Archive for December, 2016

 

From Stained Glass to Virtual Reality Glasses

Posted on: December 26th, 2016 by Hayim Herring

The Past and Future of Congregations and Nonprofits

When the values of a congregation or nonprofit are out of sync with the values of their stakeholders, we have a recipe for frustration between individual and institution. Congregations and nonprofits live by two sets of values: their stated interpersonal values, and their embedded organizational values. Their interpersonal values, framed in Jewish values language, guide how community members are expected to relate to one. They are often explicitly codified in an approved organizational “values statement.”

Organizational values are expressed through leaders’ responses to policy changes, programs and initiatives. For example, how a congregation or nonprofit responds to trends like “fee for service” or “donor directed giving” provides insights into organizational values about customer service, experimentation and agility. But organizational values are so embedded that they are invisible to those who work in or regularly volunteer for them. They only become apparent when the values of congregations or nonprofits are misaligned with the values of their stakeholders. And until leaders and stakeholders realign their organizational values, it’s unsatisfying for both sides.

In Leading Congregations in a Connected World: Platform, People and Purpose, a book that I co-wrote with Dr. Terri Elton, Associate Professor Leadership at Luther Seminary, we trace a brief, three-stage history of faith-based organizations and their embedded organizational values. Being aware of these values can help or hinder deeper relationships between congregations or nonprofits and constituents. These three stages are:

Organization 1.0: the “benign parent” or hierarchical model, where decisions are made thoughtfully and caringly by a small leadership group at the top for a larger less “informed” group below.

Organization 2.0: a version of the above that creates a parallel presence of the organization on the web, but still is basically a one-way channel for broadcasting the congregation’s or nonprofit’s message with little meaningful room for engagement with members. Many established congregations and faith-based nonprofits are still organized as 2.0.

Organization 3.0: a blended model of hierarchy and networks that is present both in digital and physical space, characterized by dialogue, more shared-decision making and creation of content and meaning. It values are based on deep engagement between individuals and organizations. (Spoiler alert: on page 11 we even give the date on which Organization 3.0 first became possible—June 29, 2007.)

The fundamental difference between Congregation or Nonprofit 2.0 and 3.0 is an acknowledgement that that individuals do not need existing organizations to express and explore sacred meaning and purpose. They have the ability to bypass them and find or create new platforms to do so. But if congregations and nonprofits can make the pivot and become platforms for people to engage in purposeful work, they have a good chance of engaging new and existing audiences more deeply. Unlike startups, they have the advantage of doing so in physical and digital space.

To learn more about how emerging and established congregations and nonprofits in the Jewish and Protestant communities are becoming more “3.0,” we hope that you’ll purchase our book, which you can still do at a 40% time limited discount by using the code RL40LC16 when ordering. And connect with me (options for social media of your choice, top right) to explore trends like the implications of virtual reality for congregational and nonprofit communities. It looks like we’re quickly moving from gathering in “stained glass” spaces to meeting in virtual space, thanks to the affordability of virtual and augmented reality glasses. Time to start thinking about how congregations and nonprofits can shape that trend to help them increase their impact!

Fragile Communities

Posted on: December 16th, 2016 by Hayim Herring

More on: Leading Congregations in a Connected World: Platforms, People and Purpose

40% Hanukkah and Christmas Discount Still Available 

My colleague, Dr. Terri Elton, Associate Professor Leadership at Luther Seminary and I, have been highlighting key findings from our recent publication, Leading Congregations in a Connected World: Platform, People and Purpose. (In our last post, we explained the link between organizational structure and impact.) Our issue in this post: congregational and nonprofit communities are very fragile these days! Can congregations be places where people who hold diverse views continue to join together in prayer? Can nonprofits continue to mobilize volunteers around causes that are directly related to their missions? Or, has the toxic effect of social media seeped into physical spaces so that people who used to worship and work together can no longer do so when they meet face-to-face?

When we asked congregational and nonprofit leaders profiled in our book about pressing challenges, they consistently responded with one word: “Community!” We could feel their anxieties around this issue and, from our perspective, for good reason. Congregations are at their best when they are inclusive. Diversity is not its own goal, but a value that enables people to engage with the “other” – a person from another generation, a different background, a spiritual orientation or political view. In that encounter with an “other,” both people have an opportunity to grow by experiencing difference. They grow more deeply in who they are because the encounter affirms a belief or value, or they grow because they modify a part of themselves.

