Clem Walters gave this talk at a 1981 South African leadership conference. Using a People of Praise coordinatorsā meeting as a model, he offered practical teaching on how to run a meeting of leaders and advice on why and how to make decisions by consensus.
Transcript
This document is a direct transcript of an audio recording, and may contain transcription errors and other minor edits for the sake of clarity.
[Tape begins after Clem has already begun speaking.]
CLEM: . . . I was certainly happy that the title of the talk was āWorking Together as Leaders in Submission,ā because if it wasnāt, weāre out of luck, because thatās all I have. [Clem and all laugh.]
We couldāve just had a great prayer meeting for 45 minutes or something. [Clem and all laugh.]
What Iām going to do now is just move right into the material. For those of you that were here earlier for my workshop, what Iām gonna try to do is quickly go through some material that is meant to be stimulating, and I hope that weāll have some questions and, if weāre fortunate, maybe some answers to the questions, and some discussion. And by the grace of God, weāll all be out of here at 9:25. [Light laughter.]
One thing Iād like to say at the outset is that when we talk about working as leaders, that if we go it alone, if we try to be a loner in working as a leader, it severely limits Godās work. Now there are some rare cases where you have to go it alone. That is, if youāre all by yourself in a situation, if youāre all by yourself in a prayer group, itās a start-up situationāwell, clearly, you have to go it alone. Orāif itās just you and your wife, thatās a good beginning; you have to go it alone. But as a rule, it is best to, as rapidly as possible, begin working with other leaders and other people.
Itās very clear in looking at Scripture that the Lordās plan is a communal plan with regard to leadership. If you take the passage that was read this morning from Numbers, that Gerald read, you have Moses, who was kind of hacking along by himself. And he was near total exhaustion. And there was the word of his father-in-law, who suggested that he had to do something about this critical state that he found himself in. From morning till night, the people were streaming through the tent, for governance and for pastoral care. And out of that passage we saw that the Lord raised up and empowered 70 elders to assist him.
The Lord Jesus himself, in his ministry, lost no time in surrounding himself with some apostles. You know, the Lord Jesus couldāve gone and done the work by himself. But very early in his ministry, he chose his apostles.
And then, again, weāre reminded of the prayer of Jesus himself that we might be one: that we might be together, and we might be one together.
The point of all that is, it seems that itās the Lordās plan that we work together, that there is a joining together of the spiritual gifts that he has given for the sake of the whole.
Now, having said that, I want to acknowledge that working together as leaders is extremely difficult. Thatās why we have the Holy Spirit, you see. [Hum of agreement.] Come, Holy Spirit.
Itās a lot easier to do the job yourself. At least, in the beginning it is. Just as itās a lot easierāwhen you consider delegating work, itās a lot easier to just do it yourselfāat least, one time, okay? Because you have to stop and you have to teach someone, or show someone how to do the job, or how to complete it. But when you considerāwhen you delegate that to someone, if you take the time, which is often an interruption, to show someone how to do it, that person can do it from that ā going forward. From now on, that person can do that job.
So, the point of that was: itās not easy.
Also, interpersonal relationships are tough. Especially, theyāre tough when you consider how tough-minded leaders are. Leader-type people are strong, very opinionated people. [All laugh.] You know, weāre just tough cookies! [More laughter.] Okay? Now thatās a gift from God. Itās not something that we need to abandon. We need to understand, though, that weāreāwe have to overcome that as we work together with other people.
Now, certainly God provides the power and the grace for unity. In our own community, weāre a thousand people strong. And there are 16 elders that pastor and care for that body of Christ. We work together very well. And Iām gonna be sharing some ways that we can work together, ways that we can govern together. And in particular, Iāll share the way that has worked very well for the 16 men who are elders in our community.
So, weāre called to join together to lead Godās people. We need to share our individual spiritual gifts for the sake of the whole. We need to share our individual life experiences, that is, all that stuff that is there, all that life that we lived, all that training, all the education. Some people call it the college of hard knocks. You know, all of that that we bring with us, all that baggage we bring with us, which is also a gift from God. You canāt say, āOn one hand, we have the spiritual gifts here, and all this that weāve learned through experience is just carnal stuff.ā Itās all Godās work, and itās all to be used for Godās purposes. We need a āwhole bodyā ministry. The head needs the foot and the foot needs the head, certainly, so that we can be whole.
Now, without joint leadership and sharing of gifts and burdens, thereās some things that you can say for sure will happen. Itās absolutely true that unless we share leadership, the burdens of caring for people, that we burn out. People tend, when going it alone, to burn out. Itās like a shooting star that consumes itself. Thatās what happens to a shooting star! It justāitās a flash through the sky. Itās just burning up its own energy and its own self. You can all look out there and say, āThere goes Jooooohn.ā [Clemās voice descends in pitch like a descending missile. All laugh.] āAll by himseeeelf.ā Thatās what happens. People burn out when they go it alone.
