Will Mancini

Sam Chand is one of the few thought leaders today that discusses the relationship between culture and vision in the church. His new book is entitled, Cracking Your Church’s Culture Code, Seven Keys to Unleashing Vision and Inspiration. His ministry is distinctly flavored by his work with with the charismatic tribe, but I find his thinking broadly applicable. I have not received my copy yet, but I have been looking forward to this book more than any others in the Leadership Network Series since Church Unique came out.

One of Sam’s favorite lines is “Culture trumps vision.” While I agree with the statement it is most true when we erroneously define vision as a “statement” rather than a state of mind. I look forward Sam’s thoughts on how visionary leadership shapes culture.  

Here is a link to the free chapter.

Here is a link to the a free culture survey.

The second story of our series on 5 Strategic Reasons to Change Your Church’s Name comes from Jon Tyson at Trinity Grace in New York City. His leadership illustrates the second strategic reason to change a name:

#2 When a name is the barrier to the people that a church is trying to reach.

Churches serious about reaching people far from God have taken great strides to “remove all barriers” to fulfilling the mission.  In Jon’s case we learn how history trumped creativity.

Jon Tyson is as smart and likable as a pastor can be. I first met John when he was on staff with David Loveless at Discovery Church in 2005.

But Jon’s vision was to plant, and  New York City was his call.  As a bright visionary and missional strategist, Jon turned on his creativity and named his church Origins. I remember hearing Jon talk about his vision, strategy and new church name at the time. He could make any church planter weep with jealously. Surely he had cracked the code of NYC as a cultural exegete!

Or not? Several years into the plant, Jon awakened to a startling conclusion. The people of the city weren’t looking for the next flavor of doing church. They weren’t responding to what appeared to be a fly-by-night Jesus operation. Rather, they were interested in the historic and the rooted.  They wanted to attend a church that had been around for 200 years.

So Jon acknowledged the mistaken moment of creativity and changed the name of his church to remove the barrier.  The church became Trinity Grace. The new name captures accurately, both the theological prowess of the leadership team and the timeless beauty of Trinitarian God and a grace-filled Gospel.

Trinity Grace is one community that consists of several neighborhood churches (Westside, Eastside, Chelsea, Brooklyn) that network together for the common good and renewal of New York City. The church is diverse, comprising professionals, families, students and artists. Read more about their vision and values.

Your name is always your first opportunity to cast vision. Your name says something and means something to everyone who hears it or sees it. A wise leader understands the importance of a ministry’s name and maintaining continuity with a name for people inside and outside the organization. Yet, there are some strategic seasons when a name change can be a powerful decision for the vision of the church. 

#1 When the scope of a church’s ministry grows beyond a name that is geographically limited. Many churches venturing into multisite engage this strategy. In this series I will share the story Cross Church in Northwest Arkansas led by Ronnie Floyd, formerly First Baptist Springdale and the Church at Pinnacle Hills.

#2 When a name is the barrier to the people that a church is trying to reach. Churches serious about reaching people far from God have taken great strides to “remove all barriers” to fulfilling the mission. A great illustration we will explore is why Origins Church, led by John Tyson in New York City became Trinity Grace Church. Another case study I will reference will explain why Sugar Creek Baptist kept “Baptist” in their name for good reason, countering the trend to remove a denominational label.

#3 When the name re-clarifies a church’s identity during a relaunch, an organizational right of passage or a new strategic direction. This third reason brings many great stories, and as this series unfolds, I will share three examples from a radical change to a subtle shift in name.

#4 When a name streamlines communication by shortening or modifying to reflect common usage.  My friends at Metropolitan Church in Houston, decided to align their brand and lean into what become a useful, and sticky name as “The MET.” Churches should be careful when making a change like this and I will share some key principles of executing this kind of change.  

#5 When an original name works against building awareness. Sometimes a name is just bad. A golden rule of naming is that a bad name gets worse and a good name gets better. I can’t wait to tell the story of what Life Church in Portland was called before it’s name change, as well as one of the most strategic awareness building campaigns our team has ever designed.

It was really fun writing these stories so stayed tuned for more. What’s your name change story? I would love to hear it. What other reasons should I include on this list? 

This post grew from the realization that because of Catalyst, I have not experienced more peer pressure in my life since fraternity recruitment my freshman year at Penn State. Catalyst is an amazing conference for church leaders  and I am grateful for guys like Brad Lomineck who make it happen. 

But this year I am not going, despite the fact that every “young” culture-savvy leader for Jesus on planet earth will be attending. 

 My mind playfully drifted to the super-spiritual, decide-it-all question of evangelicalism – WWJD? Would Jesus go to Catalyst if he were here today? 

