[This
essay was originally an article published by the Baptist Leader in the Winter
of 1994-1995 and is printed in revised form. Slightly more than a decade later
General Stanley McChrystal, commander of the Special Operations Task Force in
Iraq, initiated a transformation process to redesign the task force from a
hierarchical structure to a hybrid organization of hierarchy and networks he termed
a “Team of Teams.” In 2013, McChrystal’s book on “new rules of engagement for a
complex world” was published to be followed in 2017 with an implementation
guide for business and civilian government written by Chris Fussell, a former
Navy Seal and onetime aide-de-camp (aka chief of staff) to General McChrystal. When
I became the interim minister of education of Holmeswood Baptist Church in
Kansas City, Missouri in 1994 Senior Pastor Dr, Greg Hunt shared his vision of
doing church differently. Redesigning committees into ministry teams was the
result of our collaboration in creating a hybrid organization for speed and
ease of our church’s missional efforts. Alas,
both Greg and I left Holmeswood for other ministry fields before the
transformation could be fully implemented. So, the article/essay below predated
the popularization of McChrystal and Fussell’s model by also two decades.]
An old joke shares the wisdom that a camel is a horse created
by a committee. This old joke would be quite funny if it were not for the facts
of wasted time and wasted ministry perpetuated by committees.
Some church leaders see the problem as ineffective
committees. In contrast, I maintain that the problem is largely inherent in the committee system itself. Committees
are bureaucratic; they are tools of a command-and-control paradigm which
primarily exist to deliberate and to manage ministry resources, not perform ministry
action. We have the mistaken notion that a large number of church committees equates
to a large number of church members
in ministry involvement. Now is the time to shift from committees to ministry teams
if we do indeed desire more ministry involvement and action from people.
Ministry Teams Described
A direct result of ministry action is that ministry team members will create community
among themselves. As Kennon Callahan observes, "People search for community,
not for committees. People will put up with being
on committees to the extent that they have discovered community.”[1][i]
Effective
ministry teams create community. As ministry performance is expected and
accomplished, team members are bonded relationally. They have ministered
together in a common venture. They have delivered ministry and service to
others. This, in tum, builds self-confidence in personal ministry and esprit de
corps in team ministry.
Business Examples
Teams, derived originally from athletics, are being
advocated in business. Tom Peters,
a leader in contemporary business transformation, is a champion of
teams. He maintains that teams differ from committees in three vital aspects:
(1) teams have an outward
focus on the customer; (2) teams have both autonomy to determine how to accomplish
the work and accountability that
the work is actually accomplished; and (3) team members depend upon one another
for personal and company success.2
A quick glance
at the business shelves of many bookstores reveals abundant publications
concerning the use of teams in business. In one of these books, The Wisdom
of Teams, Jon Katzenbach and Douglas Smith expound on the characteristics of
successful teams, whether in sports, the military, or business:
l. be small
2.
have
adequate levels of complementary skills
3.
have a meaningful purpose
4.
set specific goals
5.
have a clear working approach
6.
maintain a sense of mutual
accountability3
The team concept
is flexible to many business situations. Entrepreneurial billionaire
Richard Branson has built his business empire called The Virgin Group around an
adaptation of the team concept. The Virgin Group currently consists of more than one hundred
self-sufficient companies, all of which are homegrown and kept small to allow more people to be involved in management.
Each company's employees (usually fifty to sixty persons) are an extended team whose members know one another's strengths
and weaknesses.4
As
mentioned in the author’s note, General Stanley McChrystal commanded the
Special Operations Task Force during the early years of the Iraq War. McChrystal
became increasingly frustrated with the results he was getting and realizing
the problem was not the dedication of the soldiers and sailors in the task
force, but rather he came to understand the dilemma facing him and his command
was how the task force was organized.
The task force was organized into a command-and-control
hierarchical structure whereas the Iraqi insurgents fashioned themselves into loosely
affiliated networks. So, McChrystal restructured the task force into hybrid organization
which featured the best of hierarchy and the best of networking facilitated by
daily electronic conferences reaching thousands of troops to share critical
information and tactics. As a result, the task force began to achieve the
expected results.
With his
retirement from the Army, McChrystal founded a consultancy firm to advocate for
the “Team of Teams” approach into civilian government and business. Both
McChrystal and Chris Fussell are the public faces of this advocacy. Their
efforts are described in Team of Teams and One Mission.
Church Examples
Considering
the benefits of teams in various ventures, it is quite natural that some innovative churches have adopted the ministry team concept. examples stand out.
