CHAPTER 1

GETTING THE MESSAGE CLEAR

The Really Hot, Not So Bad, Maybe OK, Half-Burning Platform

If the trumpet does not sound a clear call, who will get ready for battle?— 1 Corinthians 14:8

If we are to renew, it is because we have a vision of something worth saving ordoing.—John Gardner

Consultants working in the area of change management often refer to the conceptof a burning platform. The term "burning platform" has been a mainstay inthe business lexicon for many years. For those not familiar with its origin, thestory goes something like this:

A man working on an oil platform in the North Sea was awakened suddenly onenight by an explosion. Amidst the chaos, he made his way to the edge of theplatform. As a plume of fire billowed behind him, he decided to jump from theburning platform even though jumping is a risky option for the followingreasons:

* It was a 150-foot drop from the platform to the water.

* There is debris and burning oil on the surface of the water.

* If the jump into the 40°F water did not kill him, he would die of exposurewithin 15 minutes.

Luckily, the man survived the jump and was hauled aboard a rescue boat shortlythereafter. When asked why he jumped, he replied, "Better probable death thancertain death." The point is that the literally "burning" platformtriggered the radical change in his behavior.

In the parlance of change management, creating a burning platform meansconstructing a concise, compelling, evidence-based, and consistentlycommunicated rationale articulating why an organization cannot stay where it is.Its purpose is to demonstrate that the risk of maintaining the status quo issignificantly higher than the risk of stepping into a future that requiresconsiderable change. A burning platform functions as the organizationalequivalent of the Biblical "hell." You don't want to be there even if itrequires a leap of faith to escape it.

In seasons requiring substantial change, it is imperative that the leader sounda clear call if it is expected that people will follow into the struggle, andconsequent renewal, that change will likely introduce. Unfortunately, clarity isin such short supply today that seeing through a glass darkly would be acomparative illumination.

Denominational leaders seem mired in uncertainty whether they should create aburning platform or lead a pep rally. On the one hand, leaders make statementsthat signal the need for significant change. In a report titled A Wake-Up Callto the Presbyterian Church issued in 2005, Stated Clerk Clifton Kirkpatrickwrote: "The fact that we are now into the third decade in which our annualmembership numbers are showing decline is a wake-up call to the PresbyterianChurch (U.S.A.)." Kirkpatrick argues that "the deepest and most profoundimplication is that we as a church are being called by God to prayer forrepentance and renewal."

Charles Fulton, director of congregational development for the Episcopal Church,responds to the 30-year numeric decline in his denomination by pondering thedepths of the water: "If it's related to one event, that can be dealt withand we'll get beyond it. If it's a systemic, life cycle issue, it will beharder to turn it around, and it will require a kind of radical leadership thatwe don't really encourage right now. Resurrection follows death — it doesnot follow denial."

We need to make changes! The platform is burning! We can't stay here! It isunbearably hot! But is it?

At the same time there are official voices wondering if it is so bad after all.In an article entitled "Picture Your Presbytery Here" found on the PCUSAwebsite, Cynthia A. Woolever, Research Services Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.),writes:

"Our presbytery suffered a net loss of members again this year. I am sodiscouraged." The "net loss blues" is an all too common ailment forpresbytery leaders and others concerned about the future of the PresbyterianChurch. But before you reach for your favorite prescription, take some time tolook at the factors behind the ailment.

Is the platform really burning? Or is our "crisis talking" an "all toocommon ailment"? Maybe it's not so bad after all!

Woolever then goes on to look at the bright side of the data, whileacknowledging losses, and concludes, "The implications are clear. Continuedcare and nurturing of congregations of all sizes and types will yield goodoverall health for the presbytery in the future."

It's really OK! We just need to continue what we are doing and our future issecured! What we really need is a pep rally!

I have chosen a handful of comments from a few good folks to illustrate theconfused message that denominational leaders are sending to the church. It'snot worth the print space to list quotes from leaders across the yearsindicating that all the losses are actually positive, that they indicate aseparation of faithful believers from nominal members, that inflated rolls arefinally being cleaned, etc. When all the pieces of the message are gathered fromthe four corners of Denomination Land they amount to something like "It's areally-hot-not-so-bad-maybe-OK half-burning platform." In contrast todenominational leaders, church members are remarkably unconfused about the stateof things. As we shall see, their priorities and concerns are clear andconsistent.

