What do I do about the group of 25 who love each other, have a great time, and won’t birth?  The group is full of potential leaders.  They’ve been together for four years.  And they won’t even talk about splitting into two groups!  What can I do about that?

I get that question a lot.  I bet you’ve asked that question…or one a lot like it.  So what do you do when you’ve got a group that’s larger?  Should you be trying to mandate birthing?  Should you just look the other way?  What should you do?

I want to encourage you to think about this challenge a little differently.  There are several parts to the problem.  Here’s what I see:

1. A group of 25 is hard for one person to genuinely care for.  That’s why we say that the target span of care is about 10.
2. In any group the five most dominant personalities do about 80 to 90% of the talking.  If you have 10 people in a living room, the five most dominant personalities do most of the talking.  If you have 25…same thing.
3. It’s easy for potential leaders to hide out in larger groups.  They’re comfortable in the group.  Their friends are all there.  It’s too easy to stay a consumer.

There may be other issues, but those are what I see as the big three.  So what can be done?  This is where a tweak in what you call a win for your group leaders is important.  Here’s what I mean:

• A win for a group leader is when larger groups sub-group for discussion.  This can be done several ways.  Simply number off 1, 2, 3.  Guys in the dining room.  Gals in the living room.  Draw straws.  Any way you can get into groups of 6 to 8 (or smaller) is a step in the right direction.
• A win is when span of care remains 8 to 10 even in a larger group by developing sub-group leaders.  This is a little further in the direction of genuine care.  Not just leading a discussion, but actually taking on caring for a few.  Making the calls.  Being available.
• A win is when a larger group takes a small group vacation, separating into five smaller groups and inviting neighbors and unconnected friends during a church-wide campaign.  Often this experience is what helps potential leaders move from consumer to contributor, a change that you can’t force.

The big idea here is that larger groups can work very well with an intentional strategy.  I’ve found that it’s much more productive to help leaders of large groups learn to sub-group for discussion and develop sub-group caring strategies than it is to mandate birthing at 14 members.  It’s also very strategic to use the small group vacation idea.  I’ve found nothing better when it comes to multiplying groups during a church-wide campaign.

Good groups grow and birth.

If you’re a student of group life, you’ve heard that line.  It’s shorthand for two of the key concepts of the Meta-church Model; the ideas that every leader should have an apprentice and that healthy groups grow over time and at about 12 members are “pregnant” and ready to birth.

The question today is, are these true “truths” of group life?  Or are they axiomatic beliefs that may be somehow holding us hostage to assumptions that aren’t really always true?

I want to suggest that there really isn’t anything about 14 members that says “this group ought to birth.”  In fact, I’ve seen plenty of larger groups that worked great and I’ve seen groups of 6 or 8 that really needed the fresh start of a birth.  I’ve also seen groups of 12 to 14 that were forced to birth only to end up with two anemic or dead groups instead of one healthy group.  So there’s nothing hard and fast that makes a group “pregnant” at 14.

That said, let’s unpack the idea of growing and birthing as indicators of health.  First, it is true that healthy groups are attractive and you’d expect group members to want their unconnected friends to get in on it.  Right?  Doesn’t that make sense?  Admittedly, there are people who would not want to share what they have with unconnected friends, but that wouldn’t normally be seen as an indicator of health.

At the same time, a group can grow too fast.  Get the right leader, add a few really attractive folks who are connectors and you could end up very quickly with a group of 20.  Not necessarily bad…but you might not end up with the kind of interaction and sense of belonging that you hope for.  We’ll talk about a few strategies in a moment.  For now, let’s just say that healthy growth probably should be expected.

The second question is “what about birthing?”  Should that be built in as an expectation for “good” groups?  Put another way, should that be seen as a win?  I think not.  I believe there are a few diagnostic questions that should be used to determine whether a group “ought” to birth.  Here they are:

• Is there another potential leader within the group that can’t possibly play the part God has for them if they remain a participant (as opposed to stepping out)?
• Is there another potential leader within the group that could actually hold a group together?  I’ve often found that the principle “good groups grow and birth” causes some premature births and end up with fatalities when the “apprentice” is not really a person that can hold a new group together.
• Are there natural connections within the group that lend themselves to birthing?  In other words, can the members sort themselves into two groups?
• Is there an easier way to end up with a new group?

