2021 Global Leadership Summit Reflections

August 11, 2021 by

Last week I had the privilege of attending the Global Leadership Summit (GLS) at Willow Creek Church. I’ve been processing that experience and the events leading up to it and that followed it. In reflecting on the experience as a whole, there’s a couple of takeaways that I found personally significant. 

Dining Out

I’m going to start with the food. Along the trip, the group I traveled with went to some really fun upscale restaurants and some not-so upscale restaurants, including one memorable trip stop at a mall food court where we played that always fun game of “Who ordered the salmonella?”

Along with the food, I noticed something very important. Every restaurant we went to was severely understaffed. Most of the wait staff were taking care of very large groups of customers at the same time. Food took longer than one would expect it to be, waters and soda’s took longer to get refills, and many restaurants had limited menu items due to low stock.

In reflecting on this, I also observed that most of the other customers were civil and recognized this as well. I suspect this is a trend that will be happening more and more. I wonder how this will affect the future of the food industry. Time will tell.

Live versus Streaming

I’ve attended the Global Leadership Summit (GLS) before, but only at the satellite locations. During those times, I would walk into the site, grab my resources, and watch the GLS videos. The energy was always good and it was always an incredible time of learning. 

In many ways, attending the GLS in person was much the same, however, there was a greater sense of energy. The volunteers were incredible, the facilities were spotless, and every aspect of the location was setup so that the attendees could find their way easily.

One thing that was unexpected was the significant amount of available seats in the auditorium. We were told that over 70% of the people attending the conference were watching from satellite locations. I would suspect this is a trend that will increase and I sincerely wonder if the Global Leadership Summit will make some venue adjustments moving forward.

Speakers

As with any conference, there’s some incredible speakers, some great speakers, some good speakers, and some filler speakers. Here’s the speakers that I took take-away’s from along with one quote that I found significant:

  • Craig Groshell
    “It’s an honor to suffer with the savior who suffered with me”
  • Michelle Poler
    “Brave means despite the fear you have courage to take action”
  • General Stanley McCrystal
    “It’s hard to assess risk and even harder to verbalize to someone else’s who is outside of your world the risk”
  • Jamie Kern Lima
    “Personal setbacks are often Gods setups”
  • Shola Richards
    “I belong in any room I step into”
  • Ibukun Awosika
    “Who you strive to be should not be replaced by the office you hold“
  • Dr. Francesco Gino
    “[Rebels have] the ability to find creative solutions to problems within a construct of expectations”
  • Juliet Funt
    “Envision the future of how work will work within the construct of where you are now”
  • Bianca Juarez Oltoff
    “Who do you miss out on influencing when you choose not to lead?”
  • Malcom Gladwell
    “Social risk-takers see the future and make it happen”
  • Albert Tate
    “What if the Lesson is what we experienced, and NOW THIS is the Test?”

Final Thoughts

I’ll close this out with the four questions that I try to ask myself anytime I go to an event or a conference.

  • Did I learn anything for myself?
    Yes – absolutely and I’ll be able to apply some of what I learned immediately and some of what I learned will have to take time for me to apply.
  • Did I learn anything I could pass on to others?
    Yes – I think there’s several things I could pass on to others in the right situation.
  • Did I hear anything I need to pause and pray about?
    Without a doubt. There was some incredibly challenging thoughts that I’ll need to really work through if I’m going to continue to grow and develop as a person, a servant, and a leader.
  • Would I attend again?
    Yes – absolutely – without a doubt.
Filed Under: Culture, Leadership, Learner, Pastor, Thinker Tagged With: , ,

Exploring Church Budgeting Alternatives

June 26, 2021 by

When it comes to discussing church budgets, it’s often a difficult process. No one really wants to talk about money and the ones that do often seem to have only one way to budget.

What if Budgeting could look different? What if budgeting could be centered more around how to use the financial resources to accomplish the goals of the organization rather than simply paying bills and making ends meet? There’s four basic types of budgets that are worth exploring.

  1. Zero-based budgeting
    Every ministry of the church starts with zero and must justify every single expense. No expenses are automatically okayed and every budget must go through a cost containment analysis to weed out the extras and focus on the essentials. It’s basically a bottom-up budgeting and is extremely time-consuming.

