Accountable Leadership

Accountable Leadership Core Purpose today is to understand what Accountable Leadership looks like in the local church environment. Objectives: Ensure church leaders understand the key concepts of accountability Recognize the connection between Mission / Vision / Goals and how they apply to our ministry Cover the SIMPLE model for holding others accountable

“Therefore, go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age” – Jesus, Matthew 28:19-20 Everything we do must support our mission…which comes to us from this scripture.

The making of new disciples of Jesus Christ for the transformation of the world. Mission of the United Methodist Church * “new” added Everything we do must support our mission…which comes to us from this scripture.

Accountable Leadership Do you want the mission to succeed? “Are you prepared to stake everything, change anything, and do whatever it takes—even if it means altering long familiar habits, redeveloping precious programs, and redeploying sacred assets?” Tom Bandy From the foreword of Winning on Purpose

Accountable Leadership This workshop is based on concepts from the book: Winning on Purpose: How to Organize Congregations to Succeed in Their Mission by John Edmund Kaiser It is recommended that pastors and laity leaders read this book for a more complete understanding of the concepts. Mention to the group that the book was not written to or about Methodist churches, so there are a few small elements which do not apply. Overall, the concepts will work in any size or type of church.

Church Leadership Basic Options – Church Leadership Bureaucratic Autocratic Committee-Based or Consensus-Driven Pastor-Centered or Personality-Driven Accountable

Church Leadership Bureaucratic: Pastor is expected to accomplish the mission, but has no real power to do so. Responsibility – Authority = Safe but not Effective Autocratic: Pastor is expected to accomplish the mission and has the power to do so…but there are no consequences for not producing fruit. Responsibility + Authority – Accountability = Effective but not Safe These are two of the more popular types of leadership in our churches now. As you can see, they each fall short.

Committee-Based or Consensus-Driven Leadership Decisions are slow – if they happen at all Decisions, since consensus is the goal, are not always focused on the mission Consensus is often not achieved; instead, compromise is the rule. It becomes better to maintain the relationships than fulfill the mission The goal, as it’s usually expressed, is to get everyone involved in the decision making process and hence have ownership of the outcome. All opinions and feelings are weighted or valued equally. 1) Decisions are often slow and sometimes don’t occur. 2) Decisions, since consensus is the goal, are not always aimed toward mission. 3) Consensus is often not achieved; instead, compromise is the rule. It becomes better to maintain the relationship than fulfill the mission.

Committee-Based or Consensus-Driven Leadership There is no one person who can be held accountable for missional objectives The role of the pastor and staff as leaders is limited The pastor and staff are evaluated by the congregation – power resides with person or group who does the evaluation 4) There is no one person who can be held accountable for a failure to meet clearly defined missional objectives. 5) The role of the pastor and staff as leaders is limited. 6) The pastor and staff are evaluated by the congregation (note: power resides with the person or group who does the evaluation). Major Downside: The pastor and staff feel triangulated/caught, helpless to effect an outcome for which they feel accountable and/or are held accountable.

Pastor-Centered or Personality-Driven Leadership The pastor makes all the major decisions Everything revolves around and is dependent upon the pastor Decisions are made quickly – sometimes impulsive or unrealistically The pastor, who is held responsible for the church successfully moving toward its mission, makes all of the major decisions for the church. Everything revolves around and is dependent upon the pastor, the pastor’s skill, the pastor’s presence, the pastor’s charisma. Decisions are often made quickly; sometimes quixotically made.

Pastor-Centered or Personality-Driven Leadership Dissent is not tolerated The pastor spends his/her time “putting out fires” Laity leaders are evaluated by the pastor and staff Congregation feels run-over & disconnected from the ministry of the church Dissent is not tolerated; or, if it is tolerated, the pastor spends his/her time and energy “putting out fires.” Lay persons are evaluated by the pastor and the staff. Major Downside: The congregation feels run-over, discounted, and shut out from the ministry of the church. Or, power needs are expressed in a passive-aggressive manner that is manifested in chronic conflict.

Accountable Leadership Bureaucratic: Responsibility – Authority = Safe but not Effective Autocratic: Responsibility + Authority – Accountability = Effective but not Safe Accountable Leadership: Responsibility + Authority + Accountability = Safe & Effective Accountability leadership is the marriage of responsibility, authority, and accountability. The next few slides outline some of the key points about accountability leadership from the book Winning on Purpose by John Edmund Kaiser. (It would be a good idea to have a copy of the book with you and to have reviewed it again prior to this workshop.)