Also, when you go it alone, you can easily become confused and misled, and you can be deceived. Leaders are especially susceptible to the enemyās work in their life. Because the enemy knows that if he can get the leader, he can get the people who are following.
Also, when people are going it alone, thereās no longevity to work or ministry. You have people that are there today and gone tomorrow. There they go. Shooo. [Clem makes another ādescending missileā sound] Out there.
Now, what Iād like to do is share one workable plan for joint leadership. This is one thatāwell, Iāll get into that a little later. This is one plan.
First of all, someone has to bring together the leaders in a regular meeting. Now, if thereās a question, āWho are the leaders?ā or if the question is asked, āAm I a leader?ā you have to answer it by saying, āWho do people listen to and who do people follow?ā If the answer is, people do follow a person, they do listen to the advice the person has givenāand also if that work that weāve seen, although it might be minimal, has been fruitfulāthen thereās a good chance that that person that weāre talking about that people follow, people listen to, itās fruitful, is a leader, and just might be included in this meeting of leaders.
Now Iām gonna be talking a lot more in detail in a later workshop, which is entitled āChoosing Leaders,ā so Iām not gonna go into that now.
Now, we bring the group of leaders together, as we begin to share responsibility. The number we bring together must be adequate in size for the gifts to be represented, but small enough to get the work done, okay? Thatās the key. Because if you begin grouping everyone together as leaders, if the group gets too large, you might as well have your leadership meeting in the prayer meeting, you know, with everyoneās ideas flowing and everyone having a say, because you wonāt get anything done. You wonāt be able to make decisions and move things forward.
So Iām just gonna arbitrarily put some numbers. The minimum size should be around three. Remember the old saying, āTwoās a party and threeās a crowd.ā Okay? In this case, this crowd is important, the minimum, three. And on the top side, if you get much heavier than eight to ten people working together as leaders, it often becomes a little difficult.
Now, weāre gonna assume that we have this group of people together. We have at least three, or on the top side, we have maybe eight or ten. We have to appoint someone, one of that group, to lead the meeting, and often itās an obvious person. The person who has the key to the house that youāre meeting in might be the obvious person. [All laugh.] But thereās usually an obvious person.
Now, this person only leads the meeting and notāand the agendaābut not the decisions. So the person weāre looking for to lead this startup group is only leading the meeting, and the agenda, and seeing that it gets doneāand Iām gonna give someāgive aātalk a lot more about itābut not the decisions. The meeting leader sees that the agreements that everyone has agreed to are kept. That is, the meeting is regular. Whatever you agree to, whether it be weekly, or if you meet every day or once a month, or whatever it is, this person that weāre going to appoint as the meeting leader sees that that happens.He or she decides that the meetingāsees that it starts on time and stops on time.
The meeting leader sees that each person has a say, that if youāre gonna be a part of that group, thereās no reason for you to be there if you donātāI mean, just to sit back and pray in tongues is not enough. While the action is going on, the meeting leader sees that each person is drawn out and has something to say.
The meeting leader might appoint prayer and study outside the meeting, suggesting that people pray about a particular issue or do some particular study or investigative work outside of the actual meeting to come prepared. The meeting leader might appoint some subgroups to get a particular task done without taking up the actual meeting time of the people.
Now, the meeting leader oversees the agenda. He sees to it, or she sees to it, that the items are prioritized. And he or she would do that in the meeting by getting an idea of the importance of the agenda items. And the meeting leader will just keep a running list of the agenda items and will find out from the group how pressing the issue is. You know, if the conference is gonna be held this weekend, we canāt plan for it next weekend. Itās something that has to happen. Thereās some priorities that have to be placed on items.
So, this hypothetical person whoās the meeting leader oversees the agenda, sees that the items are on that agenda, and puts some priorities on it with help from the group, makes sure that items are not lostāif someone in the group puts an item on the agenda, wants [sic] to make sure that itās just not forgotten.
Often the meeting leader sees to it that thereās discussion outside the meeting, or might even ask that someone prepare a formal proposal. Itās a lot easier to study something, especially if itās a very detailed planāfor the holding of this conference, as an example. . . . Itās veryāitās much better to have that done and have it reviewed, and to talk about it, maybe, outside of the meeting, and not take up meeting time for it.
Also, the meeting leader sees to it that we make a decision, that items that need to be decided is [sic] brought to a decision.
Now, the voteāIāmāin this model, Iām gonna suggest, is by consensus. Now this is a plan that has worked extremely well for 10 years or more in the People of Praise. That is, if there is one ānoā vote, itās a āno.ā The item is rejected. We donāt move forward. But I wanna talk about that just a little bit.
Thereās a difference between a ānoā vote when youāve discussed adequately the item that you want to vote on or make a decision onāthereās a difference between a ānoā vote and a vote that we describe as, āI donāt agree, but I can live with it.ā Which means, āI wonāt stop it, but I canāI wonāt reject it. I can live with it. I donāt like it much, even though weāve discussed it now for the past month, on and off. Even though we have all this collateral material weāve reviewed, I still am not satisfied with it. But Iām not dissatisfied to the point that Iām gonna stop everything. The rest of you want to move forward with it. Iām willing to move forward with it as well.ā
Now if that happens (and that happens often in our 16-men decision-making body), that means that the person or people that said, āI donāt care much for it, but I can live with itā āthat means that once the vote is āyesāāokay?āand it moves forward, that he or sheāthatās also his decision or her decision as well.
