Honesty is at the heart of organizational execution.17 In order for churches to enter the process of revitalization, they must first come face to face with the reality of the
13Herrington, Bonem, and Furr, Leading Congregational Change, 40.
14Ibid., 37.
15Ibid., 39.
16Ibid.
17Larry Bossidy, Ram Charan, and Charles Burck, Execution: The Discipline of
health of the church. Churches will often fail to face the reality of decline and will
continue doing the same programs year after year. Even mediocre success will blind them to the reality of the slow decline.
Brian Croft, in the book Biblical Church Revitalization, writes, “If you are a pastor trying to revitalize a church holding to the hope suffering will not come, you should find another line of work now.”18 The leader is choosing to expose the blind spots and ugly parts of the organization; a process that tends be incredibly offensive to the people who have been a long-term part of the organization. For many, the leader speaking the harsh truth of reality will be heard as a personal attack, opening the door for backlash and opposition. However, it is imperative that the leader exposes and confronts the culture before any change can occur.
In a church, the confrontation will involve the pastor addressing the ‘hidden’
crisis as well as the sins that have been ignored for the sake of maintaining membership numbers or simply maintaining an illusion of peace and harmony. Croft writes, “There are plenty of battles to fight. The key is knowing what needs to be fought now and what needs to wait.”19 The problems and sins within the culture are not confronted, the entire organization pays for it; small issues begin to take form and shape and grow strong roots.
Churches are filled with both pastors and members who try to avoid or hide from reality. Facing reality is a crucial but often neglected element of cultural change.
Leaders do not want to face the reality of decline because it makes the situation even more uncomfortable. Sometimes leaders are in denial or are afraid to admit that they do not have the answer to the problem, or even worse, that they are the problem. However, in order for the organization to flourish, the leadership must come to a realistic view of
Getting Things Done (London: Random House, 2011), 67.
18Croft and Reeder, Biblical Church Revitalization, 47.
19Ibid., 48.
the organization, and then attempt to move forward with practical solutions.
Unfortunately, most leaders struggle to communicate their organizational strengths and weaknesses. Often, they can describe their strengths but have a hard time describing their weaknesses. If they are able to describe them, they often do not have realistic or practical solutions to make them better. Having a leader with a realistic view of strengths and weaknesses is essential to making realism a part of the larger
organization. His commitment to realism helps to ensure that realism is the goal of the entire organizational structure.20 Likewise, the pastor must take an honest look at the church and his own leadership and be a realist about the condition of the church and its cultural reality. The slogan for the church may be “we reach people,” but the pastor must be the voice that communicates the reality that the church is not currently reaching people.
The leaders who create effective transformation are honest with themselves and with the organization they are leading. Communicating the reality of the situation is crucial. Some congregants may be completely unaware of the true status of the
organization and its direction. An effective leader understands that the best way to lead the church through tough times is to have a clear understanding of both his own and the church’s capabilities and shortcomings.21 He will need to have brutally honest
conversations about why the church is not growing. He will have heartfelt conversations with well meaning and dedicated leaders who are not being effective in their area of ministry. He will have to tell lay leaders or staff members that the curriculum they are using is outdated and ineffective. Leaders should begin to meet privately with current members and have very honest conversations about organizational health (or lack thereof).
As the leader communicates this reality over and over again, the entire organization will be forced to deal with the severity of the situation. If they then choose to not get on board
20Croft and Reeder, Biblical Church Revitalization, 48.
21Ibid., 31-32.
with future changes, they will at least know why change must happen. It is the leader’s responsibility to speak clearly about the organization’s situation and create this sense of urgency. In fear of offending the church, the leader can make the mistake of making the changes without clearly communicating the reason behind the changes. In Leading Congregational Change, the authors point out that “being honest does not mean displaying the brutal candor and adversarial attitudes that abound elsewhere in our society.”22 In order to effectively conduct these conversations with key leaders of the church, the pastor must set the appropriate tone, because they are crucial for an accurate assessment of the church’s culture and the values.