Managing Church and Ministry Conflict: A Cautionary Tale

Thursday, March 20, 2008

A Cautionary Tale

This is a follow-up to the case that was posted on November 24 – “Bushwhacked by the Board." And this is also a cautionary tale. The pastor writes:

We had been making progress. I cannot say great progress, but I believe the church was gaining “traction”. There was good healthy, positive feelings in the services again. The people that had so intensely opposed me and my continued leadership had left. The congregation was getting excited again. There was positive energy.We were making strides to hire some new staff.. On the morning of a scheduled Board Mtg., I received a phone call from our asst. state supervisor, stating there would be a meeting before the board meeting and they would “welcome me if I could attend.” “Oh and your spouse is welcome to come as well.”. I called my wife, told her of the meeting and stated, “It is going to be one of two things – either they will be planning how to move the church out of supervision or they will be calling for my resignation”. We all arrived at the meeting (at my church) and then the chair began citing how we had arrived at this point – history.Then he stated, “the State Council has decided to ask you to resign.”Excerpts from their letter stated…The division that exists in the church has occurred and continues under your leadership. These facts are indicative of your failure to lead the church in a healing and restoration process.· You have continued to display only tacit compliance to our requests. It is not our intent to compile a list of issues; suffice it to say items such as your lack of ownership for the division, our having to insist that you give a public conciliatory statement regarding the division, your limited attempts and failure to restore relationships with ministry leaders and influencers who have left the church, and your non-compliance with our pastoral staff selection process serve to illustrate the concern.· Your lack of effort and failure to make progress in leading the church to healing and restoration that would redeem as many as possible is most disappointing to all of us. We recognize that no man's ministry is greater than the church. Therefore it is with heavy hearts that we have recommended to the State Council that you be requested to submit your resignation. This is not an easy decision for us to make; it comes as a result of much prayer and fasting and hours of discussion. From our evaluation and experience of these last 14 months, we realize that a fresh start could be healing to you and the congregation.

· Out of respect for your years of ministry in the city, we will recommend a generous severance package of five months; one month for every two years of your ministry in the church, contingent upon your cooperation during the transition process, the avoidance of any further polarization of the church, and the voluntary submission and expression of your desire to resign.

I told them that I would comply with their request. I stated that I disagree with their assessment and decision. None of those making this decision had been in the church for at least 3-4 months. I stated that I was fearful that this would be devastating to many that had stood by me during this time (which is over 85% of the congregation). I have highlighted part of their statement that said I had failed to reach out to ministry leaders and “influencers” that had left. The former pastor of the church is now the State Supervisor. And some of the “influencers” are close personal friends of his.So, I leave a congregation that 10 years ago was 2 million in debt and now is debt free. They have 400,000 dollars in savings. And they have a weekend attendance near 1000. Frankly, it appears that our district leadership had a completely different agenda.

1 comment:

TAG said...: This is truly a sad posting. I think what is important in this is the need (and Joe and I know this very well, both of us having grown up and now living in the Washington, D.C. area) to monitor the political aspects of organizational life.

Unfortunately, denominations and churches among other things are political animals. Politics involve power and influence. If these issues aren't monitored closely, they tend to rise up and bite us.

This dear pastor, attempting evidently to maintain a nurturing pastoral stance, did not adequately address the political winds swirling around him. He certainly had a sense of it, that people in the local denominational office may have had agendas at variance with kingdom agendas, and certainly with the mission of First Church.

I don't want to appear too cynical, but even in the best of situations, the political weather can change radically, and what the pastor thought was a supporting entity can become an adversary.

The likely unfortunate outcome of this action by the Advisory Board is to split this church, and possibly eliminate it altogether. Congregants, along with the pastor, are going to feel very betrayed. Trust will be destroyed. And the denomination will have to work very hard to re-establish trust (if this can happen at all).

Jim; March 20, 2008 at 5:40 PM

Post a Comment

Welcome

Welcome to our new blog called clashing clergy. Our intent is to support church leaders who are dealing with conflict on a daily basis but do not feel they have the skills needed to navigate these turbulent waters. It is our belief that ministry IS conflict. Conflict is not something to be avoided at all costs. It is a necessary, and potentially useful tool that allows the community to make progress on their deepest concerns.

Welcome to the journey.To get started, you might like to take in our website at http://www.transformingchurch.net/. There you will find the book we've written, Thriving Through Ministry Conflict.

We also invite you to not only post cases, but ask questions of us. We'll try to post answers, and invite everyone to answer. Many situations are very complex and tricky.

Conflict Basics

Conflict is understood and discussed in many different ways. It is our belief that conflict is the basis of ministry, that anyone entering vocational ministry must understand that his/her calling will revolve around conflict.
In saying that, we realize that the word conflict is loaded emotionally. Many people associate conflict with destructive images, of people shouting at one another, of gangs shooting at each other, of countries involved in wars.
Certainly those are conflicted situations. But conflict, at its core, involves disagreement, differing ideas and opinions, discrepant evaluations and judgments. People are different. Each person walking this earth has a different slant on things, different ways of seeing what is unfolding, different strategies for dealing with all the situations life throws at us.
Issues regarding conflict are confusing. Is conflict good, or bad? How do I manage it? Let’s put one proposition on the table right up from: Conflict is necessary and beneficial, at least conflict that is focused properly (i.e. the Blue Zone which we will discuss later). As conflict strays away from issues, and accesses personal stories (i.e. the Red Zone), conflict becomes unmanageable and destructive.