I’ll let you decide. Below are five reasons why I think he might or might not.  To set the stage for the list, here are the four completely different perspectives I have in relating to Catalyst:

• as a local church pastor 
• as a church consultant
• as a ministry owner and therefore a potential sponsor for Catalyst
• as the author of Church Unique, which was one of the largest books giveaways at Catalyst two years ago

 With these different lenses, here’s how I see it.

 WHY JESUS WOULD ATTEND CATALYST

 #1 Jesus created crowds. A guy who hosted a spontaneous picnic for 5,000 would certainly enjoy hanging out with 10,000+

 #2 Jesus enjoyed connecting. Catalyst is one of the best places to meet ministry friends and leaders from across the country.

 #3 Jesus did the unexpected. The folks at catalyst create great experiences with a dash of surprise.

 #4 Jesus communicated effectively. From branding the event to motivational mojo of speakers, the folks at catalyst are fantastic communicators.

 #5 Jesus enlarged perspectives. There’s something about seeing literally thousands of church leaders together that encourages the soul, and touches the expansiveness of Jesus’ mission in the world.

 WHY JESUS MIGHT NOT ATTEND CATALYST

 #1 Jesus saw beneath the surface. Jesus would know what’s more important to Catalyst- the cash or the cause? Their history and brand emphasizes the connection to Andy Stanley (and John Maxwell) in the genesis of the conference in 1999. But they seem to hide the true succession of ownership. Catalyst is currently owned by a non-ministry related for-profit entity. What ultimately drives final decisions today?

 #2 Jesus was undistracted. Could the hype of the event eclipse the help of the event? Yes it’s a great place to be, but Jesus would have discerned how well the investment of time and resources meshed with his mission.

 #3 Jesus popped inflated egos. Is the leverage of key personalities year after year, just smart ministry and business, or does it cross a line of a kingdom value?

 #4 Jesus promoted stewardship. Imagine the carbon footprint of 10,000+ people driving and flying to one location when new opportunities for motivation and learning have been created in the kingdom (like Charles Lee’s Ideacamp or Leadership Network’s The Nines). 

#5 Jesus changed a few. Catalyst is all about influence in the name of Jesus, but Jesus recipe for influence was deeply relational. He attracted crowds but invested his life in a very, very few.

Whether you’re at Catalyst or not, make the best of the next few days! I’ll see you there next year.

And, I would love to hear your own pros/cons of Catalyst. The tension is good.

If your staff and volunteers don’t know your church’s strategy, they invent their own.

Many times, this is not the fault of the volunteers but a failure on the part of senior leadership. I recently reviewed an article form Havard Business Review entitled, “How Hierarchy can Hurt Strategy Execution.” This post is an adaptation of that article reframed for ministry. While the interrelated challenges of these obstacles make it hard to put in a ranking, I have attempted to do so in terms of linear progression. Also, there are many ways to define strategy. The one I use is “the process of picture that shows how you accomplish the mission on the broadest level.”

#1 Too focused on short-term results and tactics. Sunday’s a comin. Enough said. 

#2 Not taking time to develop a clear, coherent strategy. Because of the crowd fixation on the weekend worship event, most leadership teams never slow down enough to have the strategic conversation. This ultimately hinders forward progress in disciple-making and subversively reinforces a shadow mission, “to get as many people through the doors on Sunday.”

#3 Poor communication of strategy. If you do have a strategy, you can’t communicate it too much. The litmus test is getting the top 25 people in your leadership together and ask them to draw a picture that shows how you accomplish the mission. If they are not drawing the same picture, your not communicating enough. 

#4 Lack of meaning for the front-line volunteers and their roles. Once it’s clear and being communicated, it must be translated to the front line. It can’t live only in the world of “thinkers,” but must be grasped, and joyfully so, by the “doers.”

#5 Departmental silos and ministry segments with competing agendas. One of the greatest barriers is not individuals but the momentum of church systems stuff from org charts, to decision-making structures. In church, the strategy first splinters to become meaningless in the children, student and worship “departments” which typically focus 100% of their attention on their unique short-term needs. 

#6 Inconsistent or indecisive actions from senior leaders with regarding strategy. Once you set the course, you must lead the way. Strategy will set priorities and your people will quickly notice, from small daily actions, when the two disconnect.

#7 No follow-through on strategy with measurement, accountability, or celebration. Strategy won’t become meaningful without it becoming a cultural reality- something that shapes new thoughts, attitudes and behaviors. 

#8 Resistance to change. Leading with a strategy will always require some change. Some people will catch it painfully slow, and others will never see the light.