timelines, identify necessary resources required, and define measurable outcomes so that the supervisor will know whether the staff person is on track with implementation. If the strategic plan does not affect staff in this way, then it is quite likely that the vision will remain a nice statement but have no real impact upon the life and ministry of the congregation.

As chair you should keep in close touch with the board’s personnel committee to evaluate whether these changes are occurring. As well, your conversations with the lead pastor should always include some discussion about the implementation of the vision, evaluating what is going well and where some sticking points may be arising. This will enable you to discern where and in what ways the board may need to provide some encouragement.

Challenge # 3: Failure to update the vision and strategy in the light of new information and realities.

It does not take too long for a good vision statement to grow stale, unless it is being reviewed and updated with some degree of regularity (probably some kind of annual review). After expending so much time and energy to develop or revise a vision statement, a church board will be eager to get on to some issues that they have put on the shelf. The “vision thing” is done and so we can move on, may be the attitude of some. The danger is that “moving on” also means in their minds, “forgetting about it” because their experience suggests to them that  such processes rarely make much difference. As chair you have the influence to prevent this from happening.

Remedy:  Annual review of the vision and strategic plan. Education of the church board regarding trends.

One simple action that can meet this challenge is to put a review of the vision and evaluation of the implementation of strategic initiatives to achieve the vision on the schedule of the board’s annual retreat. Use this as the key process to assist the board discern “where” the congregation is in its health and development. Secondly, to stimulate the board in its review, either assign some reading or invite an external speaker, either of which would educate the board with respect to new trends, new ministry ideas, key developments in the surrounding community, and then invite the board to reflect on whether the vision needs to be revised in the light of this new information.

Challenge # 4: Failure to identify clear indicators of success.

An old leadership adage says if you cannot define your target, then you will never know when or if you have hit it. This applies to vision and its implementation within the church context. Probably the church board, in consultation with ministry staff, is the leadership cluster in the church best suited to identifying measurements that demonstrate the degree to which the vision is being realized. Some of these indicators will be quantitative (often the easiest to identify, e.g. number of conversions, e tc.), but some must be qualitative, i.e. are followers of Jesus in our congregation better equipped to study their Bibles or more motivated to pray? Without defining these key outcomes and their measurements, the vision remains words on paper and arguments about its realization remain very subjective.

Remedy:   Ensure that the board and lead pastor move beyond the statement of vision to a developed plan for accomplishing the vision.

Once the vision is defined, then plans must be created, designed and implemented. However, each part of this strategic design must contribute in some way to the achievement of the outcomes previously identified. If a ministry leader cannot demonstrate clearly how his or her ministry project will advance the vision, with specific, measurable outcomes determined, then it should not be supported. These outcomes will be critical when it comes to evaluate that leader’s performance at the annual review. If the board or lead pastor does not know how a staff person’s work results in achieving the vision, how will the lead pastor be able to affirm that employee for doing his or her job well? How will the lead pastor know how to advise that employee in terms of developing professional abilities to meet new outcomes? These things are connected to job satisfaction, vocational growth and the exercise of good stewardship.

Challenge # 5: Hold leadership accountable to the vision and the ministry strategies linked with it.

I think this is the biggest challenge. A church board has to insist, lovingly but firmly, that it will require an annual performance review for the lead pastor and through him, all other ministry staff. The church board has to give oversight to this. If the board has not built this expectation into the position description or employment manual, then do this as soon as possible.

Remedy: Build annual performance evaluation around accomplishment of strategic goals that advance the vision and require accountability for progress.

Without an annual review of the lead pastor and all staff, the board has no means to assess progress, to affirm the lead pastor in his work, and to work with him in his vocational development. The review  of the lead pastor should be delegated to the board’s personnel committee, or if the board does not have such a committee, to two of its members. A clear process should also be put in place so that the lead pastor knows how this operates and does not feel that he is vulnerable to one or two opinionated people or those who may be adversely critical of his ministry. The goal is to help the lead pastor be as effective in his ministry as possible. The lead pastor, in turn, should be the one who oversees the evaluations of all other ministry staff. Some report should be made to the church board at the completion of the process.

In the case of each of these challenges, the board chair, knowing what a church board needs to attend to, will be active in prompting the board members and even in some cases educating the board members as to their responsibilities in overseeing the implementation and achieving of the congregation’s vision. Every missional agency needs someone or some group to keep the vision’s momentum moving and a church board can fill that function to the benefit of the entire congregation and the glory of God. This will be worshipful work.

