Part 4 is smaller still.


• With smaller numbers one person seeking to disrupt in any way can have a greater impact.


• The perception of those outside the group may be of people holding too much power whose decisions cannot be trusted.


Large groups are safer than smaller ones in that they are less likely to make rash decisions and more likely to maintain the status quo. But churches that are growing and thriving today are the ones that take risks – and the Gospels hardly point to a Christian community that lives in safety mode. Provided there is recognition and understanding of the dangers, the advantages are much greater than the potential difficulties which can, in any case, be guarded against once identified.


3: Changed practices


If you move to smaller groups here are some ideas which you may need to rethink from what you are used to.


Language


The word ‘committee’ can usefully be discarded for all church groups, simply because it gives the idea of discussion rather than action. But when groups are small this becomes even more apparent. ‘Working group’, ‘Action group’, ‘… team’ are all possible ideas to use.


Paperwork for meetings


Agendas may still be important (depending on the type of meeting) because, if constructed well, they provide the road-map for the meeting. But for small one-topic groups such as ad hoc groups, the idea of formal minutes may be rather too much.


In these cases aim for, if possible, no more than one side of A4 in bullet-point format listing actions agreed and who is responsible and by when. The aim should be to get this out within 24 hours of the meeting.


Communication and accountability Small groups should first be accountable to a higher body, to ensure they do not use their freedom in unwise directions. The role of the higher level group is to set the parameters in which the small group will operate (purpose, scope, etc.) and monitor these. The role of the group itself is to communicate well with their parent: sharing the one-sided A4 sheet mentioned above as soon as it is produced, for example. But the small group needs to keep in touch with the whole church too through some appropriate means of communication (a crisp, oral report the next Sunday, for example) so that it does not come across as a secret forum which


13


people know exists but whose business remains cloaked in mystery.


Flexibility and informality


A group of three can meet for 30 minutes after church on a Sunday to save having to take up a weeknight evening. Business can be conducted on an almost continuous basis week by week, using email, text and phone calls to keep in touch. This is quite a different approach from the full agenda of a focused meeting every other month.


Specialists


Small groups can thrive when they invite in a specialist to give input on certain topics. Such specialisms may be in technical matters, representational views, or theological insight. The specialists are not members of the team, but invited guests for all or part of a specific meeting. This distinction is important or you lose the team concept.


Risk-taking


I have already made the point that we need to move away from structures that promote utter safety – often ensuring that no change takes place after a considerable amount of discussion. But the concept of maintaining the status quo and not hurting anyone by changing something is deeply embedded in the DNA of many churches. Christian discipleship involves an openness to danger. Our structures need to do far more to reflect this.


4: Limited life


As well as keeping groups small it can help to give as many as possible a limited lifespan. If groups are set up with clear ‘use by’ dates attached to them, this prevents purposes becoming clouded with the passing of time and keeps the whole structure fresh.


This will not be possible with key councils or something like a finance group (where clear and probably limited expertise is called for). But it works well with groups linked to specific events or projects. Give them a self-destruct date and stick to it. It focuses the mind well and stops people hogging memberships as a badge of respectability.


This point extends to making the norm to have ad hoc, limited-life groups rather than permanent bodies.


5: Making it work The danger of spread


Be aware that the idea of small decision- making groups is not mainstream in many churches and so, even if this concept is


Continued on page 14


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32