Staff-Led / Mission-Driven Leadership Those responsible are accountable The mission of the church comes first Must have the right people in place to accomplish the mission Small number of decision makers – large number of people in ministry Shepherding is done by the laity, not the pastor This model assumes that those who are held accountable for the outcome should be the persons who are vested with responsibility and authority for making the decisions. In this model the Church Council governs, the pastor leads, the staff (paid and unpaid) manage, and the congregation does “hands on” ministry. The mission of the church comes first. The next step must be to get good people in the right places to align with the mission of the church. This model assumes that the fewer the number of people who are involved in decisions, the more people who can be deployed in ministry. The pastor functions as visionary, leader, cheerleader, and teacher. Shepherding is done by lay persons. Staff have clearly defined leadership roles with concrete job targets, and they are accountable to the pastor. The pastor, in turn, is accountable to the “PPRC”.

Staff-Led / Mission-Driven Leadership Lots of input – very focused direction Pastor evaluates the staff Everyone is held accountable for the mission Alignment to the mission and vision is critical – not consensus Input comes from anyone; direction comes from the staff who, in turn, take direction from the pastor. The staff is evaluated by the pastor, the pastor is evaluated by the congregation, lay leaders are evaluated by the pastor and staff; everyone is held accountable for the sake of the mission. Alignment to the mission and critical thrust, not consensus, are needed for the church to move forward on an issue. The “client” is the mission.

Accountable Leadership Responsibility = Object of the Game Authority = Rules of the Game Accountability = How we keep Score This is the key to accountability leadership in our churches.

Accountable Leadership Board/Council = Role is governance Pastor = Role is leading Staff (paid & unpaid) = Role is managing Members = Role is ministering The senior pastor is called to lead the church. The staff (both paid and unpaid) reports to the Senior Pastor (not the congregation) and is responsible for managing the church and carrying out the implementation of the vision. The pastor holds the staff (paid and unpaid) accountable for achieving their goals and provides support and training where needed. The board/council holds the pastor accountable for achieving goals and protects them from things that would get in the way of achieving those goals. They protect the pastor from people or things that would negatively impact the achievement of goals, vision, and mission. The Congregation does the ministry of the church. The next slides show a good example.

Accountable Leadership Position Players Functions Metaphors Ministry Members Outreach first then care for one another Teammates, champions, athletes, etc… Management Staff Equipping and coordination Assistant coaches and specialists Leadership Pastor Vision, direction and teaching Head coach, or quarterback, captain, etc… Governance Board Accountability and support Commissioner, umpire, scorekeeper & cheerleader

Accountable Leadership Strengths Marries responsibility and authority with accountability Promotes church unity Functions on a high level of trust Decisions are made very quickly Mission/Vision fulfillment is the driving force…not management (or maintenance) Goals and objectives of ministries can be adjusted as needed After you cover each of the strengths it would be good to also explain some of the challenges the church should expect as the move to this model: Some people may experience a feeling of disconnection due to no longer being involved in every little decision of the church. The pastor will need to lead very differently going forward than they have in the past. Not all pastors have experience leading or managing a staff and will need help from some trusted mentors and the coach. There may be a perception of control or power loss. Those in the congregation who are not part of this training may get the impression that there is a loss of control when there is actually more accountability in place.

Pastor’s Role Develops Leaders Spiritual Leader / Shepherd Staff Board New Leaders Spiritual Leader / Shepherd Keeper of Mission Caster of Vision Example of Evangelist Chief Fund Raiser Main Recruiter All of the roles change as we move toward accountability leadership. It is important for us to be clear on what we are asking our pastor to focus on in our church.

Accountable Leadership Organizational Chart (From Winning on Purpose, by John Edmund Kaiser) Owner: CHRIST 1st Beneficiaries: PEOPLE OUTSIDE 2nd Beneficiaries: PEOPLE INSIDE Player: THE BOARD Position: GOVERNANCE Player: THE PASTOR Position: LEADERSHIP Player: STAFF MEMBER Position: MANAGEMENT Ministry Team Player: STAFF MEMBER Position: MANAGEMENT Player: STAFF MEMBER Position: MANAGEMENT

When we aim at nothing in particular, that’s what we hit. Unfortunately, this is what happens in too many churches. We have good intentions, we have LOTS of meetings, our calendars are FULL of activities…but at the end of the year we are no closer to our vision than we were at the beginning of the year. (That may be because we did not even know what the vision was!) It is of vital importance that we are all clear on what our mission and vision is so that we can develop goals as a church and in our specific ministry areas in order to ensure we achieve that vision. Now that we understand the key concepts of Accountability Leadership, let’s look at how we can connect it to our mission, vision, and goals.

Mission Our mission is making new disciples of Jesus Christ for the transformation of the world. Everything flows from mission… Mission is what we do. This should be the same in all churches. Some may say it in different words, but the results must be the same.

Vision The unique way a congregation achieves or accomplishes the mission. The key ingredients of a vision statement need to be outwardly focused, measurable, and provides a framework for goals and accountability for the congregation and staff. What % of the mission field are you going to reach for Jesus? The church should have already at least begun the process of developing their vision. Ask for someone to share it with the group. It would be good to have the vision written on a flipchart page and hung in the room for everyone to see throughout the workshop.