66. The Church Board Chair and the Operations of a Charity

Published by Dr. Larry Perkins on February 21, 2011 in Board, Board Chair, Board Governance, Board Member and Senior Pastor. Closed Tags: , .

Most churches in Canada function as non-profit charities.While congregational leaders acknowledge this, the implications often elude them or in some cases are just ignored. If you serve as chair of a church board which is a registered charity, this reality will shape to some extent your responsibilities as chair. In article #65  The Church Board Chair and the Annual General Meeting I outlined, for example, how the legal requirement for the board of a registered charity to hold an annual general meeting within certain periods defines some of the chair’s responsibilities. However, this is only one of several important functions that a church’s status as a legal charity requires the chair to attend to. Please note that I am writing from the perspective of Canadian charities and legal requirements in other jurisdictions may be different. You should check with denominational leaders if you have specific questions.

I will focus my comments around  4  areas:

1. Governing in accordance with the church’s constitution, bylaws and policies, as well as within all legal parameters.

A board chair needs to be familiar with the church bylaws and all board policies so that he/she can guide the board appropriately in its work. A good board secretary can be a great assist here. What needs to be clear are the matters that the board can decide by itself and what requires congregational approval. As well, the board itself may have (and if not, should have) developed and adopted some key principles to guide its operations. As the board’s chair you are bound to facilitate the board’s work within those principles, unless the board directs otherwise.

Beyond these internal standards, the chair should have a general working knowledge of external legal boundaries and any other stipulations within which the particular charity must operate legally and ethically. For example, the chair should know the essential tax guidelines that define what a charity may and may not do, as well as for what purposes it may issue a tax receipt for funds received. Further, it is helpful to know about any legal agreements that the charity has made with financial institutions (i.e. mortgage, letters of credit, etc.) or other agencies with which it may be partnering (i.e. mission organization, local parachurch agency, denominational agencies, etc.). There may be stipulations in such agreements that limit the freedom of the board to act in specific ways. As well, in today’s world being somewhat aware of human rights regulations will also be of significant benefit, particularly when it comes to staff issues, member discipline, etc.

It may be that you will not need to be an expert in all of these matters because the lead pastor or others on the board will have such knowledge, but the more you can educate yourself about such matters, the wiser and more effective your leadership will be.

2. Overseeing the appropriate use of resources.

A local church as a charity normally will have three kinds of resources — personnel, monetary, and property/facility. Although the board will not usually be providing direct oversight of these resources, it has to ensure that their management is being conducted, fairly, honestly, ethically, and responsibly. In other words there will be delegation, but with specific accountability. One means by which to manage the accountability will be to make sure that clear, written boundary principles are provided to the ones delegated to administer specific resources. These principles should be written in the negative, i.e. what the person with the responsibility cannot do, so that the worry areas of the board are taken care of. In addition, there must be clear, consistent reporting guidelines so that the board knows that the boundary principles are being followed. In the area of financial administration board guidelines may include the level of qualifications necessary for a person to act as controller, who approves expenditures, where and how income is managed, provision of quarterly reports that clearly show the financial health of the charity, the nature of the annual financial review, etc. Charities often receive restricted gifts and the board must decide whether to accept such a gift and if it does, to ensure that it is used appropriately.

In the case of property and facilities the board will want to ensure that any legal documents (property deeds, mortgage papers, etc.) are kept in a secure place (e.g. safety deposit box), that all property is adequately and consistently insured, that facilities are maintained in a safe condition, etc. Again, the board normally will not do this directly, but will need to make sure that these things are being managed responsibly.

Where personnel are concerned, the board will want the charity to be known as a good employer and this requires appropriate employee policies to be developed and adhered to.

3. All activities of the charity, i.e. the church, fit within its stated mission and charitable purposes.

You probably think this is a ‘no-brainer.’ Everyone knows what a church is supposed to do. However, in the last decade some clear guidelines have emerged limiting the manner in which a charity can engage in political activity, direct its benevolence, partner with foreign agencies. and develop business ventures that legitimately fit within its ‘charitable’ mandate. For example, the operation of a Day-care as a related business is permitted but only under specific circumstances. The charity cannot receive a gift of money designated for a person; the charity cannot be used as a vehicle to serve the purpose of private benevolence. There is a gray area here when it comes to raising money for short-term mission projects, etc., because often family members are encouraged to give in support of other family members who are participating. In the political sphere a charity cannot participate in “partisan political activity.” A charity, for example, cannot donate to the campaign of one person during an election.  In the case of activities outside of Canada, a charity cannot give money to individuals or churches in other countries directly. Such transactions must be done through another organization regulated by a specific agreement.