Red Zone
So let’s get several terms straight up front. The Red Zone is where the atmosphere is characterized by a lack of professionalism and emotional heat. We’re not talking about conflict that has no emotion. That’s absurd. But emotion is in the service of the intellect, because the primary source of the conflict is not emerging from my personal story, but from the mission of the organization.
Have a look at this chart below, which should begin to detail the differences between the Red Zone (where the conflict now revolves around me, my story, my neediness, my personal issues) and the Blue Zone (where the conflict focuses on the mission of the organization).

• This conflict is personal.
• It’s about me!
• Emotions rule without being acknowledged.
• I must protect myself , because I’m feeling weak.
• Emotions are denied in self, therefore “projected” on others.
• The situation escalates.
• Behaviors:
I disengage
I become easily annoyed
I’m resentful
I procrastinate
I attack the other personally
I use Alcohol as medication
I avoid people , situations

As I sink into the Red Zone, my personal story begins to emerge. That story has a central theme or premise that is central to that story: Will I survive? Am I acceptable? Am I competent? Am I in control? As a person begins to sink into her Red Zone, it is usually the same core theme that emerges. Consequently, you will hear out of the mouth of a person the same general theme over and over again. You’re trying to control me! (control) Don’t you think I can do this? (competence). This Red Zone theme can color every interaction unless a person becomes aware of this and is able to manage it appropriate.

Red Zone Themes

Survival
"I must take care of myself. The world is full of peril, so I must enjoy the moment."

These people have traits of competence, self-reliance, and responsibility

These people lack the ability to trust others and tend to be wary and troubled in relationships. They have little interest in anything but what is of practical benefit. They become angry and panicky (Red Zone) whenever they feel their survival has been threatened.

Acceptance
"I will do anything to be loved and accepted by others. I am a people-pleaser."

These people have a heart for serving others and are very attentive to the needs and feelings of other people.
These people are overly compliant and self-effacing. They tend to be rescuers. They become angry and carry personal grudges (Red Zone) whenever they feel they have been rejected.

Control
"The world is a threatening place, and the only way I can feel safe is if I can control every situation and the people around me."
These people tend to be have strong leadership qualities. They are vigilant, highly organized, and have high expectations of themselves.
These people often wall themselves off emotionally. They do not let others get too close to them. They can be overly controlling toward others—bossy, directive, demanding, rigid, and nit-picking. They impose perfectionist demands on others. They become anxious and angry (Red Zone) whenever anyone or anything threatens their control.

Competence
"I am loved only on the basis of my performance. My performance is never good enough, so I never feel worthy of being loved."
These people tend to be high achievers. If you are a leader, you want these people on your team, because they will work hard to achieve a great performance.
They are never satisfied with their achievements. They have a hard time receiving from other people. They impose perfectionist demands on themselves. They are defensive and easily angered (Red Zone) whenever they perceive that their competence has been questioned.

As the Red Zone core theme is activated, the feelings associated with that issue are also activated. The person then sinks down deeper into a morass of feelings, many of which come from stories long ago completely unrelated to the current story that has provoked the Red Zone response.

Blue Zone

• This conflict is professional.
• It’s about the business.
• The mission of the organization rules.
• I must protect the team and the business.
• Emotions are understood and acknowledged in myself.
• The situation is reframed into a more useful construct.
• Behaviors:
Thoughtful
Reflective
Listen deeply for what the underlying issue might be
Do not see negative intent in other person.

Blue Zone behavior is focused on the organization’s values and mission. It is a way of moving out of the Red Zone by focusing on underlying issues (even when the underlying issues may be personal). But Blue Zone behavior is motivated by protecting the organization, rather than self. It begins when a person becomes aware of their own Red Zone and acknowledges that. Blue Zone behavior then moves a person to try to pace the person with whom they are experiencing conflict. Pacing involves getting into the other person’s world – seeing things from their perspective, affirming that perspective, and demonstrating empathy (through words and non-verbals). Blue Zone behavior also involves reframing problems – away from the unsolveable Red Zone to the underlying issue that is inhibiting performance. The Blue Zone allows us to have conflict, even heated conflict, around ideas, values, mission, and strategy. Red Zone conflict moves us away from team. Blue Zone conflict moves us beyond team – to a common purpose.
• Creating the Blue Zone is essentially the life work of everyone who aspires to lead a deeply meaningful life.
• The first step is of course the most difficult. It requires that we are completely honest with ourselves in identifying our core issues - and by extension honest with those around us.
• The Blue Zone is the willingness to accept responsibility for all our behavior and the consequences of our behavior.
• It is the continual refusal to shift responsibility for our actions to anyone or to any institution or to any system.
• Awareness of the response sequence helps us to consciously decide about our thoughts, feelings and actions.
• Notice our reaction
• Identify our core issues being triggered
• Decide on alternative constructive response
• We can’t control what happens to us, but we can choose how to respond.
• Accepting responsibility for our behavior allows us to change the behavior that is inconsistent with our most personal values.
• And the inverse is also true!
• Accepting responsibility for our own behavior protects us from accepting responsibility for other’s behavior.

Healthy boundaries identify and separate the self from others and consequently are the foundation of the Blue Zone

Thursday, March 20, 2008

A Cautionary Tale

1 comment:

Welcome

About Me

Conflict Basics

Blog Archive