Blog

  • Why Jesus’ Revolutionary Table Manners Matter Today (Luke 14 v1, 7-14)

    Why Jesus’ Revolutionary Table Manners Matter Today (Luke 14 v1, 7-14)

    Imagine you’re at a wedding reception, scanning the room for your assigned seat. That familiar flutter of anxiety: “Where do I fit in?” We’ve all experienced that moment of social navigation, wondering about our place in the carefully orchestrated hierarchy of any gathering.

    This Sunday, we’re diving into one of Jesus’ most subversive teachings: a story that begins at a dinner party but explodes into something far more radical. What looks like ancient etiquette advice becomes a blueprint for revolutionary living that could transform how we see ourselves, our communities, and our world.

    Jesus wasn’t just observing social dynamics at this particular feast; he was dismantling them entirely. His teaching about taking the lowest place isn’t about false modesty or strategic networking. It’s about fundamentally reimagining what makes life valuable and meaningful.

    In the UK’s class-obsessed culture, where postcodes and accents still determine opportunities, Jesus’ words cut through our carefully constructed hierarchies like a knife through wedding cake. He’s calling us to something beautifully disruptive: a life where worth isn’t determined by status, where the margins become the centre, and where radical hospitality transforms strangers into family.

    The most explosive part? Jesus doesn’t stop with personal humility. He challenges us to revolutionize our guest lists, literally and metaphorically. Instead of networking events and strategic relationships, he calls us to open our tables to the overlooked, the struggling, the different, the uncomfortable.

    This isn’t just ancient wisdom; it’s desperately contemporary. From food banks discovering that volunteers and recipients aren’t so different, to online communities breaking down barriers during lockdowns, we’re seeing glimpses of what Jesus envisioned: tables where everyone belongs.

    The Methodist tradition has always understood this radical hospitality. Our spiritual ancestors created communities where coal miners worshipped alongside merchants, where women preached alongside men, where the gospel became genuinely good news for everyone, especially those society had written off.

    This Sunday, discover how Jesus’ “upside-down kingdom” isn’t just a nice ideal.  It is a practical, transformative way of living that promises real blessing, authentic community, and the kind of joy that comes from finally finding where you truly belong.
    Explore what it means to live as people of the resurrection, choosing love over status, service over self-promotion, and radical inclusion over comfortable exclusion.

    For Sunday 44C, RCL Year C (Luke 14 v1, 7-14)

  • How Best Can Churches use AI and Technology?

    How Best Can Churches use AI and Technology?

    Aligning technology with ministry goals is crucial for churches to ensure that technological integration supports and enhances their mission rather than detracting from it. Here are some best practices:

     

    Establish Clear Technology Policies and Guidelines

    Start by formulating a mission statement for the technology team that aligns with the church’s overall mission. This ensures that all technological efforts are purposeful and support the church’s goals [6].  Develop a strategic plan that outlines how technology will be used to support various ministries and activities. This includes setting both long-term and short-term goals for technology use, ensuring that every technological investment is aligned with the church’s mission [5].

     

    Prioritize the Human Element

    Use technology to enhance the worship experience and foster community connections. For example, audio-visual equipment can make services more engaging, and live streaming can extend the reach to those unable to attend in person [1][2].  Ensure that technology complements rather than replaces personal interactions. For instance, while online platforms can facilitate communication and engagement, they should not replace face-to-face pastoral care and fellowship [3].

     

    Provide Ongoing Training and Education

    Offer regular training for staff and volunteers to ensure they are comfortable and proficient with the technology being used. This helps in maintaining a high standard of technical excellence and ensures that technology is used effectively [2]. Encourage continuous learning and adaptation to new technologies. This helps the church stay current with technological advancements and ensures that the technology used remains relevant and effective [4].

     

    Maintain a Balance Between Tradition and Innovation

    While integrating new technologies, ensure that the church’s core values and traditions are preserved. Technology should be used to support and enhance these values, not overshadow them [1][3]. Regularly evaluate the impact of technology on the church’s mission and values. This includes gathering feedback from the congregation and making necessary adjustments to ensure alignment [6].

     

    Foster Community Engagement and Accountability

    Encourage open dialogue and feedback from the congregation regarding the use of technology. This helps in understanding the needs and concerns of the community and ensures that technology is used in a way that benefits everyone [1].  Establish accountability measures to ensure that technology is used responsibly and ethically. This includes setting clear guidelines for online conduct and data privacy [5].

     

    Leverage Technology for Mission Enhancement

    Use technology to expand the church’s outreach efforts. This includes leveraging social media, podcasts, and online Bible studies to reach a broader audience and fulfil the church’s mission of spreading the Gospel [3][7]. Equip other ministries within the church with the necessary technological tools to enhance their effectiveness. This includes providing technical support and ensuring that all equipment is maintained and fully functional [2].