4. Employee and volunteer care.

With the growth of church staff church boards increasingly are involved with employment issues. If handled well, the ministry and mission of the church will flourish; if neglected or poorly managed, such matters have potential to destroy the effectiveness of the charity. Hiring practices, evaluation processes, harassment policy, termination procedures, various kinds of leaves, are all important policies for a church board to have in place and implemented consistently. Make sure all employee policies are current and consistent with provincial labour codes. Your denominational office should be able to help here if you have questions. Salary decisions should be made on the basis of an explicit grid linked to experience, expertise and level of responsibility; benefits should be defined in writing; all appointments should be based on a formal written proposal that includes a clear position description and terms of employment. Verbal agreements are not sufficient. Do not forget the criminal record check which should be done for every new employee as a condition of employment.


As chair you probably will not be directly involved in the implementation of such policies and procedures. However, you need to ensure, both as a board member and chair, that the charity, i.e. the local church, is operating within these boundaries. If your lead pastor says “trust me”, be very cautious. Trust is good, but accountability is still necessary. Make sure you do your due diligence as chair in these matters, because you will be protecting not only yourself, but safe-guarding the life, ministry and testimony of the congregation.


65. The Church Board Chair and the Annual General Meeting.

Published by Dr. Larry Perkins on February 14, 2011 in Board, Board Chair, Board Governance, Board Member and Senior Pastor. Closed Tags: , , , .

In some way the role of church board chair gets linked with the preparations for and oversight of the annual general meeting (AGM). As board chair you may or may not chair the AGM, but you must ensure that it is planned well and the members of the local church receive reports that demonstrate good accountability in relation to the church’s mission, vision, and values, as well as meet all legal requirements that your jurisdiction may have for the governance of non-profit charities. Of course, having an AGM is not an option for most churches because they are legally registered charities and must by law, at least in Canada, hold an AGM on a regular schedule and conduct specific business at that meeting.

What is the key purpose of an AGM? This meeting of the congregational members provides the primary, annual occasion for the church board to demonstrate how it has advanced that local church’s mission and managed the trust the members have placed in the board with excellence and integrity. While various people may report about several different aspects of the church’s ministries, including the lead pastor, they do so on behalf of the church board. I realize that most church AGM’s are not planned or presented from this perspective, but legally and also I would argue spiritually, this is what should be occurring. This assumes that the lead pastor is responsible to the church board for his leadership and through the board to the congregation. Of course, the lead pastor will be sharing stories of God’s work and his perceptions of where the congregation needs to give particular attention, but he should be doing this as part of the church board’s presentation to the church — because he is a member of the board. You will probably need to have a conversation with the lead pastor about this to develop good understanding in this matter and ensure that he realizes the board is not seeking to usurp his role or limit his voice.

Since this is the nature of the AGM, the church board and its chair needs to be involved with the lead pastor in planning the agenda, overseeing  the presentations/reports, and making arrangements for the meeting. A first step would be for the chair to discuss with the board members their understanding of the purpose of an AGM and through distribution of basic information help them appreciate its importance — and potential for good. An outcome of this conversion would be a clear statement of the two or three key outcomes that the board desires the AGM to achieve. The second step would be for the chair and the lead pastor to develop a proposal for an effective, vision-focused AGM that delivers the accountability required, but is future-oriented. Once the board has reviewed this proposal and achieved consensus about it, then the chair and lead pastor should be empowered to implement it.

At least four key things need to happen at the AGM:

1. Provide an accurate, honest, transparent account of the “state of the mission” as a result of the last twelve months of ministry.

The church board members are accountable to the congregation which has appointed them and entrusted them to provide spiritual and governance leadership on their behalf for the mission of the church. The AGM provides the most significant opportunity for the church board to report how they have fulfilled this responsibility, indicating both the positive and, as necessary, the negative. The AGM is an accountability session. In this regard the church board chair reports on behalf of the board to the congregation. Normally the church board will also invite the lead pastor to present a report focusing more on the ministry aspect of the congregation’s development. It is quite possible that the chair and lead pastor will decide to present a joint report, with each emphasizing different aspects of the board’s work. Because this report does represent the church board’s governance, it is important that the board members have opportunity to review the report before it is circulated so that they are supportive of its contents.The report should be available in printed format (as well as in electronic format). It is a public document and so should be written with that in view, i.e. that all in the congregation and those outside the congregation (government officials) will have access to it.