Now the reader may be thinking something like this: "Of course there aredifferent perspectives on the need for change. It is natural and appropriate forthere to be free and open debate about these issues at the highest levels of thechurch." My response is simply this: I do not know of a single effectiveorganization today in either the profit or nonprofit realm that is stilldebating the need for substantial change in the way they go about accomplishingtheir mission. If the denominational leadership wants to continue to debate theneed for change, it will have to accept the consequential decline in the systemas a whole. There will be bright spots scattered about, but these will be led bypersons who have figured out effective strategies on their own, often inreaction to the inertia of the system. Church leaders cannot expect folks tocharge into the chaos of system change if they continue to sound such anambiguous call.

Good communication skills are a core leadership requirement. In situations thatcall for significant change, clear communication makes or breaks the process.The first step in creating a transformational regional association is to realizethat the primary target audience for the case for change is not members ofchurches but key players in the systems, including pastors, regional associationleaders, and higher-level denominational leaders.

Strategically, members of congregations are keenly aware of the need to grow andrevitalize their churches. Having surveyed tens of thousands of church members Ican say without equivocation that the number one priority for members is toinvest additional energy into reaching new members and the number two priorityis making necessary changes to attract families with children and youth. This istrue in 95 percent of the churches surveyed and has not changed significantly in20 years of data gathering. Church members have sparkling clarity on this issue.

In addition, when church leaders are asked to indicate priorities for theirregional association, their number one priority is equipping pastors and otherchurch leaders with strategies that will help them grow and revitalize theirchurches. No "wake-up" call is needed; I would urge that we cease upon thatparticular bugle. Church members are awake! They don't need more "pow"!They need more "how"! But where are the persons who will allocate the time,money, expertise, and spiritual juice to provide the "how"? This, it seemsto me, falls squarely in the lap of regional association leaders and is theopportunity that calls for the redevelopment of those associations.

There is a question here that screams for an answer: What does it mean that wehave denominational leaders sounding wake-up calls for the church to become moreconcerned about reaching new persons, when all the research indicates that thenumber one concern for members is reaching new persons? It suggests to me thatwe have denominational systems in the middle that are unaligned with that goaland that these systems are robust in their resistance to change.

Clifton Kirkpatrick listed six imperatives for one Presbyterian Church to"rise again":

1. We need to realize that our most important evangelistic outreach begins athome.

2. We need to follow the wisdom of the Book of Order concerning inactivemembers.

3. Jesus was quite clear in the Great Commission that we as followers of Christare called to make disciples of all nations by baptizing them (Matthew 28:19).

4. We need to learn from our growing churches and imitate them!

5. If we are going to be a growing church, we must be a multicultural church.

6. We need to start more new churches.

Kirkpatrick has provided a respectable list of strategic initiatives that fewmembers would argue with. What is missing is the necessary revamping ofdenominational systems to provide the focus, resources, and expertise to makethis happen, specifically at the level of the regional association. I wouldargue that Charles Fulton has it right: we are dealing with a "systemic, lifecycle issue, [that] will be harder to turn it around, and it will require a kindof radical leadership that we don't really encourage right now."

So, for the sake of the blessed clarity which I espouse, let me sharpen thelines. If systematic change is going to occur, not just for a few churches, butfor the majority, the locus of that change will need to be the regionalassociation. Leading that change will require the clearest, most compelling, andmost consistently communicated rationale of all. Without a change in this middlebody, we will simply become noisy gongs sounding wake-up calls to rooms vacatedby people who wanted to learn something beyond what an alarm could teach them.

* * *

Discussion Questions

For church members and leaders

1. What is your vision for what your church will look like in three to fiveyears?

2. Do you know how to get there? What do you think your church needs to learnhow to do?

3. What is the basic message you are hearing from your regional associationregarding what you need to be doing? How clear is that message?

For regional associations

1. How would you respond to Clifton Kirkpatrick's wake-up call? Is it strongenough? Too strong?

2. What do you think about Charles Fulton's analysis? Are we dealing with asystemic, life-cycle issue that calls for a radical kind of new leadership?

3. How clear is your regional association about the need for change?

CHAPTER 2

BEYOND TWO-SKUNK SOLUTIONS

Only through such transformation or contextual shift can an individual, a workunit, an organization, or a society break the self-limiting barriers imposed bythe old frame of reference and open up to the possibility of renewal.—John Williamson

There once was a woman who lived in a house by the woods. One evening sheabsentmindedly left the outside basement door open. When she went down thebasement stairs to do laundry the next morning, she was startled by a skunk thathad entered during the night.

Dismayed by the prospect of being sprayed by a skunk but unsure what to do, shecalled the local department of natural resources and asked a ranger for advice."It is really quite simple," the ranger said. "Leave the door open againtonight, but before you go to bed place a trail of bread crumbs from thebasement door to the woods."

