« July 2009 | Main | September 2009 »
Since I've recently landed in a season of additional clarity as to my own strengths, weaknesses, and roles that allow these to thrive, I thought I would beta test a purpose statement that seeks to capture not only my strengths, but also how I see God wanting to use them for his kingdom purposes.
Designing future-oriented structures that allow increase God's people's capacity to serve Him.
Designing future-oriented structures that mobilize God's people for kingdom purposes.
Designing future-oriented structures that lead change and mobilize God's people for kingdom purposes.
I'm leaving the first two up to hopefully expand the amount of feedback.
These are some recent & not so recent things that have fueled this:
I'm sure some of you have worked on a life purpose or personal mission statement. Would love to hear yours if you have one.
photo courtesy of gwgs
Have you had an experience recently that clarified your strengths?
I concluded an insightful conversation with a pastor about what it looks like to live out your specific role within God's kingdom.
He walked through an intensive training with a spiritual formation director and found that he had two "streams" where he thrived in ministry.
As I thought through the experiences that revealed my gifts, passions, and strengths, I identified one major "stream."
A few questions for consideration/feedback:
Numbers can bridge the gap between the ideal and the real and expose misconceptions about a particular strategy.
The image is from my ministry's website on the day we passed out over 2,000 flyers (1/8 of our campus) and completed 500 individual surveys.
I assumed that hundreds of students would go to our website looking for our events and activities. Instead less than 30 ended up visiting.
So often leaders keep strategies in place because it's what's been done in the past or because they feel strongly about it. Solid metrics can allow a team to have a robust discussion about a particular strategy that is influenced more by reality than by individual preferences.
Are there strategies in place that lack solid metrics? What sort of tools do you use to measure and determine your strategy's effectiveness?
Companies are more like living organisms than machines, he argued, and most viewed knowledge as a static input to the corporate machine. --from a wikipedia entry
I stumbled on this entry through a blog conversation with Brian Virtue. This quote sparkled as I read it, because it summarizes my frustrations with large organizations/groups.
How I have seen this quote play out:
One more gem from the entry:
Nonaka advocated a view of knowledge as renewable and changing, and that knowledge workers were the agents for that change. Knowledge-creating companies, he believed, should be focused primarily on the task of innovation.--ibid
How does your organization or local context treat information? Is it more to satiate the present or fuel the future and innovation?
photo courtesy of caveman_92223
One road. Two different experiences.
I recently drove my car over a gravel road en route to a conference. I then road my bicycle over it the next day.
If your movement/organization suddenly went from bicycle-size to car-size what kind of experience would it be for those involved? Could it handle the road?
I have made some structural changes to the movement I lead at Chico State over the past few years; many of these changes have had a lifespan of one to two years before they required additional tweaking to accommodate the changing size of the group.
It would have been a miss for me to assume that structural changes that produce success must be preserved at all costs.
When you examine your context, what part of your structure facilitates scale? What needs some tweaking?
photo courtesy of intherough
Sometimes I find myself in contexts where so many things could be changed. Although initially exhilarating, it can end up being overwhelming.
Where do you start?
Anything that looks like a museum, walks like a museum, or quacks like a museum.
Museum qualities:
The modern era loved museums. Many organizations feature these museum qualities:
I'm amazed at how little resources are required to de-museum-ize parts of an organization. Most tools are free.
photo courtesy of vubui
From my google reader or random jaunts through the interwebs this week :)
Search Engine Optimization Blog: how to help others find you online even when they're not looking for you.
Isn't it odd that we're willing to spend $300,000 to buy an accredited but ultimately useless academic line on our resume, but we hesitate to do a month of hard work to create a chunk of experience that's priceless?--from a recent Seth Godin post
You must simplify your core message to the point where anyone can understand it and communicate it.--from the Duct Tape Marketing Blog
Curious how to do ministry or church 'on the cheap?' click here. (thanks to churchcrunch for the find)
thanks jshappell for the photo
I found Jack Welch's book Winning insightful. One of the most practical aphorisms he shared was the 20/70/10 principle.
He believes that in every organization, at every level, 20% of each group is excellent, 70% is average, and 10% is below average. This is very bell curve-ish and not that smart on the surface. Except when he noted that among the best of the best in any organization, 20/70/10 applies.
What do you do with the bottom 10% of your best? Our solution at Chico State has been to provide them with more training and vision, to help them close the gap between themselves and the other leaders.
In the last four years I have to admit that has not happened.
This year we are trying something different: creating a leadership culture that facilitates the bottom 10 wanting to stay in leadership. Our hope is that providing extended time in the leadership culture will facilitate leadership capacity more than training and vision.
Have you ever made an effort to develop or identify the bottom 10% of your leaders? Would you agree that they need time much more than your top 20 or even middle 70? Or do you treat every leader the same?
