Issue 2, Volume 1    April, 2006

   An Invitation to Leaders:

Playful Experimentation

Jackson Carroll, long time leader in the field of congregational studies, has a unique perspective on leadership. He views it not as a particular position or set of positions in an organizational chart, nor as a set of character traits. Rather, he argues that leadership is best understood as “an activity that can be expressed by various people within a congregation (Studying Congregations, Abingdon, 1998, p 170).”

Elaborating on this perspective, Carroll notes that the activity of leadership enables a congregation to create a vision that is faithful to its understanding of God’s purposes in its immediate situation; and then helps to embody the vision in its corporate life. During times of broad and pervasive social and cultural change such as we are experiencing today, leadership is about transformation.

As such, the core purpose of this newsletter is to provide research-based resources that help congregations develop the leadership required for change, the leadership necessary for embodying God’s purposes in this changing context.

Implicit in our purpose are several biases for which we are unapologetic, and with which we hope readers resonate. One is a bias toward action. We seek to provide information and insight that addresses those questions that local congregational leaders -- lay and profession -- are asking about how they can make a difference in their setting. A second bias is toward information and insight grounded in research. Why? Because during periods of social change the disciplined nature of research can help in identifying the newly emerging opportunities for change. Because the wide sweep of national survey research can provide a concise, albeit general, summary of the collective experience of congregations in adapting to changing circumstances. Because reflecting on narrative case studies can uncover the nuanced stories of particular congregations. Implicit in the latter two points is a third bias we hold, namely that during times of change the richest source of innovation is at the local congregational level. The greatest source of wisdom and learning during a time of transition lies in fostering conversation among as wide a spectrum of congregations as possible.

We believe research is an invaluable tool in capturing such emergent wisdom. We further believe that research conducted toward such an end comes with an obligation. This obligation includes both sharing insights with congregation leaders as well as inviting them and others into a conversation. We believe in the capacity of different faith traditions to learn from each other without compromising the integrity of their respective theological differences.

But back to Leadership and Transformation! Following from our understanding of leadership as activity, our issues are thematically oriented to the eight leadership tasks of highly adaptive congregations drawn from Carl Dudley and Nancy Ammerman’s, Congregations in Transition. Our previous issue highlighted the theme of “Curiosity.” Our next issue will focus on “Disciplined Self-assessment.” The heart of the current issue is “Playful Experimentation.”

Recognizing that change is always scary, Dudley and Ammerman note that successfully adapting congregations tend not to stake everything on a single change effort, but rather take “modest risks” and “cut their losses when an experiment doesn’t work.” Further, they note that this approach is typically accompanied by a spirit of playfulness that “enables congregations to laugh at their failures as well as celebrate their successes.”

Now I don’t know about you, but “playful” and “experimental” were about the last words I would use to describe the congregation in which I grew up. Indeed, “serious,” “formal” and “unchanging” more readily come to mind. Data from the Faith Communities Today 2000 national survey of congregations suggest that this was not just because we were Calvinists, nor was it because it was so many years ago. Rather, a majority of congregational leaders still describe their congregations in these terms. Equally important, there are deep seated and well-reasoned theological arguments within some traditions why this should be the case. However, this is not a unanimous experience among faith communities today. In stark contrast, for example, leaders described in the just released FACT2005 Survey of Megachurches overwhelmingly describe their worship as always or often joyful and exciting.

Megachurches are certainly as controversial as they are visible in today’s religious landscape. But it is hard to argue that their innovative styles and approaches do not resonate with growing segments of the American population. Many are as playful in their style as they are experimental in their organizational development. Therefore, a disciplined understanding of what they are and a guided reflection on what other congregations can learn from them fits well with this issue’s theme of “playful experimentation” as a strategic leadership task for adaptive congregations. So relax and have some fun with us.

-- David A Roozen, Editor

THE SURVEY SAYS  

Megachurches Today 2005: New Research Debunks 11 Myths About Megachurches

According to a groundbreaking research study just released by Leadership Network and Hartford Seminary’s Hartford Institute for Religion Research, many of the most widely held beliefs about megachurches could not be farther from the truth.

The Megachurches Today 2005 survey is the most thoroughly researched study of the Protestant megachurch movement in the United States. Since June 2005, more than 1,800 churches were contacted by e-mail, phone and mail, with complete data for more than 400 qualifying congregations received, tabulated and analyzed.