It is helpful to put this report close to the beginning of the meeting because everything else in the agenda will build upon this report. Normally linked to this report will be the treasurer’s report regarding the state of the congregation’s finances. Consider including a paragraph or two that explains what the different figures and categories mean, i.e. what are the two or three key indicators that reveal the true financial state of the congregation. Putting this in print will take a lot of the mystery out of the process and educate the congregation in these matters. Every effort should be made to provide a financial statement that has been reviewed by someone, preferably not directly connected with the church, who has financial expertise and can make some expert pronouncement regarding its validity. Though dollars might be scarce, scrimping on this part of the report may prove to be a serious mistake. Financial credibility is usually linked with other kinds of credibility. You should ensure that the report affirms that all required financial reporting to the government for purposes of retaining charity status has been done. As well, the board’s report should indicate how many members/partners formally are part of the society and which members/partners have been removed or voluntary resigned. It is important to keep the membership current because this number will affect things such as quorum requirements.

2. Elect key officers and church board members.

The Nominating Committee normally is appointed directly by the members and thus should report directly to them. While its work will be overseen by the church board and one or two board members may be part of it, it does not report to the church board but operates at arms length. So it will need some time in the agenda to present its report regarding recommendations for new board members, treasurer, and clerk, plus any other official positions that the church bylaws require the congregation to elect directly. The committee’s report should be included in the materials sent to all members two weeks prior to the AGM. If the bylaws allow for nominations from the floor, then arrangements should be made to accommodate this (i.e. ballots, pencils, etc.). The chair of the meeting will need to appoint scrutineers to secure the ballots and count the votes on behalf of the congregation. Once the ballots are counted, there should be a motion to destroy the ballots. When the results are announced, this presents a good opportunity to thank publicly those who have served and contributed their time and expertise to the congregation’s mission.

3. Review and approve changes to foundational documents (i.e. bylaws, church policies, etc.).

It is always a challenge to keep core documents up-to-date. However, working with unrevised and inaccurate bylaws and policies creates confusion, inhibits the ability of new and current board members to carry out their responsibilities, and can lead to manipulation of process because no one knows how things are supposed to be done — you make up the rules as you go. Preparing for the AGM provides an annual opportunity for the church board to review these matters and discern whether any recommendations for change need to be proposed to the congregation and provide enough time for the recommendations to be formulated carefully. Every five years there should be a major review of these documents — institutions change more quickly than we realize.

4. Review and approve key plans for the coming year, explaining how these plans fit the vision and will advance the mission.

I would suggest that you consider integrating a report regarding mission-directed plans for the coming year with the presentation of the proposed budget. If you lay before people a set of numbers devoid of context, then it will be confusing and for most an exercise in frustration because they will not understand the rationale behind the numbers. However, if you lead with a summary of four or five key ministry initiatives that the church board (and the ministry staff) believe should be attempted in the coming year and tie these then to the proposed budget, the budget becomes a planning tool, a way to express anticipated, missional gains. When people link numbers to mission and vision, they become motivated.

Give yourself enough lead time to enable the church board to prepare well for the AGM. It would be wise to introduce some discussion about the AGM into the board’s agenda at least two months prior to its date. Remember that you need to have materials out to the congregation, at least in the Canadian context, about two weeks prior to the actual meeting. So if your church board meets monthly, this allows six weeks for preparations to be made. This also enables you to work with the lead pastor to draft the board’s report and seek their input at the meeting prior to the AGM.

If at all possible, provide some children’s care so that parents of younger families can attend. Encourage people to see this as an opportunity to celebrate, praise God, and pray together for his continued guidance and help in this mission. While some “business” has to be done, in the church context it is all related to mission fulfillment and this important spiritual work.

Finally, you might consider asking the Board to appoint someone, other than the board chair, to chair the AGM. If you as chair are giving reports and perhaps making motions, it will be awkward to do that and simultaneously chair the AGM.

