The Multi-Site Revolution
I just read a draft of The Coming Multi-Site Revolution by Geoff Surratt, Greg Ligon, and Warren Bird. Great stuff. Props to Geoff, Greg, and Warren!
We are living through one of the greatest revolutions in "church praxis" in history. The Protestant Reformation was theological in nature. This revolution is practical--the way we do church.
I still remember when God gave me a vision for NCC meeting in movie theaters @ metro stops throughout the DC area. I wasn't aware of any churches who were multi-site. There were a handful, but I didn't know about them. Who would have thought that a few years later there would be 1200 multi-site churches across the country. The multi-site forum I was part of last week with more than 500 attendees. There is a groundswell. According to a recent survey cited in The Coming Multi-Site Revolution, 31% of Protestant churches said they had moved or were going to move to a multi-site model. That's one out of three churches!
The Coming Multi-Site Revolution cites a fascinating trend that I hope inspires you to buy the book when it comes out. I have utmost respect for these three guys. Greg Ligon has been an amazing cheerleader and coach. I'm grateful for his friendship and support. He's go the gift of encouragement big-time! And WarrenBird is writing an article on NCC for Leadership Journal. I love the way he crystallizes things through his writing. He's a gift to the kingdom.
In the 1940's, a hotel owner in Tennessee came up with a novel idea--a network of family-friendly hotels across the country with the same name. A manager had just watched "Holiday Inn" with Bing Crosby and Fred Astaire. The idea clicked. In the 1950s when Holiday Inns began springing up around the country, 98% of hotels were stand-alone, single-entity hotels. At last count, 80% of hotels are now brand names.
The same thing happened with restaurants.
The same thing happened with coffeehouses.
The same thing happened with retail shops.
The same thing is happening with churches.
I have mixed feelings about it. I'm a both/and thinker. So I think we need mom-and-pop shops as well as retail chains. I love chain restaurants, but I like an occasional "greasy spoon" or "hole in the wall."
I think the balance will shift between stand-alone churches and multi-site churches in the next ten years. I'm not suggesting that "stand-alone" churches are better or worse. But I think the multi-site model is all about leverage which is another name for stewardship. It's about best practices and synergy and cost effectiveness. And ultimately, I think it's a God idea. I think its a new wineskin.
For me it boils down to Isaiah 43:18-19: "Forget the former things; do not dwell on the past. See, I am doing a new thing! Now it springs up; do you not perceive it."
I know that people respond to change on a bell curve. There are innovators and adopters and laggards and resisters. I tend to be an innovator. It's exciting being part of a "new thing" in the words of Isaiah 43. We were one of the "first movers." But it's exciting to see so many churches getting a vision for multi-site. Part of the reason I believe this is a God thing is the weekly calls and emails we get from all over the country from churches who are moving to a multi-site model. I'm seeing it first-hand.
Exciting stuff!
For what it's worth, Surratt and Ligon and Bird predict that there will be 30,000 multi-site churches in the next few years!
Pick up the book when it goes to print.
We are living through one of the greatest revolutions in "church praxis" in history. The Protestant Reformation was theological in nature. This revolution is practical--the way we do church.
I still remember when God gave me a vision for NCC meeting in movie theaters @ metro stops throughout the DC area. I wasn't aware of any churches who were multi-site. There were a handful, but I didn't know about them. Who would have thought that a few years later there would be 1200 multi-site churches across the country. The multi-site forum I was part of last week with more than 500 attendees. There is a groundswell. According to a recent survey cited in The Coming Multi-Site Revolution, 31% of Protestant churches said they had moved or were going to move to a multi-site model. That's one out of three churches!
The Coming Multi-Site Revolution cites a fascinating trend that I hope inspires you to buy the book when it comes out. I have utmost respect for these three guys. Greg Ligon has been an amazing cheerleader and coach. I'm grateful for his friendship and support. He's go the gift of encouragement big-time! And WarrenBird is writing an article on NCC for Leadership Journal. I love the way he crystallizes things through his writing. He's a gift to the kingdom.
In the 1940's, a hotel owner in Tennessee came up with a novel idea--a network of family-friendly hotels across the country with the same name. A manager had just watched "Holiday Inn" with Bing Crosby and Fred Astaire. The idea clicked. In the 1950s when Holiday Inns began springing up around the country, 98% of hotels were stand-alone, single-entity hotels. At last count, 80% of hotels are now brand names.
The same thing happened with restaurants.
The same thing happened with coffeehouses.
The same thing happened with retail shops.
The same thing is happening with churches.
I have mixed feelings about it. I'm a both/and thinker. So I think we need mom-and-pop shops as well as retail chains. I love chain restaurants, but I like an occasional "greasy spoon" or "hole in the wall."
I think the balance will shift between stand-alone churches and multi-site churches in the next ten years. I'm not suggesting that "stand-alone" churches are better or worse. But I think the multi-site model is all about leverage which is another name for stewardship. It's about best practices and synergy and cost effectiveness. And ultimately, I think it's a God idea. I think its a new wineskin.
For me it boils down to Isaiah 43:18-19: "Forget the former things; do not dwell on the past. See, I am doing a new thing! Now it springs up; do you not perceive it."
I know that people respond to change on a bell curve. There are innovators and adopters and laggards and resisters. I tend to be an innovator. It's exciting being part of a "new thing" in the words of Isaiah 43. We were one of the "first movers." But it's exciting to see so many churches getting a vision for multi-site. Part of the reason I believe this is a God thing is the weekly calls and emails we get from all over the country from churches who are moving to a multi-site model. I'm seeing it first-hand.
