Please Stop Herding Me

by: Geoff Surratt

1

Tweet

As I said in my previous post, I think the primary business of the church is the Moving Business. We are called to help people move from where they are to where God is calling them. Today I’d like to share a contrast and a prediction. First the contrast.

Moving vs Herding

We are in the Moving Business, not the Herding Business. The Herding Business gets the livestock to go where the leader decides they need to go. There is a pre-determined destination for the herd; the individual isn’t important. The goal is to move as many animals (members, attenders, cattle) from point A to point B as efficiently as possible.The challenge is to protect my herd from poachers, who have a different destination in mind, while moving them closer to my end point.

In the Moving Business the goal is to move the individual toward their destination, not necessarily the destination the leader chooses. Almost everyone has a different destination, so there is no “one size fits all” ministry package. The Moving Business is much slower and more complicated than the Herding Business. The Moving Business is only effective when the herd is broken down into much smaller groups with many more leaders; each individual needs a leader who will help them move toward their God-ordained destination. While connection to the herd is important, these smaller groups are where the actual moving is accomplished.

The Moving Business has huge, untapped potential

Jesus demonstrated the Moving Business approach when he called his first disciples. He pointed them toward their God-given destination as fishers of men and then spent three years teaching them to fish. Although Jesus attracted crowds and taught the masses, his primary focus was moving 12 men toward their God-given destinations. Jesus final act as he wrapped up his mission on earth in John 21 was reminding Peter of the primacy and individual nature of his mission.

John 21:22 (ESV) Jesus said to him, “If it is my will that he remain until I come, what is that to you? You follow me!”

The Moving Business has potential for exponential growth. People desperately want to know how to find the way to their God-given destination. Rick Warren sold 60 million copies of “Purpose Driven Live” because of this drive. Joel Osteen’s “Your Best Life Now” addressed the same topic from a different angle. Even “The Secret” by Rhonda Byrne appeals to this desire. A church that delivers on the promise to help people discover and find their way to their true God-ordained destination won’t be able to contain the growth.

To see this kind of impact, however, a church has to change businesses. Educating, warehousing, entertaining and herding become secondary, and they refocus their energy and resources on the Moving Business. The key activity becomes equipping leaders to help people discover and move toward their God-given destination. The Moving Business is all-encompassing but hugely rewarding.

Read more from Geoff here.

Tags: Geoff Surratt, Recasting Vision, Vision Clarity, Vision Frame

| What is MyVisionRoom? > | Back to Vision >

Eleven Things Your Church Can Learn from the Airport

by: Seth Godin

0

Tweet

[Of course, this post isn’t actually about airports].

I realized that I don’t dislike flying–I dislike airports. There are so many things we can learn from what they do wrong:

1. No one is in charge. The airport doesn’t appear to have a CEO, and if it does, you never see her, hear about her or interact with her in any way. When the person at the top doesn’t care, it filters down.
2. Problems persist because organizations defend their turf instead of embrace the problem. The TSA blames the facilities people, who blame someone else, and around and around. Only when the user’s problem is the driver of behavior (as opposed to maintaining power or the status quo) things change.
3. The food is aimed squarely at the (disappearing) middle of the market. People who like steamed meat and bags of chips never have a problem finding something to eat at an airport. Apparently, profit-maximizing vendors haven’t realized that we’re all a lot weirder than we used to be.
4. Like colleges, airports see customers as powerless transients. Hey, you’re going to be gone tomorrow, but they’ll still be here.
5. By removing slack, airlines create failure. In order to increase profit, airlines work hard to get the maximum number of flights out of each plane, each day. As a result, there are no spares, no downtime and no resilience. By assuming that their customer base prefers to save money, not anxiety, they create an anxiety-filled system.
6. The TSA is ruled by superstition, not fact. They act without data and put on a quite serious but ultimately useless bit of theater. Ten years later, the theater is now becoming an entrenched status quo, one that gets ever worse.
7. The ad hoc is forbidden. Imagine an airplane employee bringing in an extension cord and a power strip to deal with the daily occurrence of travelers hunched in the corner around a single outlet. Impossible. There is a bias toward permanent and improved, not quick and effective.
8. Everyone is treated the same. Effective organizations treat different people differently. While there’s some window dressing at the edges (I’m thinking of slightly faster first class lines and slightly more convenient motorized cars for seniors), in general, airports insist that the one size they’ve chosen to offer fit all.
9. There are plenty of potential bad surprises, but no good ones. You can have a flight be cancelled, be strip searched or even go to the wrong airport. But all possibility for delight has been removed. It wouldn’t take much to completely transform the experience from a chore to a delight.
10. They are sterile. Everyone who passes through leaves no trace, every morning starts anew. There are no connections between people, either fellow passengers or the staff. No one says, “welcome back,” and that’s honest, because no one feels particularly welcome.
11. No one is having any fun. Most people who work at airports have precisely the same demeanor as people who work at a cemetery. The system has become so industrialized that personal expression is apparently forbidden.

