How Do We Empower the Next Generation of Leaders?

Summary

Summary prepared by Acts 2:38 Life from the transcript below — the preacher’s words follow in full.

Develop a team — succession as a culture, not an event

• The question posed (in the host's frame): a recent survey of upci ministers showed most of them past the age the preview names (the preview styles the proportion as a percentage). What can these seasoned leaders do, to prepare those who come next, for service? What should younger ministers be doing now, to prepare for the day, when it is their turn to lead? (The episode also carries an invitation, in Bernard's own voice, to the gathering it names — which stands verbatim-only, as episode furniture, not as part of the answer.) The host's question: in your book (the one the question names), you included a chapter titled 'planning for a successor'. And you open that chapter, by writing, that someone has said: to be successful, you must have a successor. And then you added: nowhere is this statement more applicable, than in pastoral Ministry. The reality is — is — no matter what Ministry we're in, none of us will be in that Ministry forever. I was looking at a recent survey, of upci ministers (the question carries its figures — the count of credentialed ministers, and the proportion of them past that age). And while we're not trying to push anybody off the scene, I think you've pointed out: it's wise, to plan for that inevitable day, when we're no longer around. What advice, then, would you have to offer, to those who are looking — that at some point, in the future, they're going to need to pass that Ministry baton? What words of advice would you have, to those leaders? And then, what words of wisdom do you have, for younger leaders, who may be charged with running that next leg of the race? The answer: that's an important question. And I think perhaps even asking the question, discussing it, is a big part of what we're talking about. We're trying to create a culture, of team leadership, and transfer of leadership. So: when you're developing a team, then it's easier to think of a successor. If you're a solo leader, then it's hard to think of one person replacing you — or when you want that to happen. And more broadly: my book, spiritual leadership in the 21st century (as titled), talks about leadership, and principles of leadership. It talks about how you should develop a team. How you should be a servant leader. How you should develop a culture, of sharing Authority, and responsibility — or delegating. The goal of the leader is not to do everything, but to develop a team, that together — they can do what's needed. So once you start thinking in those terms, then it becomes a little easier, to think about a successor. Because — just a natural outgrowth, of what you're doing now ('because just a natural outgrowth', as the letters stand). And by the way: Gary Tracy, one of our senior ministers, has an excellent book, on planning for a successor, that I highly recommend. And he does the same thing I'm doing here: not only does he talk specifically, about how to make a transition — which he did, with Aaron Bachelor, here in the St Louis area — but he talks about the principles of leadership. Because really, you can't just separate this discussion, from the overall concept, of being a servant leader, a team leader, a leader who delegates, a leader who shares. Then it flows naturally. And if you don't have that style of leadership, it becomes very difficult. So I would say, first of all, for a senior leader: even long before you're planning a specific transition, you should develop this style of leadership, where you delegate, where you share, where you Mentor. Where — in — when my wife and I started the church, in Austin, we had to start just about every department, and Lead it, to begin with. But from the beginning, our goal was to work ourselves out of a job, so that we could do something else. So we were constantly — she — my wife was the first music director, the first ladies leader. I was the first Outreach director. But I was the first men's leader, so to speak, such as it was. But in each case, we weren't trying to hold on to that position. We were trying to develop someone else, to give that position to. So we could focus, on more directly our task. Or so that we could start the next Ministry. And so we're in a constant growth mode, or transition mode. So: long before you're actually needing a successor, you start developing leaders, under you. A constant culture of discipleship, in the church — followed by a constant culture of leadership, trying to elevate leaders. And so you use assistants, even when you don't need them ('you use assistance even when you don't need them', as heard). Even when you can do everything yourself, you divide up your job, and say: okay, what can — and only I — do, right now, and I must focus on that? But if it's something that someone else can do, I need to share it. And even if they can't do it as well as I can — if they can do it 75, or 80, or I could train them to the point they can, probably — that's good enough. So, for example: maybe I'm the best Bible study teacher. But I can't teach 20 Bible studies. So if I have to be the only Bible study teacher ('the only Bible study to try', as heard), I'm going to limit myself. But if I can train others, then there's no limit, to how many Bible studies our church can teach. Oh: maybe I'm the best preacher. But if I have to be the only preacher, then there are only so many nursing home services, and jail services, and youth services, and so on ('and Etc', as spoken), that I can preach. But if I develop a team, there's no limit, to how many services we can conduct.

