This is a post I put on another blob, but thought it might be interesting for the wider public.
Changing Organizational Structures and Authority
Covenant is experiencing some significant shifts. Below I am
attempting to give us some lenses for understanding what might be going
on.
Numerical Analysis
One way to analyze and
understand these shifts taking place at Covenant is through looking at
it from a numerical perspective. Basically the idea is this - How many
people are in the community effects the way in which the community
behaves and organizes itself.
Church organization folks, sometimes categorize churches in the following way.
Family Size – 0 to 50 participants
Pastor Size – 50 to 125 participants
Program Size – 125 to 350 participants
Corporate Size – 350 to 500 participants
Each of these types of churches has its own dynamics of power and
leadership and requires different organizational tasks and skills.
Alice Mann, from the Alban
Institute has studied communities in transition and provides a
description of some of the changes that happen with communities in
transition.
- Congregations almost always encounters difficulty when they
arrive at a new step- the boundary between one size and the next-
because the culture of the congregation is in flux.
- Congregations that can manage the transitions will fall back or become stagnant.
- In transition formal and informal relationships are being reshaped and renegotiated;
- Key structures are changing
- Key processes are changing.
Sound familiar?
Mann also describes some of the characteristics and challenges of different size churches.
Pastor Size and the Pastor
- a key figure of the Pastoral size congregation is that members
experience having their spiritual needs met through their personal
relationship with a seminary trained pastor.
- Small enough that everybody can know the pastor personally
- Leadership revolves around the pastor and a small group of leaders
- Strong personal skills are important
- Difficult to maintain for more than 150 members
- Growth depends on the skills of the pastor-pastor is in control
- Pastors experience burnout frequently
Program Size and the Pastor
- the program church has many cells of activity headed by lay leaders…that includes pastoral functions.
- Pastor is still at the center but its role has shifted dramatically
- Need for planning, visioning etc.
- Key skills is to pull together diverse elements of the parish into a mission statement-to find consensus
- needs to motivate and train lay persons
- Pastors with a “pastoral” mind frame will feel flat and a lack of fulfillment
So where is Covenant you might ask? Well as of today we have 126
people on our egroup list, not including children. Not all of those on
the egroup participate in worship or in an intentional community, but
they are in some way connected to our community and they an effect on
how our system operates. So we as a community are right in, what they
call the “groan zone” of church type transition – moving from a pastor
size church to a program size church.
So from a church size perspective we need to be aware of and
attentive to the shifts that are happening and work together to discern
how we might facilitate some of these transitions in a healthy way.
In short, from a church size transition perspective it looks like we need to focus on a few things.
- re-organize and empower the session and teams and facilitate equipping of lay leadership.
- re-image my roles and responsibilities for the community – decentralize me!
- clarify identify, core values and guiding mission
- I wonder what else….
Systems Analysis Perspective
Another
way to analyze our community is from an organizational systems
perspective. Basically what kind of organizational system will most
effectively facilitate our vision and values – somewhat independent of
our size.
Here are a few explanations of this from the work of Otto Scharmer. (from: Theory U: Leading From the Future as it Emerges)
Centralized Structures
“Most young companies, founded and
driven by one or several pioneers, are simple structures. The
coordination and growth of this type of organizing depend primarily on
the skills of the founder(s). The more successful the organization
becomes, the more its strength (being organized around one person) can
become a weakness.”
Decentralized Structures
“When shifting from centralized
to decentralized structures the primary source of power moves from the
center toward the periphery; in other words, decision-making power
moves down the hierarchy and closer to the customer (participant).”
Networked Structures
“When a company (community) shifts
from decentralized structure to a networked structure, coordination
happens through mutual adjustment in networked relationships. Unlike
the structures of hierarchy and competition, mutual adjustment depends
much more on the quality of the relationships among the key players,
Accordingly, the quality of conversation becomes a central issue when
organizations move into this field of coordinating.”