     

    By following these best practices, churches can ensure that technology is used in a way that aligns with their values and mission, enhancing their ability to serve their congregation and fulfil their spiritual goals.

     

    Citations:

    [1] https://www.parkchesterbaptistchurch.org/ministries/ministries/technology-ministry.html

    [2] https://richmondhill.church/tech

    [3] https://outreachmagazine.com/resources/76288-technology-and-the-church-what-you-need-to-know.html

    [4] https://www.fellowshipone.com/blog/7-ways-technology-improves-church/

    [5] https://www.greatchurchsound.com/blog/how-to-set-tech-goals-for-your-church

    [6] https://churchm.ag/every-church-tech-team-needs-mission-statement/

    [7] https://pushpay.com/blog/definitive-guide-to-church-technology/

    More Resources

    https://www.christiantechjobs.io/blog/what-is-church-tech-a-comprehensive-guide-to-church-technology

    https://www.playlister.app/blog/how-to-use-technology-to-make-your-church-more-efficient

    https://timetracko.com/blog/leveraging-technology-for-church-growth/

    https://get.tithe.ly/blog/church-technology

    https://www.ministrybrands.com/church/management/technology/

    https://www.christianitytoday.com/partners/pushpay/how-latest-technology-trends-are-shaping-your-church.html

    https://biblelines.app/why-the-church-needs-technology/

    https://www.allen-temple.org/ministries/congregational-stewardship/information-technology-ministry

    https://www.acstechnologies.com/church-growth/the-essential-guide-to-building-and-managing-your-churchs-it-budget/

    https://www.altarlive.com/blog/using-ai-for-ministry-a-revolution-in-church-leadership

  • How might AI affect the church?

    How might AI affect the church?

    AI could have a significant impact on the church in various ways, most of them positive.  However much will depend on the Church’s willingness to adopt the new practices and new ways and the extent to which changing societal pressures pressure the change to move in new directions.

    Pastoral Roles Transformation

    Pastors who primarily rely on dispensing information and teachings may find their roles partially taken over by AI-generated content. AI could effectively communicate spiritual truths. However, pastoral roles involving genuine engagement, empathy, understanding, and spiritual mentorship cannot be replaced by AI. These human elements will become more crucial.[1]

    AI-Generated Church Services

    While some churches might adopt AI-generated holographic presentations for preaching and worship, there could be a backlash as congregations desire authenticity. Real pastors and empathetic communities are likely to be valued over virtual experiences.[1]

    Job Replacement

    AI’s integration across industries threatens numerous jobs, including radiologists, auditors, bill collectors, screenwriters, fashion designers, and even computer programmers. Goldman Sachs projects AI could cause the loss of approximately 300 million jobs worldwide, potentially compelling governments to explore universal income programs.[1]

    AI in Advertising

    AI-generated holograms could replace human actors in commercials, making advertising more cost-effective and versatile. However, deepfake technology powered by AI raises concerns about misleading content, manipulation of public sentiment, and erosion of societal trust.[1]

    Routine Task Automation

    AI can automate routine tasks like recording donations and attendance data, allowing church staff to focus on other responsibilities.[3]

    Personalized Content

    AI can help personalize content by suggesting relevant Bible study materials, prayer schedules, or sermon topics based on data analysis, facilitating a deeper understanding of the Bible.[3]

     


    Potential Pitfalls

    There are concerns that large language models of AI could manipulate biblical texts and their interpretation to align with societal values, particularly where the common interpretation is not in accordance with good scholarship or the leading of the Spirit.  This could lead to weaker discipleship, a dissolution of the church’s witness, in turn leading to decreased church attendance, desensitization, and stifling creativity. Additionally, AI-generated sermons may limit unique perspectives and spiritual growth within the Christian community.[3]


     

    The church must navigate AI’s implications wisely, embracing its potential benefits while preserving the essence of faith-based practices, human connections, and the integrity of the gospel message.[1][2][3]

     

    Resources:

    [1] https://tristatevoice.com/2023/07/26/the-future-of-ai-10-global-implications-for-the-church-to-consider/

    [2] https://www.breezechms.com/blog/ai-and-the-church-possibilities-and-concerns

    [3] https://baptistnews.com/article/when-artificial-intelligence-finds-its-way-into-the-church/

    [4] https://www.altarlive.com/blog/the-impact-of-artificial-intelligence-on-the-church-embracing-the-opportunities

    [5] https://missionalmarketing.com/the-future-of-faith-7-ways-artificial-intelligence-is-transforming-church-marketing/

  • The change the church needs will come

    The change the church needs will come

    Change might not come from within.  It may not come from where we plan, or expect.
    Change will come from ‘Bethlehem’ rather than ‘Jerusalem’.  Micah 5v2

    The last Soviet leader, Mikhail Gorbachev died in 2022. He was 91.

