How do you like to make decisions?
Imagine that you are in a church meeting facing a very important decision. Got one in mind? Perhaps you are considering adding staff, starting a new ministry, or even leaving the denomination.
Would you rather:
- Be personally involved in making the decision? OR Let a few key leaders decide the matter for you?
- Have a detailed, written proposal on the issue with clear consequences? OR Trust that details will get worked out later by someone?
- Have time to ask questions and talk with others to shape the best decision? OR Prefer to have a straight up and down vote and get it over with?
- Like to know the timetable to implement the decision and how the decision will impact others? OR “Wing it” and figure it out later?
- Take time to discern the will of God for your faith community? OR Finish the business meeting quickly and end the angst?
What are the options?
Did you answer “yes” the majority of the first choices? If so, the odds are high that you are not satisfied with a parliamentary style of making decisions. Unfortunately, that’s the only method most churches use to make decisions. Yet most people long for a better way. There is one!
A parliamentary style of making decisions comes from government processes. It was never designed to reflect the interests and practices of a faith community. Therefore, it does not immerse itself in the ‘means of grace’ like prayer, study and conferencing. It is a business model that tends to focus on the inital proposal brought before a group.
Problems with a parliamentary way of business
- limits information to 3 “speeches” for and against a motion
- over simplifies issues by creating an artificial binary choice between “yes” and “no”
- creates winners and losers by forcing the majority view on the minority
- can be confusing when people try to amend or substitute motions
- usually does not spend time in study, or small groups interaction
- is not concerned about implementing the decision – just making it
Yes, this process can work when the situation warrants a simple, quick decision like the paint color in the Fellowship Hall, but it is not highly participatory or engaging except for the final vote. However, on important issues it is less than effective and can actually cause harm.
Benefits of a consensus approach
A consensus-based approach to making decisions is designed especially for a faith community. So it includes prayer, study and discussion. Also it is respectful of different viewpoints and considers creative options.
- can involve the entire community and hear diverse viewpoints
- lessens conflict by sharing information and practicing respectful listening
- surfaces creative options for consideration and seeks common ground before a vote
- “perfects” a proposal so it speaks for the whole community
- allows people to ask questions and get clarification on complex matters
- moves naturally to a decision point when people have felt heard
To learn more about the differences between a parliamentary model of making decisions and a faith-based model, I invite you to read our book: The Church Guide For Making Decisions Together. It details a consensus-based approach to use when making decisions.
I encourage you to move toward a consensus-based model to strengthen your faith community. This approach will allow it to deal well with hard challenges. Be the faith community God intends you to be. Live out of your values. Use a decision-making process that expresses the Christian values of attending to God, respecting the people Christ has called into a community of discernment, is Spirit led and leads to discernment.
Leave your comments below to let us know what process you use to make decisions and how well it is working for you. We welcome your feedback!