Mission as Business
At my core, I’m a Jesuit.*
While I may not be a card carrying member of the Society of Jesus, I have practiced Ignatian Spirituality for years by doing The Exercises and meeting with a spiritual director. I understand myself to be a “contemplative in action.” All that to say, most of the concepts presented by Chris Lowney in Heroic Leadership were familiar to me, though the stories of various Jesuits expanded my understanding of the spiritual practices that I have adopted as my own.
While I am a fan of all things Ignatian, I agree with Arthur Paul Boers assessment that, “Lowney’s attempt to secularize the Jesuits is troubling.”[1] Jesuit practices are deeply rooted in faith and dependent upon Christ’s work in a through the person. To imagine that one could be transformed into the likeness of Christ without the participation of the Holy Spirit is as crazy as Paul and Elder suggesting that human beings can discuss controversial issues in “an unbiased or, at least, a balanced manner within a framework of depoliticized discourse.”[2]
Lowney rightly explains that what sets apart Jesuit leadership principals is that they are less focused on what one does, and more interested in who one is, insisting that the Jesuit nuestro modo de proceder has “a lot to say about who leaders are, how leaders live, and how they become leaders in the first place.”[3] But despite his desire to make this “way of being” accessible to those with a secular worldview, Lowney himself cannot explain how one attains “self-awareness, ingenuity, love and heroism” apart from God.[4]
Let’s take the pillar of ingenuity, for example. Lowney asserts that the characteristic that distinguishes Jesuit ingenuity is not the resulting behaviors, but rather, “what makes these behaviors possible in the first place. Loyola didn’t merely exhort recruits to be adaptable and creative; he ensured through the Exercises that recruits would adopt the demeanor, attitudes, and worldview that make adaptability and creativity possible.”[5] Qualities like indifference and discernment are decidedly spiritual in essence, and to insinuate that they can be honed in a spiritual vacuum seems disingenuous.
And while I am bothered by Lowney’s endeavor to offer what, in essence, is spiritual transformation apart from the Spirit of God, I’m even more concerned by the fact that many churches and mission organizations, also feeling the impact of a “leadership deficit,” have done just the opposite. Setting aside the values epitomized by the cross, they’ve turned to secular sources for a solution. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not against pastors and missionaries drawing insights from the wisdom of great books like Edwin Friedman’s Failure of Nerve[6] or Susan David’s Emotional Agility.[7] We have much to learn from psychologists, sociologists, ethnographers, etc.; regardless of their worldview. They offer us universal truths that can and should inform our work, and like Augustine, I believe that all truth is God’s truth. But I am frustrated by churches and mission organizations that are being run more like capitalist corporations and less like Kingdom cooperatives because they have chosen entirely secular models of leadership and strategy without evaluating them according to the standards and ethics of Christ.
And then here’s what can happen:
Let’s say a mission agency needs to have a certain number of missionaries on the field to remain viable as organization. This is because the missionaries raise the funds to go on the field, and the sending agency takes a percentage of those funds for overhead costs, which includes the salaries of all the home office employees. The mission agency in question needs 300 units** to stay above water, but it currently only has 270 units. The bottom line is, they need to bring in 30 more missionary units, so that those 30 units will raise support, and then the agency will get the additional overhead needed to say solvent. So the mission agency gets a little more lenient in their recruitment process, reduces the educational and work experience requirements, and compromises on some screening issues when interviewing aspiring missionaries. The objective becomes keeping recruitment numbers up rather than discerning the call of God on a person’s life. From a business standpoint, this is the right thing to do—it puts the emphasis on the bottom line. But from a Kingdom standpoint, this is a lousy thing to do—it puts people and ministries at risk.
And where is Christ in this solution?
And then there is the constant demand to do ministries that will elicit more financial support, regardless of whether those ministries are needed or relevant. Missionaries are pressured to be “leaders” and “innovators” which leaves little room for collaboration with and submission to indigenous ministries. But people don’t want to fund “servants” they want to fund “movers and shakers,” so that is what mission agencies demand that their missionaries be. And there is no mention of personal transformation, or the “self-leadership” that the Jesuits cultivate.[8]
And where is Christ on this agenda?
My project is exploring missionary sustainability and effectiveness in the 21st century, and one of my fears is that missionaries are not effective and are leaving the field early because too much has been compromised in the screening process, the cultural integration process, and the personal development process. And my suspicion is that this is happening because mission agencies are being run like corporations.
What would Ignatius say about that?
*Well, as Jesuit as any woman (except perhaps Juana of Austria) could have been prior to 2014, given that the Order was exclusively male until recently. I’m glad to see that they have broadened their decidedly egalitarian stance to include women.
**A “unit” for a missionary sending agency is either a single missionary or a missionary family. In other words, a single woman counts as one unit; but, a married couple also counts as one unit, as they are a joint source of income for the agency.
