More Slots Than Workers?

In most of the churches I work with I hear, “Every year we have trouble finding enough workers.” Rarely do I hear anyone say, “We have too many positions to fill.”

Whenever we have more slots than people to fill them, we automatically assume we’re short on workers. Could it be that the root problem is not too few workers but too many slots?

Case 1: Cut the pieces bigger

With a growing Sunday school, children’s church, and full-scale Wednesday night program, Carla struggled constantly to staff the children’s ministries at her Church.

Carla needed 91 workers for the three major ministries. Or she would have, if she had found 91 people willing to work every week. She didn’t. So Carla divided some of the jobs into once-a-month obligations. Now she needed 187 workers.

I asked Carla, “Do you have 187 people who feel called to work with children?” She rolled her eyes. Carla knew that some of her volunteers were helping with children only because of the worker shortage. Quite a few were mismatched to their assignments.

So Carla streamlined the children’s ministry. Though the church had grown to 650 in worship attendance, they were still using a small-church class structure—small classes with solo teachers. Carla combined the children into larger groups of 20 to 30 with each group led by a ministry team including a master teacher. That produced several important advantages.

The ministry teams allowed each team member to work in his or her area of giftedness rather than having to do everything (teaching, worship, crafts, care giving). The teams created a support system for workers. And the switch to ministry teams eliminated the need for seven department supervisors since each team became basically self-organizing.

In restructuring, the 187 slots were cut to just 60. With fewer slots, Carla lined up all the workers for the fall programs by June—a first.

Case 2: 1 goal, 1 program

At another church I worked with, Gus felt stymied in his attempt to grow the adult Sunday school. As education director, he wanted most of the adults active in a class. That would mean increasing the number of classes from four to nine. Gus was having trouble finding teachers to start new classes.

At the same time the associate pastor, Ron, was finding it hard to grow the small group ministry. Both programs seemed stalled about halfway to their goal of total congregational involvement.

When asked to name the primary goal of adult Sunday school and small groups, Gus identified “fellowship” as the main purpose of both. These two programs addressed the same need and were competing for the same participants and leaders. People were saying they didn’t have time for another weekly meeting. That explained why both had stalled.

Which ministry served the purpose more effectively? Without hesitation, Gus said “small groups.” First Presbyterian decided to make small groups their primary setting for community-building and discipling.

This meant redefining the purpose of adult Sunday school. All adults would be encouraged to join a small group for discipling in a context of committed relationships, but they would be invited to take Sunday classes as short-term electives as they had time and interest—not necessarily 52 weeks a year. If older adults preferred to relate in their Sunday school class as a “small group,” that would be great. But they wouldn’t be expected to also join a weeknight small group.

This change in expectations removed the pressure to add classes, which also meant that those five new classrooms on the drawing board wouldn’t be needed.

The key to streamlining

How do you decide which slots to eliminate?

If God is not calling anyone to do a particular ministry, maybe it shouldn’t be done. But doesn’t this call-driven approach endanger some existing programs? Indeed, it does.

As Elizabeth O’Connor writes, “If the church were true to herself, she would help all her people to discern and be faithful to call. In such an effort, however, institutions probably recognize a threat to their own structures. … If church people begin listening to call, those we count on most will likely be off on some wild adventures of their own. Some of the tasks that we have depended on lay persons to do may not get done.”

When a call-driven approach to ministry results in unfilled slots, those openings can show us where to streamline. Consider these questions:

Are there ways to simplify the program, sharpening its focus on doing one or two things very well rather than doing many things?
Does this program compete with another ministry for participants or leaders?
If so, can the two ministries be combined into a single, stronger ministry?
Should enrollment in some programs be capped at a level that does not strain staff and facilities?

Of course, there will be times when an essential role has to be filled temporarily by someone whose primary call lies elsewhere. But if the arrangement goes on too long, we need to ask why:

Has the church erected conscious or unconscious barriers—expectations about education, social standing, gender, or membership—that may discourage those God is calling from considering the job?
Does the job description need to be reshaped?
Is the support system adequate?
Is this position less essential than previously assumed?
The most important question: what is God saying to the church through this vacancy?

Pruning for new growth

When we hold onto the structures and activities that produced yesterday’s fruit, we dilute the church’s energy. But if we allow the Holy Spirit to prune our ministries, we avoid spreading the church’s resources too thin. By pruning, we focus on what God wants to do now, in this season.

Eddy Hall is a church consultant based in Goessel, Kansas.

Is your church over-programmed? Take this self-test by Eddy Hall.

To respond to this newsletter. Write to Newsletter@LeadershipJournal.net.