Barnabas File

I was sitting in a conference room with several other people a number of years ago.     We had gathered to create an organization that would raise funds for Baptist collegiate ministries in underserved areas of the United States and Canada.     A consultant who was volunteering his time led us through a planning process called SWOT--strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats.    The process made sense at the time, gave us some direction in the formulation of our plan, and I even used it in a couple of other settings, but I began to be a bit uncomfortable at the negative connotations of parts of the process. In recent years, I have come to use an Appreciative Inquiry process in consulting--one that identifies and builds on the inherent strengths of an organization.  I was pleased, therefore, when I discovered that someone had taken the SWOT approach and transformed it into an Appreciative Inquiry process. In The Thin Book of SOAR:...

You’ve seen it happen.     A motivated, well-meaning group of leaders decides to provide a ministry, program, or outreach that will change the lives of a particular segment of the population. They gather the resources, train the providers, deliver the intervention . . . and it falls flat on its face.     What happened? There may be multiple causes for the failure, but one could be that those delivering the intervention never stopped to talk to those who were the designated recipients.  Perhaps the project failed to meet a real need, duplicated another service, was offered at the wrong time, or failed to understand the values of the recipients. There are times when the intervention might even be offensive. In recent years, several processes have been developed—total quality management, asset-based community development, and design thinking, for example—that begin with those who know more about the concern or problem than anyone else: ...

(This guest post is provided by Cheri Torres, co-author of  Conversations Worth Having: Using Appreciative Inquiry to Fuel Productive and Meaningful Engagement .) We’ve all been there. Someone comes at us full of anger, looking for someone to blame, and spewing ultimatums. If we’re not aware, before we know it we’re in an argument, defending, counter-attacking, and escalating the situation. In these situations, our nervous systems see saber tooth tigers. The brain leaps to protect us, sending oxygen and nutrients to help us fight, flee, or freeze. The higher-order thinking needed in these situations doesn’t stand a chance. When our brain is hijacked like this, it takes us to a place of distrust, and any hope of a conversation worth having is severely diminished. Problems can best be solved with the help of critical thinking and creativity. This means moving out of fear and distrust and into a place of trust and cooperation. Anyone can do that. Whoever does it...

“They followed worthless idols and themselves became worthless.”--2 Kings 17:15b, NIV                                                                                                                 Following the death of King Solomon, Israel split into two kingdoms and both began a downward spiral into idolatry, rejecting the worship of Yahweh for the fertility gods native to Canaan.  They turned their devotion from God...

Over the last 50 years, a number of consulting firms have emerged with a primary focus on church development.  Organizations emphasizing capital development (fund-raising) were in the vanguard, but many others have emerged, especially as denominations have down-sized the services offered to local congregations.  These new groups offer strategic planning support, conflict management, search committee orientation, leadership training and other services to churches, judicatories and faith-based organizations. Many of these consulting firms have not only taken the place of denominational entities, but they have generally adopted the programs and processes of those denominational entities. In other words, they are simply building on and repackaging old techniques.  Although providing worthwhile services, they have remained mired in the old denominational mindset of bigger is better.  They have generally adopted an organizational, mechanistic approach to church develo...