    He is remembered in the West fondly for ending the Cold War. He is remembered less fondly in Russia for ending the Soviet Union. The thing is, he didn’t try to do either originally. What he was trying to do is, through Perestroika and Glasnost, reform the Soviet Union. Keep the system, but just remove some of the more unpleasant and inefficient bits from it.

    But once he started the process the whole thing started to unravel, and the entire country imploded. And that was that. Once it all collapsed, the Soviet Union ceased to exist within weeks (and nobody in the West or the East saw it coming, by the way), they’ve been trying to pick up the pieces ever since.

    So “Gorby” is an interesting case. A fellow who tried to do something good failed miserably but somehow ended up on the right side of history nonetheless. He will be missed. We could use more like him.

    Thirty years later after the fall of the Soviet Union, it’s still an interesting question. Starting from where Gorbachev was standing, what would one have done differently? Hard to say.

    Like Marc Andreesen said, once a culture gets to a certain state of stagnation, internal reform is impossible. Nothing to do but let the outside world eat its lunch. Let that be a lesson.

    The image was inspired by something Marc Andreessen, the legendary VC said in a podcast (The Knowledge Project #129), namely that when an organization gets to a critical mass of bureaucracy and stagnation, it can no longer be reformed from the inside. The only thing that can happen is that it can be toppled from the outside

     

    Credit (including image):  www.gapingvoid.com

  • When faith fails…

    When faith fails…

    This blogpost from Luke Larner, the ragamuffin priest is well worth a read, as is much else on his blog, “The Roadside Musings – Confessions of a Ragamuffin Priest”.  You can find it here: https://roadsidemusing.wordpress.com/


    Like many others, I’ve been emotionally impacted by the Mike Pilavachi / Soul Survivor situation.

    My heart particularly goes out to those who have come forward, and those still afraid to do so. Abuse, including spiritual abuse, absolutely decimates peoples’ lives. I’m painfully aware that churches need to do better.

    There are a wide variety of responses from both victims and the many people trying to make sense of their own experiences in light of these allegations. I’ve noticed a number of people wanting to reassure others with words to the affect that ‘Whatever happens with the investigation, it doesn’t mean what we experienced at Soul Survivor wasn’t real and wasn’t God.’

    I want to offer a different story. I want to offer my story, and I know this might feel painful to some, and maybe even heretical to others, but this is my story. And it starts with a simple question – What if?

    What if the intense experiences, what if the incredible emotional highs of being in a big top with thousands of other young people, what if the overwhelming desire to be something bigger than ourselves, what if hearing a ‘mission from God’ – what if it wasn’t real? What if it wasn’t God? What would that mean?

    I became a Christian at the age of 16 in a charismatic Baptist Church. Or at least that’s what I used to say when I ‘gave my testimony’ (i.e. told over-the-top versions of my backstory including the ‘many’ sins I committed) to try to inspire faith in others. The reality is, that for most (but not all) of my life, I have been shaped by participation in both church and the Christian story. There have been times when I outright rejected it. Times, that I often shared in my testimony, like regularly proclaiming to my friends at school with a loud voice: “If there is a God he’s shitting on me from a great height!” (in my characteristically subtle manner).

    But as slightly-above-averagely wayward teen, it was the intense experience of conversion and ensuing prayer ministry and black-and-white theology that really took my life in a different direction. This was heightened when me and my best mate (that dragged me to church) joined the youth group of an Anglican Church plant nearby who regularly visited both Soul Survivor Watford and the summer festivals. Thus ensued the regular pattern of visits to Watford and treks down to Shepton Mallet (and latterly Peterborough). Before long I was on the ‘prayer and prophecy team’ at the summer festival, and taking groups there as a leader myself over the course of many years.

    What I experienced, particularly at the summer festivals, came to shape the rest of my life. The incredible persuasiveness of hearing a call to follow the almighty God in a tent with thousands of my peers, the effortless cool of the beautiful leaders, the ‘Christian skate park’ and ‘Christian rock music’ and ‘Christian t-shirts’ created a social in-group I desperately wanted to be part of. And, as is my way, I took it to the extreme logical conclusion. Within two years I was signed up to be a missionary in parts of the world where it carried the death penalty if you got caught. I abandoned any thoughts of higher education or decent job prospects (cos God would provide, of course!). I became an intern youth worker, sofa surfing with families from the Church, until I got a very poorly paid job in a ‘Christian cafe’ to cover rent on a room in a ‘Christian shared house’. People were ‘prophesying’ to me all the incredible things I was going to do. In the midst of all this, my family thought I had joined a cult. They weren’t far wrong.

    Frank Zappa (a major musical influence until I binned all my ‘non-Christian’ CDs), famously said that the only difference between a religion and a cult is how much real estate they own. Selah.

