1 of 5

"From 1992 to 2002, investments in church facilities grew from $4.5 billion to $8.5 billion a year," says Ed Bahler, president of Aspen Group, a church and school design and construction company based in the Chicago area. "But 83 percent of U.S. churches are in decline. Of the 17 percent that are growing, only 4 percent are growing through new conversions, which means the other 13 percent are just shuffling people from church to church."

With all this money being spent on new construction, why aren't attendance numbers keeping pace? Are churches being effective in their use of construction funds? The answers to these and other questions are the subject of three research studies sponsored by the Chicago-based Cornerstone Knowledge Network and conducted by TAG of Fairfax, Virginia. Aspen Group is a founding company of Cornerstone Knowledge Network. "We want to understand the underlying root issues of how facilities either enhance or weaken a ministry," says Bahler.

Your Church talked with Bahler and Brad Eisenmann, Aspen Group's general manager, about the surprising results of the latest survey, published in November 2006.

One of the most important concepts that emerges from the research is that every church has a "code," which Bahler defines as analogous to the dna in a living cell. It's this code that makes a church (or any organization) unique. "It has to do with a church's history, its cultural makeup, its articulation of who we are, what we mean, and where we're going," he says.

While every church has a code, not every church understands it or articulates it. A successful church understands its code and clearly communicates a vision and mission driven by their unique code. For a church to remain successful, every decision made—including building design and construction—must be consistent with their code and their vision and mission.

When churches embark on a building project without a clear understanding of their code, their approach is flawed from the beginning. Decisions are based on "accepted" ideas that might not fully apply to their unique situation. The result is almost always a disconnect between the church building and the church's ministries. Money spent on new construction is not as effective as it could have been, and much can be lost in the following years trying to fix the problems.

One of the most commonly accepted ideas is that the best use of construction money is to build multipurpose space that is flexible and easy to set up for a variety of activities. But Eisenmann cautions that there is a difference between a ministry that can fit into a facility and a facility that fits a ministry. "Although multipurpose-space churches may be inexpensive to build, they may not support the purpose of the church and may end up costing much more in the long run," he says. "The attitude that says, 'Just build me a box so we can worship on Sundays, do fellowship on Saturday night, and use it as a gym during the week,' can be problematic."

next page... |  1 of 5

share this page