Ministry Council
Organization Change Analysis
Barriers/Resistance to Change / Factors that cause or manifest the resistant behaviors or beliefs / Approach to change initiators that impact or create opportunities for great outcomes /Limited or lack of focus on God’s will, Christ-like thinking and behaviors / · Tendency to caught up in the silo and perceptions of ministry versus looking deep into God’s purpose for our church and how we fulfill a kingdom vision
· Not fully holding to or lifting up a New Testament standard for ministry – operating from a place of fear and anxiety
· Persistence of confusion when the wrong behaviors are present / · Grounding and rooting in the word as the first stage of alignment – being sure to follow God’s work and keep it present and lifted up in all situations so that the spiritual capacity of the organization increases
· Commitment to being prayerful versus reactive
· Establishment of Kingdom Building practices and purpose areas
· Changes the lens that we view from: basing all decisions, policies, alignment strategies, communications, intentions to reflect God’s way of ministry and faith in his power to deliver
· Established Ground Rules for Ministry Meetings and Activities – as a standard
· Continued transformation exercise and discussions with council leaders
Limited or lack of clear, prioritized goals or the benefits of the change / · Leadership planning and articulation (consistency across the organization) of the specific goals and outcomes that are needed
· Confusion in the organization that exists as a result of difference of opinions and perspectives
· Tendency to react to situations versus carefully considering implications of changes in directives or decisions
· Continued lack of consideration given to the impact of this on the entire organization and church body
· Unclear understanding of how each ministry contributes to the overall goal / · Leaders required to plan properly – no longer accepting the behavior as a weakness to be tolerated by the organization
· Provide clear vision statement that is communicated and explained in each session with leaders
· Provide clear definition of purpose areas and outcomes – this is the business case
· Provide clear lens perspective of what is important – and working in alignment with it
· Provide benefit statement for every new process and tool
· Commitment to monthly communication (2014) and quarterly communication session (2015)
Limited, Inappropriate, or lack of Communication / · Failing to consistently communicate in an accurate, timely, or responsible manner (derivative of limited planning)
· Failing to follow through on commitments and to communicate why (derivative of limited planning)
· Naming, blaming, and shaming culture – allowing this behavior
· Not holding persons accountable for their speaking, representation, or truths – speaking without facts or substantiation
· Not having adequate communication lists and tools for delivery and to leaders / · Use of communication plan for each stage or key activity
· Utilize the designated structures, best practices, and process to facilitate accurate communication
· Communication and training sessions that are scheduled and conducted according to what has been agreed
· Hold ourselves accountable for how we speak on the ground or in reaction to comments and feedback
· Design a process that makes all communication available and transparent for all who are involved
Church Leadership Example or Paradigm / · Leaders (executives, Deacons, Trustees, council leaders) perceived as not fully on-board and/or in alignment (speaking, actions). Negativity thinking that starts at the top, persists, and permeates throughout the organization
· Leaders (by their speaking and actions) who undermine the leadership and directives of other leaders – disempowering the leadership strength
· Tendency to be undisciplined in difficult or contentious situations
· Culture of problem-centric focus and behaviors
· Decision making process at EBC – convoluted and ineffective as many decision are reversed or undone
· Leaders who adopt the corporate model of leadership versus the kingdom approach (there is a significant difference)
· Leaders concerned about their positions/roles and the perception of them that is impacted – perception of potential loss
· Rapid, reactive, sudden changes and decisions that are not well thought out but more so a response to the issues (or accusations) on the ground
· Asking staff, ministers, etc to participate on council in leadership roles but not requiring them to step to the same level of accountability – message that is sent is confusing / · Servant leadership model – Jesus is the reason, way, truth, and light – leading out of service for the benefit of others and serving the ultimate purpose of building disciples
· Expect decency and order in all situations – follow the process and hold the organization to it
· Awareness - Provide clear statement of responsibilities of council leaders – acceptance is by default if - participating on council – teach this example; be this example
· Educating and empowering council leaders to become transformational change agents – motivating and inspiring ministry leaders to the next level of ownership and accountability - promote sponsorship of this key initiative – coalition and collaboration leaders – as a standard
· Acknowledge leaders when they are doing a great job in their areas
· STOP tearing down the Kingdom within people - disallow negative speaking on the part of the senior or council leaders – negative speaking comes from negative thinking – Council leaders are required to lead at standard – keep the ministry space clean of these things
· Follow firmly to the process of discussion and decision making so that the organizational learning and maturation can occur
· Including Deacon and Trustee Board Liaisons in the Ministry Council so that important communication to these areas can be facilitated
