When leaders tell members of their congregation that it’s time to do congregational renewal, visioning or strategic planning – three similar processes that go by different names – some people get excited. Other people groan. Not everyone loves congregational planning processes, often because of negative previous congregational planning experiences, including because of myths/misconceptions about what and who congregational planning involves. At Credence, we run multiple congregational planning processes every year, for both large and small congregations. We have found that busting congregational planning myths can help congregations improve their planning experience.
Myth #1: “Congregational Planning doesn’t matter. We already know what we need to do.”
Congregational planning can look like it doesn’t matter. In well-run congregations, staff, congregants and lay leaders know what to do and how to do it well. In fact, congregations can stay on course without a plan as long as the answers to several key organizational questions don’t change. Briefly, these questions include: Who are we? Why are we here? What shall we do?
Unfortunately, the answers to these questions can change without anyone really noticing. A changing society, new technology, a growing or shrinking congregation, changing demographics, new leadership, a congregational rift, a sense of mission drift, congregational malaise, changing economic realities, leadership exhaustion – all are examples of change that impact the answers to a congregation’s key questions. Congregational planning provides an opportunity to (a) celebrate and learn from what the congregation has accomplished and who the congregation has been; (b) assess current reality and consider key organizational questions; and (c) establish a direction that grounds the congregation in its core commitments, sets direction, and invigorates and motivates both staff and congregants.
The current season has been difficult for many congregations: many are struggling with decline or a lost sense of direction. Others see new life among them and want to focus this new energy. Engaging in congregational planning allows a congregation to explore meaningful and hard questions about who it is and where it is headed. In some congregations, planning conversations will lead to new vitality; in some, the conversations will help to focus the congregation’s direction and ministry; in still other congregations, planning conversations will lead to a meaningful and grace-filled decision to close. Congregational planning does not prescribe an outcome. Instead, effective planning processes invite congregants to listen for God’s leading and to follow the sense of direction emerging among them.
Myth #2: “Congregational plans just sit on a shelf. They don’t change anything.”
When congregational plans ‘sit on a shelf’, people become discouraged and cynical – they invested time in a process that ultimately did not impact the congregation or its direction. There are several ways to avoid creating plans that simply fill space on a shelf.
- Create plans that are doable. A congregational plan that is too big or that establishes too many priorities and goals can be overwhelming, stymying the congregation’s ability to act on its commitments. At Credence, we recommend a maximum of three or four priorities, alongside a reasonable number of concrete goals to animate those priorities. What is a ‘reasonable number’? This varies from one congregation to another, depending especially on the number of staff and the time frame of the plan. For small congregations, two to three goals per priority is typically enough. Larger congregations with multiple staff will more likely find themselves establishing five to ten goals per priority. Establishing a target for the number of hoped-for goals to animate each priority can help create a smoother planning process and can strengthen the likelihood that the congregation will act on its commitments.
- Complete your congregational plan. Congregational plans typically involve three “buckets”: congregational statements (identity, mission, values); the plan itself (key priorities and concrete goals); and the operational plan (the details that define who does what and by when). When organizations complete only the first or second buckets of the plan but do not complete the third bucket, it is difficult to translate ideas into action and track progress over time. Effective planning processes include a clear plan regarding which groups will be assigned various aspects of the plan and how this work will be coordinated by a leadership body in the congregation.
- Report on your progress. It is deceptively easy for people (all of us included) to forget the progress we have made, whether over the course of a conversation, in congregational life, or with respect to the actions already taken related to our planning commitments. Regular reporting regarding the work being done on the plan ensures that people see and experience the congregation living into its commitments. This builds momentum and generates excitement for the congregation’s vision and direction.
Myth #3: Spending time on Identity, Mission and Values is a waste of time.
Some congregations wonder whether it is important to spend time on their congregational statements (identity, mission, values). I am fond of telling congregations that they already have a clear mission, as given to them in the Scripture: Love the Lord with heart, soul, mind and strength and your neighbour as yourself. Even with this Scripture-driven mission statement in place, however, congregations still must explore what this passage means for them, in their context and with their people. Spending time exploring questions of identity, values and mission can help congregations (re-)establish their “why” (why they exist) and their “who” (their identity and the core values that are emblematic of that identity). If this work has already been done, a congregational planning process can nonetheless meaningfully review and affirm these commitments to ensure they remain “alive,” thereby influencing the rest of the planning process.