    Through all of this I had big dreams of being God’s man of power for the hour. I wanted to be like the big boys on stage. I wanted to be part of changing the world. I wanted to be empowered. The problem was — it didn’t work. The healings and miracles never came, including in me (despite trying so hard to convince myself). Then the questions started to come. You see – I really believed, I consumed all the books and talks and conferences – I wanted to learn and to grow. And when I started to learn, and devoured the Holy Scriptures, I started to see some issues with what I was observing. I started to ask hard questions of pastors and leaders, which I soon discovered was not the done thing. The cracks started to appear, and great was my fall from grace. I became a pariah in the community. After all, we were all so scared that the devil was going to get us through the influence of ‘backsliders’.

    There were many more experiences that I don’t have space to share here – most of which were nothing to do with Soul Survivor. But I chased the dream they sold me for all it was worth, and it failed.

    I got to the point where I realised that so much of what I had given my life to was a fever dream. Or maybe worse, a lie. I had given money, time, and the best years of my life to a fantasy and to a movement that was never going to empower or liberate someone like me. Try as I might, I was never going to be one of the ‘chosen ones’ – my charming working-class habit of asking blunt questions of powerful people had put paid to that. There were other parts of myself I’d hidden to assimilate that took years of healing to bring back into the light. I remember one winter’s night in particular, travelling back from a biker party in a friends car, and I was trying process all this in the wee hours. As the dark country lanes whizzed by, I remember scribbling into my little brown notebook, “This is it. I am undone,” I was never the same after that day.

    Eventually, with the support of my spiritual director (a wise former-Catholic missionary priest), I had to face a big question: What if? What if it wasn’t all real? What if all the promises and prophecies were bullshit? What would that mean? What would I do? Would I stay a christian if it had really all been hype? Would I continue pursuing the discernment to a vocational ministry? Or would I just walk away. I was already spending an increasing amount of time in my local Zen Buddhist monastery at this point, and flirted with converting. I also had to ask, what did this mean for all the people I had bashed over the head with a Bible, who I had influenced with my fundamentalist theology, who I had recruited to the thing I now saw was hurting me and others? We were just vulnerable kids. We didn’t know.

    So what did I do? In the end – I stayed. Because I realised that, in spite of it all, there was still something so compelling to me about Jesus of Nazareth. I realised that with all the hype and power and success driven away, I was compelled by the life and teaching of the Nazarene, whose God casts down the mighty from their thrones, and lifts up the lowly. I was compelled to follow in the footsteps of a fellow house-builder who calls people to a life of non-violent resistance against the powers of empire and death. I realised that, in the words of Sufjan Stevens, I’m drawn to the blood, the flight of a one-winged dove. I realised that in the sacraments and community of the Church I found something that gives my life a greater depth of meaning. I realised that, borrowing words from brother Cornel West, there was something about that sweet Jesus that still teaches me to love my crooked neighbour with my own crooked heart. I realised that what I had been sold wasn’t the only Christianity.

    I could have happily walked away. My life would probably have been much easier if I had. I know others who did walk away, including close family members, and you know what? I think that was the right decision for them. Of course the reality is that if I had walked away, I wouldn’t be doing a job which I really love (on the good days at least), including the study of academic theology which has helped me process all this. So, it’s complicated. This is my story, and it’s where I ended up. Others will be called down a different path.

    So for those wrestling with what they have experienced in light of this scandal – if it feels safe to do so, and maybe with the help of an experienced guide – I dare you to ask: ‘What if?’ What if it wasn’t real? What if a lot of what we experienced was hype? What if we were carried on the wave of hope for a better world and a better life, but were left wanting? What if we hurt people in the process? What if we gave our everything to something that failed us? What if we were just impressionable kids who deserved better?

    Will we still follow Jesus? Or will we find a different way?

    What if there is something more than the hype and the numbers and the influence and the career and the nice feelings?

    What if G-d is really out there, and She is gently calling to us somewhere in the quiet: “Come away with me my love….”

  • Is the Church Losing Faith in Low-Income Communities?

    Is the Church Losing Faith in Low-Income Communities?

    A report on church closures in Greater Manchester reveals that more are being lost in areas of low income and deprivation.

    The report, Is the Church Losing Faith in Low-Income Communities in Greater Manchester?, was commissioned by Church Action on Poverty and compared the number of churches in the city in 2010 with those that remain in 2020.  One of the authors, the Rev Fiona Tweedie, told a Religion Media Centre briefing that they looked at five main denominations: Baptist, Roman Catholic, Methodist, Church of England and United Reformed.  Most church closures within the CofE, Catholic, Methodist and Baptist denominations were in the most deprived areas, the report said. Only the United Reformed Church had more closures in affluent areas than in low-income areas.

    It continued: “Reasons for church closures included: declining numbers attending church services; buildings falling into disrepair, coupled with churches being unable to afford their upkeep; and fewer priests and ministers to serve the churches. However, this … does not explain why many more churches have closed in deprived areas, in comparison with more affluent areas.”  Ms Tweedie said: “Sometimes while there’s fabulous work going on in deprived areas, sometimes there aren’t people to fight to save a church in the way that there are in some more affluent areas.”