As we see at many organizations that end up like this, the airport mistakes its market domination for a you-have-no-choice monopoly (we do have a choice, we stay home). And in pursuit of reliable, predictable outcomes, these organizations dehumanize everything, pretending it will increase profits, when it actually does exactly the opposite.

Tags: Recasting Vision, Seth Godin, Vision Frame

| What is MyVisionRoom? > | Back to Vision >

How (Not) to Inspire a Shared Vision

by: Chad Hall

0

Tweet

Like millions of other Americans, I tuned in to hear President Obama’s second inaugural address.  The President is rightly admired for his strong oratory skills and ability to use communication as an effective leadership skill.  That’s why I was so disappointed in the speech.  While there were parts of the speech that resonated with me, overall I thought it landed flat.  As I reflected on my disappointment, I realized that the President had not inspired a shared vision.

If you lead within a church, a ministry, a non-profit, a business or a community, you must be able to communicate in order to lead.  As part of the communication responsibility, every leader must be able to inspire a shared vision.  An inspired vision pulls people forward.  It projects a clear image of a possible future and generates energy to strive toward the destination.

I think the President’s address can help us better understand how to inspire a shared vision.  Here are five components of an inspiring vision (adapted from Kouzes and Posner’s The Leadership Challenge) along with my two cents on how the President performed on each:

1. An inspiring vision shares an IDEAL.  An ideal is a high standard to aspire to, an ennobling purpose and greater good we are seeking.    What followers need from our leaders is not a laundry list of ideals, but a single high standard to which we want to aspire.
2. An inspiring vision is UNIQUE, it creates healthy pride in being different by creating an identity that is extraordinary.  An inspired vision helps followers know how we are collectively unique, singular, and unequaled.
3. An inspiring vision uses IMAGE to make concepts tangible through descriptive language.   Word pictures, stories and symbols help make the vision more memorable and compelling. When a vision lacks true focus, the use of many images prevents the vision from being memorable.
4. An inspiring vision is FUTURE-ORIENTED, looking toward a destination.  Visions describe an exciting possibility for the future and stretch our minds out into the future and asks us to dream.
5. An inspiring vision is built around a COMMON GOOD, a way people can come together.  Visions are about developing a shared sense of destiny.  Followers must be able to see themselves and their interests served in the vision; they must see how they are a part of the vision in order to enlist others in it.

So how well do you think the President inspired a shared vision?  What worked and what missed the mark?  And what are some examples of leaders who did a masterful job of inspiring a shared vision?

Read the full article here.

Read more from Chad here.

Tags: Chad Hall, Recasting Vision, Vision, Vision Clarity

| What is MyVisionRoom? > | Back to Vision >

The Art of Vision

by: ND Strupler

0

Tweet

VISION = a preferred future – everybody has vision = HOPE

What vision can do for you

• it gives you a clear picture of what you want and what not.
• the clearer the vision, the easier to say yes or no.

