Challenges and Benefits for the EMC One Conference Model

Posted on March 18, 2008

This Effort Will Increase The EMC’s Ability To Master Change. In general, our endeavor to make changes to the EMC organization will remind us once again of the basics involved in any change process.

We will be reminded once again that resistance to change is a given. Regardless of the need for change or the proposal put forth for change, some will immediately be against it and want things to stay just as they are. There is no way to avoid this initial reaction. We need to anticipate this reality, seeking the Lord’s wisdom as to how to respond.

(None of us is ever really prepared for that which is wholly new. It takes inordinate self-confidence to face a major change without some inner trembling. A drastic change means that we have to adjust ourselves. It calls into question our self-esteem. A major change is really a test. We have to prove ourselves all over again. Some would prefer to simply “play it safe”, no matter how damaging such inactivity may be to their future well being.)

We will need to accept the responsibility to set up a comprehensive agenda for change. This includes making a diagnosis of the conditions that require that a change take place, defining the transition process from the old way to the new, and developing strategies and action plans for managing the new way once it is in place.

(Or, in other words, change is hard work and takes time.)

We will need to face the possibility of faulty communications about the change. In the beginning of any change process, faulty communications tend to be widespread, often go unrecognized, and are hard to repair. Therefore we must put forth a conscious effort to avoid/minimize them. More than any other single item, faulty communications trigger unfounded fears and bitter resistance. Open, accurate communications are essential. Repetition is essential. Time is required.
We will need to deal with the fear of the unknown. This is a common human reaction, especially so when a change is vitally needed but ill defined in the early stages. This often produces a stand-pat opposition on the basis that “the devil you know is better than the one you don’t know.” The proposed change needs to be widely distributed as soon as possible. A change should be decided on the basis of its’ actual merits.
We will need to do everything we can to insure that all those affected will make the change their own personal view, not something imposed by others. This can be done by listing the benefits to be derived from the change. In every change process, only benefits motivate!

Benefits From Having a Unified, One-Conference Structure to the EMC

An Easier Path. A streamlined EMC organization would work better. Communication throughout the denomination would be better. Unified planning would be less complicated. Consistency in relationship between the conference and each local congregation would be improved. Redundant layers of organization would be removed. Gathering of statistics and the processing of data would be centralized. When right sized, the EMC would work better.
Increased denominational unity. By reorganizing, streamlining and rightsizing the EMC into one unified conference, everyone would have ownership of the whole denomination. Everyone would have something at stake, with equal access, privileges and responsibilities. In addition, this one conference plan would improve the “connectional” side of our organization. We have done an excellent job over the years with the “congregational” aspect of the EMC, but have been less successful in connecting local churches together in fellowship and joint ministries.
Denominational identity. With the unified conference boards leading the way by developing comprehensive, consistent policies and action plans, we would be able to say with regard to any aspect of the denomination- “This is who the EMC is, and this is what the EMC does, anywhere in the USA.”

In other words, we would be going from “fragmented task activities” to “holistic processes.” Thinking of an example, we now have six district evangelism boards, each having a different policy and approach to the planting of new churches. With one unified evangelism board we would have one holistic policy for planting churches that would apply anywhere in America.

Strengthening conference leadership. The “college”/”cabinet” of conference superintendents, headed by the General Superintendent, would result in greater unity, team spirit, and mutual assistance than the “cabinet” of somewhat remote district superintendents, some part time and some full time, each having differing district involvements and constraints.
Regional training sessions. The envisioned regions of local churches, established by geographical proximity, provide excellent settings for training sessions that can be “tailor made” to meet unique needs in specific areas around the country.

In addition, these regions would greatly reduce the travel cost in time and money for churches to function jointly. Given today’s busy schedules and high travel expenses, each local church would be encouraged to primarily team up with the churches closest to it for ministry and fellowship.

Keeping in focus. The criticism has well been made that “in the past 40 years polity has replaced theology in many evangelical denominations.” The point is that we say things in organization/administration in order to say something else more effectively. We do things in organization/administration in order to do something else more effectively. That “something else” is the Gospel of Christ, and producing transformed lives through its’ power. To spend inordinate amounts of time, energy, and money on the administration of the church organization is essentially to be side tracked from the main objective. The unified conference plan would boldly stand against this flawed trend of our generation. “Business” would be kept to a minimum. “Joint ministry and outreach” would clearly be identified as our focus.

_____________________________________

What people want is evidence of the type they need to convince them that there is amandate for organizational change in the EMC .

Keeping current organizationally. Beginning around the year 1989, impact-loaded social and economic trends, plus incredible technological advances, fundamentally and forever restructured organization…local, regional, national, global- the entire organizational world. Many referred to this historical development as “the re-inventing of the work place.” Essentially what occurred was the demise and elimination of middle management. Almost overnight that level of the organization had little contribution to make. As a level of control, administration, and decision making organization Since the function of the “district conference” level of the EMC organization is increasingly time consuming, expensive and redundant, to continue to operate this way opens the door for thoughtful observers to conclude that the EMC is not serious about growth or effectiveness, especially so when better options are available.
Non-functioning boards and committees. By streamlining and simplifying the EMC organization, there will be fewer boards and committees but each will be highly functional; comprised of skilled, committed personnel; with each having one comprehensive, consistent action plan.
Lack of encouragement. Some in the EMC have at times expressed the sense of being alone, and the feeling of having limited contact and fellowship in the denomination. This will be eliminated by (1) each local church relating directly to the conference headquarters regarding finances and organizational matters, and (2) by the twenty regions of local churches designed specifically for growing relationships between local congregations.