I’ve been thinking a lot recently about clarifying the win in the various ministries and steps at Canyon Ridge. We always want to identify what we will call a win before we schedule anything. Actually, before we calendar anything we want to know what you will call a win and what are the embedded steps that lead to where we want people to go next. See also, How to Design First Steps and Next Steps.
What will you call a win? Peter Drucker framed it slightly different when he asked, “What will you call success?” Same idea. See also, 10 Principles for Building a Thriving Small Group Ministry and 5 Non-Negotiables that Define True Small Group Ministry Success.
I’ve been spending some time again with Playing to Win: How Strategy Really Works by A.G. Lafley and Roger Martin (the former Chairman and CEO of Proctor & Gamble and the Dean of the Rotman School of Management at the University of Toronto). This book is packed with great insights and the application is practically dripping off the pages.
I love the distinction made between playing to play (or participate) and playing to win. Lafley and Martin point out that:
“When a company sets out to participate, rather than win, it will inevitably fail to make the tough choices and the significant investments that would make winning even a remote possibility. A too-modest aspiration is far more dangerous than a too-lofty one. Too many companies eventually die a death of modest aspirations (p. 36).”
Are you playing to play? Or playing to win?
That is a very compelling question, isn’t it? Since unconnected people are always one tough thing away from never being at your church again, doesn’t it make sense that you would play to win? Doesn’t it make sense that you would readily make the tough choices and the significant investments that would make winning likely?
What does it mean if you aren’t?
Image by Brendan Loy