Who Plays in My Sandbox?
“The fundamental rules that have governed how relationships work are being rewritten, because of easy, no-cost information sharing.” – Charlene Li[1]
Relationships are changing as quickly as technology is evolving. In the past decade, the meaning of the word “friend” has shifted, “messaging” now means several different things, and no one could ever have predicted the change in what a “platform” holds. We have to clarify if our friends are “IRL” (in real life) or online. Every facet of our society is becoming more open. If you need an example of this, try following a high school student on SnapChat for just a couple of days. You will know so much more about their life than you EVER wanted to know. Or follow someone on Instagram whom you have never met for a month and notice how you begin to feel as if you really know them.
These free social media platforms are the stuff of 1950s sci-fi, and the stuff of our lives in 2017. As Li says, they are rewriting the rules which we have followed in terms of relationships for a long, long time. Li’s book, Open Leadership: How Social Technology Can Transform the Way You Lead, specifically addresses the way social media is changing relationships centered around organizations. The bottom line, according to Li, is that organizations must figure out ways to be more open and engaging in line with society, or risk being left behind.
What does it mean to be open? Does it mean that businesses and organizations must put all of their information “out there” on social media? Maybe. But not without first carefully defining the relationships they are engaging in and putting in place boundaries and processes that help everyone participate safely and effectively. Li calls these structures “Sandbox Covenants.”[2] I love that she calls them covenants, because right off the bat it implies a relationship rather than an effort at control. Ironically, relinquishing control takes more work than hoarding it, because of the necessity of these types of parameters. Opening an organization up to public and employee involvement can’t be done well if it is a free-for-all, or the relationships within the system will implode. Boarders, boundaries, and covenants of engagement become the structure on which some pretty amazing new creations can be built.
In Li’s book, there is no specific mention of churches or denominational organizations, but I can’t help but thinking that every pastor, board member, and bishop or superintendent needs to read this book and think about the ways this information will translate to their own organization. For some reason, churches (in my experience and from stories I’ve been told of others’) tend to be almost secretive with important information and then are genuinely bewildered when people get frustrated and leave. Is it enough to print the budget vs. giving information in the bulletin? What does that say about the relationship that has been built? Are congregations included in the visioning process, or are they “given” the vision and simply asked to get on board? How does the church engage on social media? Who gets involved? Has the church developed a carefully thought-out social media presence that welcomes engagement and interaction? Does as much time, money, and effort go into building that presence as does decorating the sanctuary?
On the back cover of the book, Guy Kawasaki writes, “Charlene makes it clear: Open up or die.” That’s a blunt and somewhat terrifying statement, especially for churches who are struggling just to keep doors open, but those are the times we live in. Li’s book offers step-by-step guidelines for opening up, even in small ways, and growing in that openness. Her tools and advice have helped corporations, banks, and even government agencies change direction and engage with the greater community. I think it’s worth our time as church leaders to hear her out and apply some of these to our own organizations.
[1]. Charlene Li, Open Leadership: How Social Technology Can Transform the Way You Lead, (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2010), xiv.
About the Author
Kristin Hamilton
14 responses to “Who Plays in My Sandbox?”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Kristin, I like your reflection on how “every pastor, board member, and bishop or superintendent needs to read this book and think about the ways this information will translate to their own organization.”
How will church leaders become more open and engage everyone who wants to participate? I don’t see the Patriarchal churches opening up much. And I don’t have any answers for how to get them to think about being more open.
For most other churches though, these should be exciting times. How many more can participate now online, Zoom, or messaging? Of course, it’s all about what Charlene Li says – leaders must be willing to share the power.
Thoughtful post as always!!!
Mary, I think you are right that there will certainly be different degrees of openness in different types of churches. I keep thinking of Li’s statement that people are already engaging organizations. Most of these remain at the watcher level and never show up in real life if an organization doesn’t engage them and draw them in. Churches are dying all over the country. I do think this lack of engagement is one major reason this is happening.
