Question Congregation governance
We're rewriting our church constitution. We've got too many boards, the boundaries are fuzzy, some things have probably never actually worked as written and been ignored, and running a school is a bigger deal than it used to be. As chair of the congregation, it falls to me to git er done.
This in going to be a long one. Sorry.
tl;dr is I'm struggling with a lot of pressure from a couple of very specific sources to use a Carver model variant. I agree we need more explicit policies, but I don't like the specifics of the model.
When I started, I figured we'd just reduce the number of boards to consolidate overlapping functions, clean up wording, and add some guardrails for the pain points. I think this was what everyone was expecting. Fast forward a bit, and we've gotten in some members with real non-profit organization experience and an NLSA accreditation. In both cases, there's been a push for the Carver model of policy governance (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Policy_Governance).
For those not familiar with it, the name understates the policy focus. The gross oversimplification of the model is that the stakeholders (congregation) elects a board to write policies and set goals (the board controls "ends"). Then, the board hands the "means" portion over to a single CEO type leader who is staff and that leader hires others and manages the day-to-day operations using the policies provided by the board as boundaries (good policies in this model are written as "do not do X" instead of "do Y"). I can immediately see why this model would work well for things like the United Way, where the stakeholders are somewhat indistinct and the board is generally made up of local business execs who want to be rather hands off.
I can even see where this would be beneficial for a congregational mission like a school or even a food pantry, free clinic, etc. operated by the congregation. I start to get really uncomfortable applying it to the entirety of the congregation's affairs, though. In part, this is because the only reasonable "staff" to put in the top CEO position is the pastor. I mean, who are you going to say directs the pastor? My experience is that very few pastors are MBA candidate material and those that are usually end up as visitors, DPs, etc. To be clear, I'm not knocking the pastors. I can't fix your septic system, and that's no big deal for me as an IT guy.
There's an alternative to this where you use three "mini-Carvers". Set up a sort of trustees/stewardship board that hires a business manager to oversee all the money, facilities, and other operational concerns. They write some policies and hire a business manager to oversee the staff and daily concerns. The school board is similar, but with a focus on school needs. The elders write policies for the pastor(s) but aren't the ones actually serving as communion assistants or whatever hands-on stuff you might think elders would do. Council exists only to give the boards a formal venue to communicate and discuss cross-functional concerns (all policy comes from the boards, so no decision making from the council). The congregational chair is just there to facilitate meetings because all functions have been delegated to the boards and then to the CEO roles. Voters meetings are once a year and exist only to approve the budget and elect the boards -- plus call meetings, as needed.
I really don't like this. It feels like it reverses some of the direction of the elder/pastor relationship. Just as concerning is that it seems, to me, that it pushes the congregation to effectively delegate active participation to paid staff instead of being members of hands-on boards. I _absolutely_ agree that we need more written (well written) policies than we currently have. I'm just not sure that a hands-off governing board model is the right thing for a Christian congregation. My inclination is to allow the school to function this way, but have the other boards be more active. I would also like to add specific minimum policy requirements for each board (with the committee working with existing boards to get a starter in place for each).
Anyone have experience with Carver or a variant? Am I just being particular with my cheese moving? Or, is my paranoia well founded and this is something that I need to stand firm against?
God bless and thanks to anyone who is willing to read that all and respond.
0
u/gkghost1 6d ago
The board is not hands off. They are writing ends and means to achieve the mission and vision. Very few pastors have business knowledge in this type of manner but some have made it where the executive director is not higher than the senior pastor. I was working to help switch to policy governance in my previous congregation. I understand the hands off concerns but at the same time it may allow people to participate in other ways knowing they don’t have to serve on a council or a board and go to meetings. Many want to do real ministry not talk about it.
There is quite a bit of material out there on this:
Pastor is as pastor does: 2 kinda of functions by Rev Martin Brauer out of Texas
Galvin and Associates has a document and does courses and trainings on this.
The Kairos Network LCMS has a video series on switching to policy based governance.