It is harder to examine the congregation’s needs and to discern what kind of leadership is needed. Is this a time for entrepreneurial boldness or patient tending? Is there an important voice not being heard or a divergent viewpoint not at the table? Does the future have an advocate or only the past?
It is harder still to examine the congregation and to discern gifts for leadership. Who has a demonstrated aptitude and attitude for collaboration and consensus? Who has a history of causing trouble or of getting things done? Who talks too much or listens well? This means looking beyond popularity and discerning effectiveness.
Hardest of all is politely declining the leadership aspirations of those who truly aren’t gifted for that role. They want to lead, they insist that it’s their “turn,” they resent being put into support roles in a system where only top leaders get respect, and they offer some factor — their age, gender, socioeconomic status, tenure — that should override giftedness.
Hard as it may be, the “best practice” in leadership development is to recruit leaders who fit the need and context and can embrace the future. Look at how much energy God devoted to recruiting Abraham and Moses, and later Saul and David. Look at how Jesus recruited the men and women who were his closest disciples. Those weren’t casual “pick-up” squads of whoever happened to be standing nearby. He called specific people, and then trained them to carry on his ministry.
Congregations need to devote as much energy to recruiting lay and volunteer leaders as they do to selecting clergy and staff. It takes a solid leadership team, not just one or two capable hires, to lead a congregation to health. A shallow, self-serving, and change-resistant board can undermine any good work staff members attempt to do.
Tom Ehrich is a writer, church consultant and Episcopal priest based in New York. He is the author of “Just Wondering, Jesus,” and the founder of the Church Wellness Project.
