A few weeks ago, we started a series on how to engage with people who aren’t sure about your idea. We took a divergence (which I do not regret in the slightest) to talk about the Norrises, but I wanted to return to this: having people who give you push back on your ideas is a healthy, normal part of leading a community. It is not a problem to be solved, it is an opportunity to hone and sharpen your work. Honestly, if you somehow don’t have detractors, doubters, skeptics, or those who slow your roll in your community, you should go find some. 

That resistance looks different depending on the personality of the person and the system, so let’s take a minute to think about what we can see in those who tend to pump the breaks, and how it looks to learn from them:

The Fighter. 

This is someone actively resists your idea. They may criticize discreet elements, the theological foundations, or your leadership, but they are vocally expressing to you and to others that they think this change is headed in the wrong direction. Depending on your personality as a leader, these people can be either the easiest or the hardest to engage. If you’re a person who is uncomfortable with conflict, this can be extremely emotionally distressing and make you want to give up altogether. If you’re a person prone to a little bit of fighting yourself, this can easily devolve into a competition between two people, and not a collaboration for the sake of Kingdom work. 

So how do we engage a fighter productively? First, entertain the possibility that they may not see themselves as a fighter. I often think of Suzanne Stabile and Ian Cron’s description of the enneagram 8 in The Road Back to You, when they say that a person who is a type 8 is often confused by others’ descriptions of them as aggressive or hostile. They thought they were just having a conversation, not picking a fight. If you are a person who doesn’t tend to be particularly confrontational or direct, it is easy to misinterpret what was intended as clarity as aggression. 

If they truly are intentionally picking a fight, then that’s better news still. Because while it may be hard to suss out at first, their grievance (even if you disagree) probably emerges from a real weak spot in your idea or presentation of it that can be addressed. These are the people that are most likely to directly tell you what isn’t working, and that, while uncomfortable in the moment, saves a lot of time. I had a meeting with a pair of leaders the other day to give feedback on some curriculum I was writing. One said that she thought it was great content, but that she was struggling to stay on task through all of it, and wanted my advice on balancing allowing conversation and pushing through the agenda. We talked for a few minutes while I waited for her teammate to join. When he did, I asked him how he thought the curriculum was going, and he said, “It’s too long. You need to make it shorter.” I looked at the first leader, and she (very politely) agreed. “Ok, then!” I told them, “Consider it done.” 

Obviously that example doesn’t begin to touch on the real hurt that can come from feeling like you are being berated by a person who doesn’t possess the emotional maturity to process disappointment, frustration, or any of the other normal feelings that come up in a time of change. The pastor easily becomes the punching bag, and that’s not something we can just ignore. Finding safe distance and boundaries with people who aren’t processing in a healthy way is important for your tenure in ministry. 

If you can find the emotional space to hear what a fighter is really communicating, rather than just what they’re saying (or the volume at which they’re saying it), they can be an extremely valuable resource. Because while they may be the loudest, they are probably not the only people who have the same complaint, and addressing the content of their complaint, without engaging with its emotional timbre, can be enlightening.

For me, in context, this has looked like an angry leader spouting off to my supervisor for half an hour, and my supervisor passing along some of the content of his complaints. I asked him to meet, and offered back what I had heard his notes were, and asked if I had missed anything, or if I had captured it all. By articulating the complaints myself (distilled into actionable feedback, which was really pretty reasonable), he got the experience of feeling heard, while I didn’t have to get yelled at. 

Next week we’ll cover two more archetypes of people who aren’t on board: questioners and passive resisters. But for now, know that first: you don’t deserve to be verbal punching bag of every person who wishes things would just go back to the way they were, and second that everyone in your community who is lending their time and mental energy towards your project is someone you can learn from, and who has something to offer (even if it’s a bit of work to get there).