    There are a few churches using this, but because it is so demoralizing and it restricts the budget so significantly, it’s not used widely. Only in cases of a restarts and other restructuring efforts is this appropriate.
  2. Incremental budgeting
    We spent X amount on children’s ministry last year so we’re going to spend X amount +/- a % amount (determined by last year’s income) on this year’s children’s ministry. This is how most churches seem operate. It’s good and it’s bad for a variety of different reasons.
  3. Activity-based budgeting
    We want to have a really good worship experience and to accomplish that we need to invest in our creative team and their needs. That’s going to cost the church XXX amount of dollars and so that’s how we budget for it. Again – lots of churches operate this way – for good and bad reasons.
  4. Value-based Budgeting
    We want to have a church that is focused on connecting with the community. Because of this – every item in the budget must focus on the community. No single item should cost more that the value it adds to the community. Every budget item should be focused on the community. And because the community needs are ongoing, every effort must be made to avoid unnecessary expenditures that don’t deliver value for the community.

If you’re goal is to set a 3-5 year budget – then you really need to consider value-based budgeting. It’s provides the only option that, in my opinion, a healthy mission-centric church should consider. Money isn’t the focus – accomplishing the vision according to the values (mission) of the church is.

Filed Under: Administration, Leadership, Learner, Pastor

The Problem of Persecution

January 11, 2021 by

For decades the church has been praying for revival. However, for revival to take place, change must happen. Change, by its very nature, is always disruptive and creates tension. This tension is problematic at times, but necessary, if the change desired is to take place. Which means, if we truly want revival, then the Church must be willing to accept and embrace the change necessary to bring about revival.

If revival is the goal, then there has to be some elements of persecution in place in order to accomplish that goal. As pastors, we are called to equip the saints for the work of the ministry, for building up the body of Christ. If the work of the ministry is discipling individuals to Know God and share the hope and good news of Jesus with the world, then it is also necessary to equip the individuals that make up the Church to identify and adapt to the tensions necessary to bring about change. In short, individuals need to be discipled and prepared, both in seasons of revival and in seasons of persecution, to know God and share the hope and good news of Jesus with the world.

If this is true, then why does it seem that so many pastors are anxious and worrying about the potential threat of persecution?

Have these pastors been derelict in their duties to equip the saints and instead been placating the masses with easily consumable life lessons that have no eternal impact?

Have these pastors failed to equip the saints under their charge to process information correctly with a Christian mindset in order to filter out the nonsense and to discern the best way to share the hope and good news of Jesus with others in any situation?

Have these pastors emasculated themselves from the power of the Holy Spirit to change lives and subjugated themselves to the whims of the perceived cultural and societal needs for the sake. maintaining a status quo, of placing “butts in the the seats”, and procuring consistently increasing tithes and offerings?

Have these pastors embraced a “victim” mindset that has created an “us versus them” framework that’s allowed various cult ideologies to exist rather then a “victor” mindset that creates an “all have sinned” framework that correctly positions Jesus as the hope and salvation for the world?

Why are so many pastors worrying about the potential threat of persecution instead of focusing on the hope of Jesus?

Filed Under: Leadership, Pastor

The Maxwellian Leadership Model Origins

May 9, 2020 by

Oftentimes in the church, I hear the phrase, “Leadership is Influence.” “Leadership is Influence” is a distinctive of the “Maxwellian Leadership” model that has been so pervasive in the church, especially the Wesleyan Church, by our own John Maxwell. Both Kevin Myers and Dan Reiland, extraordinary leaders and thinkers in their own right, are strong supporters and communicators of the Maxwellian model, as are many of our current district and denominational leaders. It is a good model, but I don’t believe it to be a Biblical model, despite being supported by Biblical leaders.

Based on my research and best educated guesses, here’s how the Maxwellian model came to be and how that phrase came to hold such significance. We know that in 1968, the merger between the Pilgrim Holiness and the Wesleyan Methodist church occurred forming what we know as The Wesleyan Church and Fishers, Indiana became the headquarters.

The Greatest generation, the generation that had fought in WWII, was now firmly entrenched in the leadership. There was still some of the Silent Generation, but the Greatest’s were seen as the future and the ones who would hold the standard until the Boomers were mature enough to take over.

