Assignment:
Case Study Development
Good afternoon team, this week's input intended to develop and share a case study. This case study presented a conflict Christian leaders may encounter. Hopefully, it will help strengthen understanding of course information through application in a real-life setting. The input introduced the case study issue, provided background and a more detailed description. It also summarized the issue and offered questions for further discussion. Thanks, God bless!
Introduction
One day the Neighborhood Missions Leader was there organizing and engaging with his ministry team. The next day, he was not. No one has seen him since. Church Leadership has not spoken of him nor discussed his surprising and abrupt departure. It was as if he was never part of the Church's Missions Team.
Description
The Neighborhood Missions Leader was hired just before churches and various local ministry partners suspended or reduced operations due to Coronavirus (COVID-19). His background made him uniquely qualified for the programs associated with the Neighborhood Missions Ministry. He experienced drug and alcohol addiction as a young adult and spent time in jail. During rehabilitation, he felt restored and called to ministry and subsequently pastored a rural church. He also developed his own program to help others through addiction's myriad challenges. He replaced a very popular ministry leader who retired after an ostensibly successful tenure and their visions and approaches varied greatly. Nevertheless, because of his lived experience and testimony of redemption, people believed in him and his vision. Notwithstanding the different direction and challenging COVID-19 environment, he set out. He established relationships with local non-profits and governmental agencies and seemed to make progress.
Then, all of a sudden, the Neighborhood Missions Leader resigned shortly before a major Neighborhood Missions Christmas event. The ministry team found out when he replied to his Bible Study partner who was inquiring about their upcoming scheduled Bible Study. His absence from the Christmas event was gapingly noticeable. The Church Leadership, Lead Missions Minister and Administrative Assistant were all in attendance along with ministry team members and community partners. He was the only one not there. The ministry team members felt his absence and they prayed for him and his family.
It weighed heavy on their hearts. Yet, they could only speculate about the reason for the sudden exit. To this day, there has been no discussion regarding the nature of the departure. There were ministry team meetings with the Church Leadership, Lead Missions Minister and Administrative Assistant to ascertain the way forward. There was not, however, any communication or conversation regarding this recent past. It was difficult to look forward when the ministry team did not understand where it had traveled nor how it arrived at its current state.
Summary
In summary, the Neighborhood Missions Leader abruptly resigned with no explanation provided to the ministry team or the Church. While Church Leadership and the Lead Mission Minister graciously met with the ministry team, they did not discuss the past. They focused on the future state of the Neighborhood Missions Ministry without addressing this situation.
Questions for Discussion
1. Should Church Leadership and Ministry Leadership have provided some explanation to the Neighborhood Missions ministry team regarding the Neighborhood Missions Leader's abrupt resignation? If yes, why? If no, why not?
2. Why do you think Church Leadership and Lead Missions Minister chose not to discuss his departure with the ministry team?
3. What conflicts might arise as a result of leadership's choice not to discuss the departure with the ministry team or the Church?
4. What leadership challenges might arise as a result of the choice not to discuss the departure with the ministry team or the Church?
5. From Van Yperen's (2002) depiction of the types of responders (passive, evasive, defensive, aggressive) what type best describes the leaders' response in this scenario?
6. As a Christian Leader, how would you have responded if you were Church Leadership or the Lead Missions Minister?
7. Given your response and in the context of Van Yperen's (2002) leader response styles (passive, evasive, defensive, aggressive), what style would you most align with?
References
New King James Version Bible. (1982). New King James Bible Online.
Van Yperen, J. (2002). Making peace: A guide to overcoming church conflict.
Pack Rat: To Keep or Not to Keep
Introduction
Innovation gives way to an array of thought processes that all serve the same purpose-to enhance the way we solve problems (Rogers, 2003 para. 1). In the case of the "pack rat," the Executive Pastor, Tom, wants to take everything from the old facility to the new. This includes furniture, appliances, toys, everything but the kitchen sink. The team leader, Pastor Otis, thought it was a good idea to sell or throw away most of the things at the old facility because it was outdated and did not fit with the modern theme of the new facility. The Senior Pastor, David, wanted to be out of the old facility and into the new one by 5 Nov 2018.
The purpose of this case study is to illustrate and apply a concept from reading the course material and discuss with fellow students. The problem is the differences of perspectives of the Executive Pastor and the Project Leader of the amount of people it would take to move and the cost to move so much furniture by the deadline. This dilemma can be replayed over and over in many churches, "to take or not take" especially when it comes to moving. Let's see how to handle this crisis.
Description
On 5 October, Pastor Otis creates his strategic plan to move the church items to the new location. He separates items to take and items to throw away or donate to a worthy cause. Next, he calculates the cost of hiring a moving company or asking for volunteers. After getting the numbers and the time it would take for the moving company or volunteers, he makes his decision to recruit a team of volunteers and selects his date to be in the new location that is ahead of the senior pastor's deadline. Not only does his strategy meet the deadline, but it is also the most cost effective. So, he presents this report to the team and immediately it was met with opposition.
Pastor Tom notices the red chairs and the Christmas decorations and questions what Pastor Otis plans were for those items in the pile marked "dump." Pastor Otis told him that this is the take pile, and this is the throw away pile. Pastor Tom was furious and told him not to throw away some of the items he noticed in the dump pile because someone will use them at the new location. Also, he told Pastor Otis that recruiting volunteers would be asking too much on the congregation because they were an older congregation.
Since Pastor Tom is the executive pastor, no one would challenge him about his collection of items until now. If they did, they were either fired or left the church. Pastor Otis refuses to back down and continues his plan and throws away the items despite Pastor Tom's request because Pastor David was the one who appointed him to handle this project and not Pastor Tom.
Summary
Church conflict is nothing new. We see this dilemma played over and over in many churches, "to take or not take" especially when it comes to moving. Often, we find ourselves with different perspectives on methodology, facility, personnel, crisis resolution, or budgets. The task is to decide who has the best perspective to make the call. In the case of the pack rat, there are several ways to handle or resolve this conflict based on reading the course material. Apostle Paul said in Philippians 3:15, "15 All of us, then, who are mature should take such a view of things. And if on some point you think differently that too God will make clear to you. 16 Only let us live up to what we have already attained (New International Version). Let's discuss from the questions below.
Discussion Questions
1. What category of the adopter stage do you find Pastor Tom, Otis, and David and why?
2. What would you suggest being done to resolve the tensions of the different perspectives?
3. Is there a way to meet the needs of both?
4. How will this decision affect the people and ministries?
Reference
Rogers. (2003). Diffusion of innovations. Free Press,.