    Niall Cooper, director of Church Action on Poverty, said there must be a reason why churches in deprived areas were closed more frequently and there was another story going on. “I’m not saying in most cases it’s a deliberate strategy. But unconsciously, there are forces at play, where churches with less resource, less money, potentially fewer human assets are the ones that close — and those will be the ones in low-income community areas.”  He said the report was inspired by a policy from the Church of Scotland 15 years ago, to target areas of deprivation as priority areas for the denomination, as “a theological imperative”.

    Eunice Attwood, the church on the margins officer for the Methodists, said she had been aware of closures in low-income communities for many years, but sometimes in such communities the building was absolutely essential and her team pleaded with churches to keep those buildings open.  However, the church was not just about buildings but communities, she said, and the Methodist Church was intentionally putting resources into low-income areas, to nurture communities — not buildings: “The church that emerges may look very different — we’ve seen walk-in churches, muddy church, a church that meets on a Wednesday, not a Sunday. New places for people need not to be tied to bricks and mortar.”

    The report contains the example of the Triangle Community Church, north of Bolton, where four Methodist churches were closed and a new centre built, providing a community café and activities for people in the neighbourhood.

    The Bishop of Manchester, David Walker, spoke of the Antioch Network, a group of community churches developing in Manchester on housing estates and inner-city areas. Money from central church funds is going to Manchester specifically for this purpose, he said: “We’re closing fewer buildings than we are opening new congregations.”

    He pointed to the reality that churches built in Victorian times served populations which had simply moved away and the buildings were not needed in the same areas. It would be like keeping a church open in a field in Norfolk near a village that had been destroyed by the Black Death. “If a population moves, you actually have to move where you’re putting the church,” he said, and suggested more work needed to be done to analyse population numbers in the areas where churches closed.

    The Rev Philip Brooks, deputy general secretary of mission for the United Reformed Church, said it would never shut a building unless there was local co-operation. Sometimes, however, buildings were a millstone.

    Ecumenical projects can combine to provide purpose-built community facilities, such as one in Salford which has a place for worship alongside space for a food bank, community gardens, community café, all important for the church in areas of deprivation.

    Researcher Deirdre Brower-Latz produced an accompanying report, What Does it Mean to be a Church on the Margins?, describing through interviews what church means to people living in areas of deprivation. Describing a church as on the margins was problematic. “It’s a very top-down understanding isn’t it?”, she said. “There’s almost an implied insult or a diminishing, or a potential power exchange that’s really unhelpful.” She told the briefing that their conversations with Christians in those churches had been “really wonderful”. “It opened up all kinds of conversations about inherent dignity, pride and communities that others would slight. A sense of ‘what does it mean to belong here?’, because … here is our home, and a place of life for us, and flourishing and hope. “The stories that emerge are full of ordinary miracles, tiny spaces of seeds of life, yeast, salt. It sounds very biblical, what people say back to you, you know, here’s the way we encounter Jesus in this space.”

    Kate Gray, minister of the Dandelion Community in Wythenshawe, Greater Manchester, said there was something behind the closure decisions about class, power, resource and numbers. Her church had been under threat of closure and was often spoken about as tiny, with 15 people maximum on a Sunday morning “if there was a revival” and between 400 to 600 people part of the community through the week, involved in community events such as a gym, carers group, mental health group, community café and food bank. But she told the briefing that the threat of closure had gone as the wider church had changed its approach in recent years and listened to local wisdom and experience, while the local church had “skilled up” to speak the language of the wider church and “join in middle-class conversations”.

    Eddie Tulasiewicz, of the National Churches Trust, challenged people on the call to talk about money as well as power. He said the government had given £50m via the Heritage Stimulus Fund, much of which went to beautiful churches with small communities. But there was a conversation needed about where the next tranche would go — to heritage or a community stimulus fund, he questioned. He urged people to contact their MP and local council and find if money was available. He said many churches lost out because they were not Grade I listed, which automatically attracted funds. But he cautioned against demolishing buildings: there was less climate impact if buildings were kept going.

    Reflecting on the report findings and the future of the church in deprived areas, Mr Cooper said they were communities of hope. “This is the gospel priority, to ensure that the poorest and most vulnerable communities are ones that are supported, to be the best communities that they can be. That’s why we’ve commissioned this. “And now we’re looking into the next phase about how we enable people in those communities for their voices to be heard, to shape the strategies and decisions of the churches as institutions, which ultimately will be how those communities get access to power and are able to ensure that they have dignity and agency. “This is not just a conversation about church, it’s how all communities are represented in society, and are able to articulate that they should get justice in terms of our wider decisions about resources within societies, communities, and ultimately as a country.”


    This article was written by Ruth Peacock and published here, in February 2023: https://religionmediacentre.org.uk/news/the-poorer-the-area-the-quicker-the-churches-are-closing/
    Photo by Kate Remmer on unsplash.com

  • Will ‘Downsizing’ Save the Church?