Since the end of the Great Depression and WW1, the Silent’s had revolutionized the business world. They brought the structure and discipline they had learned in the war, into the boardroom. It was brutal, ruthless and took no prisoners when it came to creating and establishing market control and dominance. By the time the Greatest came into power,

But that didn’t sit well with everyone. In particular, there was a Silent named Robert K. Greenleaf who worked for AT&T who started teaching an unpopular ideology that “the organization existed for the person as much as the person existed for the organization.” This positional statement lead to the formation of the “Servant Leadership” organizational model.

The Servant Leadership model was then co-opted into the Church world and began to gain traction. Silent’s began actively recruiting Greatest’s who had business backgrounds to lead church and eventually placed them in positions of denominational leadership. Still, talking while leadership traits were encouraged, talking about leadership in the church was not.

Maxwell changed all of that. Maxwell, one of the first Baby Boomers to really have substantial influence in the Church, recognized early on in his ministry that in order for him to connect better with the business leaders and people in his congregation, he needed to discover ways to develop his own leadership abilities.

Now, this part I have no actual evidence of, but based on what I’ve read in Maxwell and in Greenleaf, there’s a high probability that Maxwell, in seeking to develop himself, was exposed to Greenleaf’s servant leadership model early on. Greenleaf was from Indiana and visited and spoke there regularly, Wesleyan Headquarters was in Indiana, and we know Maxwell served as a pastor in Indiana. It’s not much of a stretch to see the probability of Maxwell being influenced by Greenleaf. And to take it one step further, If you read Greenleaf’s book, “Servant Leadership: A Journey Into the Nature of Legitimate Power and Greatness”, it’s relatively easy to see Greenleaf’s fingerprints in the various teachings and writings of Maxwell. Simply put, there are far too many similar concepts, theories, and practices for it to be a coincidence.

Regardless, Maxwell’s now intentionally developing his personal leadership skills, which was a new idea to pastors who were only focused on developing their Bible skills. When Orval Butcher retired from Skyline, Maxwell brought those leadership skills with him and began teaching what he had been learning in staff meetings. Those staff meetings were recorded on cassette tape and somehow got leaked to pastors outside the church. Once pastors heard about this, they began calling and asking for these tapes and Maxwell, recognizing an opportunity to share his knowledge for a fee, began selling subscriptions to what became Injoy, which is now known as Equip. (Fun fact, when I was just starting out in ministry, I was told that I needed to listen to these Injoy tapes so that I could learn how to be a “real” pastor) :).

From here, most of us know Maxwell’s trajectory. He left Skyline with the sincere belief that his ministry was teaching leadership to pastors and Christian Business people. He’s gone on to become the foremost Christian leadership expert in the world.

Everyone in ministry today has, in some part, been influenced by Maxwell’s commitment and dedication to teaching leadership principles. We should all be aware and extraordinarily grateful for Maxwell’s willingness to be used by God to forever change the landscape and expectations of what it means to be a pastor and to pastor a church.

But your original question is, “Is there a better way to think of leadership?” And the answer is absolutely yes. The Maxwellian model opened the eyes of many to the need for Christian Leadership, however, few have actually explored a Biblical understanding of leadership. That’s not a criticism of pastors, but rather the reality that we are influenced by our personal experiences and the experiences of those around us. And if those around us have experiences based in the Maxwellian model of leadership, well then it’s highly likely that’s where our experiences will be based out of as well.

And that, in my opinion, is the problem that the Church and pastors are running into. Far too many of us have embraced a Maxwellian model of Leadership or a co-opted Servant Leadership model designed for business and incorrectly, and perhaps inappropriately, applied it to the systems and processes of the church.

The unintended result being that the church now looks and operates more like an Organization where success is defined by numbers and growth rather than the Organism that God created it to be where success is defined by the transformational power of Jesus and the life-giving attributes of those who follow Jesus to the communities and individuals around them.

What do you think?

Filed Under: Leadership, Pastor, Thinker

Pandemic Reflections

April 9, 2020 by

Over the past few weeks, I’ve been watching and listening to the people that I interact with on a regular basis and processing how they are coming to terms with the reality of this pandemic.