[1] Arthur P Boers, “God’s Soldiers: Adventure, Politics, Intrigue, and Power–a History of the Jesuits,” The Christian Century 121, no. 21 (October 19, 2004): 62–64.
[2] Trisha Welstad, “Critical Thinking: Pragmatism, Answers and Irony,” accessed November 9, 2017, http://blogs.georgefox.edu/dminlgp/critical-thinking-pragmatism-answers-and-irony/.
[3] Chris Lowney, Heroic Leadership: Best Practices from a 450-Year-Old Company That Changed the World, Reprint edition (Chicago, Ill: Loyola Press, 2005). 15.
[4] Lowney. 9.
[5] Lowney. 127. Emphasis mine.
[6] Edwin H. Friedman, Margaret M. Treadwell, and Edward W. Beal, A Failure of Nerve: Leadership in the Age of the Quick Fix, 10th anniversary revised edition (New York: Church Publishing, 2017).
[7] Susan A David, Emotional Agility Get Unstuck, Embrace Change, and Thrive in Work and Life, 2016, http://lib.myilibrary.com?id=949648.
[8] Lowney, Heroic Leadership. 9.
About the Author
Jennifer Williamson
Jenn Williamson is a wife and mother of two adult sons. Before moving to France in 2010, she was the women's pastor at Life Center Foursquare Church in Spokane, WA. As a missionary with Greater Europe Mission, she is involved in church planting and mentoring emerging leaders. Jenn benefitted from French mentors during her transition to the field, and recognizes that cross-cultural ministry success depends on being well integrated into the host culture. Academic research into missionary sustainability and cultural adaptation confirmed her own experience and gave her the vision to create Elan, an organization aimed at helping missionaries transition to the field in France through the participation of French partners.15 responses to “Mission as Business”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Hey Jenn- Excellent and very thorough post. Thank you. I resonated with a couple parts of your post and had a surprisingly different reaction to the meat of your post. First, though I have not done the Exercises and haven’t practiced Ignatian Spirituality as extensively as you, I also do love all things Ignatian and have embraced in my own practices, and taught about Ignatian Spirituality for maybe 5-10 years. I particularly appreciate pretty much everything written by Fr. James Martin, SJ. Second, I resonated with your frustration with the pragmatism of the mega-church, where the bottom line numbers set the course more than the theological vision of the Spirit. Having grown up within 5 miles of Saddleback Church, I’ve had many friends who worked there, whose stories would only fuel your fire. I’m with you 100% on that. Interestingly, I had a different reaction to the “secularization” of the book. Perhaps I didn’t read it as closely as you, but I felt the Holy Spirit all throughout the book, perhaps because I know the author’s story, and I saw it as what a great opportunity to bring such a positive view of the Christian faith to the workplace, for it’s own benefit. I wonder if secular folks who might have read that book for the purpose of business success, have since started asking questions about the relevance of God in their lives. At the same time, what you wrote seemed valid to me also. What a challenge it must have been to try to adapt his seminary learning to a secular business context. But I agree, no Spirit = no spiritual transformation.
I agree that Lowney has implicitly brought “the Christian faith into the workplace,” since much of the Jesuit principals are rooted in scripture and animated by the Spirit. I guess that I was disappointed that Lowney seemed to “sterilze” the the leadership model to make it accessible to secular leaders. I don’t like the implication that these practices have power apart from the person of Jesus Christ. For example, Ignatius (and Calvin for that matter) would say that self-awareness is not possible apart from God-awareness. To suggest one without the other will create navel-gazing.
Jennifer, what a wonderful, insightful post. I too found lots of concerns about Lowney’s book on the Jesuit model – however they were not my own they were from reviews. I’m so glad you are researching missionary sustainability and believe your suspicions are correct – there isn’t effective screening and placement. I feel this is typical of all things ministry including pastors. Your thoughts?
I think that, in general, churches are staff-heavy because they have not learned the egalitarianism of the Jesuits, that welcome and empowers the gifts and leadership of all members. We also have a fascination with celebrity pastors, which is not at all healthy. Both of these reflect corporate America more than they reflect the early church.
Jenn
Good job bringing in past readings of Paul and Elder. I agree that we have to keep corporate models out of Christ’s work. I read (and blogged about) this book from a different angle. I took the idea that all of Augustine that “I believe that all truth is God’s truth” and ran with it. If the work of the Jesuits was a successful as Lowney claims it was then God hand had to be a part of it. I saw this because they were not creating a corporation rather spreading the Gospel around the world. I do believe he tried to secularize the principles but I don’t see how the faith of those involved can be ignored. I think we are saying similar things but approaching from different angles.
Your mission example had me thinking of several agencies that seem to just be “sending agencies” with no member care or team building models. They see their job as only handling the funds. I believe that is irresponsible on their part. I believe Ignatius would have a few table to overturn.
Yeah, Greg, I read your post and I think we are getting at the same thing from different angles. And yes, I think that when missionary sending agencies and churches adhere to business models they lose their capacity for “indifference” and therefore “ingenuity” and “love” are also compromised.
