Controversial II

I recently shared a post from Carey Nieuwhof. You can read it here.  He is someone who challenges me to think outside of my 'box' all the time. 

Because his post was, in my mind, so controversial, I asked for feedback, and since I don't get a lot of that here on the blog (not complaining just stating a fact) I put it out on facebook and via e-mail. 

Here is the gist of some of the responses I got:

~ LOVE IT!  I have seen so many ideas go to committee to die, let leaders lead!.
~ Everything in moderation, spend too much time trying to build consensus you'll never do anything, but if you never slow down long enough to think through your ideas with others, then you'll burn a lot of bridges and make some really bad decisions.
~ Lots and lots of verses from Proverbs about how success comes from seeking wise counsel.
~ If leaders don't make sure that absolutely everyone is on board with every the idea, they will destroy the church, the author is wrong, dangerously wrong!

I got a good range of answers!  Exactly what I was hoping for.

One trusted advisor pointed me to Hans Finzel's book, "The Top Ten Mistakes Leaders Make", specifically the chapter on making room for "Mavericks"  (I just happened to have a copy, and being home from work because I was sick yesterday I had plenty of time to read!) In this chapter Finzel talks about the life cycle of organizations.  They tend to follow the life cycle of humans, not able to do much when they first start out, really awkward teenage years where they struggle to define themselves, vibrant adult life full of accomplishments, and a slow decline before eventually dying (or just decomposing).  Finzel says that in the graying years, organizations need "Mavericks", people who defy convention, (and consensus) and are willing to buck the system enough to make it vibrant again.  Effectively they take the organization back to it's adolescent stage, re-introduce it to the awkwardness of trying to define its identity.  The organization then has 2 options.  Change or continue the slide toward irrelevance.

Finzel cautions that you pay careful attention to the difference between a Maverick (Someone who has the goals of your organization at heart, just very different ideas about how to accomplish those goals) and a Malcontent (someone who just doesn't like what you are doing, or thinks their own personal way is the only way or wants to re-define your mission).  He recommends evaluating the ideas of Mavericks, based on the objectives of the organization.  Do they want to completely change your mission? If so, best to ignore their advice.  Is their thinking completely different from the way you've always done things, but their passion is for the same mission you've always had? Maybe you need to give them room to grow.   

Finzel concludes by saying that, "The best way to take the wind out of the sails of a visionary is to send their ideas to committee." Which is I believe the very same point Carey is trying to make.

So here is my take:
Don't kill ideas by sending them to committee. Instead, have standards (a measuring consistent measuring stick) for evaluating suggestions so that you can keep the good ones and filter out the bad ones!

Here is a sample set of standards:
1. Is it Biblical (if not, don't waste your time)
2. Is it in keeping with the mission of our organization (if you are running a nursing home ministry and someone wants to allocate resources to open a preschool, they may have come to the wrong place.)
3. Does the person presenting the idea demonstrate the following:
  a. Experience (Maybe not the 5 decades of experience you have, but have they done some time in the trenches?  after all you can't lead until you've learned to follow.)
  b. Research (if someone is reading everything they can get their hands on about the topic, they are far more credible than people who won't show up to a meeting or read a book)
  c. Passion (Please don't confuse passion with how loudly they speak! instead ask yourself, "Do they live the ministry they want your organization to be a part of?"  )
  d. A willingness to seek and take advice (if they won't listen to the Proverbs and won't take advice, they they can't be trusted with leadership. True leadership requires a submissive, servant's heart)
  e. Willingness to work within the current system. (or do they refuse to volunteer until they get their way?)


What would you add to or subtract from the list?