|
Korean leaders have been asking me as an alternative to the power
based structures they have ended up leading to document how a
prophetic/apostolic ministry can operate without building a large
organizational and hierarchical structure. American funders are
confused as to how without significant resources we have been able to
catalyze over 211 organizations, churches, denominations, development
agencies in the slums, ministries among the marginalized, transferring
millions to the poor each year, while we remain poor, live in a Decile
1 neighborhood, and have a miniscule organizational structure.
Their questions confuse me, for in my naiveté I have simply sought to
follow the models of Jesus the poor one, who renounced positions of
wealth, of Paul the apostle, who was as poor, yet making many rich, of
Assisi and Kagawa of Japan who from the slums transformed the nation.
Their questions presuppose that ministry to the poor
and subsequent transformation of poverty has to do primarily with
wealth transfer. Jesus could have done that. Could have
come as welfare king of Israel. He came as servant among the
poor.
Their questions presuppose agreement with Peter
Wagner that an apostle is a wealth accumulator and works from a
position of power. Paul disagreed. he used power when need
be. He chose powerlessness.
In 1981, I wrote Companion to the Poor,
where I clearly showed that the scriptures showed that from the
choice of incarnation and powerlessness comes much fruit. Thirty years
later those statements now are evidenced by the fruit.
I do not think that this mystery can be interpreted
in management terms for my friends who have wealth and power, although
Tom Peters and other management experts have increasing moved in their
thinking away form centralized bureaucracies and controlled
organizations. How do I explain the result of: "Live among the poor,
preach the gospel, the Spirit of God will visit you, seeds will sprout
and become great trees" in management terms.
I will foolishly try and you will be frustrated with the attempt.
Some things are only understood by doing.
Urban Leadership is an organizational nucleus for Viv Grigg's
catalytic ministry that preceded postmodernism, but uniquely has
responded to the Gen X then postmodern generation. From the age
of 14, I began to initiate ministries. Over the years that has
speeded up to about one every three months. I attribute this to
remarkable actions of the Holy Spirit and a sensitivity to his voice.
He promises to revel himself to those who go where he goes. The gifts mix seems to have developed from pastoral/ administrative/
evangelistic to prophetic / apostolic. The capacity to see both
vision and implementing structures meshes a spiritual sensitivity coupled with an intense intellectual
study and research/publications regime learned from my father that integrates and voices the visions
of partnering groups.
In secular terms, the operational style seems to be
a capacity to model a response to a need, to envision the future
structure and strategy to meet that need, give insight into values
that sustain a missional community for decades, articulate a
response and an inspiring goal, gather leaders into loving and committed teams
around this response, define the structures needed with them, identify
and release the vision to this leadership, and release the work.
Critical Organizational Principles for Success
This model of Gen X/postmodern catalyzing and
releasing is in stark contrast with an older generation of missions
structures. Some operating principles are:
 |
Identification with workers among the poor requires modeling
identification with the poor, simplicity and sacrifice. Each year the organization passes on what
it receives to the poor, not seeking to build large equity or
resources. The office is donated to the daughter movement each time
Urban Leadership moves on to catalyzing the next movement. |
|
Creating communities of love. Whether this is in a churchplant,
mission-plant or network, the central gifting has been to create
loving relationships around shared goals and momentum. This kind of
seed multiplies. |
|
Speed of
multiplication in order to evangelize and transform as rapidly
as possible. The aim is 50,000 to reach 2 billion. Speed is dependent on the core Urban Leadership
organizational structure remaining efficient yet small, by
decentralizing ownership and admin through daughter or partner
organizations. Increasing admin responsibilities of ULF beyond
core functions is counterproductive. Thus the organization
grows and contracts as each movement is birthed and spun off. We
give it away again and again. Relocation
to each country facilitates speed. |
|
By
prophetically calling, apostles, pastoral leaders and administrators
surface. the works that have failed through the years have been
because no apostolic leader moved forward to carry that vision.
I generally don't initiate a new work unless a leader is in place
around whom to build. |
|
Partnerships growing out of that love, enable affirmation of related but diverse visions, accelerate
such visions through existing structures, through synergy, shared
learning, increased accountabilities, crossover of best case models
and ideas. My remaining as a catalyst without major
infrastructure more effectively generates partnerships of equals
than a process of delivering a program from a powerbase.