According to Warren Bird, Leadership Network’s Director of Research, “Based on the results of this survey, we are able to conclude that there are at least 1,210 Protestant churches in the United States today with average weekly attendance of over 2,000. That is nearly double the number of megachurches that existed five years ago.”

While tremendously significant as a cultural study and as a “how to” guide for large churches, the survey also is instructive for churches that are anything but “mega.” Scott Thumma, Professor of Sociology of Religion at Hartford Seminary and primary architect of the survey, said, “I am absolutely convinced that megachurches have blossomed, at least in part, because they have responded creatively to the new needs and interests of people in a new cultural reality. There is much to learn from megachurches—and it isn’t all about being big.”

As Dave Travis, Executive Vice President of Leadership Network, also noted, “Not a week passes without megachurches figuring prominently in one or more national news stories. During 2005 alone, four megachurch pastors had books on The New York Times bestseller lists. And megachurch pastors always dominate the lists of the most influential religious leaders in the country. The Megachurches Today 2005 survey provides the perspective that to date has been missing from most reporting on this movement.”

The wide-ranging survey includes data on the many attributes that together define the nature and impact of megachurches in our society. Collectively, the results debunk 11 of the most common beliefs about megachurches (see sidebar).

In terms of affiliation, the greatest number of megachurches are nondenominational (34 percent), Southern Baptist (16 percent) or Baptist, unspecified (10 percent). The remainder are scattered among Assemblies of God, United Methodist, Calvary Chapel, “Christian,” and other Protestant denominations.

The regions with the greatest concentrations of churches are south Atlantic, Pacific and western Central. Every region of the United States has some megachurches. The phenomenon is spreading outside the Sunbelt states.

Downloadable copies of the complete Megachurches 2005 Today survey (in both html and PDF versions) are available at both organizations’ web sites: www.leadnet.org and http://hirr.hartsem.edu. A 15-minute podcast discussion of key survey findings is archived on both sites.

Personal contacts include:
· Dave Travis, Leadership Network, dave.travis@leadnet.org or 770.972.8792
· Scott Thumma, Hartford Seminary, sthumma@hartsem.edu or 860.509.9571

CONSULTANT'S CORNER  

What Small Churches Can Learn From The Megachurches Today 2005 Study

by Carl S. Dudley, Professor Emeritus, Hartford Seminary

THREE THINGS SMALL CHURCHES ARE NOT:

1. WE’RE NOT BIG We look with awe but not envy at the amazing multiplication of these “Big Sister” churches. Not only is the number of megachurches growing (50% every 5 years) but attendance in the “average megachurch” is also growing (57% in five years), and more than a third (37%) are engaged in planting new ones. This phenomenal growth of participation in megachurches has much to say to smaller congregations – by contrast and by affirmation.

2. WE’RE NOT DEEP As compared with small church structures (some that are much too large, and all that are a challenge to maintain), megachurches typically have multiple buildings fondly called “our campus,” sometimes strategically located in several communities. What’s more important, megachurches fill every corner of their buildings with niche-driven programs, organized by a technologically sophisticated core of professional staff and guided by a small army of volunteers. Fortunately Thumma’s report dispelled the myths of magical managerial expertise—sometimes they are well managed, but not always (it helps to know they’re human, too).

3. WE DON’T FLOAT As compared with megachurch membership that is scattered throughout an entire metropolitan area, in many communities and sometimes a multi-state network, small churches tend to have a more specific, often historic location. Megachurches are typically planted in new and growing suburbs, located near major arterial highways, and providing highly focused services—like a religious mall with a boutique or specialty shop for particular segments of the total population. Megachurches are the flagship of their own fleet that “float” above geographic locations without need for denominational or even postal address (separate PO Box). By contrast, most small churches burrow deep within a particular, historic and often obscure location. For small churches, place matters.

FIVE THINGS SMALL CHURCHES CAN LEARN:

So what can we learn from these church giants? Clearly they do some things very well that small churches can celebrate and appropriate as our own. Thumma’s report explores many aspects of megachurch life that correlate with increased participation and spiritual vitality. Of the many familiar elements that might be mentioned, I suggest five broad areas where small church leaders can learn from what their Big Sisters are doing.

1. WORSHIP In an avalanche of agreement, megachurch leaders overwhelmingly place a top priority on the centrality of worship. Regardless of their personal role (sermon preparation was barely mentioned) the focus was on the total worship experience—joyful, inspirational, thought provoking, exciting, informal, reverent and constantly evolving. The fresh drama of routine worship is the cutting edge of growing churches. Apparently, “change” does not need to be a radical break with the past or offensive to religious tradition. Rather worship is the arena where cultural differences are honored and adapted, much as a small church might celebrate music even when it is outside their comfort zone, but it is presented by “one of our own church family.”