Limited Ministry Leader Participation (Capacity, Commitment,
Buy-In) / · Limited consideration for how ministry leaders experience the change and the impact to them (spiritual, personal, and organizational)
· Perception of lack of knowledge and skills or lack of effort on the ministry leaders parts
· Organizational tendency to belittle the contribution and value of ministry leaders
· Council following through – using their time responsibly
· Issues with communication across the organization
· Perception or past experience that manifests present fears
· Fear that changes means devaluing their past contributions
· “This too shall pass”, wait and see approach
· Inactive leaders still in roles that require activity – being allowed to assume a responsibility that they do not assume / · Make this a great experience for them, experience joy in servant leadership – helping them to see (or envision) that in themselves
· Ensuring that leaders understand that they are key stakeholders, essential to the process and their role is valued and important to the organization
· Remove rigidity and bureaucracy – but enforce key activities that ensure that they are moving through the process – consistency in expectation across all ministries
· Visibility, transparency, and consistency so that trust will be increased and fear will be reduced
· Move in a way that is palatable and amenable to leaders’ needs but holds them to accountability –assist leaders in growing in this area
· Support for their gaps for learning and education, and letting the need be ok – coach leaders up
· Making timely decisions
· Make training available to suit leaders schedules – start and end on time – online, on demand, on-site
· Respecting leaders’ time by follow through and communication
· Opening the space to and actively seeking their feedback – responding and delivering to leader requests
· Involving leaders in council activities – begin to train new persons for council leadership – move in the way of the catalytic leadership model
Lack of Alignment of Ministry Purpose (or understanding of) or Implications of External Factors / · Ministry leaders not understanding the alignment or imperative reasons for change
· Ministries allowed to continue business as usual (without congruency)– even when change is necessary and imminent consolidation, collaboration, and refocus
· External factors such as a change in the community demographics and needs that have not been acknowledged in our plans for how we serve a changing community
· Internal/External factors such as a society that is changing in it’s perspective on attending and participating in church – the need and relevance of this versus other life priorities
· Organizational impatience – tendency to act without knowledge (spiritual and intellectual wisdom) that can lead to real change / · Clarity in purpose areas and kingdom building outcomes - and how ministries are mapped to the purpose areas
· Developed Purposeful Alignment Methodology
· Training in the discernment of purpose areas and how to align the ministries and establish goal alignment – close gaps
· Requiring/Reinforcing alignment in event planning, new ministry suggestions
· Plan for how to continue to educate, equip, and edify leaders in this for 2015 –f or impending need for change
· Begin to study and participate in activities in the community that will educate us further on the changes happening around us – where relevant, bringing these discoveries to the forefront of church and ministry discussions
Practicality, Adoption, Reinforcement, and Sustainability (PARS) / · Limited thinking on the ‘change’ in this ‘change initiative’ and what the impact to the organization is – leading without reasonable expectation or capacity to deliver
· Limited consideration/acknowledge for how ministry leaders experience the change and the impact to them (spiritual, personal, and organizational)
· Continuing to make commitments to the organization without well thought out plans and budgets to execute the change
· Limited threshold test of what is appropriate for leaders versus operational responsibilities / · Continue to explore the PARS and impact to ministry leaders
· Build capacity (tangible/intangible, spiritual/intellectual) – identify and train these change agents
· Continue to resolve operational policies that are in conflict with the new direction
· Continue to balance space and structure
· Phased approach to begin to change the thinking and behaviors of leaders; deploy – incorporation of usability engineering approach
· Support team in place but needs to grow
· Weekly follow-ups with ministry leaders during the initial stages (will go to monthly by Q2 2015)
· Measure increase in use of process adherence, tool adoption, cultural thinking and behaviors
· Survey for whether the solutions are intuitive, efficient, and task-enabling
Lack of Operational Structures, Systems, Tools that facilitate the process / · Limitation of clear, agreed objectives and the measurement – so that they support tools can be in place to measure
· Limitation of organizational change management experience
· Limitation of technology experience (and fear in some cases) by operations and leaders
· Level of operational support needed and the impact to the current operation
· EBC limited investment in the operational and organizational needs to support the deployment and sustainability of the initiatives / · Use OCM and technology expertise in training and delivery
· Development of organization centric tools and infrastructure
· Provide support team ‘Ministry Services’ with persons who can deliver (continue to expand this team)
· Electronic management and measurement of key processes (training registration and checking, event planning, ministry roles and profiles, access of procedures and documents)
· Continue to communicate with operations team on how to assist
· Get a realistic budget in place
1
EBC Ministry Council Confidential Material