Mission & Vision Goals Tasks / Activities Once the church knows and understands its mission and vision this should flow clearly into the goals for each year. Those goals must be connected to the goals of each church ministry area. Leaders are then responsible for ensuring there is a connection between those goals and the tasks/activities being done in their areas.

Church Wide Goals Specific Measurable Achievable Relevant Time-Based Who? When? Where? How? Did it work? Specific Measurable Achievable Relevant Time-Based Explain to the group the importance of a church having clear goals. More detailed information is available from Ken Willard if needed. (This is also covered as part of our PLD2 training in session one.)

Holding Others Accountable is SIMPLE S = Set Expectations I = Invite Commitment M = Measure Progress P = Provide Feedback L = Link to Consequences E = Evaluate Effectiveness

Holding Others Accountable is SIMPLE S = Set Expectations Never assume Be clear and focused SMART Goals are a great tool

Holding Others Accountable is SIMPLE I = Invite Commitment Just because they know what to do…doesn’t mean they will do it Explain how the goal will benefit them and the church Connect what they want to what the church needs to achieve

Holding Others Accountable is SIMPLE M = Measure Progress Reward completion…but recognize steps along the way Periodically (monthly, quarterly, etc…) let them know how they are doing Ask what they need – what is getting in the way? Remove obstacles Good goals are always measurable

Holding Others Accountable is SIMPLE P = Provide Feedback Honestly share how you feel Be clear – don’t make them guess Feedback is a gift, be sincere Intent is more important than technique

Holding Others Accountable is SIMPLE L = Link to Consequences What will happen if they are successful? What will happen if they are not? Not about punishments…focus on the mission and vision

Holding Others Accountable is SIMPLE E = Evaluate Effectiveness Focus on the results – not the effort What worked and what did not? What should have been done? What did they learn? Be systematic and consistent

Accountable Leadership

Single Board Model

Single Board Model Core Purpose today is to understand what the Single Board Model looks like in a local church. Objectives: Review church structures Cover the key concepts of the Single Board Model Understand the steps in transitioning to this model

Typical Church Structure The typical church structure is driving the mission versus the mission driving the structure! Safe and ineffective. The church exists for mission, not for structure. Briefly review the current church structure. This can be done with a handout or by inserting a slide here. Either way, the point is not to speak badly about the current structure but to use this as our starting point for change. You may want to have a quick conversation around this in order to help people feel better about what they have been doing for a long time. What has worked well with this structure? What elements are important for us to try and take forward?

Structure Forms of Structure: Budgets / Finances Calendar Structure = the design and arrangement of tangible factors in time and space. Forms of Structure: Budgets / Finances Calendar Facility / Buildings

Structure & Changing Generations Post WWII – Baby Boomers – Gen X – Millennials The WAY we do church is changing Attendance Meetings Committees to Teams

Problem with most Structures Promotes disunity and enables dysfunction Clear lines of authority…but no clear lines of accountability All responsibility on the pastor, but little or no authority Nearly impossible to make difficult and timely decisions Promotes disunity and enables dysfunction – having multiple committees operating in a church will often lead to each one going in a different direction and different interpretations of what is really important; there can even develop a lack of trust due to pastors, staff, boards, etc…feeling like they have to justify everything they do or get permission for their ministry needs Have clear lines of authority but no clear lines of accountability – many churches have detailed organizational charts, each person on the chart has specific responsibilities. But what happens when they do not fulfill those responsibilities? How is meaningful accountability expressed or exercised? Place all the responsibility on the pastor, but give him/her no authority – how can a pastor lead the church into the future without the proper authority to make decisions. One example of this in many churches is what happens with there is an issue with a staff member. The pastor is expected to manage the staff but must work through the SPR to hire, fire, disciple, etc… Nearly impossible to make difficult and timely decisions due to the process – we have all experienced at one time or another the challenge of needing to make a quick decision in a church and running head-first into the bureaucracy process.

Problem with most Structures Inward Focus Anarchy Democracy Oligarchy Let’s take a look at some of the problems that occur in churches now due to ineffective structures. Hierarchy

Problem with most Structures Inward Focus Hard to win if you’re not in the game The Great Commission, to make disciples, is displaced by other good pursuits. Putting the desires of insiders first leads to divisions based on opposing special interest groups. In the absence of biblical mission, the congregation suffers a lack of vision.

Problem with most Structures Anarchy Hard to win if no one is sure who’s picking the plays When we aim at nothing in particular, that’s what we hit. Movements seeking to restore “New Testament Christianity” often overlook cultural and missional contextualization in both the first and twenty-first centuries. Lack of intentional structure will facilitate the path of least resistance, which is inward focus. Even with an outward focus by intention, a ministry without structure is unlikely to make much impact.