Salut Jenn… there’s so much I want to comment on but I think we need a face-to-face. But first, I did agree with Chris above that I wasn’t troubled by the apparent lack of reference to God in the book. I believe Lowney’s track record speaks for itself as being impregnated with faith and commitment; therefore, I read everything within that perspective and saw God all over it.
Regarding the commercialization of missions I have a few opinions on that too. I mentioned in a previous comment last week (?) that I really support your move to bivocational ministry as I think that’s a more sustainable model for missions and it demonstrates increased respect for your local French church planters who must also follow the same model.
I think we are seeing a drop-off in new missionaries being mobilized and lowering rates of retention because the faith-support model is becoming obsolete. Here in Canada it appears the local church has largely lost faith in mission enterprise, has reduced willingness to fund church planting overseas, and tries to create their own pathways forward into mission which as you know are fraught with many problematic issues.
There is a tension between having an effective business model and God’s calling people into ministry. I think both are possible and should be integrated. We shouldn’t fear solid business planning, even when they (unfortunately) call people “units”. It’s just that we are caught between old cracking wineskins and finding the newer wineskin that can hold this new wine.
Yes, Mark, I agree that we shouldn’t fear solid business principals. Your wineskin analogy is helpful to me.
I think churches and mission agencies need to balance budgets and have strategic plans and be accountable to “stakeholders.” I’m all for those things. My challenge is when we start acting like a we have a product to sell and base our success on numbers, or create celebrity CEO pastors who no longer feel the need to be accountable to the body of Christ, or think in terms of “profits” and “returns,” or compete with the church accross the street rather than cooperate, or lauch churches that feed a consumer mentality in its congregants.
Yes, there is a tension. As always, your response is insightful.
I am in complete agreement with your sentiments here.
Oh, and I didn’t mean to suggest that I didn’t see God in this book or in these practices. I meant to question the fact the Lowney suggests that these practices can be of use to people without faith, but then only uses people of faith (Jesuits) as his examples. Beyond that, I think that the reason these practices have transformative values for individuals is because they help us to cooperate with the work of God in our lives. Lowney says, “Jesuits did not become successful leaders simply by adhering to particular religious beliefs but by the way they lived and worked.” I’m not sure the two can be separated. I think we create false dichotomies when we suggest that the sacred and the secular, or belief and action, are separate. Take the pillar of “self-awareness.” Ignatius and Calvin both believed that there is no knowledge of self apart from knowledge of God.
Jennifer,
Great reflection on the viability of missions run as a business. I have seen in my on denomination the “firing” of a fairly significant amount of missionaries so they can run their budget correctly. I know several who were taken off the field personally and know they were called by God. One decided to stay and raise his own support. The biggest issue I have with this is the IMB has not cut their own offices commiserate with the cuts on the field. Very disappointing to run a missions organization this way.
I do think missionaries should be accountable for their budgets, but I agree that sending agencies (such as IMB) often look to solve financial challenges by making cuts on the field rather cuts at the home office.
Jennifer, powerful insight. My wife and I worked as houseparents at a children’s home early in our marriage; while there, one of the most disconcerting things I heard was when they referred to the children as “clients.” I realized early on that they had lost perspective on the ministry and focused too much on only the business aspect of things. Even more sadly, the children had noticed the same thing. Though our duties included houseparenting, I was also hired on as the home’s first official Youth Minister. The very first policy I immediately put into effect was that no child would ever be referred to as a “client” again. In just a couple of months, this one act, combined with other re-teaching policies, started to show a change for the better in the youth. I understand the frustration that comes from seeing a business mindset interfering with the ministry goals.
Here is the question however: When there is the shortage, which results in a shortage of working capital, how would you propose overcoming the financial deficit without having at least some business management instilled? After all, if the money is not there, then there is no mission work support…thus the ministry ends completely.
I’m absolutely FOR good financial stewardship and responsibility. I think we need to be accountable for our finances. But in the example I gave, I would not compromise the intake process for the sake of the bottom line. Maybe there need to be cutbacks at headquarters (if there a fewer missionaries on the field there should not need to be as much support in the home office), or maybe they need to increase the amount they take from existing missionaries (whic would mean those missionaries would have to raise some more money, but at least those missionaries would have been vetted). At the end of the day, this is a longer discussion, because I think the current model of funding missions is not viable for the long haul, and we need to be doind a major paradigm shift for how missions are funded. So perhaps the mission agency in my scenario needs to get together a team to begin planning for such a shift.
Jenn,
First, I read your note about being Jesuit first because I was sure it would have something to do with the male dominance of the Jesuit order. Thanks for the notation and insight.
Second, I appreciate your personal insight as one who practices the Exercises and brings wisdom both to the text and to your own context in applying it.
I agree with you that Lowney does not give any practical guidance on attaining these virtues. As someone who’s practiced these, do you see any practical way forward, in particular with the principle of innovation?