2. CONSERVATIVE BELIEFS, CHANGING BEHAVIORS In an apparent contradiction, megachurches overwhelmingly rate themselves as “conservative” (85%), and yet by the same margin reject “formal liturgy” and affirm the use of electronic instruments in worship events. Apparently their deep beliefs, values and spiritual commitments provide the anchor below the surface that permits, perhaps encourages, creativity in worship and changes in the programs they endorse. Small churches—often stuck with formal worship and traditional music—would do well to re-examine their meaning of “conservative.” They can learn from megachurches that a really solid foundation in historic beliefs will permit, perhaps demand, a break with time-honored, repetitive behaviors in order to live up to the vision of what God is expecting of us now and for the future.

3. LIKE A FAMILY Thumma’s report destroys the myth that small congregations have a monopoly on feeling like “a close family.” Intimacy is a high value for megachurches as well, and it’s no accident that they achieve it. Megachurches know that personal relationships are foundational, and they work hard to achieve them. Megachurches emphasize participation in prayer groups, discussion groups, religious education for every age, choirs, clubs, and support groups for a myriad of hazards on life’s perilous journey. They spare no effort to “help” new members, even visitors, become involved in small groups. Too often small congregations take relationships for granted, and the intimacy, that once was their strength, sometimes becomes a liability.

4. NETWORKS OF CARING As opposed to the expectations of some observers, megachurches typically were not politically active and showed little interest in campaigns for social justice. At the same time these congregations cared about the lives of people in their congregations. Like smaller churches, Megachurch members were involved in ministries of compassion where their members live, often working with other partner congregations and agencies for local and international mission and service. Both the larger and the smaller churches realize that community ministry cannot be done alone, and both sorts of congregations embrace non-members in networks of care throughout their communities, and even around the world. Ministry for both is much bigger than membership.

5. LEADERSHIP SPREAD This sudden, rapid, current wave of megachurches growth still rests on the shoulders of founding pastors, which leaves a giant question mark suspended above the future: what will happen when these great shepherds depart? Beyond the personal genius of these leaders, megachurches have shown a universal (although diverse) capacity to share the work and spread out the load. Two questions then challenge small churches: Are our few willing leaders exhausted by “wearing too many hats,” or are we not growing because, unlike megachurches, we are unwilling to spread out the leadership tasks (Thumma says it takes one clergy or volunteer for every 10 members)? Second, do we have more conflict in small churches because we are so intimate, or are we so intimate because leaders have failed to focus the vision beyond ourselves toward the new kingdom that God expects from and for us? Leadership remains the unfinished challenge from the megachurch report.

Thanks to the megachurch study, small churches have a lot to learn from our “Big Sister” congregations. Worship, commitment, family, caring plus leadership = new strength, and “let the God give growth”(I Cor.3:6,7).

CLERGY PERSPECTIVE   Here we present the viewpoint of one or more clergy who work in local faith communities and have first-hand experience in applying the theme of the issue.

Insights For Leaders of Ministries of All Sizes 

by Meredith Wheeler*

This issue of Leadership & Transformation shares some of the results of their monumental 2005 survey of U.S. Protestant megachurches. The study offers many significant findings regarding this relatively new phenomenon. More importantly, it offers important insights for leaders of ministries of all sizes. I'd like to offer just a couple of thoughts as a fellow learner and a fellow leader as to how all of us can most benefit from this particular study.

There are a couple of obstacles to learning.

(1) Speaking as a pastoral leader, there is an unfortunate proneness by those in ministry to compare one's self or one's ministry to other ministries, gauging skills or ministry size as a measure of significance. That is often not a very productive exercise.

Learning can come from all places and just as large ministries can learn from smaller places so the reverse can take place (yes I intended to say that in this order). Ministry size is not necessarily an indicator of ministry health and certainly in the eyes of God is not the measure of one's worth.

In my own theological perspective the sovereignty of God in choosing to work particular ways through particular people in particular locations defies explanation.

(2) There also tends to be the packaging of methodologies and programs as the next answer to ministry success (however one defines that) and often these methodologies and programs are imported without an understanding of the unique cultural, demographic and personal distinctives that contributed to particular models of ministry.