Problem with most Structures Democracy Hard to win if everyone picks the plays Congregational rule is notorious for divisive politics. The agenda of a democratic congregation has difficulty rising above the lowest common denominator of spiritual maturity. A democratic church culture is fertile ground for controllers. A vision for the future that arises from a committee of the whole is fragmented, fuzzy and unstable. Congregational churches tend to leave ministry to the pastor and leadership to the members.

Problem with most Structures Hard to win if a committee picks the plays Oligarchy The use of selected biblical titles in polities tends to camouflage adherence to biblical principles. Congregations ruled by elders often assume that their polity mirrors the New Testament church and therefore is sacred. For congregations with independent polity, the elders tend to be accountable to no one but themselves. Elder boards easily mistake groupthink for the voice of the Holy Spirit.

Problem with most Structures Hierarchy Hard to win if bureaucrats pick the plays In an explicitly hierarchical denomination, mission tends to be displaced by institutional distinctives, whether intellectual reflection, liturgical purity, charismatic experience, or social activism. Layers of bureaucracy in Episcopal systems can easily smother missional effectiveness. Denominations that relocate pastors every four of five years make it difficult for congregations to build a climate of missional accountability. Venerable structures, who’s usefulness has long since calcified into crippling rigidity, make it hard for winning innovations to emerge.

There is another way . . . Single Board Model

Alternative Structure The alternative structure is based on ¶ 247.2 of the 2008 Book of Discipline: The charge conference, the district superintendent, and the pastor shall organize and administer the pastoral charge and churches according to the policies and plans herein set forth. When the membership size, program scope, mission resources, or other circumstances so require, the charge conference may, in consultation with and upon the approval of the district superintendent, modify the organizational plans, provided that the provisions of ¶ 243 are observed.

Typical Single Board Model 9 to 13 members elected by the Charge Conference (2) PPRC Team reps (2) Trustees Team reps (2) Finance Team reps Board Chair and/or Lay member to Annual Conference Lay Leader UMM rep UMW rep Youth rep Single Board Notes Min 9 people and max 13 people Designate SPR Chair for DS liaison for appointment issues Board Chair, Lay Leader & Lay Delegate can also have an additional board function Boards needs to name Chair, Vice Chair and Secretary for MO incorporation to stay in alignment with BOD Staff reports to pastor, Build relationship w/ staff that pastor is their advocate to the Board Pastor has authority to hire, fire, evaluate in alignment with mission, vision and budget Need to limit amount teams/pastor can spend when spending budgeted items without checking on finances or emergency needs Need for pastors to over-communicate in this model Create feed-back loops (surveys, focus groups, Town Hall meetings, etc.) SPRC reps should be people w/HR backgrounds & experience “resource people” and “sounding boards” review pastor based on goals & make recommendations to the Board Trustees are building resource people, Here’s budget & now go do it. Background in building maintenance. Vision Sundays: What is our mission, vision, core values, goals. Where are we goings? What have we accomplished? Hold3-4 times per year. Board Agenda: 1/3 time in learning and spiritual development. 1/3 time used in puzzling through items board members couldn’t figure out on their own (challenges, issues) 1/3 time on measurement of goals including names of new people since last time & how they are engaged and financial reports. Annual Board Retreat to go over mission, vision goals and next year’s goals. Function of the Board is to set boundaries NOT day to day operations. Board governs. Does not operate in day-to-day activities. What is governance? Policy manuals (building, sprc, safe sanctuary) Budget Accountability to goals Support Visioning Over-site responsibilities such as money is where it is suppose to be and people are where they are suppose to be.

Three Types of Work for a Governing Board Fiduciary = tending to the stewardship of tangible assets Strategic = working to set the congregation’s priorities and seeing that resources are aligned with those priorities Generative = problem framing and sense making about the shifting environment of the congregation and community

Governing Board Sets Boundaries Budgets, policy, goals, oversight, etc… NOT DAY-TO-DAY OPERATIONS OF THE CHURCH

Two Challenges of a Governing Board Decision Making - Accuracy / Effectiveness Management of Communication

New Leadership Agenda 1/3 – Spiritual Formation, Leadership Development, review of new people/families 1/3 – Deal with pressing decisions / issues, help groups as needed 1/3 – Review goals / Accountability and reallocation of assets

Single Board Model Information Sheet Leadership Board Purpose Leadership Board Responsibilities Pastor’s Role Guidelines to Ensure Alternative Structure’s Success Other Materials

Single Board Model Step One – Partner with your District Superintendent Step Two – Ensure all key leaders have been trained on accountability leadership Step Three – Communicate, communicate, communicate…and then communicate some more! Step Four – Annual Charge Conference votes to move to new structure with election of members. Step Five – Move to new structure (if appropriate) with the new year.

Single Board Model