What vision can do for people around you

• it gives purpose
• it gives belonging
• it gives meaning
• it gives direction

Creating a vision

• keep it simple (it takes time to make it simple)
• it needs to be memorable = portable
• it can’t be complete (the larger the audience the simpler the vision)

Communicating a Vision

• repeat it (everybody needs to know the vision in order to have every job motivated)

Careful If you want to create a complete vision statement, it will be too long. If you say everything you say nothing. Here are two good examples

• Bono: make poverty history!

As a rock star, I have two instincts, I want to have fun, and I want to change the world. I have a chance to do both. Bono

• Obama: Yes we can!

Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we’ve been waiting for. We are the change that we seek. Barak Obama

I often hear leader say: “my people are not motivated, not committed”. It’s only because vision is not comunnicated clearly and often enough.

A vision needs to be emotional

• what is the problem?
• what could the future look like?

Practical

• produce a 120 sec. video with your vision
• stand in front of people and say what you see (again and again)
• live your vision (smoke what you sell)

Read more from ND here.

Tags: ND Strupler, Recasting Vision, Vision Frame

| What is MyVisionRoom? > | Back to Vision >

The Four Stages of Visionary Leadership

by: Will Mancini

2

Tweet

I have reflected over a decade on the question of how visionaries develop. These are some initial thoughts that I want to share with blog readers as I think out loud a bit. I would really appreciate your comments and input toward the development of these ideas.

Stage One: VISION CATCHING

Every visionary leaders starts by following someone else’s vision. Here, the fundamental practice of following well precedes and develops the ability to lead well. During this time, a future visionary learns to submit to godly authority. In this stage the future visionary’s style is shaped by the strengths and limitation of the lead visionary. Strengths provide a foundational modeling opportunity. Limitations and weakness forge convictions that will eventually shape the values of the future leader.

Stage Two VISION CASTING

Eventually the visionary leader starts casting vision themselves. There are three nuances of how this vision relates to the the prior vision-catching content. In other words, most of early vision casting is found “underneath” the vision of a leader and/or organization of the developing visionary. The visionary casts vision: a) in support of, b) in relation to, and finally c) in contrast with.

• In Support Of: The first practice is recasting the vision that already exists. The visionary is articulating and communicating what was given to them. The art of communication is matured as commitment, passion and ownership of the vision progresses. For example, a student pastor shares the greater vision of the church he has been serving for the last two years with his seminary buddies.

• In Relation To: Eventually the emerging visionary will create and develop their own initiatives or ministry models within the larger vision. This mini-step takes the art of visionary leadership to a new level. As a visionary leader “builds” within their “domain” of the larger ministry they are responsible to relate what they are doing to the bigger picture. That is, they are advancing and enhancing the vision that they “caught” by casting new vision for their team, event, group, area or department. Our student pastor, for example, is recruiting two dozen new volunteer leaders for a high-school, gospel saturation strategy he developed. This strategy and mini-vision is developed in concert with the broader church vision.

• In Contrast With: This is the positive step of beginning to sense a shift in calling or being attracted to a new ministry vehicle. While this is not an eventual reality for all visionary leaders it will happen for many of them. And by the way, it’s difficult for many senior leaders to watch this happen without sensing betrayal or hurt. This is normal. Yet from God’s perspective, isn’t it natural that a strong emerging visionary will develop completely a new “holy discontent?” Won’t he see new problems and want to find new solutions? The term “in contrast with” is helpful because oftentimes in the mind of the developing visionary, the language of the new is contrasted with and compared to the existing vision. (Hence we talk about missional vs. attractional approaches  or going to unreached people groups vs. growing an existing flock.) For example the student pastor starts dreaming of planting a different kind of church in contrast with the vision he has been serving in.

Stage Three: VISION CARRYING

At this pivotal place, the vision casting stage has matured to a point of full ownership, most often embodied by the senior position or lead role. Hence, not every visionary leaders reaches this point. And it is wrong, in my opinion, to expect that all visionary leaders should aspire to. (Or we would have not visionary second-chair leaders or visionary teams.)