Congregational planning processes alone do not help congregational to thrive. Identity, mission and value statements do, however, reflect a congregation’s culture. When congregations allow time for meaningful conversations about their core commitments, they are making space for culture conversations – conversations that can help ensure the efficacy of congregational planning processes. (Sidebar: For congregations with significant culture challenges, it is often best to set aside planning initiatives until an intentional process to review and heal the culture is completed.)
Myth #4: “If the facilitator has worked with other congregations, can’t the facilitator just tell us what to do.”
Some congregations would like the facilitator to simply tell them what to do, based on what other churches in the area are doing. While it is good to learn from others, ultimately every congregation must discern for itself, what its unique calling in the world is, given the location, demographics and context in which the community of faith is planted.
But there is another, equally important misconception buried in Myth #4. Effective congregational planning is a journey of the mind, yes, but it is also a journey of the heart and the soul. Many communities of faith who engage in planning conversations are looking for congregational transformation. It is difficult for congregations to transform, however, if the people in the congregation are not also being transformed. Effective congregational planning processes are both practical and spiritual – they invite a contemplative heart, prayerful conversation, a spirit of discernment and nuts-and-bolts decision-making about the direction in which the congregation is being called.
Myth #5: “Planning isn’t in my skill set. It’s better if I leave this to others.”
Setting a congregation’s direction requires a diversity of skill sets and insights from across the congregation. Some people think in a big picture fashion, while others are more detail-oriented. In the early stages of the congregational planning process, it is common to take stock of current reality: How is our congregation doing currently? An effective facilitator will steward this conversation in a fashion that ensures both dreamers and detail-oriented people can contribute their insights. In the dreaming and visioning stage of a strategic planning process, the big-picture thinkers shine. In the nuts-and-bolts planning associated with strategic planning, however, it is the detail-oriented people who shine. Effective planning ensures diverse skill sets are welcomed and encouraged throughout the process.
Myth #6: “Can’t we just do this as leaders? Do we need to include everyone?”
Several years ago, a facilitator told me that he has done away with everyone but the top five people of the congregation when he leads planning processes. In his view, engaging the rest of the staff, lay leaders and congregants slows down planning and makes the process more cumbersome. While creating a plan that involves a diversity of voices can feel slow, generating buy-in for the plan is more complicated when people beyond the congregation’s leadership do not have a voice. It is also harder to develop an effective plan without the insights from people with diverse experiences from across the congregation.
To ensure a diversity of voices has input into the plan while nonetheless protecting congregational time and energy, Credence prefers an “accordion” approach to planning. This approach, like a true accordion, expands and contracts, to allow for both larger and smaller group initiatives throughout the planning process. Practically, we want to hear from a range of participants prior to facilitated group meetings. The finalization of the plan itself is completed by a smaller group of leaders with regular check-ins with the congregation. In this way, a cascading group of individuals is involved throughout the process, ensuring the inclusion of a diversity of voices, buy-in and an efficient use of time and money.
Myth #7: The congregational planning process will take too long and will be too arduous.
Congregational planning processes do not need to take too long; nor do they need to be arduous. At Credence, we have found that effective beginnings generate efficient endings. Practically, this means investing in: (a) interviews or focus groups alongside other forms of data collection to start the planning process; (b) a well-crafted listening report that provides participants with the information they need to engage in strategic thinking; (c) ensuring an effective Reference Group is in place to support discernment at key stages of the process; and (d) effective facilitation to ensure conversations move forward in a manner that hears diverse voices while staying focused on the task at hand.
Myth #8: Congregational Planning is boring. I’d like to be inspired.
Congregational planning processes should be joyful and lifegiving. An effective process celebrates the congregation’s achievements, considers the congregation’s current reality (reviewing strengths and challenges driven by both internal and external forces), re-grounds the congregation in its core commitments, includes creativity in both the planning process and the outcomes under consideration, and sets a direction that propels the congregation forward. Busting the myths and misconceptions of the planning process can help congregations create processes that are inspiring, that invite prayerful discernment, and that lead, ultimately, to an inspiring and motivational direction for the congregation.
.
Supporting Leaders, Engaging Teams. Transforming Congregations.
Credence believes strategic planning can be inspiring, collaborative, and tailored to your congregation’s unique story.
Explore more about Credence’s approach and how Credence can support your congregation’s next planning process at https://credenceandco.com/services/strategic-planning/