The Congregational Consulting Group, organized in 2014 by former consultants of the Alban Institute, is a network of independent consultants. We publish PERSPECTIVES for Congregational Leaders—thoughts on topics of interest to leaders of congregations and other purpose-driven organizations. — Dan Hotchkiss, editor
If ever there was an election with a clear message to the mainline churches, it has been the election of November 2024. To me, the message is: Church, get back to your core competencies, core mission, core message. Young people, especially, are already trying to improve the world. They need our help creating a theological and spiritual foundation for work they are already doing!
SWOT analysis is ubiquitous. This planning and decision-making tool is used in so many different professional environments, it is widely understood by church members. However, from my point of view as both a consultant and a working minister, SWOT needs to be expanded to direct attention to not only what is known, but what is only dimly seen through eyes of faith.
While many people seek out like-minded gatherings to avoid conflict, my experience as a consultant over the last 14 years tells me there is a large marketplace of people who prefer gatherings of people with diverse viewpoints who can discuss issues without screaming at each other. By creating diverse congregations, we have an opportunity to lead society out of its current polarized condition, rather than reflecting it ourselves.
The more I talk to members of my own congregation, the more I discover that they struggle with belief, and it’s the message itself, not just its institutional forms, that they struggle with. The language Christians have used about life with God for centuries—the Trinity, sin, atonement, the Resurrection—doesn’t make sense anymore, even to some of my oldest and most dedicated members. Even a basic belief in God is no longer shared. So maybe it’s time for those of us who are ordained to be more honest about our own struggles to believe.
The election is upon us and so is anxiety. As we await results and anticipate reactions, we fear that our country, our communities, and our congregations may unravel.
People often behave badly when captured by anxiety. Leaders react to bad behavior in one of two unhelpful ways: over-control and withdrawal. We focus our energy on the people behaving badly, only to discover that we have no control over them. Or we ignore bad behavior, to our own peril and the organization’s detriment. These are the extremes—but there is a middle way.
Leaders must hold steady in the face of anxiety. We do this by pausing to observe and interpret so that we can intervene effectively.
Board members, tired of repetitive requests for approval or permission, often say, “We should write some policies.” This impulse is correct: Policies can spare the board much tedium and help ensure consistent handling of like situations. But in practice, efforts to write policies often frustrate and disappoint. It’s a lot of work and does not always stop the flow of management questions coming to the board.
Fortunately, a board can create “Leakproof” policies. The key is to reverse one of the assumptions most boards bring to making policy: that authority must be dispensed timidly, a little bit at a time. A wise board flips this script and delegates full management authority, then sets limits and adds guidance until it is ready to let others make decisions away from the board table.
Denominational headcounts have declined sharply in recent decades, reflecting both the overall drop in religious affiliation and the rise of nondenominational churches. In this new religious landscape, congregational leaders are considering new options for affiliation.