That is, you canāt say later, āIt didnāt go too well. You know, I wasnāt really in favor of it anyway. I was one of the ānoā votes secretly, you see, but they talked me into it.ā That does not work. So if youāre gonna run the meeting working together by consensus, if you have someone that continually says ānoā to everything, you canāt move anything forward. And yet, you need to beātake care with the people that you bring into such a group to make sure that you can work together. It isnāt a popularity contest as you begin grouping together. Itās a matter of: can you work together to advance Godās kingdom in the situation?
So I think you understand the difference between the ānoā vote and theābetween the [sic] āI donāt agree but I can live with it.ā
Now if an item is stoppedāletās say there is a ānoā voteāanyone in the group, that is, any one of the leaders in the group, is free to put it back on the agenda at another time, just as the same is true for the person who said, āI donāt like it much. Iāll go along with it. Itās now my decision; Iāll back it one hundred percent.ā A month later, or two months later, as youāve executed that decision, he can put it back on the agenda for further discussion. He can say, āThree months have gone by. You all . . .ā (Heās saying this in the privacy of the meeting.) āYou all know that I didnāt favor it much three months ago, and I really donāt favor it now because of these reasons.ā It can be put back on the agenda and reconsidered, just as a ānoā vote can also be put back on.
You know, the Scripture of the woman who knocked and knocked and knocked until the door was finally opened. . . . okay? Itās not a matter of wearing the people down that are serving with you, but itās a matter of being able to beāto come to one mind and to move forward in discerning Godās will.
Now thereās some other valid plans for leadership. You could use the plan that I just described, but you couldāinstead of using a consensus vote, you could use a majority vote. Now thereās a problem with the majority vote. Thereās a danger of factionalism. Thereās a danger of choosing up sides, and some hostility outside the meeting. You know, because āWhy the heck didnāt you side with me? You know, if we had gotten one more vote we couldāve stopped it, you know?ā Thereās all these discussions, side issues, outside the meeting. Caucusing, you know, to see if we can gather enough strength to reject this crazy thing, anyway, that I donāt care for, okay?
But a majority vote is a valid way to proceed. Itās just that in our experience, it doesnāt work very well. It has not worked well with us, and thatās why we vote and run our business and our pastoral work by consensus.
Now thereās another valid approach. If the bishop or the pastor of the church has called the meeting togetherāthat is, has called the core group or called the leaders togetherāfor the sake of the prayer meeting, then he might be in authority. And he might use the group merely as giving him input for his prayer meeting that is being conducted in his parish. In that situation, he hasāhe can make the decision. The question is, what are the ground rules as you begin the process? If itās his prayer meeting, heās called the meeting into being, then he should be free to make decisions and decide, and can use the people that are on the core group or in the body just as very valuable input.
Now once you have a group in place and working, that is, itās functioning, there isāyou should strive for stability. You should strive for permanence as much as you can. There needs to be a brotherhood or a sisterhood developed, a real love between people who are serving as leaders for the sake of the prayer meeting or for the sake of the community, or what have you. If you have a constant flow of people through it, you can never really get to one another; you can never really get to be brothers or sisters in Christ. You only begin to be functionaries. Youāre just there to do a job, and itās a thankless task anyway, you know, and you just grind it out.
So, a lot of groups make the mistake of having elections somehow, rather than selecting people that will work well with the group, and have them so often that there can be no stability or real brotherhood or sisterhood. And I think that thatās a flaw and can cause difficulties.
Another rule that we have is that we do not allow outsiders to becomeāto come into the meeting and participate in the governance or the decision making. We have outsiders come in if thereās technical advice thatās required. If we need financial information, we might ask someone who does the accounting to come in and to give us a financial report. But that person does not stay on to help us make a decision about next yearās budget. In other words, you can have technical assistance come into the meeting, but you donāt have that person stay on to enter into the decision-making process. I think thatās pretty normal.
Also, using this group dynamic, you can select a leader, the leader of the group, or maybe a representative that he would designate to relate to other groups. If you have a prayer meeting, a core group, and thereās a need to have good working relationships with a number of other ministries in the parish, as an example, thereās no reason why all seven people in the group have to be tied up going to the Knights of Columbus or going over to some other parish group. You can have a representative or the leader of the group, who would bring back the findings, bring back for decision whatever common work should be undertaken between the different groups within the parish.
Okay. That is a short version of what I wanted to say now, and what Iād like to do is leave the next 10 minutes for, first, questionsāif you have questions for clarification of anything that I said. Thatās the first item. And the second item will be anything you wanna ask questions about.
[Recording ends here.]
Copyright Ā© 2022 People of Praise, Inc.