We conducted our research a good year prior to the nastiness of the 2016 presidential campaign. But already then, the issue of community preoccupied the minds of clergy and chief executive officers. Think for a moment—aside from congregations, what other institution is designed to take people at all stages of life and grow with them over time? Congregations, and to a slightly lesser extent, faith-based nonprofits, are inherently lifelong centers for creating and sustaining communities with a wide mix of people.

Hayim Herring - BookWe see a significant role for congregations and nonprofits around the issue of community. But given how fragile and complex community is today, we believe that congregations will benefit by learning from one another. One opportunity for shared learning is in gaining greater understanding about the limits of digital space in engaging members and participants. What kinds of “conversations” are effective on digital platforms and which are best held in a physical space? What happens when a professional or volunteer publishes information about an issue that is unintentionally misleading or inaccurate—or simply false? One of clergy leader in our study framed the issue this way. He said that for now, he’ll take an old-fashioned town hall meeting about an important issue over a digital discussion because “there’s an accountability piece missing” online. When people don’t have to make eye contact with one another, they have to grapple with the impact of their words.

Meeting an “other” can be positively disorienting. Stereotypes that people carry inside of their heads often don’t resemble that “other” who stands beside them, engaged in sacred, mission-driven work. We invite you to share your suggestions about how congregations and nonprofits can continue to be places where diversity brings out the collective best in a community. So please connect with Hayim (options for social media of your choice, top right) or with Terri (telton@luthersem.edu, www.facebook.com/terri.elton, @TerriElton) and contribute your wisdom to these unprecedented questions.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Today’s Disruptors, Tomorrow’s Disrupted

Posted on: December 7th, 2016 by Hayim Herring

More on: Leading Congregations in a Connected World: Platforms, People and Purpose

In our last blog post, my colleague, Dr. Terri Elton, Associate Professor Leadership at Luther Seminary and I, described the launch of our new book, Leading Congregations in a Connected World: Platform, People and Purpose. (And remember to take advantage now of a time-limited 40% discount on your purchase.) Now for our motivation: we confess that we’re organizational geeks! We actually like to study how people in faith-based communities organize for collective purpose and impact for several reasons. Organizational structure can:

• Either inhibit or accelerate impact.
• Become invisible to those who work in organizations once they learn how to live within its parameters.
• Become so deeply embedded in organizations, that leaders need to make a conscious, intentional choice to think about alternatives.

Organization and structure matter, then, because they have a dramatic effect on mission, meaning and impact.

When one congregation is in distress, it provokes only self-examination. But many older, highly structured congregations and nonprofit organizations are adrift, and many emergent, socially networked ones restructuring for sustainable growth. We read that turbulence as a signal for a broader inquiry. That’s why Terri and I interviewed 34 clergy, professional and volunteers leaders from 15 Jewish and Protestant congregations and nonprofit organizations throughout the country. These leaders worked both in “established” and “emerging” congregations and nonprofits. We wanted to hear their stories of navigating disruptive times and integrate their stories with theory and practice.

snapchat-facebook

And what did we find: Disruption does not discriminate between “established” and “emerging” organizations. An example: in 2013, Evan Spiegel, one of the founders of the popular social media app, Snapchat, reportedly rebuffed an all cash offer from Facebook C.E.O.’s Mark Zuckerberg for over $3 billion. At the time, Spiegel was 23 years old and Zuckerberg was 29. Spiegel, a 23 year-old disruptor apparently didn’t believe that an “older” person like Zuckerberg could fully appreciate how revolutionary his platform was! Today’s disruptors can easily become tomorrow’s disrupted, whether in the for-profit or nonprofit sector.

Having a place for leaders of “established” and “emerging” congregations and nonprofits to discuss how they are learning to lead through the challenges of disruption would be very fruitful! So please connect with Hayim (options for social media of your choice, top right) or with Terri (telton@luthersem.edu, www.facebook.com/terri.elton, @TerriElton) and contribute your wisdom to these unprecedented questions.

_______________________
Evelyn M. Rusli and Douglas MacMillian, “Snapchat Spurned $3 Billion Acquisition Offer from Facebook,” The Wall Street Journal Blog, November 2013, accessed June 1, 2016.