64. What if the ‘Lead Pastor’ Does not Want to Lead?

Published by Dr. Larry Perkins on February 7, 2011 in Board, Board Chair, Board Governance, Board Member and Senior Pastor. Closed Tags: , .

Perspectives about pastoral leadership vary considerably. Some consider it primarily a teaching/counseling role, or a chaplaincy function, or an evangelistic vocation. Organizational leadership, leadership development, oversight of ministry leaders may or may not be accepted as a significant or central or required part of a lead pastor’s position description and responsibility. In smaller churches this ambiguity can be managed without too much dysfunctionality occurring, because volunteer leaders can probably fill the gaps. However, if a church and/or its board has a desire to grow, a lead pastor’s discomfort with or sense of incapacity to provide organizational leadership and be accountable for implementing the ministry plan will create sooner or later, significant problems. Several things may happen:  the pastoral leader will decide to change and grow in his personal capacities, or the pastoral leader will leave, or the church will stagnate, or key volunteer leaders in the church will choose to leave. Alternatively, if the church board and lead pastor together discern that he is well-suited generally for the role, but needs help in the organizational leadership of the congregation, an associate, executive pastor could be hired to complement the lead pastor’s gifting.

Now I am not “down” on pastors. I fully appreciate the challenges they face in seeking to provide spiritual leadership within a congregation. However, I am also well aware of the way the development of a local church requires them to “step up”, deepen their personal capacity for pastoral leadership, and continue to grow within their vocation. Having taught in seminary for many years, I also know that pastoral capacity and competency results from serious personal study, character development, spiritual intelligence, and mentored guidance in real ministry situations. Seminary or Bible college education will only be the initial, but important stage of vocational learning. So if a pastoral leader desires sincerely to discern and develop his leadership capacities, I want to be supportive and helpful. All of this must be nurtured within our relationships with the Holy Spirit.

So here’s a scenario. Some board members are frustrated with the usual way the church board is operating because they do not feel the board is advancing the church’s mission very effectively. Making decisions, implementing plans, evaluating their success, and helping ministry staff fulfill their roles well — these things happen so haphazardly. They want change — and so do you as church board chair.  Heightened accountability, clearer lines of authority, improved implementation of decisions — are all desired. You have heard some good ideas about ways that church boards can organize themselves and relate to pastoral leaders which, if your board could adopt them, would elevate the spiritual ministry of the board to a whole new level, with consequent benefit for the congregation. But you also know that if you pursue this direction, it will require your lead pastor to embrace new leadership responsibilities and develop some  new competencies. You love and respect your pastor, but he has a view of pastoral leadership that is focused entirely on preaching and pastoral care and he constantly says that he has no gift or desire for  what he terms “administration.” He relies on the church board to do that organizational stuff. So the congregation shows signs of growth, key leaders in the board are becoming disenchanted with the current operational mode, and the lead pastor seems to be locked into a vision of pastoral leadership that precludes change.

So what can church board chairs do when they find themselves in this situation. Is there any way forward that will be helpful for all the players — pastor, board, congregation — and you? Such a complex challenge cannot be solved by applying some simple formula and will require significant prayer, trust, time,  patience, goodwill and sacrifice from all parties, with a belief that Jesus Christ desires his church to grow and be strong (however you define “growth”). However, I think there are some principles that if agreed to might provide a way forward.

1. Develop consensus that change is necessary if the mission of the church is to advance. If not all the parties agree that change is necessary, as well as what the required change is, then little progress can be made. As board chair you might suggest the use of an external third party to advise and educate the board (which includes the lead pastor) about possible new directions and modes of board operation related to the size and potential growth of the congregation. Such a strategy has the benefit of letting a neutral party articulate some difficult things about your congregational reality that not all have recognized or are willing to admit. This can overcome “the elephant in the room” syndrome and enable some spiritually honest dialogue. If your denominational ministry centre has a process of congregational review and evaluation, this may also be a good way to initiate the conversation based upon data and discoveries made, and move the discussion beyond the level of anecdotes. It may take many months to engage this conversation and develop consensus. Some “conversion” experiences may have to occur along the way or some people may conclude that this direction is not for them. Once the board has made its decision, always be careful as chair that speak on behalf of the board and with its authority. This is not just your idea as chair.