    Will ‘Downsizing’ Save the Church?

    During the Great Recession of 2008, companies around the world downsized their workforces. American firms alone laid off more than 8 million workers from the end of 2008 to the middle of 2010. Even in healthier financial times, such as now, firms often downsize because it is seen as a way to reduce costs, adjust structures, and create leaner, more efficient workplaces. Despite the prevalence of downsizing, researchers and businesspeople alike continue to disagree on the viability of this common organizational practice. We add to this debate with our new research, which indicates that downsizing may actually increase the likelihood of bankruptcy.

    Proponents of downsizing argue that it is an effective strategy, with benefits such as increased performance and sales. Detractors, on the other hand, point to negative consequences including performance and productivity declines, decreases in customer satisfaction, and adverse effects on remaining employees, such as increased stress. As the debate continues, high-profile firms continue to downsize, as demonstrated by recent announcements or actions by Victoria’s Secret, Lowe’s, and PepsiCo.

    Our team of researchers from Auburn University, Baylor University, and the University of Tennessee, Chattanooga set out to better understand the consequences of downsizing in large, U.S.-based corporations. In our recently published work in the Journal of Business Research, we tested the theory that downsizing could lead to a host of problems that eventually increases the likelihood of bankruptcy. Among these: Downsizing firms lose valuable knowledge when employees exit; remaining employees struggle to manage increased workloads, leaving little time to learn new skills; and remaining employees lose trust in management, resulting in less engagement and loyalty. Many of these effects may have long-term consequences, like reduced innovation, that are not captured in short-term financial metrics. We sought to investigate whether these effects could increase the likelihood that firms would declare bankruptcy.

    To investigate these potential consequences, we examined 2010 data from 4,710 publicly traded firms and determined whether they declared bankruptcy in the subsequent five-year period. These firms spanned 83 different industries, including the service, high technology, and manufacturing industries. We did not examine financial firms, as changes introduced by the Dodd-Frank Act changed the bankruptcy landscape for these firms. We found that 24% of our sample firms reduced their workforce by 3% or more in 2010, including Ford, Petmed Express, and Regal Cinemas.

    To ensure the accuracy of our results, we controlled for known potential drivers of both downsizing and bankruptcy. These included the size of the firm, changes in market capitalization, prior performance, profitability, trajectory toward bankruptcy (using the Altman Z score), a large number of employees per sales relative to their industry peers, and other indicators of financial health. As firms might differ in number of employees they downsized, we controlled for the percentage of employees reduced in each downsizing event. We also accounted for the number of acquisitions in the previous five years (since downsizing often occurs after acquisitions) and industry differences. We further confirmed our findings across a different time period (1995–2000).

    We found that downsizing firms were twice as likely to declare bankruptcy as firms that did not downsize. While downsizing may be capable of producing positive outcomes, such as saving money in the short term, it puts firms on a negative path that makes bankruptcy more likely. While not always fatal, downsizing does increase the chances that a firm will declare bankruptcy in the future.

    Given this finding, we sought to understand why some firms were able to survive the negative effects of downsizing while some were not. We speculated that examining firms’ remaining resources could shed light on this question. Accordingly, we examined intangible resources (captured through Tobin’s q, a measure of the value of the firm not captured by its balance sheets), financial resources, and physical resources.

    We found that having plentiful financial and physical resources did not replace the downsized employees, who fulfilled multiple roles as workers, knowledge bearers, and cultural contributors within the firm. Having ample capital is often viewed as a corporate panacea, so it was unexpected and interesting to find that financial resources did not contribute to the prevention of bankruptcy for downsizing firms.

    We did find, however, that intangible resources helped to reduce the likelihood that downsizing firms would declare bankruptcy. Intangible resources can be redeployed in unique and perhaps innovative ways following downsizing. For example, existing employee knowledge can be utilized to revamp processes that have been interrupted or to replace these processes with more effective ones. Similarly, because these resources can be used in a multitude of ways, firms may be able to use them to attract partners that can fill the gaps left by downsized employees and thereby soften the blow for downsizing firms.

    Our findings suggest that, prior to deciding to downsize, company leaders should consider whether any positive short-term returns from downsizing will outweigh the potentially severe long-term consequences, and examine the specifics of their resource portfolio to determine whether their firms are adequately protected from downsizing’s negative consequences. Any moves that eliminate important intangible resources may limit the ability of managers to counteract the negative effects from employee layoffs.

    Given that downsizings are often part of a larger restructuring plan, managers must ensure that they retain the resources that can decrease the odds of negative outcomes. Most important, firms planning to downsize must focus carefully on their intangible resources, rather than financial or physical ones, because they will be essential if the company loses valuable employees.


