The effective pastor: Decisions, decisions

Peter Drucker writes that decision-making is only one of the tasks of an executive, but it is the only task that specifically belongs to the executive. Making decisions well, therefore, is a crucial aspect of effectiveness.

Drucker suggests a systematic process for making effective decisions.

1. Determine whether the problem calls for a decision that sets up new rules, processes, procedures, or actions. If it is a one-time freak occurrence, for instance, a decision is not necessary. If a slight change in existing operations will solve the problem, then an adaptation not a decision can handle it.

2. Define what conditions the decision has to satisfy to be successful. What are the minimum goals it must accomplish?

3. Think through what is the right answer – compromises can come later.

4. Build into the decision the action necessary to carry it out. This includes buy in from key people.

5. Create a feedback system to test the results of the decision against actual events. You can’t know if it worked if you don’t test it.

This does not strike me as the typical decision model for churches. The careful analysis and thought required to come to grips with the true nature of the problem – the first step – almost never occurs. Rather, some sense that something is wrong or some piece of data – dropping worship attendance – causes a somewhat random and seat-of-the-pants search for some new program or idea to “fix” it. Careful decision-making gives way to hunches, politics, and the twin hidden members of every church council – “we’ve always done it that way” and “we tried that once and it didn’t work.”

How much better would it be if a church spotted a problem and committed to pray, study, and work on it until they could come up with a shared and well understood explanation about what the actual cause of the problem was? It might take a lot of time and effort, but a church that does that is miles ahead of one that flails from one quick fix or fad to the next with no real idea of the true nature of the problem it is trying to solve.

And so much more true for each of Drucker’s other steps.

As with so many other points Drucker makes, this one highlights the differences between the CEO pastor and the collegial or consensus builder pastor. The CEO may consult and draw the team into discussion, but it is understood that he – nearly always he, yes? – is making the final call. The buck stops with him. Etc. Etc. How much easier it is to do the things Drucker suggests when the church council does not have to be brought into the decision loop.

Easier and more effective. But is it more faithful?

Having tried to summarize the major outlines of Drucker’s advice about effectiveness, my next and final post in this series will offer my thoughts and a rebuttal from Eugene Peterson.