2. Develop an initial set of policies and demonstrate how the position description of the lead pastor may change. Seeing how the authority and responsibility are defined and the accountability flows will reduce some anxiety and enable a lead pastor to evaluate the “doability” of this in terms of his capacities and vocational goals. Keep setting this in the context of the spiritual leadership the church requires for advancing its mission. Perhaps significant change in pastoral responsibilities will also require change in level of compensation — which is only fair. Offer to pay for additional professional training.

3. Provide all the support and assistance your lead pastor requires. This is essential. As church board chair you do not want the lead pastor to conclude that he is the victim in this process. As the discussion ensues, you might suggest he talk with several pastoral leaders who have embraced a model of pastoral leadership that places the direction and  implementation of all ministry for the congregation under his responsibility with accountability to the board. Hopefully, such conversations will help your lead pastor discern the freedom and support that such an organizational model provides for him, actually reducing frustration. Frankly, some pastors will have to alter their perception of the pastoral role if they are going to exercise this kind of leadership. Many factors, however, create significant drag on their willingness to do so.

4. Implement your plan gradually and keep learning as you go. It takes time for an institution and its core leadership to understand and implement new operational modes. In effect you are changing the leadership culture of the church. So recognize the challenge and give the implementation process the time and energy required to make it a success. Think carefully about the staging of the transitions and what measurements will tell you that the changes have been implemented successfully. Establish clearly who is responsible for what components and what reporting will be required to keep things moving forward with accountability. No plan will be implemented exactly as you intended so be prepared to be adaptable, so long as key principles are being followed.

5. If some part of the implementation plan is not working, do not be afraid to adapt, but do not retreat from the goals and fundamental principles. Probably as things are moving forward, new insights will generate different and sometimes better ideas that need to be evaluated and perhaps followed. Sooner or later someone will claim its not working — the “I told you so” response, but do not be deterred. Allowing for some adaptability will indicate to those affected by the changes that you (and the board) are concerned about their welfare and want the plan implemented in ways that are sensitive to their context. Those closest to the work often know best how to implement and need to be listened to carefully. Willingness to alter the plan based on new learning demonstrates  confidence and builds trust.

6. Celebrate progress. As implementation proceeds and you begin to discern the fruit of all of the adaptation work, commend people, celebrate the gains, and note publicly the benefits that are accruing. In particular key leaders need to know that their hard work to develop new capacity and competency is being appreciated. Keep praying for them in the board meetings. When you meet with the  lead pastor, keep encouraging him and thanking him for his commitment to the mission of the church.

Despite the best intentions of everyone, not every situation will find a good resolution. Sometimes as church board chair you have to make a very difficult decision — do I stay in this role and try to make the best of a difficult situation or do I recognize that my only option is to serve out my term and look for another way to serve Christ? Or perhaps the pastor will come to the conclusion that the ministry leadership requirements are not what he signed on for and will resign. However, if the mission of the church is to advance, which is the primary responsibility of the church board, sometimes significant changes and sacrifices will have to be made on the part of individuals. You as the board chair play a critical role in all of these discussions, as well as the planning and implementation. If you are not sold on it, then it probably will not happen. However, if you discern that such change is critical for the governance leadership of the board to advance  the mission of the church successfully, thenyou are in a key position to stimulate and lead this change.

63. ‘Conversion Work’ — How does a Church Board Chair facilitate change?

Published by Dr. Larry Perkins on February 1, 2011 in Board, Board Chair, Board Governance and Board Member. Closed Tags: , , .

All work that a church board engages in is in essence ‘conversion work,’ i.e. the effective management of missional change. The word ‘conversion’ normally is applied to personal spiritual change that brings a person into the Kingdom of God. However, we also know that the process of personal change for a believer never ends as the Holy Spirit does his “sanctifying” work in the life of the believer. The Christian experience begins with change, engages continuous change and looks forward to the greatest change of all, namely resurrection.  We should not be surprised  to discern that the faith community, this interim, imperfect  expression of Kingdom reality, has an identity that is also marked by change. It is always reforming because it is the holy community in which the Holy Spirit takes up residence. Pursuing vision involves change. The church board as the primary ministry team giving oversight to the congregation’s missional development has to understand this fundamental spiritual reality, this persistent ‘conversion work.’