    This article by Michelle L. Zorn, Patricia Norman, Frank C. Butler, and Manjot Bhussar dated April 26, 2017 was published in Harvard Business Review.  You can see the original article here:  https://hbr.org/2017/04/if-you-think-downsizing-might-save-your-company-think-again?autocomplete=true and if the link doesn’t work for you, you may need to buy a subscription.  If you want to know about managing churches and other organisations, how to get the best out of staff or use your resources most effectively the solid research done by Harvard Business School will make the subscription well worthwhile.  Having said that I think you can get three free articles per month.

    Photo by Julia Zyablova on Unsplash


     

  • In which direction is the church moving?

    In which direction is the church moving?

    So, in which direction is the church moving, or perhaps which are the most prominent winds in society which are going to move the church in a particular direction?  It is difficult to make predictions, but sometimes when one hears a consider thought it rings true.  Perhaps, something here might ring true with your experience and provide some guidance as to your ministry, the direction for your church, or simply give you hope.

    I stumbled across and article entitled “Ten (Very Different) Church Trends for 2022” by Thom S. Ranier.  You can find the article here: https://churchanswers.com/blog/ten-very-different-church-trends-for-2022/
    The article is worth a read, despite being over a year old, and you can click through and do that.  I am only going to highlight a few things which Thom has predicted and which I think are particularly interesting, and insightful.

    Thom predicted that:

    Worship attendance will average 80% of pre-COVID numbers. That has proved correct if perhaps a little optimistic.

    Neighbourhood churches will become a movement. He defines these as congregations that are laser-focused on ministering to a specific geographical area.  He is writing in an American context, but I think this is a particularly interesting in the UK context.  Is this perhaps what we are seeing in the growing number of churches evolving into community hubs and community centres?  Does this mean that we will see a decline in global mission and in the desire to support mission in other parts of the Connexion.  I hope not, but do think it might be happening already.  With this he suggests will come more community focus than any period in the last 30 years. If this is indicative of a stronger, local incarnation of the gospel that is good news, but if it simply drawing our vision and not seeing mission value beyond what will help us grow and survive as an institution that is really bad news.  Time will tell.  This relates to another prediction of Thom’s that there will be a far greater emphasis on evangelism than in the recent past.  It is no secret how much the Methodist Church is putting into Evangelism and Growth, but again the value will be shown in whether this proves to be truly missional or about institutional survival.

    Finally, for this post, Thom predicts that the micro church could become a movement.  (A micro church is defined as a congregation with 30 or fewer attendees). This is certainly true and an intentional move in some areas of the church, and one that was growing until COVID.  It also links back to our Wesleyan Revival Heritage of societies, class meetings and bands.  What is interesting is that there as so many churches in the UK which fit into this category (but are not branded micro-churches), and fail to recognise the positive aspects which they could embrace.  Of course, most newly established micro churches have little or no administrative obligations, and are even less likely to have building maintenance and assessment obligations.  So, to make the most of this opportunity and to really embrace the trend we will need a new structure or a new way of operating.

    More on those new structures and ways of operating as well as related trends of ministry in the next bog post.


    Photo by Daniel Gonzalez on Unsplash

  • Common Church Problems (No 1 in a series)

    Common Church Problems (No 1 in a series)

    I’ve dealt with a wide range of church issues over my career. I’m well-equipped to offer insight and suggestions because many of these challenges are similar to those I’ve encountered elsewhere.

    So, what are the typical issues facing churches?
    Do you know of any that might affect your church?

    Without a clear vision and strategy, people are likely to do their own thing. If there is no clear vision, there will be division – literally, two visions. Organizational drift and leadership that is based on reaction rather than intention are the outcomes. Uncertainty and disorientation pervade as a result of a lack of a clear guiding image. This issue is far too common. Clarity, purpose and direction, are all provided by a vision. The nature of vision should be prophetic; that is, focused on the future and coming from God’s heart. A vision statement can be beneficial, but only when it is more than clever words on a piece of paper.
    If your church has a clear vision but no progress, your strategy might not be aligned with it. Saying you’re going somewhere is one thing but it takes consistent and enduring action to move towards that goal.

    We are going nowhere if the culture doesn’t support the vision. A clear vision helps us understand what we’re trying to accomplish. However, the culture determines the growth and will play a significant role in our vision’s success or failure. Culture must be developed intentionally and strategically, with clear values rooted in what we believe about our mission and vision.
    People’s hearts and minds cannot be changed by a vision statement, but culture does have the power to do this. However if people fail to adopt beliefs and behaviours that are consistent with the church’s vision, in other words if they are not discipled, we will see the culture clashes and culture gaps which cause leaders to feel defeated and frustrated.  We have to disciple – teach, model, share and reinforce our core values.

    Structures must encourage, rather than prevent growth. Church structure should be organic and flexible to grow with where God is leading. It is about who you are and what you do, and is reflected in your policies, procedures and systems.  Structure can facilitate God’s blessings, resources, and opportunities but excessive, or insufficient, structure can undermine the same.  A church should not be built around structure. Instead, structure ought to act like a trellis, supporting the development of a culture that serves the vision.
    Sometimes churches have historic and traditional ministry activities that impede their expansion.