The greatest experiential difference for the vision carrier is the increasing awareness that the vision came from God not himself. Over time, a greater convergence of spiritual maturity, life circumstances, and divine relationships unveil how little the vision truly emerged from within. Eventually he sees how God was orchestrating the events of life to the point that he knows that God himself gave him a vision to carry. Of course his practice of vision-casting hits full-bloom as the vision grows and expands from an ever-strengthening identity and awareness of God calling.

Stage Four: DESTINY STEWARDING

The final stage is one that fewer leaders reach because it is found only with unusual favor AND demonstrated success as a vision carrier over a long time. The success builds a platform of extraordinary influence beyond what was ever imagined. Hence, I believe this stage is experience by leaders in or after their fifties. The feeling of “carrying” a vision for a time, which is in itself a stewardship, moves to an even greater awareness of unplanned, yet God-ordained impact. For the best leaders, this enables them to guard a humble spirit and embrace a broader influence. For example the student pastor plants a church that becomes a church planting movement, or or transforms a city or adopts an unreached people group. At this stage, decades of vision carrying are seen from a different and more enlightened perspective.

At this stage it’s easy for current names to come to mind like Rick Warren or Bill Hybels or T.D. Jakes or Mark Driscoll or Andy Stanley. But I believe there are thousands and thousands of leaders who reach this point, that we will never read about. Despite tremendous impact, they steward a more silent destiny.

So how do you react to this initial framing of these stages? Specifically how does this match up to your personal experience? What would you add or tweak or take away?  Thanks for considering a response.

Read more from Will here.

Tags: Recasting Vision, Vision Clarity, Will Mancini

| What is MyVisionRoom? > | Back to Leadership >

Favorite New Year’s Planning Posts for Church Leaders

by: Will Mancini

0

Tweet

Your favorite posts on my blog have often come during the New Year window. And I always enjoy creating new content at this time year just for you.

Here are some top posts from my last five years blogging. All of these were created from a New Year planning perspective:

Clarity 101: Goals, Vision, Planning…Blah, Blah, Blah

I wrote this post because people often misunderstand the importance of 30,000 foot, bigger picture clarity before jumping into the daily stuff. AND so much content focuses on the daily stuff.

Church Vision and Strategy Trends

In 2011, I wrote a post that is just as relevant two years later. This post was subsequently picked up by most leadership magazines and online blog aggregators including ChurchLeaders.com and Pastors.com

11 High-Impact Planning Ideas for Senior Pastors

I wrote this post to give some practical ideas to lead pastors. Have you seen it? What are you planning to do new in 2013?

Taking Vision Public: Six Steps to Vision Soaked Communication

This is actually a robust series that I wrote for New Years last year. It is useful for any pastor, but especially those have any responsibility for church communications.  Be sure to read through each post in the series. And, why not send to a friend who is specifically involved in church communications!

Happy New Year my ministry friends!!!  As always, thank you for taking time to swing by the blog.

Read more from Will here.

Tags: Planning, Recasting Vision, Will Mancini

| What is MyVisionRoom? > | Back to Leadership >

Neighborhood Transitions and the Local Church, Part 4

by: Ed Stetzer

0

Tweet

So far we’ve looked at two options churches typically consider when the neighborhood in which they are located goes through change. The first was to to create a true multicultural church. Those options are often the most common, especially relocating, but they also leave out a third scenario which is becoming more common in large metropolitan culture: multilingual neighborhood churches.

I should add that these are broad categories. You could start another campus, relocate part of the congregation, and be a multilingual multisite. Or, you should move to multicultural ministry AND have language congregations as well. You get the point– these are broad categories.

However, if the community transition is dealing with more distant cultures that speak different languages, an important third response is to create a multilingual church or different congregations meeting in the same buidling (and, better yet, part of the same church).

I once preached at a church in Boston that had five languages represented in the church. They had a multilingual church with different language congregations. In the midst of this, however, they were clearly one, unified church They shared an elder board containing people from each of the congregations who prayed together, worked together, and led together along the way.