Those things said, there are some true benefits from the research-based perspectives that "Leadership & Transformation" offers.

There are great benefits from an awareness of and reflection upon patterns of ministry expression within our current cultural context. There is something happening sociologically that is impacting the forms of faith expression today. Reflection is one of the important disciplines of leaders. Reflection does not take place in a vacuum.

The information provided in the megachurch study will provide a number of prompts for us to evaluate and ask questions, which in turn can spur learning and innovation. For example, counter to stereotypes, many megachurches do not have large facilities. Creativity that maximizes facilities and staff should encourage all of us to think outside the boxes that often limit our thinking.

Megachurches have often piloted different ways of doing ministry. Although we may not adopt certain strategies, the values behind the strategies can prompt each of us to consider how we are doing and how we might grow as leaders and ministries.

A final area that I would mention is to consider what megachurches are not doing. Actually asking the questions, "What are we doing that we are doing because we have always done this?" and, "What are we doing that we need to stop doing?" may be two of the best things we can do in reflection.


*Meredith Wheeler is the Senior Pastor of the 2500 attender Calvary Church (www.calvary-church.com) in Souderton, Pennsylvania and is A.B.D. Temple University. His dissertation is focusing on senior leadership transitions in megachurches.

TOOLS FOR CHANGE  

Here are some tips and techniques to help you transform your faith community, oriented around the issue’s theme.

Tips and Techniques toward Playful Experimentation

There are a variety of ways to engage in playful experimentation within your faith community and as a resourceful leader. One is to radically alter your perspective on your faith community. Part of the problem with trying to think about your congregation is that familiarity often draws a curtain over our eyes. We have seen the same scene so long that we miss the reality. I’m sure we have all had the experience of seeing ourselves on a video and reacting like, “Is that me? Is that how I look or how I come across to others? Did I really put on that much weight?”

The reality of your situation didn’t change for you to perceive new things about yourself in the video, only your perspective on that reality. Therefore, if you want to think new thoughts about your congregation, one way to do it is change your perspective. The following suggestions may sound silly – but after all we are talking about playful experimentation.

• Take a worship service off, if you are the primary leader, and sit in the balcony with the teens or go hang out in the nursery.
• Hide in the bathroom stall and listen to the conversation following a worship service.
• During an inactive time at the church, borrow a wheelchair and start in the parking lot and try to get into the sanctuary by yourself.
• Visit a congregation in a religious tradition you are completely unfamiliar with and observe how you are treated as a visitor, outsider, and as one who knows nothing about the faith – then do the same thing at your own congregation.
• Post a video camera in the choir loft, on the organ, anywhere unobtrusive but aimed at the congregation of worshippers. Later in the week watch it focusing on the reactions to what happens, what is said, and other interactions in the pews.
• Visit the web sites of cutting edge expressions of your religious tradition. See what others are doing.

Changing your viewpoint often creates insights about new ways of doing things. But then what do you do with these new ideas? Perhaps the problem is not that you need ideas of new ways to do worship or organize the youth or deal with deadly routines, but instead is finding ways to introduce new models into the congregation.

There is no easy, painless method to break habits and routines. But you may be able to blame the experimentation, the new efforts, on an outside entity when you try something the first time. Tell the congregation that our newsletter told you that you must try this at least once. Or “blame” an outside – my professor made me do it, or a colleague said we just have to try this. Or offer the congregation the option to participate in the change at a certain time. Or begin the experiment on the youth or teens. Perhaps you can turn crisis into opportunity by using it to experiment with a new worship form or a different approach. Often a congregation or a committee, when approached with a “just for this service” or “just a three month trial period” they will be willing to play along.

Whatever you try, you should try something. Growing healthy congregations are those (whether large or small) that continue to experiment, adapt, and be innovative.

Indeed, one of management guru Tom Peter’s principles for Thriving on Chaos (his New York Times bestseller) is what he calls “fast failures.” According to Peters a sure sign that an organization is not keeping up with a changing world is a lack of failed experiments. No one bats a 1000 when it comes to organizational change, so a lack of failures can only mean a lack of trying.

Also implicit in Peter’s principle is a key tenet in Dudley and Ammerman’s development of the notion of playful experimentation. It is that not only are adapters willing to try lots of new things of modest scale, but they also know many of these will be failures – which is why playful attitude and modest scale are important.

Trends 

Signs of the times: emerging religious patterns and practices on the U.S. landscape, as reported in the print media.

