Today, when I walked into the clergy meeting in Lexington Tennessee, I discovered that we were going to be talking about “adaptive versus technical solutions.” Part of me rejoiced. This sort of thinking is changing and transforming leadership across the country and around the world.
But there is a downside. Adaptive solutions are hard.
Let me explain.
Technical solutions are straightforward and simple. They are quick and often easy in the short-term. In medical terms, a broken arm requires a technical solution. You set the arm using a given technique. The patient goes home.
But in an adaptive situation, many things are considered. Lots of questions are asked. There are very few clear cut answers.
Another medical analogy: Doctors who treat cancer often use adaptive measures. The patient’s lifestyle has to be considered. Who are his support network? What is his family like? Where does she work? What is her state of health currently?
Depending on the answers to these and dozens of other questions, the treatment will vary from person to person and situation to situation.
This is adaptive thinking; and it is hard.
In leading a church, adaptive solutions are widely used. Methodists have been using “Christian Conferencing” for years.
But we often default to the easier, simpler techniques of the technical solution. The doctrine says this, so we do this. The pastor says this, so we do this. Until there is an adaptive backlash from the congregation, this works great.
But if the pastor begins with an adaptive style, using the methods of asking questions and seeking new solutions, long-term answers can be obtained. The answers are long-term not because they are a long time coming, but because they last longer. The congregation works together to create solutions that are unique but connectional. There is ownership.
The measure is simple: Do the solutions outlast the tenure of the pastor under whose leadership the solution was obtained?
I’ve had wild success at some of the churches I’ve served. In some cases the success went away the moment I took my hand off of the program. I didn’t even have to leave the church. In other cases the program lasted until the new pastor arrived.
In a few bright and shining points in my career, I stood back long enough to let the spirit move within the congregation. In those moments adaptive solutions made themselves apparent. People stepped into leadership. People stepped up to ownership. And the programs are alive and well today, shining examples of Christ’s ministry on earth.
So how does this work? What are some specific techniques?
One church might approach discipleship from a small group standpoint. Another church might use large group seminars and plenary speakers. Bringing in big names to teach large numbers of people has been effective in many situations. But the tried and true small-group method is also effective. The difference between what works and what doesn’t is about adaptive thinking.
How did the solution arrive? What are the questions you’re asking? Who is taking responsibility, and for how long?
This brings me to the biggest question of them all: What is the central question of our faith? What is the central function of our mission? Churches that ask this question sometimes find themselves at a loss to explain how they got so far away from their original mission. Others realize the need for major changes. And still others recognize that they’ve been doing better than they thought.
But to answer the question: One might say that the central point of both is the gospel message of God’s love for us and God’s willingness to forgive us.
So what does that mean for how we behave and function as Christian disciples? When we set about the task of making new disciples, are we more interested in bringing up our numbers? Or, are we doing the central point of our mission and sharing the gospel message. Is it enough to share the good news even if they don’t come to church with us?
You can see how quickly adaptive solutions become problematic with hairy questions abounding.
Adaptive solutions assumed that the problem is never “out there.” adaptive solutions assume that the problem begins internally. That means I have to say out loud, “the problem is within me.” Then, I have to begin the process of changing, adapting, and overcoming the perceived problem.
This brings up another difficulty with adaptive solutions: Sometimes, there is no perception of a problem in the first place.
But when the questions are as basic as the first one we ask, there is almost always a perceived problem. Sometimes the problem is in even forming the right question, or, as is the case more often, being honest with ourselves about the true nature of the issue.
None of this is original to me. I’ve been hearing about adaptive and technical solutions for years now. It’s widely utilized in the business world. And more and more churches are coming into a clearer understanding of the differences between these two methodologies.
But it may be time for me to start operating in a more adaptive manner. This will mean expecting more of the people at Grace. It will mean asking them to consider some difficult questions.
Are we ready? Have we had enough time to heal yet? Is it enough to have simply begun the healing process?
I don’t have the answers. If I did, I would apply at technical solution and barrel ahead. Instead, I’m asking questions.
So the adaptive solution starts now. 🙂
Recent Comments