{"id":14771,"date":"2017-10-26T01:08:51","date_gmt":"2017-10-26T08:08:51","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dminlgp\/?p=14771"},"modified":"2017-10-26T02:23:22","modified_gmt":"2017-10-26T09:23:22","slug":"hirschman-on-voice-and-the-church-split","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/hirschman-on-voice-and-the-church-split\/","title":{"rendered":"Hirschman on Voice and the Church Split"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/a>In 1970 I was 12 years old. That was the year when more than fifty percent of the members of our church decided to exit our church community. My family was not one of them. I remember the pain it caused in our church and our family. People who were friends for years no longer spoke to each other. Sadly, to this day the divide is still evident. Why did it happen? Why couldn\u2019t anyone do anything about it? Interestingly enough, in that same year, Hirschman published his book using the term \u201cexit\u201d and \u201cvoice\u201d to describe two competing approaches that people use to address an organizational decline. Thus introducing the world to organizational terms that were already familiar to the church.<\/p>\n

In brief, \u201cvoice\u201d is the effort to try to change the direction of an organization by staying and being a part of the needed change. On the other hand, an \u201cexit\u201d is enacted when there is no apparent or perceived option of change and no voice to speak to that change. \u201cLoyalty\u201d may be the one thing that keeps people from exiting. [1] Market theory stated that an \u201cexit\u201d of customers or an exit from an organization served as a self-correcting mechanism. As the argument goes, via a sizable exit the organization would be forced to readjust and consequently pull from the decline. As we know today, a mass exit seldom gives an organization enough time to organize, readjust and pull out of the downturn. [2]<\/p>\n

My questions in the context of Hirschman is this: Aside from loyalty, in the case of helping to correct a declining church what is more valuable to the church community, \u201cvoice\u201d or \u201cexit?\u201d I would argue that though there are times when an exit is unavoidable, \u201cvoice\u201d is more valuable to the church community than \u201cexit\u201d for these reasons: the church is a community and therefore voice is essential; an exit seldom solves the problem; a voice speaks louder than an exit.<\/p>\n

Looking at how some leaders approach a church decline, some take the advice of Collins and force problem individuals out of the organization. This is an exit of another kind. [3] I, however, lean toward Friedman\u2019s paradigm, wherein a self-differentiated leader can think and act clearly, listening to and hearing the many voices, yet remain outside of the emotion of the decline enabling them to lead into a healthy change. [4] Hirschman\u2019s thesis further refines Friedman as he argued that giving people a \u201cvoice\u201d of dissatisfaction is better at halting a decline than an \u201cexit.\u201d Today there is the saying within non-profit organizations: it takes 100% of your resources to get a donor, but only 20% to keep them. There is more than a bit of hyperbole in the statement, and yet at its core, it represents Hirschman\u2019s theory that the opportunity for \u201cvoice\u201d can have a more positive impact\u2014and using less resources\u2014on a declining organization than the \u201cexit\u201d option.<\/p>\n

And so let\u2019s consider “voice” over “exit.” First, the church is a community and therefore voice is essential. A community without the voice of its people is no community at all. A community where it\u2019s members either have no voice or the voices fall on deaf ears is the very atmosphere that makes an exit the only option. [5] During the church split many loyal people felt that they did not have a voice or that their voice fell on deaf ears. Consequently, they determined that their only option was to exit. A voice, in this case, might have relieved pressure, if not the eventual exit.<\/p>\n

Second, an exit or split seldom solves a problem and in fact, can have a far-reaching negative impact on the church community and its people. Tolkien expresses it in this way, \u201cFaithless is he that says farewell when the road darkens.\u201d[6] The exit solves the problem of getting away from the source of the pain, but the pain may not go away. The pain can easily follow a person into another faith community and even reproduce itself there in another form. Also, many who were a part of an exit never return to a church or faith community. With an exit, the problem is addressed but seldom solved.<\/p>\n

Finally, a voice speaks louder than an exit. The preacher says that there is a time to speak and a time to be silent. [Eccleasties 3:7] \u00a0This is an indication that voice has a place and I would suggest that it is best placed before the exit rather than after the exit. The voice-before-the-exit shows concern for the church, the voice-after-the-exit often has the hint of bitterness. Of those who left the church, I remember few who were able to voice positive things about the church, even though they experienced positive and life-changing events in the church. Also, even though the voices may be tense, the voice before the exit expresses a desire for the survival of the church. On the other hand, the voice- after-the-exit often expresses the wish of failure. Again I return to the memories of those difficult conversations with those who exited. They seldom had anything good to say about the church and on more than one occasion voiced a desire for the church to fail because the church couldn\u2019t possibly survive without them. No matter what side a person is on, a declining church is always a painful and tear-filled experience. However, the voice, though often spoken through tears, has hope for the future.<\/p>\n

We don\u2019t often see practically and biblically how organizational or business theory informs the leading and strengthening the church. Exit, Voice, and Loyalty<\/i> is an exception in that it can inform the church concerning its health, and in the event of a church decline, why people stay, why they leave and what can be done. In this way, in the case of a declining church, \u201cvoice\u201d is better than \u201cexit.\u201d<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

1. Albert O. <\/i>Hirschman, Exit, Voice, and Loyalty: Responses to Decline in Firms, Organizations, and States<\/i>. Online ed. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1970, 4, 76.<\/p>\n

2. Ibid., 24.<\/p>\n

3. James C. <\/i>Collins, Good to Great and the Social Sectors: Why Business Thinking is Not the Answer: A Monograph to Accompany Good to Great: Why Some Companies Make the Leap\u2014and Others Don\u2019t.<\/i> Kindle ed. Boulder, CO: J. Collins, 2011.<\/p>\n

4. Edwin H.\u00a0<\/i> Friedman, A Failure of Nerve: Leadership in the Age of the Quick Fix<\/i>. Kindle ed. New York, NY: Seabury, 2007.<\/p>\n

5. Hirschman, 35.<\/p>\n

6. J.R.R. <\/i>Tolkien, The Lord of the Rings: 50th Anniversary, One Vol. Edition<\/i>. Anniversary ed. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2005.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In 1970 I was 12 years old. That was the year when more than fifty percent of the members of our church decided to exit our church community. My family was not one of them. I remember the pain it caused in our church and our family. People who were friends for years no longer […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":90,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[251],"class_list":["post-14771","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-hirschman","cohort-lgp7"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14771","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/90"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=14771"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14771\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":14778,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14771\/revisions\/14778"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=14771"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=14771"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=14771"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}