Myth 12: Megachurches are a Protestant Phenomena

No less a student of American congregations than Mark Chaves (Congregations in America, Harvard University Press, 2004) asserted in his honorary, H. Paul Douglass lecture at the 2005 annual meeting of the Religious Research Association (Review of Religious Research, forthcoming) that by “megachurches” he meant, “very large Protestant churches.” In elaborating his definition, Chaves was clear in his agreement with the scholarly consensus that megachurches were more than a matter of size. If size alone were the defining characteristic then upwards to half of Roman Catholic parishes could be considered mega’s, and nearly five percent of both Orthodox churches and Muslim Mosques and Islamic Centers.

As important as size, megachurches share a common and distinguishing set of stylistic and programmatic characteristics. In contrast to Chaves’ Protestant focus, several articles appearing around the time of his lecture suggest that the newest trend within the mega world is adapting the mega style and structure to the Roman Catholic and Jewish context.

Both Synagogue 3000 and STAR appear to be trends setters, in this regard, within the Jewish community. An October 4, 2004 story, entitled “Synagogue 3000 aims to increase Jewish worshippers,” for example, describes what is called “a pathbreaking meeting” hosted by Synagogue 3000 http://www.synagogue3000.org/ and featuring Rick Warren (author of The Purpose-Driven Church and founding pastor of Saddleback Church) to “explore what synagogues can learn from megachurches.” Synagogue 3000’s objective, according to the story, “is to encourage Jews to recommit to Jewish tradition and synagogue life by creating new 21st century spiritual arenas where relationships with God and each other define everything the synagogue does.”

In a similar vein, STAR (Synagogues: Transformation and Renewal -- Renewing Jewish life through congregational innovation and leadership development™) has used mega approaches to develop its Synaplex model, currently being used by at least 34 synagogues across the United States. As described in a December, 2004 article in the Miami Herald about two South Florida congregations participating in the peer program, Synaplex is “the Jewish version of the multiplex theater – where congregants can sing, stretch, pray, create art or just sit in silence.” On the STAR website (http://www.starsynagogue.org), Synaplex is described as a “flexible format of cultural, educational, spiritual and social events offering expanded opportunities to learn, gather, pray and enjoy Shabbat together.”

Roman Catholic parishes have a historical tendency to be large, but they typically lack the array of small group programming characteristic of megachurches, not to mention the megas’ “seeker-friendly” orientation to worship. A December, 2005 story by Abe Levy for the Associated Press, uses St Mark the Evangelist Catholic Church in San Antonio to highlight the fact that, at least in regard to using a wide spectrum of small group programming to create community within community and in regard to architectural techniques for enhancing a feeling of intimacy in large sanctuaries, many Catholic parishes are self-consciously borrowing from the Protestant megas.

Chaves’ lecture may have been a step behind the migration of mega innovations to faith traditions other than Protestant, but he makes an overwhelming case for a broader trend of which megas are the most recent and visible manifestation. Specifically, he finds a consistent trend across denominations reaching back at least a hundred years toward more very large churches. He further notes that this trend accelerated beginning in the 1970s. And most remarkable for him, he relatedly finds an increasing concentration of people in the very largest churches. Reminding us of the old stewardship adage that 20% of the people typically give 80% of the contributed dollars; Chaves argues that the most important implication in his trend analysis for those who think about the emerging future of American congregational life is that “most churches are small, but most people are in large churches,” and “the trend in this direction is accelerating.

Web Wise 

Internet resources for faith community transformation.

Megachurch Resources

The best resource for information about megachurches is the Hartford Institute for Religion Research. At http://hirr.hartsem.edu/org/faith_megachurches.html you will find a brief description of the phenomenon as well as current research, a bibliography of books and articles, and a searchable database of over 1300 congregations.

The Leadership Network web site www.leadnet.org/ contains helpful information about large and innovative churches as well as several excellent reports about multi-site congregations, churches that meet in theatres and other experimental ideas.

Want to experience what megachurch worship is all about without leaving the comfort of your desk? A visit to www.goodnewsline.com/megachurch/ will deliver the web broadcasts of 54 of the largest megachurches to your computer screen.

Get a birds eye view of what your congregation looks like. Visit www.gpsvisualizer.com/ or another similar GPS mapping website and plug in the addresses of your membership. These helpful sites will generate a number of types of maps with your membership plotted on them. This is a great way to explore whether you have clusters of members throughout an area that might joint together in small groups.

Congregational Story 

Check out congregational story on the theme of the issue.