Kristin, you ask an important question: “what does in mean to be open?” You’re illustrations about knowing people via “SnapChat” and “Instagram” highlighted the willingness of people to be open, maybe more open than they should. My father used to say, “open minds can be like containers on the sidewalk with no lids. People will put anything in them!” And then he’d add–AND THIS IS THE IMPORTANT PART– “the point is not to be closed, but to have control of what ends up in the container.” That is why I appreciate Li’s view on the importance of leadership to set the boundaries of openness. Knowing the boundaries is at least a start in an era when boundaries sometimes seem to be nonexistent. You are right, it’s the leader’s responsibility to involve as many as possible in the process. In fact…people are already involved, via social media! 🙂 Enjoyed your post!
There is definitely a tendency toward “oversharing,” Jim! But there is also a weird intimacy that happens. I follow one of my favorite authors and have watched her journey of adoption unfold with tears and smiles. Yesterday “we” celebrated her son’s 1st birthday and I felt like I was a part of their community even though I have never met any of them!
I feel like our churches and leaders have to be ready to share the uncomfortable and painful stuff publicly in order to create that kind of intimacy within the community, but how do we prepare our congregations to “play nice” with such information?
Kristin,
‘Charlene makes it clear: Open up or die.” That’s a blunt and somewhat terrifying statement’ – blunt and terriffing, yes…. but I think this is the bottom line take away for us as church leaders – the openness is coming (or as you point out, it is already here) and churches can either strive to adapt and get on board or get left behind and die.
Thanks for underlining the importance of this simple, hard fact
I’m not sure, Chip, but I think church leaders are caught between terrifying and more terrifying at this point. It is terrifying to think of dying out because we don’t engage well, but more terrifying to think about what happens if we screw it up. That’s what I love about Li’s book. She says we definitely WILL screw up and we need to plan for that inevitability. Yes, it will be painful, but not as painful as dying as a church.
How to become an open church? Part of openness is allowing vulnerability and relinquishing control, as you mention. One way our congregation has approached this is that every single meeting we have is open to anyone in the congregation (granted, we’re not 4000 or even 400, but 150-200). This allows an opportunity for transparency and accountability to one another. Another thing we do is set out our full financial giving/expenses in the lobby– available to anyone who walks in the building. We want to be open with our neighbors as well.
Social media– well, we’re not great with that, yet; though we’re working on it.
And covenants… I, too, resonated deeply with her word choice, as that implies a mutual commitment to a relationship. Covenants encourage mutual deference to one another and a giving and receiving, which builds trust.
I love that your meetings are open to everyone, Katy! What a great move toward transparency. Now, what if one of the next steps was to include a Zoom link on your facebook page or website for each meeting so people can join virtually? It would have to be done thoughtfully and with covenants, of course, but it would be interesting to see if it increases involvement!
I think the caveat is that open meetings are for people already active and involved as the church, whereas Facebook is a public site. That said, yes, a Zoom link for our active members isn’t a bad idea, at least for some of the bigger meetings.
That makes sense, Katy. I wonder how many more people would be actively involved with that kind of access? It would be interesting to see!
Open or die
Be transparent or not be seen
We have to be true to our nature and to Christ.
Christ came with a purpose and journeyed toward that purpose. He was open to all about his purpose and when challenged he continually stated his purpose.
He went everywhere showing his power to those willing to receive. We can’t force others to be receptive to our openness but we must handle it with wisdom and humility.
To increase church membership, we will need to be more open to social media format wisely.
Can we as a church operate in an open leadership? I believe when we follow the steps of Christ, we can make a great effort.
Good point, Lynda. What would you say are some of the specific steps of Jesus leaders should follow to operate openly?
the concept of friends and openness has changed with social media. I do not believe that it means create an experience that tells all. I do believe that it requires an organization to be intentional. In doing so, their engagement with social media will reflect the ways in which they want to engage in fellowship one with another. This is not a simple task but a necessary evil if an organization desires to reach and stay relevant.
It’s interesting that you call it a necessary evil, Christal. Have you read much by Brene Brown? She talks a lot about the importance of vulnerability to personal growth. This seems to go arm-in-arm with Li’s thoughts on organizational openness. In both situations, openness is not a free-for-all, but a deliberate and carefully gauged process that can take us to a new level.