Ministry Per Square Foot

Businesses have it clean -- you have to have a certain amount of customers against a certain amount of product profit margin so as to pay for costs and have something left.  If church property were taxed, then our overhead would be even more than maintaining buildings and paying staff.  We'd have to have a certain ratio of customers to giving to handle the additional expenses.  We'd have to have a few members who give a lot or a lot of members who give some (or something in-between these two).  Tax or no, it is still the same -- you have to pay for overhead.  Or else.

Now one of the things that businesses do is this.  They say, "If we bought this land, paid for this buidling, invested in all the machinery, and we have to pay for all that whether it operates making our product for one hour a week or 148 hours a week, let's make it operate nearer to 148 than to one."  You produce more, make more money and get in front of the overhead costs. 

The church has property, buildings, and staff and so often operates only for one to two hours per week generally.  Wow.

If a business nets a $100/square foot producing only one hour a week and nets  $100,000/square foot producing 148 hours a week, then they are going to go towards 148 hours a week.

What if the church tried to get more out of what it has paid for?  I once belonged to a church which had an Anglo contemporary service, an Anglo raditional service, a Korean service, a Brazilian service, and then was considering an Arabic service.  They had already paid for the building and the organ and it got used five times on a Sunday.  And the $35 bouquet of flowers went through five services!  Instead of $35/service the flowers went for $7/service.  See?  And in the same way the ministry per square foot went up.  The amount of people touched by the tool of that facility went up. 

Just an idea ... let's think about how to increase our ministry per square foot.

Diffusion of Innovation

For some reason last week's blog didn't publish so I'll do it over. 

Everett Rogers in 1962 wrote Diffusion of Innovation.  The chart that goes with his work looks like this --



I actually remember a tail-end group opposite the innovators called "never-adopters."  Real quick explanation of it all.  There are those to the left, innovators, who are adventurous and think up new things.  Then there are movers and shakers called early adopters who try new things.  A forward leaning part of the general population will follow them.  They are the early majority.  The momentum is going so that even the more skeptic are feeling like they are missing the boat and or that the new thing is going well enough for them, the late majority, to join in.  The reluctant to change, hard to persuade, slowly adopt or adapt.  Then, like I said, there are die-hards who won't, won't, won't. 

Here's the question from this study for any organization including the church -- can you really hold all these people together?  If you cater to the late half, will the early half really have the patience to stick around?  Will they have their creative candle put out?  If you cater to the early half, will the late half feel dispossessed or scandalized and go someplace else? 

Next question for the church -- where are churches generally?  Who do we cater to generally?  When we talk in 2012 about trying to get the church into the 1970's or 80's, what does that belie about all this?  When we say, "We can't make so and so unhappy," who are we generally saying that about?

The church tries so hard to hold everyone together and maybe it just can't be done.  For the future of the organization, if you had to lose one group, which is the group to lose?  Okay, we don't want to lose any and I get that.  But if for survival, you had to pick ... if for health, you had to pick ... which? 

And what kind of guy was Jesus?  change agent or establishment?

And did he hold everyone together?  did he let some go?  throw out others?

What did he mean about shaking the dust off the feet? 

Can pastoral care for a few mean lack of stewardship of the whole, of the future, of those who are bypassing the church? 

Speaking of stewardshp, in the parable about three guys given talents and one makes a bunch and the other puts it in the ground, where is that on the chart? 

THE ONE CONFERENCE I GO TO

I've been to quite a few conferences over the years.  There is only one that I have repeated at.  And I'm on my tenth or twelth time by now.  There is only one conference that I really try to get others to go to because I believe it will do them and their church well.  It is the same "only" conference that I have been going to year after year.  It is the Leadership Summit.  For the price and the world class speakers, you simply cannot beat it. 

I go because I always learn something about the Lord, about leading, about the world, and about the church.  I don't just learn, I'm inspired.

In other churches I have made it a part of our elder training.  We have even paid for the whole session to attend.  It's that worth it.

While its main site is Chicago, I attend in Orlando.  I have been to Chicago and at Orlando you don't miss out on anything.

If we get ten from Cocoa, we can get a rate of $159 by registering by June 26.  I hope you'll go with me.  Email me if you want to go and I'll get us signed up.  revjeffwood@gmail.com. 

Check it out for yourself at http://www.willowcreek.com/events/leadership/about.asp.