In my mind there are three main factors at work in the idea that good groups birth.

1. A smaller span of care is desirable.  That is, if you’ve got 8 people in the group, the leader cares for 8.  If you’ve got 20 people in the group, the leader cares for 20.  That’s an important factor.
2. Too easy for some who ought to be leading a group to hide out in a larger group.
3. More groups offers more points of connection.

All true.  But all three are better managed another way.  You know how they say, “there’s more than one way to skin a cat?”  After years of working at it, I’ve found that this is a cat that is much easier skinned another way.  And in part two of this article I’ll talk about a better strategy.

Caught this great interview of Bill Donahue over at MacLakeOnline.  Good stuff!  Check it out.

When it comes to group life, there are few things more out of character than a point person operating solo.  If there is any ministry position that should be predisposed to connecting with other like-minded leaders from around town…you’d think it would be the small group pastor, director or volunteer champion.  After all, the whole thing is about community!  Right?

Why doesn’t it happen?  There are probably some valid reasons, but the main reason many of us don’t reach out to connect with other leaders is that we’re just too busy with our own stuff.  Between frantic preparation for the small group launch, recruiting coaches, ordering curriculum and keeping the database accurate, who has time to have coffee with some guy from another church?

Here’s the thing.  You need that hour or two a week with some folks who are passionate about group life.  You need the phone call with someone who’s just a step ahead so you can hear what they’re doing to help the next 10% connect.  And the new guy in town needs to hear from you how to train leaders.

Honestly?  We really do need each other.

Assignment

If you’re not actively building a group life network in your area, here’s your assignment:  Take action today.  Here are a few options:

1. Join an existing network.  The Purpose Driven Small Group Network is an easy first option.  It’s free.  You don’t have to be purpose driven.  You only have to be passionate about group life and there are regional groups in all 50 states and Canada.  Click here to find out how to take the first step.
2. Make a phone call.  Whether you call a mentor or a newbie…they’ll be glad you reached out.  Tell ‘em I sent you.
3. Meet for coffee.  Here’s your pick-up line: “Let’s have coffee.  I’ll buy.  What time works for you?”  Gas to get there: $1.82.  Two cups of Starbucks: $3.00.  74 minutes with someone with the same mission: Priceless.
4. Bookmark two websites.  Willow Creek Association’s Group Life Facebook page and Purpose Driven Small Group Network’s Facebook page.

Ready to go there?  This is your assignment on Take Action Tuesday!  Let me know how it goes!

Miss Henry Cloud’s Willow Creek Group Life conference call?  You missed a great conversation about “Safe People / Dangerous Groups.”  Really fantastic with some great takeaways.  You can listen in right here or you can pop over to the Group Life Facebook site to check some of the comments.  Also helpful to search twitter with #grouplife to see the thread there.

Not subscribed here?  Be sure and sign up to get the updates!

There are a few books every small group pastor needs.  One of those books is Making Small Groups Work by Henry Cloud and John Townsend.  You may recognize their names as the authors of the best-seller, Boundaries.  If you’re looking for source material to build a leader training or enrichment course, this is a must have.

Delivered in a very digestible format, Making Small Groups Work’s 292 pages is divided into 6 parts.

• How Small Groups Help People Grow: a very helpful section on the ingredients that make groups conducive for growth.
• What Happens in a Good Group: more than a description, this section is written to help leaders and members learn how to build forgiveness, mentoring, grieving, accountability, and 10 other elements into the group.
• Starting a Small Group: provides an excellent overview on the importance of deciding on purpose and ground rules as well as how to do it.
• The Responsibilities of Group Facilitators: this section could be the basis for a multi-session workshop for leaders covering everything from how to listen, facilitate for change, provide safety, and a number of other important topics.
• The Responsibilities of Group Members: if you’re looking for material that can guide desired outcomes of discussion material produced in-house, this is a very helpful section.
• How to Deal with Problems in Groups: this section ought to be included in the training process for every leader.  From neediness to passivity, you’ll find help for 7 of the most challenging issues leaders face.

