Top 5 Advantages of New Small Groups
One of the most difficult challenges any of us ever face is when we find ourselves wrestling with a new way of seeing an old problem. You’ve probably run across this drawing. It’s frequently used to demonstrate the fact that what we see initially (an old woman or a young woman) makes it difficult to see anything else.
In a recent article (What’s the Best Way for People to Sign Up and Commit to a Group?) I made the case for providing opportunities to connect to new groups and recommended matchmaking only as a last resort.
And yet…it seems many of us still feel that pull towards finding homes for new people in existing groups. You need to know that I believe this compromise is one of the main deterrents to growing the total number of people in groups. I am a fan of using small group finders (like ChurchTeams), making it possible for unconnected people to get connected 24/7. But…that is no substitute for the advantages of starting new groups.
Top 5 Advantages of New Groups:
- In a new group, everyone starts off on a level relational playing field. This is a huge advantage! I can’t overemphasize the importance of this point. When you add new people to existing groups, even the best intentioned existing groups, it is extremely rare for a new person to really break through the impermeable membrane and fit in. The longer an existing group has been meeting, the more difficult it becomes. The exceptions to this rule are exactly that: exceptions.
- Roles have yet to be established in a new group. New groups can begin with fresh outlook. There is no status quo! It’s all a new beginning. When you add new members to existing groups, you’re requiring them to fit into available roles…as opposed to a custom fit for their interests and capabilities.
- New groups come with openings for new leaders. Yes, new groups require that you figure out how to recruit new leaders (this is where the Small Group Connection and church-wide campaigns come in). Adding new members to existing groups instead of launching new groups stunts the development of new leaders. Doesn’t praying for God to send workers (Matthew 9:37-38) and then limiting opportunities for new workers to engage seems like a dangerous stewardship issue (Matthew 25:14-28).
- New groups provide greater connecting efficiency (especially when launched at connection events or as part of a church-wide campaign). Matchmaking is time-consuming, rarely overcomes the difficulties and challenges of fitting new people into existing groups, more often than not leads to frustrated leaders and often results in stalemated small group pastors (as the stack of placement requests grows).
- New groups have room for everyone to bring a friend. The first few meetings of every new group almost always include a “who do you know that would have loved being here tonight?” moment. Bringing a friend along for the next meeting is a sign that they already value the group as a good thing! A benefit they want to share. On the other hand…there are few moments more awkward than when the new member of an existing group unexpectedly shows up with a friend!
What do you think? Want to argue? You can click here to jump into the conversation.
I appreciate your thoughts here. Our Community Group movement (so far) looks good on paper, but I have yet to see how it actually will pan out.
One thought/question. It seems that people have to battle awkwardness/fear either way; joining a brand-new group with new people or joining an established group with people who already know each other. You suggest that it works better to have everyone in the room ‘new’ as opposed to having one or two new people join an existing group who really wants them to be there? I understand the logistical nightmare of constant match-making, but what about the close-cousin to that of constantly having to start new groups?
We have a large need for new groups, low availability of qualified (or even willing) leaders, and a ‘history’ of a small group structure that didn’t go very well. My current plan is to help people find a ‘core’ (2-3 couples/units) who start to meet and plan a vision for their group. I figure I can work with a group who already values meeting together (leader training, expansion, etc).
Can this work? I fear that if we try things the same old way (‘pep rally, here’s the list, sign up, etc’) that we’ll get the same old results (dead/dying groups in 6 months because people really didn’t value it in the first place).
Thanks for jumping in here Ethan! You’re asking some important questions. Let me focus my answer on the first one and then direct you to some articles that will answer the rest.
First of all, there’s no question that many people feel self-conscious, awkward, or timid when meeting new people. Don’t miss this though: Although these same feelings are present when they join an existing group, BUT they also have the added sense that everyone else is already an accepted member of the group. They don’t know the stories or the inside jokes or the in-house lingo. In many cases there is nearly an impermeable membrane around the nucleus of an existing group.
