Turn, Turn, Turn

Many churches find it necessary to combine their theological presupposition with their practices, not allowing freedom in methodology.   In fear of the alteration of their ‘what’s’, they simultaneously fail to alter their ‘how’s.’ This process stagnates the church, causing it to function more in the past with little impact on the future.  The business world can fall into the same rut: corporations must find creative new ways to run their entire organizations.  They must reject their old knowledge of the way things ‘ought’ to be done, the ways they have always been done in the past.

Even when churches begin to move through the pendulum of change, the need for continual and creative reflection upon the change is required.  In her book, Say No, Say Yes to Change, Dr. Elaine Dickson stresses that genuine change is when the status quo is completely altered.  For changes to be implemented, then diminished back to the original status quo are not true changes.  The normal cycle within many organizations is “to follow the development pattern of the human organism:  birth, growth, development, plateau, slow decline, and, finally, demise.”  Past president of Princeton Creative Research, Eugene Raudsepp, and psychologist Joseph Yeager explain that, “This sequence, however, need not be.  In organizations where creativity is continually and consciously fostered, where the ‘climate’ encourages rather than inhibits creativity, the conditions that ensure renewal and progress are clearly present.”

Advertisements

~ by Dave Smith on November 17, 2008.

2 Responses to “Turn, Turn, Turn”

  1. I wonder, Dave, if this same methodology applies when the ‘what’s’ are being questioned as well. It’s often difficult enough to bring about creative change when it comes to the ‘how;’ what do you suggest when it comes to the ‘what’?

  2. The business world can fall into the same rut: corporations must find creative new ways to run their entire organizations. They must reject their old knowledge of the way things ‘ought’ to be done, the ways they have always been done in the past.

    I don’t know that I would necessarily agree with this statement – the landscape of failed organizations is almost as littered with companies that changed when they did not need to (new coke) for the sake of change as it is with companies that failed to change when everything around them was (Head Ski who dominated the wood ski market and failed to research new trends and new technology when composite ski’s were being introduced lost its foothold” – There are product related failures and while I think what you are talking about has more to do with organizational development. Either way chgange has to be dealt with carefully and the most effective ways to do things are often the sinplest. Lawler has a great book called From the Ground Up that layes out the theories of organizational transformation – what I noticed in that book is that everyone likes to Pontificate while few can “Git er done”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: