12 Witnesses

Speaking to a conference hosted by the New Yorker, Malcolm Gladwell speaks to the issue of hiring the right people.  More specifically, he talks about the tools we use to evaluate the future success of candidates and how those tools are often the worst ones to use.  It’s fascinating to see how poorly we evaluate people for future success.

Reinventing Invention: Online Only Video: The New Yorker

What tools do you think we use that are poor indicators of future success?

It is one of the hardest things to explain. Especially to grieving families. Can you assure them their child is in Heaven. I have always attempted to do so, though I often admitted that my Scriptural validation for my belief was more or less founded in the goodness of God and His mercy.

The alternative is the cobbled together and poorly thought out, completely un-Scriptural “doctrines” such as the “age of accountability.”

Recently, Drs. Danny Akin and Al Mohler, Seminary Presidents of Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary and Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, respectively, have produced a series of concise arguments from Scripture to lend a sense of affirmation to the belief that infants that die go to Heaven.

Between The Times|Why We Believe Children Who Die Go to Heaven

While some of the arguments edge quite close to the “age of accountability” thought process, though not crossing the line, some are better. Such as David’s sense of confidence in seeing his lost infant son again, and the vast multitudes of saints in Heaven that appear to possibly outnumber those that have lived to adulthood in service to the Lord.

If you’ve ever struggled with the loss of a child, this article should bring some sense of comfort to you.

There is no standard way to create a resume. Indeed, each resume says something about the one who created it. Sadly, many resumes tell those who receive them “I may be a good person, but I lack vision and the ability to communicate effectively.” Mostly, the resume that is poorly organized and hard to follow is the one that says this, even if the content and the references are good.

Here are a few thoughts, for what they are worth, about your resume.

Stylistically, be brief. Churches know what it is to serve on staff, so don’t give every detail of every event you coordinated. They won’t read it, and that hurts you. List the highlights. If your highlights are that you organized a trip to Six Flags, I hope that you are not submitting your resume for the position of Staff Administrator. I’m sorry to say, that is probably not enough experience. No more than two pages is a good rule of thumb. Remember that the resume is just a filtering device. They will get into the depths of who you are if you strike a chord with them at first blush.

Also, only include your picture if it is a flattering picture. Seriously. I have seen many resumes with pictures that ruled the person out immediately, because it was unflattering. Should that matter? Probably not, but it does. On the other hand, if you can’t understand how to present yourself in a way that removes obstacles, then that says something to the committee, doesn’t it?

Include these things:

Personal Information - The church wants to get a sense of you and your family gives them some history that informs that in a brief but meaningful way.

Education - The committee may not have a minimum standard or they may, but one way for your resume to be filtered out is by not answering questions that they will have for every candidate. Education is a question that will be asked of everyone, so answer it up front.

Experience - Again, be brief. List positions held, dates served and major accomplishments. I only put years, eg. 1999-2001 as opposed to the full dates of hire. I find that this is enough information without being too much information. Also, I can’t remember all of the start and stop dates from 21 years ago and I never recorded them. It’s never mattered to any committee and it sure doesn’t matter to me.

Vision Statement/Ministry Philosophy - This is the personal touch that you are trying to use to find some resonance with the search committee. A lot of guys I know use this paragraph to say things that will go over with just about anybody. They look not to offend. I do the opposite, and it has brought me times of no contact or responses from folks that are “not interested.” While it may be frustrating at the time, I console myself with the thought that they would part ways with me later, or that if they did call me, we might not get along. I also console myself with the thought that the committees that have shown interest are greatly interested. I have set myself apart in their eyes and I always seem to rise to the final person or group. In fact, since taking that direction, I don’t recall ever being dropped by a church, though I have turned some down. They knew who they were getting and it really helped.

Also, make sure it fits the napkin test. It must be concise enough to be understood and yet written on the back of a napkin. That’s communication.

References - I know some guys that furnish references on request. I furnish them up front for two reasons. If they want to know more about me, then that is a good thing and I don’t want them to have to overcome a barrier to do it. Also,my hand picked references should be great opportunities. By the way, never put someone down as a reference without first asking their permission and also without knowing exactly what they will say about you. I ask my references to tell me what they would tell a committee if they called, and then a quiz them as best I can. If you are unsure, don’t list them. The quickest way to have your resume work against you is for you to encourage the committee to call someone who undermines you.

The second reason I furnish references up front is that who I put on the resume says something about me. I not only list the name and the contact, but I list how we know one another. Then I am sure to list people who have worked over me, under me and alongside me, as well as lay people.

Alright. Any questions? Any additions? Any challengers? Take your shot.

Searching for staff is, obviously, crucial. After having been through the process 6 times, I have picked up a few things, and I am sure that most of you have as well.

The committee is so important. You don’t want anyone who is a “delegate” of a person or group of people in the church. Nothing will grind the committee to a halt and frustrate the church faster than someone serving a small interest. Rather, it is vital that everyone be willing to put the good of the church first. This will lead to unity, the necessity of which is absolute.

Next, the committee needs to have a clear job description from which to work, rather than a nebulous idea of what is to be expected. In some churches, the job description is given by the Personnel Committee, in some it is left to the Search Committee and in others it is determined by the church through a survey.

One other thought I’ll pass on is that the search committees I’ve worked with, and having served in six churches, you can imagine that I have worked with far more committees throughout the process, very few of them had their act together when it came to finding out about the candidate. Most of them asked leading questions like, “Do you believe that Youth Ministers should spend time in the schools?” Clearly, this is a conviction of the Committee and they want to know if you share it. However, they have asked in a way that virtually demands a “yes” answer, so no matter what they get, they won’t really find out if this conviction is a high priority for the candidate.

If they really want to know just how important this is, they will ask something like, “What are the practical ways you pursue integrating yourself in the lives of the students in your group?” If school visits come up, then you know it is a priority for them as well.

An even better way to ask the question is this, “Describe your typical week’s activities.” Or even, “Give us a ‘Reader’s Digest’ version of the last two weeks of your ministry where you are.” You are much more likely to find out where their heart is without leading them to your heart. And don’t get me wrong, I don’t suspect ministerial candidates of intentionally misrepresenting themselves. I just think that everyone is putting their best foot forward and when you let someone know that you want to hear about “x” then that is what they are going to talk about. The only problem is that you run the risk of not really finding out who they are.

Oh, and don’t forget the background checks. Absolutely essential nowadays. But be forgiving as you look at credit stuff. Unless they show that they are still in the throws of bad stewardship, then you shouldn’t hold mistakes made a long time ago with too much credence. After all, it takes a long time to get out of credit trouble, and in our culture, young people get into credit trouble soooo fast. Even Christians.

Finally, the committee should understand the position and the skills necessary. If they don’t, they should research it diligently and interviewing other staff about it is actually quite helpful. Case in point, a previous church’s Personnel Committee hired a secretary for the church when we were without a “Senior Pastor.” They didn’t ask me a word about the situation at all. Now, the position really needed someone with Office Software expertise, but they didn’t know that. They hired the best receptionist in their opinion, and I think they were accurate in determining that. She was a phenomenal receptionist, but she didn’t know squat about word processing, putting together a newsletter, using spreadsheets, etc. Meanwhile, they let a highly qualified lady go because, though she was a new Christian, she hadn’t quit smoking, yet. She has now, but she has also moved on to other things.

When the lady they hired came in, she didn’t know what to do, so I had to train her on everything, which took me away from my own job. She got better, but she is still way behind where the other lady was years ago. I found out later that the extent of their questioning her about computer skills was to ask here if she knew much about computers. Her answer was that she used them every day - which was true. She filled out certain forms in a data entry process every day. Obviously, that was not a sufficient evaluation of what was needed.

Translation: If you are hiring for a position, find out about that position from your other staff members, then learn how to accurately evaluate the skills involved.

What else would you add? What mistakes have you seen committees make? What tools have you seen be effective?

Where should the job description originate? How much involvement should the congregation have throughout the process? How often should the committee report to the church? How secretive should the committee be?