Whether you can afford to purchase several and make them available as required reading for leaders or you simply pick up one for yourself and use it as a resource to develop leader training, Making Small Groups Work is required reading  for every small group pastor.

The Free Market small group model, popularized by New Life Church and based on Dog Training, Fly Fishing, and Sharing Christ in the 21st Century by Ted Haggard, is a term used to describe a system of groups that are based on common interests.  In fact, the subtitle of Haggard’s book is, “Empowering Your Church to Build Community Through Shared Interests.”

While there are often additional elements, Free Market is essentially a three step process:

1. Leaders start groups based on interests (dog training, fly fishing, quilting, stock trading, etc.).
2. The church publishes a list of interest-based groups (or holds a fair where open groups are advertised).
3. Members select a group based on common interests.

Sounds good?  It has some distinct advantages.  Like every model it also has its own set of problems.  Since there is no problem-free model, wise leaders choose a system based on the set of problems they’d rather have.  Here are the problems I’ve identified with the Free Market model.  You may discover others.

• Not everyone can easily identify an interest or passion that can form the basis of a group
• Hard to develop a broad enough list of interests to engage everyone
• If the goal is discipleship, leaders will need training in how to disciple without curriculum
• Difficult to find enough interest-based leaders to assimilate the number of unconnected people in most churches

Understand, Free Market does have advantages.  A group of adults with strong common interests ought to be able to form good connections.  A well promoted fair or sign-up opportunity ought to make it easy for many to find a group that fits well.  You don’t have to be a Bible scholar to lead a dog training group.  The key is to be prefer this set of problems to those of every other system.

In our ongoing look at the top 10 axiomatic beliefs of group life, one area that ought to draw our attention is coaching.  It is logical that a coach would be helpful…even required.  But who makes the best coaches?  It is so common for churches to make that assignment to their elders or deacons.  But do they have what is needed to do this job?  Other churches are stuck in the idea that there is a career path that leads from member to leader and from leader to coach.  Is that likely to produce a good team of coaches?  Or is there more to this?

When you’re new to a sport or activity and you want to develop proper techniques, who makes the best coach?  Isn’t it obvious that it’s someone who has done what you’re trying to learn to do?  After all, when you want your kids to learn to swim…you know you need someone to coach them or teach them who knows how to do it.

Makes sense right?

Then why is there confusion about who makes the best small group coach?  Probably because the role of the coach is inadequately defined.  If you know what you’re looking for, it’s easier to find the right person.  Here’s the job description I’m using right now.  Take a look.  Keep it open.  And follow along right here.

First, notice what the purpose is: “To produce healthy disciples.”  That should tell you a lot.  Note what it doesn’t say.  “Chief score-keeper” or “Accountant.”  Instead, you’re looking for someone who’s capable of building disciples.  That tells you a great deal about the kind of person you’re looking for.  On top of that, two of their top responsibilities are more about a personal connection with Christ than anything they might do for the small group leaders they are coaching.

Second, you’ll see that there is the expectation that they’ll host a huddle every 4 to 8 weeks.  That will require some preparation, a commitment to getting dates on the calendar, and the kind of winsome personality that draws people in and helps them feel comfortable.

Third, there is the expectation of personalized care for each of the leaders in their huddle.  I love the word “care.”  It makes it clear that this is more than score-keeping or accounting.  My contention is that whatever I ultimately want to members of a group to experience…the leader has to be experiencing it first.  That is, if I want the member to feel cared for, somehow I need to make sure the leader feels cared for.  This is a great challenge.  Very tough to do.  But it is the goal of the coaching structure.

Fourth, there is a need to be on the lookout for the next generation of coaches.  As your structure grows, as you increase the number of groups and the number of people in them, you’ll want your coaches (who are the right people) to be looking for potential coaches (who are becoming the right people).

Last, there is the expectation that your coaches will be involved in a huddle with other coaches where their own care needs will be met.  After all, whatever you want your leaders to experience will need to be experienced first by their coaches.

When you think about these 5 parts of the job…can you see your elders or deacons in the role?  Are some more suitable than others?  Is it likely that every small group leader could become a coach at some point?  Or would there be a kind of person who could care for 8 to 10 members that couldn’t care for 5 to 6 leaders?

