More Neglect

previous post, I argued that effective leaders know what they are uniquely gifted and called to do. Because of this, they are also willing to neglect the other demands for their time and attention. It’s not easy to master the discipline of neglect, but it is essential if a leader is going to move the organization forward. Otherwise, the leader will constantly be dealing with the tyranny of the urgent. A special case of this occurs in denominational settings. Unlike some, I’m not ready to give up on denominations. They have tremendous resources which can be a powerful force if used in the right ways. The challenge is that many denominational bodies, and their leaders, are trapped in an egalitarian mentality. What is that? It’s a belief that programs should be designed with all churches in mind. It’s an allocation of resources that is spread equally across all constituents. It’s what happens when staff members offer their time and expertise to everyone indiscriminately. There are two problems with this mindset. First, different churches and pastors have different needs. Offering the same thing to everyone will help very few. Now you may counter by saying that those who need it will avail themselves of the opportunity. Maybe, but maybe not. Some people are conference or program junkies – they’ll try everything. This points to the second problem. Many who “consume” these services will experience little if any measurable benefit. They may give great feedback and sign up for more, but if you look for meaningful results from their participation, you’ll often be disappointed. I believe that courageous and effective neglect by denominational leaders and their staffs is essential. Neglect means ignoring the cries from the many and focusing on the few. It means that having a deep impact with those few is far more valuable than having a shallow impact with many. It means being willing to say, “We’re going to invest our resources and energy in churches and leaders where we’ll see the greatest impact.” It means standing firm when critics argue that this isn’t fair. The critics may be right – is your goal to be fair and make everyone happy? Or is it to make a difference? If it’s the latter, consider some strategic neglect. It’s easy to receive my blogs by email. Just sign-up on Feedburner by clicking here.]]>