The concept and pragmatics of change generate different responses depending upon the individual or the culture of a community. Sometimes change is regarded as exiting, essential, vital, and transformational. Conversely for some change speaks of disaster, loss, chaos, dysfunction, and uncertainty. Board members will reflect these divergent perspectives. A board chair will undoubtedly reflect something of these attitudes in his or her leadership, but will need to be careful lest the chair’s particular bias towards change interfere with a board’s ability to establish its own relationship with and perspective on change. Gaining a biblical perspective on change is one means you can use to develop a healthy understanding of and appreciation for change. Consider how much change the early Christians had to work through in Acts 1-15!

Some ‘conversion work’ happens in the normal course of a church board’s life. Board members come and go, including chairs. So the changes related to orienting new board members, preparing a new chair, and the work of getting a new board working well all deal with change and adaptation. A board chair can influence significantly the entire experience of a board as it processes such changes, enabling them to be as positive and formative as possible. The annual cycle of a board’s life generates continual change as new issues require constant adaptation in order to enable the congregation’s mission to advance. Each board meeting agenda becomes in essence a map to guide the board in its management of these changes. Agenda development becomes a critical tool in facilitating change well. A chair is able to assist a church board’s progress by ensuring that all changes, whether in policy, personnel, vision or strategic planning are being processed well so that the spiritual health of the congregation is sustained and strengthened.

Other kinds of ‘conversion work’ tend to be more episodic in nature. In other words, at specific points in the board’s annual agenda or during critical congregational transitions change has to be discerned, processed, rejected or implemented. Sometimes the issues are quite tangible, i.e. buying property, building structures, or hiring for a new position. On other occasions the face of change emerges in debates about worship practice, the style of preaching, or theological controversy. And then developments in the surrounding culture force a church board to make tough decisions about changes to hiring policy, ethical codes of conduct, or financial management practices.

Some of the hardest questions about change arise as a board seeks to understand what it believes God wants that particular church to be in ten years. Do board members have a vision for growth and if so, what will this look like? How are demographics in the community changing and what new opportunities or challenges for ministry do they present to the continued growth of the church? When and how should that church plan to plant another church? If God blesses that church and it does grow beyond the capacity of the current facilities, does the current property have any potential for expansion? The questions can be quite complex. Defining vision has to be the most difficult kind of ‘conversion work’ a church board does.

So what is the role of a chair in helping a church board get on with this ‘conversion work?’ I would suggest three key elements.

1. A chair has to assist the board collectively and individually to embrace change as a fundamental ethos for its operations. The board has to see change as a spiritual process which the congregation engages and the board must help it to do it well, if the congregation is to achieve its mission. It is an opportunity for good, spiritual leadership. As noted earlier, people’s attitudes to change are quite diverse and as chair it is important to help the board as a whole to discern an appropriate pace for change that sustains unity within the board as well as deals with realities effectively. When board’s postpone dealing with change because of fear or failure to lead, the risk of congregational dysfunction and impairment increase significantly. Perhaps as well, the chair and lead pastor need to have a fairly similar understanding about the importance and direction of change in relation to congregational health. When a lead pastor believes change is necessary and a board chair disagrees fundamentally, this is a formula for a divided church.

2. A chair has to understand good practices that enable a team to manage change effectively. One aspect to this is timing — how much change, how quickly, how urgently can and should a board seek to implement?  Orchestrating this requires wisdom, skill and sensitivity. Decisions regarding significant change deserve sufficient time for careful, prayerful discernment. Encouraging the board to govern with a focus on the future builds a board environment that will embrace change. One of the stakeholders in the life of a congregation that boards often ignore are the people who will form the church ten years into the future. How are decisions taken by the board today implementing changes that will enable the congregation to be healthy in ten years and minister well to the needs of that future congregation.

3. A chair is a champion for good change because he or she knows that without change the congregation will falter. Maintaining the status quo cannot be the focus of a board’s work. This is not governance leadership. In fact, it would be a fundamental betrayal of the trust the congregation has placed in the church board. Of course, the board must guard the congregation’s constitution, bylaws, and statement of faith. Yet even bylaws can and sometimes should be changed to adapt to new developments. Just like any organism, a faith community needs to grow in order to attain its potential. The church board, in a manner to similar to a parent’s role, attempts to guide the developing congregation for the benefit of all concerned and to the glory of God.

‘Conversion work’ is hard work because it is unrelenting. Conversely it is immensely satisfying to see progress in faith, progress in the capacity of a congregation to minister in its community, progress in articulating a strong witness for Jesus. Keeping in step with Jesus will require constant wrestling with change. As a kingdom agent a church board chair will be a missional change agent.