How much time should you aim for when starting a search process? Do you give the committee a budget? If so, how much? If not, how do you fund the search?

What is the best way to let your need be known? Do you advertise? If so, where?

Next week: The Resume

[edit]

Hey, Brenda Smith from the Kentucky Baptist Convention has posted some great resources that the KBC has provided.  I am reproducing the links that she gave here, just in case you aren’t getting the comments.

Pastor Search Committee Workbook

Staff Search Committee Workbook

Thanks, Brenda and the KBC for being Kingdom minded and sharing these resources!

[/edit]

In the previous installment of of church staffing I discussed, briefly, the difference between the desire of education versus experience. I asked more questions that inspired a few really good comments, but let me go ahead and give my full thoughts on the subject.

First of all, I admit that I took an incredibly complex subject and reduced it to “this or that” in hopes of generating some discussion, which it did. This blog existed for so long as a personal opinion piece that the community aspect has not rooted well. The longest discussions we had here, though they were mostly genteel, were also adversarial. Without controversial subjects, discussion here has struggled since I turned the blog from SBC politics. So… I have been pretty excited to get some fairly good responses on these last couple of posts on Church Staffing.

Still, I have some thoughts on it myself and would like to give those to you. I would love for you to respond, though these types of pieces don’t often generate as much response. Nevertheless, here goes…

The education v experience formula is not an issue of balance, or if it is balance it is not the kind of balance that one might find on a see-saw, with a fulcrum at one mostly central point and two things holding the tension from opposite ends. There are not two things here: Education and Experience.

When we speak of experience, what kind of experience is that? Mission field? Youth Ministry? Children’s Ministry? Senior Pastor? Lead Pastor? Volunteer?

Likewise, when we speak of education, what kind would that be? Bible College? Seminary? MDiv? ThM? PhD? DMin? Which Seminary? SBC better, or worse? What about self educated men? What about online education?

I have known people with formal educations that were not the brightest. They merely jumped through the hoops. On the other hand, Marty Duren is self educated. There is a difference between uneducated and self educated, you know. Having a degree is not always the test of mental capacity.

And then there’s experience. I postulate that my 10 years of experience as Associate Pastor of a County Seat FBC, was definitely prepared me for the position of Lead Pastor in many ways better than serving as the Senior Pastor of a 25 member church in a smaller town. Yet, in some ways, it surely would have taught me different things.

I think the particular job, church, town and vision for the future all create a mixture of need
that also needs a particular balance of backgrounds and much, much more. In short, the staff position is like a recipe that needs just the right balance of this, that and the other. The next question is, how do you determine that recipe?

That’s up next.

PS - Marty is about to wrap up his Bachelor’s Degree and I think it is onward and upward from there.  I feel sorry for all the twenty something kids that are getting the bell curve busted by him.

We had quite a bit of traffic on the first Church Staffing post this week and a few comments. In fact, that post is still dragging lurkers at a pretty decent clip, so it must have hit a nerve, or at least been moderately interesting.

So the last one was primarily about part and full time staff. How about another balancing act?

Which do you value more? Education or experience?

Do you qualify education? Seminary over Bible College? PhD v DMin v MDiv v MDivBL? Do you check grades?

Do you value one Seminary over another? Why?

How does experience factor in? It can’t mean nothing, so what does it mean? Does mega church intern beat small church Chief?

I know guys who, during Seminary, took tiny churches in the boondocks because they wanted the title “Senior Pastor” on their resume, while I volunteered as a Youth Worker and Sunday School teacher at a local church.  Know what?  It worked.  They got taken more seriously by a lot of search committees and went to larger churches than I did.  Which is fine, because I went where I needed to go and served that church for almost ten years.

I’ll also add this controversial thought:  Most PhD’s I know have been decent profs (not all), but I’ve rarely known a PhD that made good preachers or pastors. Settle down, I’m not saying all academics are too in their head to pastor, but anecdotally, I’ve seen academics thrive best in academia.

So, where’s the balance?