I think that the best scenario is not relocation (option 1), though I understand there are times and situations when that it the best thing to do– and congregations need to listen to the leadership of the Lord. The church is not a building and, if the church has moved far from its building, something has to be done with the building. So, if you relocate, start another church and ministry in the building the Lord gave you.

However, I think multicultural transition is a better choice, either in one multicultural congregation (option 2) or in multiple congregations in one facility or (even better) one church (option 3). With that in mind, let me conclude with some thoughts that are applicable to both options 2 and 3.

Practically speaking, how can this pursuit for a genuine multicultural community in a transitional neighborhood be accomplished? Based on my own limited experience, and more broad experience researching and consulting with churches, I see five foundational steps:

1. Begin to build leadership reflective of the community. When we were planting our church in Buffalo, our neighborhood was about 40 percent African-American, 30 percent Anglo, and the rest was a mix of other races. We tried to model those percentages in our leadership from the very beginning. The community responded.
2. Intentionally engage ethnicities present. Multicultural engagement will not happen by accident. A strategic plan should be created. Intentionally seek sufficient knowledge and background about the culture from someone who knows this information.
3. Move beyond tokenism and give actual representative leadership.Disingenuity will be spotted a mile away. Multicultural leadership must be present across the church: in worship, administration, and teaching to name a few areas.
4. Consider calling a pastor that is reflective of the predominant ethnicity of the community. Ultimately, it is God’s call who to place as pastor, but be intentional, however, to broaden the search to include candidates from a number of different backgrounds.
5. Reflect the values of the Kingdom of God. Above all else, our church, and the people that make it up, needs to be a picture of Heaven on Earth. Only through God’s grace, love, and guidance can this kind of miracle happen. I can’t think of too many other images that can better illustrate what Jesus Christ can do in the hearts and minds of people who love Him first and each other second.

Since pursuing a multicultural setting goes against individuals’ natural tendencies toward homogeneity, church growth WILL be slower. Nevertheless, when God gives the opportunity to move to multiculturalism, take the risk and make the commitment. When changed lives are the fruit, it’s worth it.

This is the final post in a series of 4; read the rest here: Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3.

Read more from Ed here.

Tags: Ed Stetzer, Local Predicament, Multicultural, Recasting Vision

| What is MyVisionRoom? > | Back to Vision >

Dealing with Neighborhood Transitions in Your Church, Part 3

by: Ed Stetzer

0

Tweet

Over the past few weeks, I’ve been discussing neighborhood transitions and what to do when a church and its community no longer share a socio-economic or ethnic makeup. Last week we looked at relocation as an option. While I do not think this is the best answer, it’s quite possibly the most frequent for churches. If you are going to do it, I suggested a few things to consider.

This week, we turn our attention to the hard work and commitment required to create a multicultural church. That, I think, is a better course of action.

While a neighborhood transition is a fantastic opportunity to create a multicultural church, most people who call for this have never actually been in, much less have successfully built, a multicultural church. Juan Sanchez has written a pair of blog posts about multicultural worship and multi-ethnic congregations here on the blog in the past few months. While his church didn’t face these exact circumstances, he provides some helpful suggestions.

First, we must understand that a multicultural church is a lot more than simply getting someone who is African-American by background, Latino by background and Asian by background and proudly saying, “We’re multicultural.”

If all those people live in the same geographic area, listen to the same music, and go to the same movie theaters and restaurants, they do not reflect true multiculturalism– where there is intentional embrace of cultures, not just the presence of people who come from certain ethnic backgrounds. More accurately, such churches reflect a mono-culture with different racial and ethnic backgrounds represented. This is not to belittle this development. I praise God for the development of churches containing multiple races and ethnicities.

However, to be truly multicultural, however, takes a lot more work. Now, I should not say that I am the expert on the subject– others have written more articulately on the subject. However, what I’ve learned personally was from a planting a multicultural church among the urban poor in the inner city of Buffalo, New York.