|
|
Chaos
as a characteristic of entrepreneurial catalytic leadership vis-à-vis
the order of managers of systems. In the context of chaos, partners
pick up various roles to complete processes, eventually making Urban
Leadership a non-essential player. This is in strange contrast to
attention to rigid attention to goal-setting, financial and legal
requirements - these are part of the mandate to manage physical
resources well. |
|
Urban
Leadership remains in a prophetic/apostolic role in the leadership
mix till the new structures are stable, the directions fully
established, the leadership functional. Sometimes 1, sometimes 20
years. |
|
Releasing Creativity: Every
work, every movement, will develop with a different combination of
these principles. |
|
Sensitivity to the Spirit at all phases is
critical. Apostolic leaders will also have major weaknesses that may
destroy the processes their gifts help create, so cautiousness in
sustaining enough authority till these areas of weakness have checks
and balances within the emergent structures is critical. |
|
Having
said all of this, the global nature of these movements requires me
to sustain a simple structure to cover travel, consultations, to
fund a few embryonic development projects and to initiate each new
work. As a board we have identified that as ideally six
associates living by faith /admin/editorial staff at a level of
US$320,000 per year. |
|
Power/wealth-based post WWII mega-missions
|
Simplicity-based Postmodern Urban Leadership
|
| Primary Motif |
Managerial |
Prophetic/Apostolic - vision
giving, community building |
| Operational Model |
Based on 60's models of a managed
multinational with a hierarchy of controls, strong accounting, MBO
processes |
Prophetic Catalyst Embryo or
Incubator, based on the flat structure of the postmodern
generation. |
Size of operation
|
Yearly
increase of head office (principle of consolidating power)
this limits speed of multiplication, and creative outcomes to
management capacity. Base in US to consolidate |
Keep
small: Core embryo increases and contracts as each movement
is spun off (principle of losing life) The result is far wider
multiplications. Relocate to new continent every 2-5 years to
create new community and base |
Process of multiplication: Generating creativity vs perfecting
systems
|
Multiplication of a simple
process to increasing number of groups. Perfecting the system processes is seen as an
objective in order to maximize productivity. |
Creation
of new environments for new movements. These
constantly develop in creative new directions. The creativity
generates maximal ownership and productivity |
Funding: Decentralized vs. centralized funding
|
Central
office funds ongoing processes |
Processes move rapidly to self-funding. The embryo seed funds,
encourages living by faith and connects to ongoing funding
sources. Central office avoids becoming a fundraising
organization. |
Relationship of CEO with derivative works
|
CEO is an
executive over derivative organizations, with vision, and
administrative roles, and control gifts that integrate
these, usually under one name. |
CEO is
servant-leader, whose ongoing leadership is not dependent
on roles or controls or financial dependence, but on servant
relationship, expertise, and capacity to connect and envision.
|
Nature of Partnerships
|
Western
power: Initiates "partnerships" with expectation of
controls and financial flows back to head office. This
results in subservient partnership |
Mutuality: Seeks mutuality in equal "partnerships" refusing
to franchise. |
Ownership
|
Sustain
ownership, and utilize name of parent organization as part
of this |
Give away
ownership: At the outset seek to develop processes through
consultation. Derivative works develop their own name as part of
ownership of process. |
Length of Organizational Involvement
|
Long-term |
Varies:
Organizational relationship from 1-15 years dependent on critical
factors being in place, including functional leadership mix,
actual and ongoing results, clear values, structure and financial
flows. |
|
|
Servants to Asia's Urban Poor
Incarnational mission with
communities in the slums of Asian cities, and five bases in Western
nations |
|
Servants was formed over five
years through Viv's mobilizing a movement of youth in New Zealand,
recruiting a core of 25 workers, defining and publishing the vision,
structure and values, and passing over leadership to an
apostle, and a home base administrator
Servant-Partners is a US
equivalent. In this case Viv had to develop it three times, two
times recruiting a core of leaders, getting 30 to the field each time,
imparting a value system, then moving on. The first leader then
died, the second faced conflict with te board. In the third case Viv was able to work
alongside an apostle, who took the vision, values and structure and
remolded it for his existing people. All this took 20 years. Now
70 workers in 8 cities.
Kairos took only one year, as
Viv
co-labored with an apostle, who caught the vision, could recruit the
workers and was able to follow through on the models provided.
Now 350 workers in slums of 12 cities.
Vision for Auckland: built
team, did research, defined vision, published, but despite pulling back,
leadership did not emerge for 4 years. Now Vision NZ has followed
through with the vision.
The Encarnacao Alliance took 10
years to build momentum, the grassroots training developed from 2002,
with core modules constantly being written and rewritten, the vision
for 50,000 workers developed in 1989, was collectively owned in
2004, defined the core team by 2006,
The Encarnacao MATUL training
commission took six years to build and will result in
publication and delivery of 15 courses from 2007
Because of the truth "Of the best of leaders, when the work is done, the people will
say, "We did it ourselves!"" those we have teamed
with would and should perceive of our involvement as less significant
than their own. I have no desire to take that away from them, simply
to explain to those who want to know how we operate the way we do. |