Exciting stuff!
For what it's worth, Surratt and Ligon and Bird predict that there will be 30,000 multi-site churches in the next few years!
Pick up the book when it goes to print.
7 Comments:
I loved this blog on multi site and changes. I used to be a consultant with Price Waterhouse in the Change Integration practice group. People hate change. The loathe it. The stories on change I could tell you. Had my tires slashed. Had threatening phone calls in my hotel rooms. Had been followed by creeps. All because of "change management". In my last days there I did benchmarking for several large corporations. Wait till you start telling people how everybody else is doing it. Resistance comes. But there are so many days when the band breaks and change just happens. The only people who really love change are wet babies - and come to think of it - they are usually screaming the whole way through the process.
Keep the message (the gospel) the same and change the packaging. That's what Sandy Millar says.
What is the difference between multi-site and the network of churches that were set up over 2,000 years by the Roman Catholics, or the network of churches the Episcopalians have set up, or the Methodists, or the Presbyterians?
Maybe the question to ask is - How does the multi site church maintain its relevance to people's lives - How do you manage multi site churches that attract different people from different walks of life, while keeping your "brand" or that thing that makes this church unique?
The primary difference is that a multi-site church is typically led and taught by one pastor which gives each location the same spiritual DNA. There is one vision. And each location tends to have a similar personality.
The groups you mention are denominations which is a very different ballgame. They are stand-alone churches that choose to align with one another.
I'm not sure one church should be designed to reach all people. If we have a kingdom mindset then we realize that not everybody is perfectly suited for National Community Church. But they can plug into some other local churches in DC that will be a better fit. And that's ok.
My two cents :)
"I'm not sure one church should be designed to reach all people."
The tabernacle was designed for all, the Temple was also. There is no indication that the early Church was any different. Think about this, "This Church is not for you" may be one the worst things someone could hear.
What I'm referring to is church personality and sytle.
I think churches can reach across any and every demographic and racial divide. One of the cool things about NCC is that you can have people that society would consider "up-and-outers" worshipping next to people that society would call "down-and-outers." It's that diversity that makes us who we are.
All I'm saying is that people have stylistic tastes when it comes to music for example. We tend towards worship choruses so someone who wants to sings hymns exclusively probably won't resonate with our worship.
I think doctrine is unchangeable. But different people have different tastes. And that's ok. We're all wired differently and that's a testament to the creativity and originality of God.
Imagine a Mexican restaurant saying they are going to now serve Italian and German food. I'm guessing it wouldn't be real good because it's not their core competency.
It's KINGDOM MINDSET. We may not be the church for everyone :) But there is a church for everyone. And we're all on the same team.
My two cents :)
For when one says, "I follow Paul," and another, "I follow Apollos," are you not mere men?
What, after all, is Apollos? And what is Paul? Only servants, through whom you came to believe—as the Lord has assigned to each his task. I planted the seed, Apollos watered it, but God made it grow. So neither he who plants nor he who waters is anything, but only God, who makes things grow. The man who plants and the man who waters have one purpose, and each will be rewarded according to his own labor. For we are God's fellow workers; you are God's field, God's building.
- 1 Corinthians 3:4-9
I think we have to be careful when we start talking about "branding" here. The only brand is that of Christ. There is a danger of having a cult of personality in a church, so that when the pastor leaves, the church falls apart. Every church should have the same spiritual DNA, because we are all one body. I think there are other reasons behind "multi-site churches," and I'm not sure it is so revolutionary, but may more "evolutionary" -- adapting to the circumstances. One circumstance is a lack of leadership in the church.
I agree that individual congregations will have different roles, perhaps appealing to different types of people, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't work together. Your left eye and right eye see things differently, and if they each had their own brain, they would probably argue about which was seeing things properly. However, when you put the two together under "one head" you have an amazing thing called depth perception (a more accurate view then either gets on its own). The church can't have enough eyes to see all of what God is (was and evermore shall be). While God deserves our "new songs," he also deserves to be praised throughout the generations with one voice. The words Wesley wrote are as true now as they were then. The problem is with us. For obvious reasons, we have a hard time being spontaneous and fresh, while keeping "tradition." We do our best to worship an infinite God with our finite resources, and in this day and age, that means division of effort.
We have been pretty good at that division thing, but we are lacking in the union aspect that we get with stereo vision. We have double-vision, with each church claiming a slightly different view of things and not finding a way to compromise. That is what causes denominations. National Community Church can't see all of God, but it should be able to work towards common goals with others who see God slightly differently.
One God. One Body. One Creed. Endless diversity.
Enjoyed the comments Joshua. Very thought-full.
I think truth is found in the tension of opposite. Job 11:6 says that "true wisdom has two sides." Unity and diversity are a great example. It's a balancing act.
Anywho.
I think we underestimate the fact that God created each of us with a unique fingerprint, eyeprint, voiceprint, and soulprint. I think each church has a unique churchprint and we ought to celebrate that. Otherwise we're "clones" of each other.
Let me put it in individual terms. We have a dual-destiny. One destiny is universal--to be conformed to Christ. The other destiny is unique--to be the unique person God has created us to be so that we can uniquely worship and serve him.
In the same sense, all churches have a universal destiny and theology. But God doesn't want them all to look alike. I think he wants different churches to be as unique as different people.
I think there is certainly the danger of a "cult of personality." But there is also the danger of "no personality" :) I think God loves our different personalities.
We have a core value: conformity doesn't equal maturity. We're all called to conform to Christ. But we aren't called to conform to each other. That's a fine line :)
My two cents.
Post a Comment
<< Home