We learned a few things there, but a subsequent study illustrated more.

Here are a few things to consider (which I will flesh out later) on the transition:

1. A church needs a vision for a multicultural future— a passion to reflect the Kingdom in this way.
2. Leadership needs to embrace and model the change— including creating a multicultural leadership team.
3. Churches need to prepare for the challenges, conflicts, and opportunities that such transitions provide.

A multicultural church is more work than you think– everyone likes the hypothetical idea and complains about the lack of multiculturalism in the church, but are often not willing to make the transitions and pay the price needed.

We’ll talk more about them in the next post.

Read Part 2 of the series here; read Part 4 here.

Read more from Ed here.

Tags: Ed Stetzer, Local Predicament, Multicultural, Recasting Vision

| What is MyVisionRoom? > | Back to Vision >

Dealing with Neighborhood Transitions in Your Church, Part 2

by: Ed Stetzer

1

Tweet

We began a series last week dealing with the transitions churches go through in their life cycle as the community around them begins to change. As I stated last week, I see three primary options:

• congregational relocation to a context more in line with their congregation,
• intentional multicultural integration in one congregation, or
• multi-congregational partnership in one building.

When faced with neighborhood transition, a change in which some people have transitioned in and some people have transitioned out, one response often attempted is to relocate the building. Though this model sounds offensive to some, if the church body primarily consists of the people who have transitioned out of the community, why not start a new church that reflects the community where they once were? Since we believe theologically that people comprise the church, then, in all actuality, the church relocated long before.

In other words, when you move a church building, you often are simply moving the location where the church gathers (its new building location) to where the church lives (the people of the church live in a new place).

Other than church death, this may be the most common response to a transitioning neighborhood– especially when the neighborhood transition occurs in urban areas. I know of many congregations (and you likely do as well) who have relocated from historic urban settings to suburban ones within the last decade or two. I can think of several “Main Street Methodist” or “Elm Street Baptist” churches which are no longer on Main Street or Elm Street. They have kept their name, but not their location.

Sometimes these moves are for logistical reasons: both land and parking in urban centers are at a premium. Often congregations simply outgrow their space and moving is the logical response. However, more often than not, it is because the make-up of neighborhood no longer reflects that of the congregation. That requires a look at motivation and mission.

This is typically the genesis of the “should we really relocate the church?” discussion, and leads to the real question of “What are we going to do with the fact that the church has already relocated and yet its building remains in another community?” The real issue here is that we have tied our churches (gathered people) with buildings (sacred places), so when our people move and our buildings don’t, there is trouble.

I wish I had a hard and fast answer to those questions, but I don’t. Every church has a different set of circumstances and every church has a different type of people. I’d like to think most churches would embrace their local community and reach those around them. As such, relocation is not my first choice, but rather intentional multiculural transition is– which I will address soon. However, relocation is the most common choice (for surviving churches), and it can be done well.

My recommendation to churches contemplating a relocation is to consider five steps.

First, check your motives for relocation. When relocating a church, if your desire if simply to get away from the “undesirable,” you need to reconsider. Actually, you need to repent. God may have you there for a reason. Relocation to get away from people simply because they are different from you (culture, ethnicity, color, customs, etc.) is wrong. (I’ll have more to say on that later.)

Second, a relocating church must decide that their building is a tool for the gospel. (It’s a tool, not the goal, so make sure someone else gets use of the tool God gave you for awhile.) If a congregation is going to relocate its meeting space, it can (and should) ask, “How can we help another congregation start or thrive in our former space?” That might be an intentional church plant that is reaching, for example, a Korean population that has moved into the community.

Third, if some of the church members are not relocating, you might consider leaving behind a church plant that reflects its emerging context and community. This is particularly helpful when some of the members did not move to the new area and they want to be a part of a church where they live. They become core members along with your local leaders who are more reflective of the ethnicity there.

Fourth, you might also consider another location– going multisite-– and working through the wonderful opportunity to learn from other cultures and customs.

