Reading: 2.4—The Dynamics of Change

2.4 The Dynamics of Change: Change is difficult and complex, and it’s helpful to note several dynamics of change. There is more to navigating change than these four dynamics, but understanding these four provide a baseline for approaching change effectively.

1. Willingness to Change – When leaders are endeavoring to move a congregation through change, their thoughts tend to focus on the willingness to change. Are our people willing to change? With that question at the forefront, leaders follow a logic that says, “If you can reach the point where people are willing to change, you’re home free.” Not so fast. In reality, the willingness to change is just the starting line of change; it’s not the finish line. Yes, people do need to become willing to change, but the willingness to change doesn’t tell the whole story. My study, observation, and experience tell me that people can legitimately be willing to change and still not make the change. Willingness operates in the theoretical, the hypothetical. Folks reason that, when the time comes, “I’ll make the change because I know we need a change, and I am willing to change.” However, when reality hits, i.e., when the change moves from theory to practice, some folks, though willing, are not able to make the change. It’s not what they thought it was going to be in theory. Yes, they are willing to change, but they can’t.

2. Ability to Change – On the heels of the Willingness to Change is the Ability to Change. There are many times when people who are legitimately willing to change are not able to change when the actual change arrives. As they projected into the future, having recognized the need for change, they got on board and enthusiastically signed on for the new and improved ministry. However, when the actual change arrived, they were disillusioned and unable to follow through. Wise leaders understand that there is more to effecting change than simple willingness but that actual change requires ability, a much more advanced dynamic. The willing are not always able.

3. Substance of Change – Change has two faces. First, what are we changing FROM? Second, what are we changing TO? Changing FROM is much easier to navigate than changing TO. When change is being considered by a group of leaders, and ultimately their congregation, what a church is changing FROM is well understood. More than likely, this element is very well known and has been witnessed or experienced many, many times over a period of years. So, when speaking of changing FROM, everyone engaged in such a decision is well informed and knows exactly what the element to be changed is and how it functions. For example, if there is a group of ten leaders discussing changing FROM a given element, all ten know exactly what that element is, and it’s reasonable to push for a consensus among leaders such that all ten come to agreement. However, once changing FROM is decided, it’s much more difficult to garner unity about what to change TO, or what should replace the element that is being changed. Continuing with this example, ten leaders who unanimously agree in regard to changing FROM might offer ten different perspectives on what to change TO. Even when choices are narrowed down to a final selection, there will be ten different projections as to what that final selection will look like on the field of ministry. At the point of selection, the change replacement is a theory, an idea, something to be tried. Often, the projected change turns out to be quite different when applied that when it was being discussed as a hypothetical idea. At this point, leadership might find itself suffering in the gap between willingness to change and ability to change and is subject to both “buyer’s and seller’s remorse.”

4. Pace of Change – The Pace of Change wrestles with the questions, “How much change can our congregation handle,” and, “How fast can our congregation process the change?” There are dangers on either side of this issue. Too much, too soon can throw a congregation into conflict and crisis. Too little, too slowly can leave a congregation stagnant with the promise of change not being forthcoming and confidence in and credibility of leaders waning. There is no set formula for determining how much is too much or too little, and there is no set formula for determining what pace is too slow or too fast. It’s vitality important that leaders know their congregation well and that the application of change be continuously monitored to gauge where the congregation is in its acceptance or resistance of change. To be clear, I’m not suggesting that leaders allow a congregation to, in essence, hold a dynamic missional vision hostage by withholding acceptance of needed changes. I am suggesting that change be navigated with awareness and sensitivity to congregational reaction in order to avoid careless conflict or passive aggressive behavior from the congregation toward the implementation of wisely discerned changes. Think back to our discussion regarding Discerning & Developing Vision and to what’s already been covered regarding Casting Vision & Creating Ownership.

Vision casting to create ownership recognizes that change is difficult and complex, and approaches change through four principal dynamics: Willingness, Ability, Substance, and Pace.