Back when "Five Practices of Fruitful Congregations" was published, we coined a new verb: "to Schnase." To "Schnase" someone was to quote his book to them, so you could say, "Of course, for our hospitality to be truly radical it would have to carry us outside of our comfort zones ... and now you have just been 'Schnasied.'"
So imagine my delight when I was invited to host "Bish Schnay-Z" on my blog to talk about his newest book "Just Say Yes!" I mean, it would be an ENTIRE BLOG POST that was just ONE GIANT "SCHNASE!" Amazing!
He is doing a "blog tour" of sorts, talking about his book - he was on Hacking Christianity a couple weeks ago. And I truly think it is a wonderful book, with lots of helpful thoughts about ministry and I commend it to you all. And so now, ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls - the one and only, Bishop Robert Schnase...
Thank you,
Andy, for inviting me to post a guest blog as part of a Blog Tour to introduce
my newest book, Just Say Yes! Unleashing People for Ministry. Here’s the question you sent me:
“Sometimes
there is so much happening in the congregation I serve that I’m informed of an
ongoing ministry that I knew almost nothing of. I really don’t think there is
anybody in leadership who knows everything that’s going on. At the same time, I
want the activity of the congregation to align with the mission and vision.
Each ministry must be held accountable to the mission, which implies that
someone has to know what’s going on in that ministry in order to hold it to
account.
- If a
system that says “yes” really does “cease being a reporting organization,” then
how does it achieve the “high accountability” that is expected?
- Would
you say a little bit more about what it looks like to not be a “reporting
organization?” Isn’t that really just “communicating?”
- How will
the ones keeping our ministries accountable to the mission know enough about
the ministries in question unless there is a fair amount of reporting going
on?”
Some years
ago, a natural disaster drew the attention of the nation and the church. The United Methodist Church’s response was
immediate and generous, but it was not without problems. General agencies duplicated the work of
sister boards, some offices tried to restrain the work of others, conflicting
messages were sent out about what was needed most, leaders disagreed about who
could authorize special offerings, and appeals for help went public using
inconsistent nomenclature. United
Methodists were tripping over one another in their eagerness to help. Government agencies and other non-profits
suffered similar confusions in the face of overwhelming human need. A level of chaos is the very nature of
crises.
A few
months later, the Council of Bishops received reports on United Methodist work
related to the natural disaster. Leaders
from various levels of the church talked about the volunteer teams that
responded, the amount of money raised, the number of blankets and flood buckets
and health kits distributed, and the long-term plans for follow through. United Methodists did immeasurable good. At one point, I raised my hand, stepped to
the microphone, and offered what I thought was a common sense suggestion. I wondered if it might be wise to gather the
conference leaders and bishops most affected, along with the agency staff and
response teams that were involved, in order to process together how the UMC
responded: what worked, what didn’t,
what was helpful, how we might avoid miscommunication and duplication in future
disasters.
The
president of the council said, “Thank you, Bishop Schnase.” Then he looked around the room and said, “Is
there any other business before we adjourn?”
I returned
to my seat feeling embarrassed and chastised.
As a newbie bishop, I didn’t understand the reason for the not-so-subtle
dismissal I received. A retired bishop
leaned my way as I sat down, and said with a wink and a smile, “Young man, you
just learned the difference between a reporting organization and a learning
organization!”
Andy, I
value sharing information, excellence in communications, and transparency of
operations. These provide the oil that
keeps the machinery of an organization running smoothly. They contribute to trust and
accountability. But when an organization
does nothing but reporting, as in the example I gave above from the Council of
Bishops, it avoids the most important tasks of leadership. In the time we spend merely reporting what
happened in the past and what’s coming up next, we could be participating in
significant decisions, learning about challenges that limit our mission,
processing together how to approach difficult issues, and generating fresh
ideas.
I’m writing
this blog the day after presiding at a meeting of our conference Mission
Council. Fifteen elected people, most of
them laity, join with me and the five conference directors for four hours. We do this six times a year. After a devotional, each director presents
what they are working on, as does the lay leader and the dean of the
cabinet. By following this agenda, we
cover all major areas of ministry of the conference.
A folder of
material is sent to members ahead of the meeting which includes written reports
from all the directors. The reports
include the numbers, dates, happenings, graphs, and stories that I would call
reporting. For instance, the director of
finance sends a budget summary, an outline of changes to health insurance, and
upcoming dates for training sessions.
The director of connectional ministries distributes revised sexual
misconduct policies, mock ups of new communications materials, and a summary of
evaluations from the annual conference sessions. Much communication between directors and the
mission council is done before the meeting even begins.