When you’re looking for coaching candidates keep these requirements in mind.  For more on this topic, see my four part series.

What produces a genuinely deep connection?  Is it just time spent with someone?  Or are there other essential  ingredients?

When I listed what I called the top 10 axiomatic beliefs of group life, I included the belief that “the longer a group is together the more deeply connected the members become.”  I’ve heard this argued hundreds of times, mostly in response to the idea that good groups grow and birth.  “But we’ve just started to really connect!  How can you ask us to send out Bob and Carol now!”  You’ve probably had the discussion too.  You may have been on either side of the argument…

But the question is, what really produces a deep connection?  And if you’ve been observant in group ministry you’ll know right away that there are plenty of groups that have been together for a long time and still really don’t know each other all that well; certainly wouldn’t consider themselves “knit together in love.”  So what causes that?

I believe there are at least two other ingredients that play a bigger part than time when it comes to deep connection.  First, a common understanding of the purpose of the group is essential.  If half the group’s members long to “do life together” and the other half is really only in it to meet some kind of obligation to the church or pastor…it’s unlikely to get very far.  Does it need a common purpose from the beginning?  No, but you’ve got to help them get there pretty quickly, probably within the first 3 to 4 months.  This is where the idea of a group agreement or covenant is beneficial.  Clearly stating the purpose of the group can start the group on a course for a deeper connection.

The second essential ingredient is intentionality.  Groups don’t drift into a deeper connection.  Group members choose to go deeper.  Sometimes life chooses for us.  We’ve all seen groups that responded to a crisis in the life of a member and found that they had somehow grown closer.  Short of life crowding in, an intentional approach to how group life happens produces a deeper connection.  Developing a spiritual health plan that incorporates  accountability can be an expression of intentionality.  Can you introduce this in the first week?  Probably not.  But you’d best not wait too long.  Group norms harden pretty quickly and it becomes much more difficult to introduce new ideas after about 6 to 9 months.

You may have identified other essential ingredients.  The key is to recognize that more than time is required.  Without a purpose and intentionality, groups are unlikely to develop a deep connection.  And without a deep connection, life-change, the kind of life-change we hope will happen…will be much less likely.

You’re reading this…so you already know that the optimum environment for life-change is a small group.  Right?  After all, that is one of the key axiomatic beliefs of small group ministry enthusiasts everywhere.

The question is, “Is it true that a group is the optimum environment for life-change?”  Or are there some factors that must be in place for that to be true?

I’ve been saying for several years that life on life is how life-change happens and small groups are the best delivery system for that.  Say what you want to about mentoring.  It doesn’t scale.  That is, once you’re beyond 75 to 100 people, you’re going to have a very hard time delivering life on life through a mentoring strategy.  It becomes much more realistic to give the opportunity to a much larger number of people through a small group strategy.  That said, there are a few essential ingredients that must be present in a group for life-change to be likely.  Here’s my list:

• Communication in the group must be two way.  Dialogue.  That means we’re not really talking about it being led by a teacher.  I don’t really change if I’m just listening.  It can be a contributing element.  But, it’s not enough.  I also need to talk.  It is much more likely that someone with gifts of shepherding, encouragement, leadership or mercy will be a more effective leader.  Or a teacher who understands how to start a conversation.
• The small group needs to be a safe place.  I’ve got to able to share what’s really going on.  Not on the first week.  But in time I have to get to the place where I can share life with someone else.
• The meetings must be frequent enough to maintain connection.  Once a month is not enough.  Twice a month is a challenge because if I miss once…it’s been a month.  There’s not a magic number, but more frequent insures better possibilities.
• There needs to be an intentionality about what happens.  A kind of plan.  This is what’s so appealing about the Spiritual Health Assessment and the Spiritual Health Plan that are part of the Purpose Driven approach.  I’ve written about these two tools right here.
• It goes without saying that time in the Bible and prayer together are essentials.  This makes what you study very important.  You’ve got to be providing study materials that are about application.  It’s not enough to learn about the Bible.

These are the essential ingredients.  If you want life-change to happen…it won’t be accidental.  And it won’t be automatic.  It will be because these ingredients are at work.

Want do you think? Have a question? Want to add something?  You can click here to jump into the conversation.