My pastor friends seem to fall into two distinct categories.

The first category is built from the mindset “Once this inconvenience blows over, it’ll be back to normal for everyone.” Their timeframe is very short, sincerely believing that probably everything will be fine in another 2 weeks or so. Every time they share something, they talk about how much they can’t wait to get back together, how they are going to be running up and down the aisles and hugging and kissing everyone they can. They sincerely resent not being able to meet on a regular basis and they are extraordinarily uncomfortable with online church or any other form of church that may be different then simply coming into the church building, worshiping, listening to the sermon, and then leaving. I often wonder if quietly many of them are whispering to themselves that everything else is heresy…

The second category is built from the mindset “The church will never be the same, the old has gone and the new has come!” Their timeframe is much longer, believing that we will be in shutdown until at least June or July and that nothing will ever be the same again. They’ve adapted quickly to this new paradigm. Many of them are secretly relieved that church is no longer business as usual and they are quietly hoping that some of the “problem” Christians that attend their church will leave for other churches. They are so relieved to be rid of the routine and they are embracing and taking advantage of every single moment in this crisis to reinvent how they think about and do church.

My political friends, both conservatives and liberals, are operating out of an entirely different mindset.

My conservative friends, particularly the Libertarians of the group, are absolutely convinced that this pandemic is a direct result of the Democrats trying to destroy Trump’s chances at reelection and the economy at the same time. They aren’t buying what the news channels or experts are saying, they think the entire pandemic is a scam and they are refusing to change how they live or interact with others. They believe that the experts and reporters are grossly exaggerating the numbers and using the argument that people are actually dying from the Flu and not Covid-19, if it even exists at all. And interestingly enough, they are beginning to resent Trump for what they see as bowing to the pressure.

My liberal friends are taking the pandemic seriously. They are staying home and encouraging others to stay home. They are listening to all the news channels and experts and drawing interesting and convincing arguments about the severity of the pandemic. Like my conservative friends, they don’t believe the experts and reporters are accurately reporting the numbers, instead they believe the numbers are actually much higher then what is being shared because the U.S. responded late and there aren’t enough tests or accurate tests for everyone to be tested. Initially, my liberal friends continued to blame Trump for this pandemic, but interestingly enough, many of them are now quietly praising Trump for how aggressive he has been in responding. They still don’t like or respect him, they still think he’s a barely literate idiot, but they are appreciative that he’s doing what he can do to try and prevent the spread.

And then there are my normal friends.

They have jobs, or used to. Their kids are in school, or used to be. They have offices and co-workers that they went to and saw everyday, or used to. They had some savings, or used to. Their response to this pandemic is to just keep holding on. They are doing everything they can to hold things together. Some bills aren’t going to be paid this month, they know that. Some of them are running short on food, toilet paper, and essentials and they’re trying to figure what to do about that. They are scared and worried, but they are just trying to take things one day at a time, take care of their families, and figure out what to do next.

But my friends that scare me the most are my Christian friends.

The reason for this is because my Christian friends are also my pastor friends, my political friends, and my normal friends. They are intermingled with every group that I’ve written about. Some are pastors convinced this is temporary. Some are pastors convinced everything’s changed. Some are conservatives convinced this is a scam. Some are liberals who are taking this seriously. Some are just normal people trying to make it through another day.

What scares me about some of my Christian friends is this, through their statements and interactions on Facebook, phone calls, and other means, it’s clear that Jesus might be their savior, but Jesus is clearly not Lord of their life. They are the Lord of their life and while they are forever indebted to Jesus for His sacrifice, they’ve never truly made Jesus the Lord of their life. They are still in control of their thoughts, words, and actions, those have never truly been surrendered to Jesus.

Here’s the point I want to make. You cannot call yourself a Christian and not have Jesus as Lord of your life. It’s just not possible. You cannot claim Jesus’s sacrifice and then retain complete control over how you think or respond or act. When you claim the sacrifice, the old person who controlled everything is gone. A new person is created who has agreed to submit to letting Jesus be Lord of their life. You cannot claim to be new and still live like the old – it’s just not possible and people see right through the hypocrisy.

