How to Change a Church

David Lawrence

David Lawrence

Philip and I recently led a session for people training for Christian ministry at Trinity College in Bristol. The students were approaching the end of their course and beginning to anticipate some of the challenges of their first ministerial appointments. Several of them were headed for smaller churches which were very traditional in their outlook.

The students had big dreams and  knew what they wanted to do to move their churches into 'mission mode' - but were concerned about the processes of change required to get them there. It's a common problem: all too often a visionary leader gets frustrated by the seeming intransigence of those in the groups that they are leading.

There are lots of helpful books on change processes, but one of our favourites is 'Holy Conversations ' by Gil Rendle and Alice Mann. In the book they talk about the importance of finding the right people to work with when embarking on the change journey (such as that from 'maintenance-church to mission-church mode). According to their analysis, when change is announced:

About 2% of the church sign up straight away, and 2% say 'no way Jose'!

The leader can be seduced by the enthusiasm of the '2% YES' people into thinking the change can happen easily, or depressed by the '2% NO' people and imagine that they have to be convinced before anything can happen. Rendle and Mann explain that these groups (which they call 'positional people', because they have a single-minded position which nothing is going to shift them from!) are largely unhelpful in the change process.

"This last group are the productive group to work with in change processes. They may not always agree, but they are always committed to seek the answer."

 

Managing Change

About 72% of the congregation appear relatively neutral about the change process proposed by the leaders.

They tend not to be involved, to be hard to engage and appear to think that the changes will not affect them much - life will soon return to normal! Rendle and Mann point out that leaders who work hard to stimulate this group are largely wasting their time, since they are trying to provide answers for people who have no questions!

The remaining 24% of the congregation are divided into two apparently opposite groups: 12% are inclined to say 'yes' to the change proposals, and 12% are inclined to say 'no'.

The difference between these groups and the 'positional people' (above) is that these hold their views thoughtfully: 'they are listening, they are considering, they are praying'. They may be in agreement or disagreement with the leaders, but no matter. They are willing to work with the leaders and the others to discern what is best, are willing to get involved, and believe the work of addressing the questions is important.

This last group are the productive group to work with in change processes. They may not always agree, but they are always committed to seek the answer. Wise leaders discern who they are and invite them to accompany them on the change journey. Once momentum is gained, a large number of the central 72% will almost certainly begin to move as well. The '2% YES' people were already on board  - and the 2% NO people were never going to get it anyway!

For more on this see Gil Rendle and Alice Mann, 'Holy Conversations' (The Alban Institute, 2003)

Comments (2)Add Comment
Nigel Savage
June03 | 08
Thanks for this article David, it's interesting to break down how the change process works. If we're to be an influence in changing our society, surely we've got to be able to change our own churches and understand how that process works. I've found that I've not had a problem with new ideas or vision, but how do i get everyone else on board and see the stuff become reality?

Are there any circumstances when the above principle doesn't work and a different approach is needed?

Anyway, thanks for the post.
Nigel
David Lawrence
July14 | 08
Hi Nigel. I think your question points towards a fundamental leadership dilemma - how to get people to follow you!!

I increasingly think that the problem revolves around where 'vision' comes from in the first place.

It has become something of a mantra in the last 3-4 decades that 'leadership is all about vision'. This is often outworked in what I call 'the Moses up the mountain model' of leadership, which sees leaders as the ones who 'get vision' - usually by spending time listening to God - and then face the challenge of how to come back down the mountain and influence others to take the tablets (so to speak).

This then often leads to your expressed frustration - 'how do I get everyone else on board and see the stuff become reality'.

An alternative model of vision-forming involves people at an earlier stage in the process. Rather than leaders giving people answers to questions they are not asking - or imagining that they really can predict the future with any degree of certainty - this approach (called 'Adaptive Leadership' in the jargon), exposes people to the the problems and empowers them to work together towards solutions that they - as a group - feel are viable.

A good book on the subject is 'The Learning Congregation: A New Vision of Leadership'

Not sure if that answers your question but blog me again if not!
Write comment
You must be logged in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.

busy