Monitoring ministry effectiveness beyond feelings
Ministry evaluation helps church leaders measure results when goals are defined. This article urges leaders to move past “dysfunctional politeness” and establish clear expectations, monitoring, and evaluation so ministries can adjust and bear fruit.
- Set clear expectations before launching a ministry program.
- Monitor results against defined goals, not subjective impressions.
- Evaluate and adjust so ministry efforts produce fruit.
By Kent Fillinger
I love the Bible because the good, the bad, the ugly, and even the strange are recorded honestly and objectively from start to finish. Two particular stories illustrate the honesty of the Bible and provide the context for a significant leadership lesson.
Counting the Kill
In the Old Testament, King Saul’s daughter Michal was in love with David. In an attempt to destroy David, Saul asked David for a dowry of 100 Philistine foreskins in return for his daughter. David exceeded the request. First Samuel 18:27 says, “David and his men went out and killed two hundred Philistines. He brought their foreskins and presented the full number (emphasis mine) to the king so that he might become the king’s son-in-law. Then Saul gave him his daughter Michal in marriage.”
What a bizarre account! Can you imagine being the servant who had to verify “the full number” to make sure they were all there?
Why did God have the specific details of this story recorded in the Bible? Why, when we have so many unanswered questions about life, did God include these facts?
It is clear from the context that this was a key point in the growing animosity and fear Saul harbored for David. David’s success was obvious and he intimidated Saul. This story illustrates how Saul’s assorted attempts to eliminate David proved unsuccessful and how God protected and provided for David. It was obvious that “the Lord was with David” (1 Samuel 18:28).
Specifically, this account was included to demonstrate David’s effectiveness or success in battle. The facts enable the reader to measure David’s results. If David had been able to bring back only 80 foreskins when the goal had been 100, people would not have heralded his success. But David doubled the requested amount. Because the goal was defined, David’s effectiveness could be measured.
Counting the Catch
In the New Testament, after Jesus’ resurrection, he appeared one morning to the disciples who had just experienced an unsuccessful all-night fishing trip. He instructed them to cast their nets on the “right side of the boat” (John 21:6) and the result was a huge catch. John documented the account: “Simon Peter climbed aboard and dragged the net ashore. It was full of large fish, 153 (emphasis mine), but even with so many the net was not torn” (John 21:11).
Why did John take the time to include the exact number of fish? I can only surmise the purpose of recording the fact was to demonstrate the effectiveness of obeying Jesus’ fishing tip. The number of fish caught clearly must have been an impressive number.
These are but two examples of the various times the Bible includes numerical specifics. Whether it was the dimensions for constructing the temple, the number of soldiers in battle, or the results of a war, numbers figure into the fabric of the Bible.
God consistently monitored and evaluated his success and included the data for us to observe. So if God monitored and evaluated his effectiveness, why do many church leaders fail to do so?
Trying to Be Nice
When I started in ministry, I would prayerfully develop the vision for a new ministry, selectively recruit leaders and volunteers, thoughtfully invest time and money and personnel, and creatively schedule and promote the new program. After it was over I would move on to the next event on the calendar.
Was the ministry program effective or successful? Was the response worth what we spent in time, money, and personnel? Should I repeat the event again in the future?
Back then, I was too busy doing ministry to stop and answer those questions. I have since altered my approach. Now after coaching and leading others in ministry, I realize how challenging it is to stop to evaluate ministry effectiveness or success, but also how essential it is to do so.
When I ask church leaders to evaluate a program the typical responses I receive include: “Well, people really enjoyed it” or “We worked really hard to make it happen” or “I thought 45 people was a good number considering how busy people are today.”
These subjective responses provide no insight to make informed ministry decisions in the future. The reason church leaders do not monitor and evaluate ministry is because they suffer from “dysfunctional politeness.” In a misguided attempt to be nice, church leaders refrain from assessing ministry results and effectiveness. Edward Lorenz said, “We should believe what is true even if it hurts, rather than what is false, even if it makes us happy.” To be good stewards of God’s resources, we must pause and implement a strategy to monitor and evaluate our ministry.
Beyond Feelings
Here is a plan I have used to move beyond nebulous feelings and generic responses to establish a model for monitoring and evaluating ministry programming.
First, set expectations to manage expectations.
My experience is that everyone has his own idea of how a ministry program is going to function and his own expectations for the desired outcomes of a specific program. When planning a ministry program, it is critical that the expectations are discussed with your team so that mutual expectations can be set. Unless the ministry leadership team is united on the purpose and desired results of the program, confusion will reign.
The process of setting expectations is a valuable experience for your ministry team that will require the team to honestly communicate and receptively listen to each other. The leader needs to navigate the discussion and guide the team in reaching a consensus. Until the team can clearly forecast its goals and expectations for a ministry program, it should wait to implement the ministry.
Second, set the expectations to monitor programming.
If you do not establish your ruler for success, it is impossible to monitor results. Collect facts about what happened and stand them against your plans and goals.
For example, let’s say you plan a ministry event and 75 people attend. If your preset expectation for the event was 125 people, then it is clear the event fell short of its goal, and you can begin to evaluate why. But on the other hand, if your expectation was for 50 people, then you exceeded expectations and can celebrate the success. Without clear expectations, knowing that 75 people attended does not provide an opportunity to determine the effectiveness or value of the ministry program.
When I plan my ministry programs, I set three quantitative goals to help monitoring—minimum, acceptable, and exceptional. Attendance objectives are only one aspect because they are only part of the picture. Discuss with your ministry team other results to monitor.
Third, monitor ministry programming to evaluate progress.
A football coach monitors the game stats throughout the first half and then makes adjustments during halftime to hopefully improve performance in the second half. The same process must be played out with each ministry team in the church.
Fourth, evaluate progress to make adjustments.
Monitoring is only one side of the coin. The other side is evaluation. Berit N. Lakey explains the difference in Nonprofit Governance: Steering Your Organization with Authority and Accountability:
Program evaluation focuses on the quality of programs and services and on whether the results are worth the expenditure of funds and effort. . . . Evaluation asks, Are we doing the right thing? Is this the best way to accomplish our mission? . . . Evaluation involves the analysis of data.
Evaluating is more challenging than monitoring, but it is essential to making future decisions that will impact the ministry specifically and the organization collectively. To complete the assessment process, an outside ministry partner can be of great assistance because “you can’t read the label from inside the bottle.”
Finally, make adjustments to produce fruit.
One day when Jesus was hungry, Matthew 21:19 records, “Seeing a fig tree by the road, he (Jesus) went up to it but found nothing on it except leaves. Then he said to it, ‘May you never bear fruit again!’ Immediately the tree withered.”
Jesus talking to fig trees is also unique, but the application is unilateral. Jesus expected the fig tree to bear fruit because that is its original purpose. In the same way, Jesus expects the church, a living organism, to grow and bear fruit. It is not sufficient to look like a church from the side of the road and be unfruitful upon closer examination.
Ministry in an ever-changing culture requires adjustments be made. The only way to make effective and necessary adjustments is to monitor and evaluate our ministries; when we do, our ministries and church will produce fruit.
Kent Fillinger is president of 3:STRANDS consulting in Indianapolis, Indiana.
Author: Kent Fillinger
Kent Fillinger is President of 3:Strands Consulting, Indianapolis, Indiana, and Regional Vice President with Christian Financial Resources.