So this is a wakeup call both for me and for others. Who is really Lord of your life? I hope you say Jesus and I hope that the Lord will grant you the wisdom and discernment to move away from the things you are attempting to control and serve Him faithfully and without question.

Filed Under: Culture, Leadership, Pastor, Thinker

A Theology of Virtual Sacraments

March 29, 2020 by

Oftentimes, I have people asking me my opinion on the validity of virtual sacraments. So here’s the foundation of theology of virtual sacraments.

1. Technology is not autonomous.
No matter how sophisticated the technology is, it still has to be programmed by a human being. Everyday I depend on sophisticated bots to collect and gather information from a variety of sources. But I was the one who programmed those bots to search out, identify, qualify, collect, and distribute the desired information.

So what this means is that every time we interact with some entity virtually, regardless of the skin the avatar is using, behind that is a real person. Which means, the conversations and relationships you build with the individual in the game or virtual world has the same value as if someone had come and sat down in your office or home.

To devalue the individual just because of where you first met them, is to devalue the reality that Jesus loves and sacrificed for that person.

2. Communion is adaptable.
At the last Supper, Jesus shared both wine and unleavened bread as a means of communion. And for hundreds of years, that’s how communion was served. But in the 1890’s, a Wesleyan-Methodist pastor by the name of Dr. Thomas Welch created pasteurized grape juice so that those of the Wesleyan-Methodist tradition who are opposed to alcohol could still take part in the sacrament of communion. I’ve seen the communion “wine” presented via water, kool-aid, soda, and beer as a representative of taking part in the blood of Jesus.

I’ve seen the communion bread presented with the wafers, those weird little tick-tak style of bread, actual bread, and most recently gluten-free bread. I’ve even seen pastors use M&M’s, crackers, pretzels, and slices of pizza as a means of consuming the body and remembering Jesus.

What’s important is not the elements, but rather the symbolism of the elements. Remembering the death of Jesus, intentionally choosing to be part of the body of Christ, and the commitment to love and care for the other believers in our own congregation and across the world.

3. Baptism is fluid.
Jesus was baptized in the Jordan River. A river that people used to bath in and clean themselves. A river that people used to wash their clothes in. A Living water that flowed and washed away the impurities.

But today, we baptize in weird, semi-heated bathtubs in our sanctuary. Or we baptized in stock tanks meant for livestock. Occasionally you’ll hear of someone going to a lake or a river to baptize, but that’s rare. Some people just sprinkle water from a container on people.

I’ve heard of some in Africa during long periods of drought, that have baptized with dirt. I’ve heard of others who have used the anointing of oil as a means of baptism. The reality is that if we think that baptism is simply about water, we’re missing what is significant.

What’s significant is the testimony of the believer. The public declaration that they have chosen to abandon the world and have committed to following Jesus. The water is simply a substantive vehicle that physically conveys this public declaration.

4. God doesn’t care.
I can see and understand the animosity of those against this and I can see and understand the affirmation of those for this. However – at the end – I don’t think it really matters to God at all. It matters to us, but not to God.

And if it did matter to God, then I’m not sure I’d want to be in a relationship with God. Because what if I spent my whole life committed to following and serving God, only to have Him disqualify me from being in relationship with Him for eternity just because I took communion with grape juice rather than wine or that I was baptized virtually instead of in a living river like Jesus was? I don’t want to be in a relationship with a God like that and I sincerely doubt anyone else who is serious about their relationship with God would either.

5. You really don’t care either.
I’ll add this one last thought. As a pastor, if someone came to you and said they were saved, baptized, and discipled via an online ministry – are you really going to tell that person that it doesn’t count? That the relationship they have with God is invalidated because they didn’t do it the way you think it should be done?

There’s no way you’d do that. You’d welcome them in with open arms and great them as a brother or sister in Christ. They are family, no matter how they came into the family.

If you did reject them, then I would wonder if you should actually be in ministry at all. Because if we can’t accept that God is going to reach all kinds of people through all kinds of methods – regardless of whether we agree with those methods or not, then it’s probably best to stop being a pastor and take some time to learn what it really means to follow Jesus.

Filed Under: Leadership, Online Church, Pastor, Theology, Thinker