Ecosystem Structures
“The movement from a networked system
to an ecosystems requires seeing from an emerging whole. This fourth
type of coordination is called the ‘innovation ecosystem.’ In order to
tune in to an emerging field of possibility, an organization needs to
go beyond itself – to systemically tune in to the relevant emerging
contexts, which can be identified only in the collective context of a
larger ecosystem.”
So what does all this mean when applied to Covenant?
Covenant
began about six years ago. In fact it was six years ago in November
that the Launch Team first started meeting weekly. We began mostly as
a centralized system where vision and power were held by the founders,
(Liz Kaznak and myself). However, from the beginning we valued shared
power and authority using the statement, “Authority at the point of
gift.” Meaning that power was shared as people stepped forward to
offer their gifts and discerned their calling. This manifested in
diverse leadership and the beginning of intentional communities. In
some ways we have functioned as a centralized system – to the degree
that Liz and I have held and shared the vision and direction for the
church. AND in some ways we were a decentralized system – to the degree
that intentional communities have a great deal of autonomy for what
they do and how they do it. As our Intentional Communities have grown
we have also develop Networking structures.
Now, we seem to have elements of three different structures operating at once
- Centralized - I still have a great deal of authority and
influence in the community. Which could, if we are not aware, become a
hindrance to our growth.
- Decentralized – the session has authority to make decision and intentional communities have a great deal of autonomy.
- Networked – As our intentional communities grow and diversify the
relationship and flow between these communities becomes more important
and influential. For example when a community like the Just Mothers
dissolves the whole community feels the ripples. We can say it like
this “Covenant is as our Intentional Communities are.”
What I see (and probably want to see) emerging is the possibility of
developing ecosystem structures. This would involve cultivating
structures that keep us organically and interdependently engaged in
what is happening in Louisville and the world. Covenant would become
and develop out of relationship to what is happening in the wider
community. We can say it something like this “Covenant becomes as
Louisville is” or “Covenant becomes as the world is.” This means
that we balance my leadership and vision, with the leadership and
vision of the whole community, with the leadership and vision of us as
a networked community of communities with the leadership and vision of
what is emerge and happening in Louisville and the world.
Again, So what does this mean for us as a community?
I don’t really know, but I feel a few things…
- Energize and Cultivate The Core – If the core of CCC,
the center of the swirl, is not strong, energized and life giving we
will not be able to “look outward” to develop networked intentional
communities and structures of an emerging ecosystem. So, what is the
core? - the core is …
- Covenant Partners (your commitment to the whole of the community),
- Worship and Sunday night participation,
- Leadership – Session, teams, and pastor (me – redefine my roles).
- What else is core for you?
- Develop Our (CCC) Structures of Communication and Conversation –
In order to evoke vision, decentralize authority and empower leadership
we need to cultivate healthy and open channels of communication and
conversation so that everyone may act from what is emerging in
different places in our community rather than just from a centralized
person or group of people (i.e. me or the session). The more
information, thoughts and opinions we take in from the community the
more we can act from the whole rather than from our limited thoughts
and opinions.
- Host and Participate in Conversation
- Conversation Café
- Egroup Blogs
- Harvesting – sharing widely what is learned in these conversations.
- Use “Airset” as shared networking tool
- Report on what your community is doing at worship
- Develop Structures of Communication and Conversation with Community and World
- Develop
ways of communal listening and “presencing” to determine what is
happening in the world an how that might help us become locally.
- Spend more time in silence discernment – what is the spirit doing and how can we join in!
- Host conversations with local organizations and leaders to determine how we might join in what they are doing.
- Equipping and Training – We need to continue to become a
learning community that empowers and equips everyone for ministry and
action. o This is the vision and purpose of the Ecclesia Project that
is currently being developed. Stay Tuned!
I would love to hear about your thoughts and comments. Again
participating in a blog is a great way of developing a strengthen the
social field called "Covenant!"
Peace,
JudCh