Assistants become a pool — and the transition plan belongs in writing

• So when you're thinking like that, you're — you — you have people who assist you. And you have an assistant. And you may not even necessarily designate them, as your successor. And you may not tell them, that they might be your successor. But the very fact, that they're assisting you, and shadowing you ('and shattering you', as heard), and sharing in you. And what I try to do, with assistants ('with assistance', as heard), is not just have them fulfill my commands. But I — I shared what I was trying to do. I shared the philosophy, the concept. I gave them authority, to do things their way. But I wanted them to understand, what I was doing, and why I was doing it. So they could take initiative. One day, they're their own leader. They might — wouldn't — do things exactly like I would. But at least they would know, what I did, and why I did it. They would have something to gauge, or judge, by. And so: if you — as a senior leader — if you can develop several assistants ('develop several assistance', as heard), either simultaneously, or over time, then that becomes a pool, of future leadership. So when it — when it comes more closely, to make a transition, you've already got options. And it's not necessary, to every case ('it's not necessary to every case', as spoken), that you would designate your successor. For example: I'm general superintendent. But I don't necessarily intend, to try to figure out, who my successor should be. But I hope to involve other leaders, around me, who are already serving, in high capacities, on a district or general level. And work closely with them. Give them opportunities. Give them exposure. Share My Philosophy. Give them jobs to do. In hopes that that will give people experience, training, exposure. And the fellowship will have — well, first of all, there will be a pool of leaders, who are capable. And also, that the fellowship — the constituency — will have some options, that are visible to them. Well: any — even a local church, you can do that. Although at some point, you may identify, and narrow it down, to a successor. But you could have a pool of people, who have assisted you. Pool of guest ministers, who have come frequently. Who have been in partnership with you ('who have been a in Sign partner with you', as the letters stand), in growing the church, and inspiring the church. So that, if something happened unexpectedly, or prematurely — even if you didn't have a designated successor — you would have several qualified people, associated with the church, whom the constituency could think about. And then, as you become close to the end of your tenure, very possibly, you would want to identify a successor, and have a plan. And then there should be a transition plan. And I recommend, on both sides, that it should be in writing. And that there should be a timeline. And that it should not be too long, of a timeline. Because what I've found is: people may develop a plan, and talk about it, and they trust one another, but they don't put it in writing. And then, a year later, they have different Recollections, or opinions. Or circumstances have changed. And one person is mentally adjusted, but the other person hasn't. Or what sometimes happened: a senior Minister recognizes: I don't have the stamina, or the health. Or: I'm nearing the end of my time. I want some time, to do other things. Maybe I still want to be active in Ministry. But I don't want to be tied down, to daily responsibilities, of counseling, and decision making. And so I need a younger person, to come. And I'll — I'll promise them, that they can be my successor, in a couple years. Well: then the younger person comes, with fresh Vision, excitement, strength, hard work. And the church starts exploding, numerically, or spiritually, or both. And then the senior guy thinks: we — you know — why was I thinking this was so hard? Well, how was I thinking, that I'm finished? Well, I could keep going like this, for 10 years. But the guy who's come on, isn't thinking, waiting 10 years. So that's why I believe: you need to have a plan, in writing. And, in the context of a local church, I recommend sharing with the church board, getting buy-in. Because I do believe: the people should have a share. It should be shared governance. So the people should be part of the process. It shouldn't be a unilateral process. But the people should have a say, in who their Pastor will be, and who the successor Pastor would be. So it should be a joint effort, of pastor, church board, congregation. Should be a defined plan.

Counsel to the incoming leader — honor, and 'he must increase'

• And for someone who's on the receiving end: I would advise, that you have a definite plan. But you come to honor, to respect. Not to challenge. Not to force. And even when the leadership has turned to you, you still honor, respect. Don't make sudden, rapid change. Especially of the kind, that would cast aspersions on previous leadership ('cast dispersions', as heard). You're always going to do some things different. But doesn't mean it has to be better, or worse. It's just different. So you don't have to disparage another leader, to establish your own leadership. Don't force people, to choose loyalty to your predecessor, versus loyalty to you. You allow them to do both. And you build, through relationship, through influence, through service, through love. People naturally shift their primary loyalties, to you — without you having to enforce it. And so it can become a natural process. Ideally, when both leaders are working together, there will be inevitable differences, or hitches, or certain people who object. But if the two work together, they can overcome the obstacles, and make a smooth transition. It has to become, where we lessen our ego. And we have our confidence, in what we've done for God, and who we are in God, and not in our particular role. We need to have the attitude, when the time comes, as John the Baptist said of Jesus: he must increase, but I must decrease (the saying is priced in the refs note: the sayer is named, and his words are delivered entire, but no book is designated, so no entry is made). So: I recognize transition is coming. I prepare for it. I facilitate it. I get myself out of the position, so the next person can really fulfill the mission, that God has given him.