As we move
through the agenda, each director talks about what they are working on, and
also presents challenges or questions that they are wrestling with. They invite feedback and conversation from
the Mission Council and from the other directors. For instance, following the summer’s mobile
camping success, one of the challenges is how to scale up this ministry at a
responsible rate while dealing with the disappointment that churches will feel
who request a mobile camp but don’t receive one next summer. Nearly all of the 10 churches that
participated this year want to repeat the experience, and another 29 churches
have already expressed interest. The
Mission Council processes the issue, discusses alternatives, and makes
suggestions for how we might learn from other conferences who have done
this. Another director highlights the
complexity of the next annual conference and the challenge of identifying an
appropriate theme, given that this is the bishop’s last annual conference, that
General Conference will be on peoples’ minds, and that we’ll celebrate the 200th
anniversary of Methodist conferences in Missouri. Another director processes the opportunities
and challenges of starting congregations that rely on languages other than
English, including our new Congolese and Vietnamese congregations. The Mission Council had a lengthy
conversation about strategies for my last year as bishop. How should I best use
my time? What loose ends need to be tied
up? How best can I prepare the
conference for new leadership?
Questions were asked, insights were offered, priorities were clarified,
and the group generated various scenarios and next steps.
The Mission
Council only takes one or two votes a year, other than approving minutes and
other perfunctory actions. How would
you describe what goes on in the Council?
It’s not merely reporting, because most of the statistical and factual
communication takes place before we arrive and less than 40% of our meeting
involves presenting information. It’s
not legislative, because votes are seldom taken. Our meetings are generative conversation,
creative engagement, problem solving, and learning. They are interactive and participatory, and
they provide guidance and support to the people who lead the ministries of the
conference.
Accountability
relies on more than what happens in administrative meetings. It begins with clarity of mission and
well-defined expectations, involves careful recruitment of staff and
volunteers, includes regular evaluation of programs and staff, and on-going
learning, mentoring, and improvement.
When complemented with these other elements, the Mission Council
contributes to a culture with high expectations and great accountability, more
so than if we were merely a reporting organization. On behalf of the conference
that elects them, the members of the Mission Council gain ownership in our
ministries and make contributions that shape the conference. These benefits
would be lost if we merely went around the table telling what happened and what
comes next.
The last
hour of most Mission Council meetings usually involves an explicit learning
component related to big picture challenges that affect our mission. We use a book or an article that we’ve agreed
to read prior to the meeting. These
conversations challenge assumptions, cause us to shift perspectives, and make
us continually reevaluate what we do as a conference. For instance, our next Mission Council will
discuss Gil Rendle’s essay entitled, “Waiting for God’s New Thing,”
(downloadable from the Texas Methodist Foundation website). Rendle challenges the fundamental notion of
congregations as the principle way of fostering faith for people who mistrust
institutional religion. Conference
leaders need to be familiar with such issues, even though they challenge our
basic operations.
I want
members of the Mission Council to drive home after a meeting mulling over
ideas, pondering new insights, searching for better approaches, and feeling
that they’ve contributed to next steps and new directions. These outcomes can’t be achieved with an
agenda of sequenced reporting to passive people. The congregational leadership teams we
formed when I pastored a local congregation followed a similar model—less
reporting, more learning, greater problem-solving, more mutual support.
You asked
how church leaders can know enough about all the various ministries to keep
them accountable to the vision, values, and practices of the congregation. Some congregations hold semi-annual
gatherings with the leaders of all their ministries—the chairpersons of
committees, the leaders of mission teams, the teachers of bible classes, the
sponsors of children’s ministries, etc.
They fill the fellowship hall on a Saturday with all the leaders and
leaders-to-be to worship together and to express appreciation for the effort
leaders pour into ministry. Then they repeat the vision of the congregation and
rehearse the values that every leader and teacher exhibits. They teach leadership and answer questions
and offer suggestions to help team leaders with common small group issues. By re-enforcing a common vision and common
language (excellence, fruitfulness, radical hospitality, etc), accountability
is pushed deeper into the consciousness and practice of the whole
organization. One person, operating
from a vertical top down manner, doesn’t have to know everything that is going
on to hold the system accountable.
Rather, accountability is maintained by dozens of people, horizontally,
who hold one another accountable.
Just Say Yes! Unleashing People from Ministry reminds
us how churches say No in thousand
ways to new ideas, ministry initiatives, and creative people. Creative ideas face systemic resistance
because of the labyrinth of committees, steps, and policies. Congregations don’t realize that they have
created a default of No, which leaves
them simply repeating ministries the way they’ve always been done before. Our countless meetings to report and review
and rehash has a dampening effect on creativity and causes us to avoid the
generative and missional conversations that leadership requires. We can do better.
Thank you, Andy,
for the conversation. And thank you for
your support of Just Say Yes! Unleashing People for
Ministry. Later this month, additional downloadable resources
will be available to help local congregations unleash people for ministry,
including supplemental videos, invitational postcards, a leader retreat guide
and a 7-session devotional guide.
Thanks for your good work, and for your thoughtful
questions.
Yours in
Christ,
Robert
Schnase
No comments:
Post a Comment