"That's not so hard," she thought to herself, and went about her otherwork. That evening, before she went to bed, she placed a trail of bread crumbsfrom the basement door to the woods, just like the ranger had instructed her.

The next morning the phone rang in the ranger station. "Sir, I did what yousaid. Now I have two skunks in my basement."

The story illustrates what I refer to as two-skunk solutions. Two-skunksolutions inadvertently create problems that are simply replications of existingones. Denominational efforts in the 1980s and 1990s to prop up marginally sizedcongregations with financial supplements simply resulted in more marginallysized congregations. Fostering dependency is generally a two-skunk solution thatfeels like help but simply generates more dependency.

When we do not think deeply enough about a problem, we create two-skunksolutions. The chronic use of credit cards to cover a consistent shortfall inincome is a solution that simply creates a second, similar problem. As Einsteinput it, "In order to solve a problem, you have to think in a different waythan what created the problem in the first place."

Even the best of solutions creates new problems. But the goal of solvingproblems is not to eliminate problems but to create higher problems. Jesussolves the hunger problem of the five thousand by feeding them. But thissolution simply introduces a higher-level problem: how do you nourish a sense ofmeaning and purpose in your life? Jesus shatters the illusion of a life withoutproblems; the goal of any endeavor is not to eliminate problems but to createand then engage higher-level issues.

The effort to redevelop a regional association is not aimed at eliminatingproblems; it is aimed at engaging higher-level problems. Denominations arefailing to make the changes that are necessary to cultivate vital, healthycongregations. Instead, they are engaging in relatively superficial solutionsthat not only fail as solutions but replicate existing problems. Just as weconfess our small sins to avoid confessing more serious ones, denominations areengaging low-level issues in order to avoid dealing with more substantive ones.Endless reorganizations, "new" mission statements, salvation by language allfeel like change, but they are usually little more than a fresh coat of paint.

There are many noble reasons for focusing on higher-level problems: missioneffectiveness, creation of meaning, spiritual growth, rich team experiences. Butmy favorite is simply that they are more fun to solve even at their mostdifficult. That, I believe, is why Jesus told parables. A parable is a kind ofpuzzle that invites the reader to engage in a quest for solution. Once thepuzzle is solved, the reader is taken to another level; the reader "owns"the solution at a higher level than if the answer had simply been given away.

So let me say up front to clergy, board members, church members, and regionalassociation leaders: my goal is not to make your life easier by eliminatingproblems; my goal is to make your life richer by challenging you to engage thehigher problems that are truly worthy of your soul's endeavor. Paradoxically,what we avoid only makes life harder.

The Challenge of Church Leadership

This book is sympathetic to the challenge of church leadership. How hard is itto lead in the church today? Business consultant Peter Drucker suggested thatthe three toughest management jobs in the United States are universitypresident, hospital CEO, and senior pastor of a large church. From researchconducted with thousands of members in hundreds of churches, on average only 55percent of members are clearly satisfied overall with what is happening in theirchurch. By way of comparison, over 85 percent of members in an average communityare clearly satisfied with their local public library (see Table 2.1).

The problem we are facing is not simply a numeric decline, but churches wheremembers indicate such poor quality of community life that it is difficult toinvite new people into them. From the standpoint of the satisfaction with theirexperience, it is easier to make the case for folks to get a library card thanto join the typical denominational church in their community! With some notableexceptions, few of us are exclaiming with the Apostle Paul, "my brothers, youwhom I love and long for, my joy and crown" (Philippians 4:1). No wonder thecareer mortality rates of new seminary graduates is so high. In a landmark studyof seminaries and their graduates (Appendix C), Carolyn Weese found that onlyone in five seminary graduates continued in ministry five years aftergraduation.

What clergy are experiencing at the helm of leadership, church board members areexperiencing on deck. The seas are rough for both; the same wind and spraybuffets them all. At any particular board meeting important decisions are made,most of which would receive the support of a majority of the congregation, butnone is likely to be energetically and enthusiastically embraced. Burn-out atleast implies a fire, but rust-out (burn-out at room temperature) is the morelikely destination for the average board member.

Transformational Churches

The reader might be tempted to heave a sigh of resignation at this point:"That's just the way it is with churches! We're supposed to be struggling!Jesus called us to pick up our crosses and follow him! That pretty much meansthat if something is making our life as a church unsatisfying, it is our crossto bear. These low levels of energy and satisfaction are simply a reflection ofa life of discipleship!"