    The church is the only organisation which, by definition, exists for those who are not a part of it. The church will eventually dwindle and disappear if it fails to prioritise taking the good news of the gospel to those who have not yet accepted it. You can take a quick inventory of your ministries by asking, “How many of our ministries serve those outside of the church?”
    We set ourselves up for failure when we devote our resources and time to making those around us happy. Examining how we can serve the world and spread the kingdom through word and deed is better, and more biblical. If you look around the church and see no new faces, recognise that as a problem.

    Often the discipleship of members is inadequate. In most cases there is no churchwide plan to people grow into Christian, because there is no culture of discipleship.
    The ministries and programs are not bad, in and of themselves, but, often, they are hit-and-miss in terms of discipleship. People are empowered to take specific actions when there is a clear path. They should have access to resources, opportunities, tools, and people that will help them develop their faith.

    There is too much hesitation regarding digital ministry, including our internal and external communications. Technology is constantly evolving, but when it comes to online ministry, many churches are not moving with the trends and falling further behind. WE don’t just need a static church website we need to find ways of doing digital ministry well.
    This is the way forward, regardless of what you think about social media, the internet, and digital ministry. There are difficulties associated with technology and social media and it has the potential to cause a great deal of harm; however, this is not an issue pertaining to the church; rather, it is an issue pertaining to society. It can also bring a lot of opportunities and benefits.

    Teams can increase ministry effectiveness, but difficult issues arise when teams are imbalanced. This could be caused by uneven power dynamics, control, a lack of empowerment, a lack of awareness of dysfunctions in leadership styles, teams with too few gifts or experiences, or teams with gifting gaps. As previously stated, the culture of a church is shaped by its leadership teams, so a dysfunctional team leads to a dysfunctional culture. That’s why the New Testament has a lot to say about who belongs on a church leadership team and who shouldn’t. Identifying your team’s temperaments, ministry interests, and leadership styles are excellent first steps.

    There is a declining pool of leaders in the church at the moment. Sometimes that is because there are no new leaders coming forward, sometimes because the leadership training is ineffective and sometimes because we fail to hand leadership on to those who can grow into it. We want leaders who are pretty much like us, who won’t shake things up too much or take us off in a new direction.
    Sometimes the problem is from the other side – there are more things that need a lead than there are leaders to take them on.  There are too many ministries going on at once. It is better to wait for a leader than to start ministry too quickly.  Churches should be intentional in creating leadership pipelines to find, educate, and promote leaders to various levels of ministry leadership; leadership pipelines that start at the fringes guided by values like equality, diversity and inclusion.


    Regardless of the issue which your church is facing, it is not new and you are not alone. Others will have dealt with it and come out on the other side. Often it is helpful to gain an outsider’s perspective in order to better understand the real issues.

    Photo by Kimson Doan on Unsplash

  • Unexpected Church Growth Methods

    Unexpected Church Growth Methods

    It is a tough world we live in and these are tough times.
    Nevertheless, it is God’s world, and “God’s Kingdom will come, and God’s will, will be done on earth as it is in heaven”.
    And while we might feel ourselves, even find ourselves, in crisis management mode the solution isn’t to tighten everything up (Harvard Business School has shown that organisations which downsize are twice as likely to fail as those that don’t), and draw everything in (who ever survived a siege? Answers on a post card.)

    So here are five counterintuitive rules for 21st  Century Church growth:

    1. Generous giving campaigns which are paired with vision help churches expand. It does sound strange. Why would you ask for more money in order to expand your mission? People are drawn to vision in a world filled with distractions. People react when the vision is made clear, which is frequently required in a generosity initiative.
    2. Especially among younger and older generations, belonging is a “thing.” The churches that emphasize a high bar of church commitment and leadership are the ones which are attracting younger age groups.
    3. Online resources can help, maybe.
      As long as they are treated as a front door, online platforms can aid in the expansion of churches. Making a strategy to bring online viewers into the heart of your church is crucial. The few churches who do this report large numbers of visitors coming from their online attendance.  When engaging in an online experience, you must welcome users—but you have to find a way of bringing them into community -even if they remain online!
    4. Outreach must become untamed. It cannot be church in disguise. There are significant needs in your community that the gospel can meet, or which can be met through Christian service.  The needs are complicated, that much is true, but the wisdom and support is out there if you can supply the local engagement.   Let me say it again, it has to be genuine service, meeting real needs without a hidden ambition to sell church or find new members.
    5. Through baptisms, weddings, and funerals, pastors can have a significant impact on individuals. Your church has one of its best opportunities to connect with individuals around significant life milestones, in gracious service (rather than money making opportunities).

    Any other thoughts? Let me know.

     

    Photo by Annie Spratt on Unsplash