Fifth, a relocating church needs to engage its new community from the start– evangelizing, serving, engaging, etc. This will be a test– a church fleeing from one community often simply is looking for a place where they can remain customers of the religious goods and services they formerly received at their own location. The motives for moving were wrong, and that becomes evident when they don’t engage where they are going.

Relocation is always difficult. It is often (though not always) a retreat from a mission opportunity in a changed culture and context, engaging new ethnicities and peoples. However, there are times when it is simply acknowledgement that the church has ALREADY moved, and the meeting place needs to be near the living place.

What about you? Have you seen good relocations? What are you thoughts about relocations in general?

Read Part 1 of the series here; read part 3 of the series here.

Read more from Ed here.

Tags: Ed Stetzer, Local Predicament, Recasting Vision

| What is MyVisionRoom? > | Back to Vision >

The Vision Vacuum

by: Nicole Unice

0

Tweet

In my nine years of parenting, I’ve attended some really bad kid’s birthday parties. In my years in ministry, I’ve also participated (and lead) awkward small groups. I’ve been on volunteer ministry teams that didn’t accomplish much. And I’ve held jobs where I spent more time frustrated than fulfilled. The experiences were painful in different ways, but they had one thing in common: they all lacked vision.

For example, let’s consider the bad birthday party. During one of those experiences, I observed the group dynamics of a gaggle of preschoolers. Although there were clearly fun things available, there wasn’t any sense of direction. No one led the kids into a plan. No one helped them experience the fun together. Some kids clumped together in packs and began fighting. Some wandered aimlessly, loners outside of the group. And none of them really had much fun at all. The party didn’t lack the essential elements of a good time–it just lacked vision.

The party debacle reminded me of Matthew 9:36, when Jesus had compassion on the people because they were “harassed and helpless, like a sheep without a shepherd.” Yep, I just applied that to a preschool birthday party, a vision-less, shepherd-less experience for everyone. And that same concept applies to your work today.

Most churches and organizations have overarching vision statements, but as leaders, we can underestimate the need for vision in everything we shepherd. Perhaps you can tell me about your big vision in your church or company, but can you tell me about your vision for today’s staff meeting? Maybe you have a sense of what your manager or senior pastor believes is the vision of your team, but can you tell me about your vision for the event you are holding next month?

What that bad kid’s birthday party reinforced in me is that my primary role as a leader is to spark and maintain vision. Here’s a few ways you can apply that today:

1. The Hook: Start off meetings or emails with a personal story. Use the story to hook back into the vision of your program. Most people are motivated when they know their work makes a difference, but you are responsible for communicating these connections. This can help us all keep the “main thing the main thing.”

2. Rigorous Pruning: As a leader, we must ask ourselves the hard questions. Does what we are doing actually accomplish the vision? Even if no one is talking about it, they are certainly thinking about it. Lead with courage, and prune projects and programs that aren’t accomplishing the vision.

3. Careful Tending: In order to lead with vision, I must carefully tend my own soul. The more vision-casting that’s required of me, the more solitude and prayer I require. Being the vision-holder is a tiresome job, no matter how much you believe in what you are doing.

4. Repeat with Diligence: Although your vision may be very clear and present to you, it’s never as clear or present in your team. Never assume that your team knows what you are after without a reminder. Spark the vision. Maintain the vision. Repeat.

Not only do we need vision for the work we do, we need vision for the life we live. In ministry, we all have the temptation of becoming reactive. I asked a co-worker recently about his workload, and he admitted he can lose a day (or more!) each week merely answering email.

We need personal vision. What is the most important thing you do? How do you prioritize? When should you say no in order to say yes to the most critical needs of your soul? If you are operating in a personal vision vacuum, today might be a day to spend some time refreshing yourself on what matters most to God, and what he’s gifted you to do. Tend your soul, tend to your team, and remember…even your kid’s birthday party needs vision.

Read more from Nicole here.

Tags: Nicole Unice, Recasting Vision, Vision Frame

| What is MyVisionRoom? > | Back to Vision >