To the sense that there is pressure to always be starting new groups, you’ll find a ton of information on the blog about a variety of ways to launch new groups (Small Group connections, church-wide campaigns, using special days like Mother’s Day and Father’s Day to launch new groups, etc.)
mark
Thank you for your reply, Mark! After I posted, I surfed your site and did find several of those helpful articles. And I don’t disagree about a person/couple joining an existing group with the given dynamics.
But we also have a few existing small groups that have gotten very small due to attrition/moving away, etc. How can I encourage the core that’s left to reach out and include new people? Can a ‘re-plant’ happen?
Thanks again for your resources. It has been very helpful.
Group attrition happens. When it does, small group point people have several options and every option comes with a set of problems. Since there is no problem-free, our opportunity is to choose the set of problems we’d rather have. Here are the options: (1) We can assume the role of “member supply.” You have to like the problems that come with matchmaker. (2) We can teach our leaders to fish for new members. They retain the responsibility of adding new members. I wrote this article for that reason: http://www.markhowelllive.com/skill-training-top-10-ways-to-find-new-group-members/ (3) We can encourage groups that have lost members to “take a small group vacation” and separately host new groups in an upcoming church-wide campaign (I’ve written two articles on that topic).
As I mentioned, all of these options have problem sets that come with them. Wise point leaders simply choose the set of problems they’d rather have.
mark
I have one concern that I am very interested in earing your thoughts on…. I believe that anyone who searches for a group is a person entrusted to me by God. Because of that, i need to have confidence that I am placing the person in a safe environment. How do you find a new leader that you feel comfortable placing in charge of the group.
Currently, I encourage a person or couple that has been groomed in an existing group to step out and lead. We then do an event to put new people under the leaders care. ( or the new leader taes over existing group and the old leaders start a new group).
This creates the placement problem you talk about, but I am concerned about the health of the all new group.
Love the article!
I have one concern that I am very interested in earing your thoughts on…. I believe that anyone who searches for a group is a person entrusted to me by God. Because of that, i need to have confidence that I am placing the person in a safe environment. How do you find a new leader that you feel comfortable placing in charge of the group.
Currently, I encourage a person or couple that has been groomed in an existing group to step out and lead. We then do an event to put new people under the leaders care. ( or the new leader taes over existing group and the old leaders start a new group).
This creates the placement problem you talk about, but I am concerned about the health of the all new group.
Love the article!
Great question Joseph! Thanks for jumping in here. Couple thoughts. The notion of “placing” almost implies that you’ve vetted the suitability of the leaders of available groups. Many of the traditionally accepted small group ministry systems vet and pre-qualify new leaders through a system like you suggest. Then, they attempt to match-make or place interested group members in one of the new groups led by a pre-qualified new leader. At the same time, most small group ministry champions acknowledge/commiserate about the fact that they can’t develop enough pre-qualified leaders to keep up with demand (and let me say, also, that if they’re keeping up with demand it has more to do with lower demand than prolific leader development).
This is the reason that I regularly recommend adopting one of two main small group strategies for helping unconnected people find a group. The small group connection strategy invites potential group members to an event and the event itself enables the group to choose from themselves a kind of “test-drive” leader. Sounds strange when you first hear it, but I’ve found conclusively that if you give a group of adults an hour together with the right process, they can figure out who relative to themselves has the most going on spiritually (my 5 part article series about Small Group Connections explains this process in detail).
The second strategy that I’ve found extremely helpful is the HOST strategy when used in the context of a church-wide campaign. Since host volunteers are largely filling their own group with friends, neighbors, family members and co-workers…it only stands to reason that they’re inviting people who they are able to lead. Again…it’s the relative shepherd concept.
Is it problem-free? No. Is the current method you’re using problem-free? No. Which set of problems would you rather have? When we’re honest, many of us would conclude we’d rather have less unconnected people (with the risk of occasional messiness) than more unconnected people with 100% vetted leaders. In fact, if we’re honest, we’d all admit that even with 100% vetted leaders we still end up with a train wreck now and than.
Hope this helps! You are asking the essential questions.
mark
Great thoughts! Thank you for taking the time to teach others what you have learned!
I love it that you’re engaging here Joseph! Keep coming back. Keep challenging in your own context.
mark