Drama, Comedy, Video & Movie Clips: Megachurch Worship

Mike Lee, the pastor of Hope Community Church in Raleigh, N.C., prides himself on staying plugged into popular culture. A few weeks ago, he preached a series on sin that included a skit called, “Church Scene Investigation,” a spoof on the popular TV crime show, Crime Scene Investigation, or “CSI.”

Increasingly, the church, which draws 3,500 people each Sunday, relies on drama, comedy, video and movie clips.

“Jesus was the most masterful communicator,” Lee said. “He always had a story. So we try to put things into story form.”

Lee, who has led the nondenominational church since its founding 12 years ago, is part of a growing number of pastors trying to reach people by relating to the culture in which they live. While these pastors share orthodox Christian beliefs, they prize innovation and creativity, and are always tinkering with their presentation in an effort to keep people excited and motivated about worship.

A recent study by the Hartford Institute for Religion Research and the Dallas-based church resource center Leadership Network shows there are more than 1,200 megachurches across the country — far more than researchers had predicted. These churches, defined as Protestant congregations with an average weekend attendance of 2,000 people or more, are far from monolithic. They differ in growth rates, size and emphasis. Still, many churches attribute their growing success to the creative ways they have responded to the needs and interests of 21st century Americans.

In the study, many megachurches featured an informal service with contemporary music and extensive use of the latest technological innovations. Worship was described "joyful," "exciting" and "thought-provoking."

Before starting his own congregation, Lee visited some of the most successful megachurches, including Saddleback Church in Lake Forest, Calif., and Willow Creek Community Church in South Barrington, Ill., Still, he said, his Raleigh church is not a clone. Lee learned there were many approaches to a successful worship service, and that willingness to experiment and change were key.

While some approaches are worth repeating, others fall flat or never get off the ground. Recently, for example, church leaders thought to invite the North Carolina State University cheerleaders to a service. At the last minute, Lee thought the cheerleaders might offend some and strike others as out of place. The appearance was scrapped.

Other ideas, however, have worked well. Lee likes to invite church members to share their testimonies in a one-on-one interview during the worship service. After the success of a sermon in which he invited a couple to talk about overcoming their marital problems, Lee invited a former men’s club dancer to talk about how Jesus changed her life.

As with so many megachurches in the Hartford Institute study, Hope Community does not have a huge sanctuary or an enormous campus. Even before it started construction on a 1,500-seat auditorium, church leaders knew they would continue to provide multiple Sunday morning services. To deal with a shortage of parking spaces, the church runs four buses from a nearby shopping center where parking is ample.

Like many growing congregations, Hope is now poised to try two new approaches to better manage its size. A group of college students and young adults that meets at the church Sunday evenings will likely be asked to plant a new, independent congregation, mostly likely near the NC State University campus.

But the church also wants to start a satellite venue for members living in the fast-growing southern suburbs of Wake County, Lee said. The plan is to establish a meeting space that has its own leadership, including a worship band and children’s programs. But the sermon, or message, will be broadcast via satellite from the main campus.

“Our philosophy of ministry is, you reach out to your community, and you can do that more effectively where you live,” said Lee. “We don’t really want to build a bigger building.”

But as with every venture, Lee indicated that if that doesn’t work, the church will rethink it’s approach and try again.

What’s Ahead...

June 2006: The FACT2005 National Survey of Congregations is being tabulated as I write. We’ll present highlights in the June issue. One of the purposes of the FACT national surveys is to provide a comparative angle of vision for congregations working to deepen their self-understanding. Accordingly the issue’s thematic focus is “Disciplined Self-assessment” – another in the series of Dudley and Ammerman’s eight leadership tasks of highly adaptive congregations. On theme, we’ll review several survey tools for assisting local congregations in self-assessment, our Consultant’s Corner will provide a primer on appreciate inquiry, and we’ll hear the story of an Eastern Orthodox project working with parishes to identity their major developmental needs.

September 2006: In addition to their general tracking of a wide range of aspects of congregational life, each FACT national survey also contains a module of questions on a special topic. The FACT2005 topic is Numerical Growth, and we will introduce the results in the September issue. Correspondingly, our featured leadership task for the issue is what Dudley and Ammerman describe as “Deep Hospitality.” We will play with there two interrelated themes – Numerical Growth and Deep Hospitality – from a variety of faith perspectives in the rest of our standard features: Congregational Stories, Consultant’s Corner, Tools for Change, Clergy perspective, Web Wise and Resources for Change.