We at Ministry Incubators pretty much exclusively work with people who are in a state of profound change. Be they solo innovators, denominational bodies, or congregations, everyone we meet is in the messy emergence of something new.
While every context is unique, and God is up to something special in every community (as well as in every person), there are certain patterns that tend to emerge. One of the most common ones is the predictable reticence to change in at least one key leader. I personally have never worked with a community engaging in the work of innovation that didn’t have at least one person who was pretty sure that this whole project was a bad idea.
This hesitation can look different for different people – some will actively push back, some will offer consistent questions and problems to be solved, and some will engage in a sort of passive non-compliance.
We’ll get into those archetypes later, but what’s important to highlight right away is the reality that these skeptics, doubters, and fighters are not just a hitch in our plans for innovation, but a key feature, and a crucial, sacred part of the process. They are fulfilling the work God has called them to just as faithfully as the visionary innovator is. Engaging empathetically and compassionately with our doubters is a part of our responsibility as leaders, and framing them as crucial contributors to the project, not detractors from it, allows us to see the wisdom in their perspectives, not just the challenges that wisdom produces.
The push and pull between the idealist and pragmatist, the optimist and the pessimist, those that would speed ahead, and those who keep things as they are, is where the good stuff happens. It’s in that tension that nuanced, thorough and formative conversations are had that hone and sharpen ideas and offerings.
In the Jewish faith, as far back as the Babylonian Talmud, there has been a practice called havruta in which the Torah is studied in pairs, with students debating over meaning in texts and questioning one another’s answers. The conversation is meant to be cordial of course, but spirited, with the understanding that the responsibility to come up with the most faithful answers together, is higher than any responsibility to ensure that everyone agrees. The idea is that the wisdom of the text emerges in the space between them, not in any one individual’s insights. 1
Our engagement with those who disagree with us on our ideas meant to further the Kingdom can be thought of as our own havruta. That it is in the honest conversation, the negotiation of ideas, that wisdom truly emerges. We at Incubators firmly believe that innovation is not a strike of lightning, but an iterative process of gradual change leading to transformation. For those iterations to be actual improvements and not just a vanity exercise, they have to be opportunities to capture honest feedback from those who are willing to point out what doesn’t work.
All of this wisdom and learning, however, has the prerequisite of being able to have an honest, straightforward, cordial conversation with those who disagree with you. That can be a lot easier said than done, particularly with the backdrop of church cultures that tend to prefer a parking lot conversation to an honest debate.
Next week, we’ll get into a bit more detail about how to lovingly, compassionately, bring those who disagree with you or your ideas to the table, not so you can convince them otherwise, but so that you can learn from what they have to say. For now, look for opportunities to find a little magic in the space between you and others, and let us know what comes up along the way.
0 Comments