First, Rick Warren, founding pastor
of Saddleback
Valley Community Church in Mission
Viejo, California, advocates mobilizing and releasing the laity based
upon these key principles:
"1. Every believer is a minister; 2. Every believer has a
different function; 3. Every
ministry is important; and 4. We are dependent upon each other."5
Second, Don
Cousins, assistant pastor of Willow Creek Community Church in South Barrington,
Illinois, describes the "fits" necessary for ministry teams to function effectively.
The first fit is the ministry fit; people doing
what God created them to do. Aspects of the ministry fit include spiritual
gifts, talents, temperaments, passion, personality, and background. The second
fit is the team fit; the relational glue among ministry team members. To
relate well together, team members
must like one another, be close, enjoy one another, work well together, benefit
mutually, and have right chemistry.6
While
utilizing the team concept from "day one," as Saddleback and Willow
Creek have done, is certainly easier than redesigning committees in a more
traditional church into
ministry teams, it is my belief that many long-established congregations that
desire to eliminate the command-and-control
mentality of the committee system can shift to the ministry team concept as the
basic foundation of their ministry. Let's look at some steps to accomplish this
shift, which I call the "Perfect Camel Plan."
Steps
Toward Ministry Teams
First, appoint a “point person” to shepherd the process to full implementation
and sustainability. This person may be a current staff member, a new minister to
the staff, or a even a volunteer. Regardless of the person appointed, that person’s
portfolio must direct the “point” to give a significant amount of time to the
process.
Second, determine which of your current committees truly set policy
for your congregation. For most churches there are perhaps three or four of these committees
(or boards— all-church cabinet, trustees, for example). Keep these committees
intact as is. I suggest, however, that the membership of each committee be
redesigned with each having six members elected for three years, two members elected each year.
Third,
redesign all other committees
into ministry teams, beginning with the Nominating Committee. It now becomes
the Ministry Mobilization Team (MMT) with enlarged responsibilities. Its chief function
is to match persons with ministry opportunities,
not to nominate people for vacant positions. The MMT needs to have enough
members to allow each to be a specialist in a significant, but manageable,
area of church life. Elect
MMT members for two or three years, one-half or one-third being elected
annually.
Fourth,
the MMT enlists and the church elects three core members for each of the other
newly redesigned ministry' teams. These
core members are church members. They select their own team chief and, in cooperation with the MMT, enlist other
church members and constituents (regularly attending nonmembers) to help them
accomplish their ministry projects. Consider indefinite terms for all team
members, allowing them to enter and exit the ministry as they discern God's
call. If terms are
deemed necessary, elect team core members for three years with one member
elected annually and allow
the other team members to have indefinite terms of service.
Ministry
teams are guided by the church’s vision/mission and supported by the church
budget. Each team prepares an annual plan of proposed projects and evaluates
each completed project. Each team’s performance is annually reviewed by the MMT
assisted by the church staff. If any team does not deliver effective ministry
service as determined by preexisting performance standards, it may be offered
special assistance, be designed, or in extreme situations, be eliminated.
In
large churches, teams can be grouped by affinities. Each affinity group (like
community ministries, for example) is coordinated by a council composed of the
team chiefs in the affinity group. Each council offers support and
encouragement to the affinity teams. Church staff persons serve as resource
persons and guides to the affinity councils.
Fifth,
redesign the church’s educational and music ministries into ministry teams with
their special qualities left intact. Moving in this direction is relatively
complex compared to redesigned committees so I recommend beginning with the
board, council, or committees coordinating these ministries and move into the
program ministries (for example, choirs, Sunday School) only after the new
ministry teams are effectively functioning.
Once
the process is structurally implanted, a church will then work on full implementation:
1.
Shared
vision for the church’s missional imperative
2.
Shared
mission for reaching the church’s particular ministry opportunities
3.
Flexibility
and speed in making a Gospel difference in the lives of people
Finally, remember that no redesigning of ministry is perfect. Any plan
that is to be effective must be personalized to each church's unique situation. I encourage
you as a church leader to dream how your committees can be redesigned for
effective ministry. If the "Perfect Camel Plan" is not for you, then
create your own! 
1Kennon Callahan, Twelve Keys to an Effective Church,
p 35.
2Tom Peters, Liberation Management: Necessary Disorganization
for the Nanosecond
Nineties,
p.
208.
3Jon R. Katzenbach and Douglas K. Smith, The Wisdom
of Teams: Creating the High Performance Organization, pp.
43-64.
4Echo Montgomery Garrett, "Branson
the Bold," Success, (November 1992), 21-26.
5Rick Warren, "Mobilizing and Releasing Lay
Ministry," The Pastor's Update, (October 1990), 3.
6Don Cousins, "Developing and Managing Leaders and
Staff," The Pastor's Update, (August 1990), 3.
Additional Resources
Fussell,
Chris with C.W. Goodyear. One Mission: How Leaders Build a Team of Teams (2017).