There has always been a sort of underlying assumption that the sciences are measurable and immutable. The arts, on the other hand, have long been viewed as more subjective and less clear-cut. And as anyone who works with people knows, humans are anything but measurable and clear-cut. Highly relational fields like social work, psychology and certainly ministry are unpredictable and often chaotic.<\/p>\n
Margaret J. Wheatly has written widely on the dichotomy between measurable, machine-like control vs. subjective, adaptive interactions in organizations. In her earlier work, Finding Our Way : Leadership for an Uncertain Time<\/em>, she uses the framework of \u201cold story vs. new story\u201d. She encourages leaders to move away from an approach she characterizes \u201cas a story of dominion and control\u201d[1]<\/a> in order to \u201cevoke people\u2019s innate creativity\u2026 solve complex problems\u2026 [and] create healthy communities.\u201d[2]<\/a> In her later book, Leadership and the New Science : Discovering Order in a Chaotic World<\/em>, Wheatly employs metaphors drawn from scientific discovery to focus on the \u201cimpact of non-material forces in organizations.\u201d[3]<\/a> She wants readers come to \u201ca new (and ancient) awareness that we participate in a world of exquisite interconnectedness. We are learning to see systems rather than isolated parts and players.\u201d[4]<\/a> She emphasizes moving away from organizational planning toward strategic thinking.[5]<\/a><\/p>\n When my family landed in France 13 years ago, we learned the hard way about the difference between planning and adaptive, strategic thinking. Our supervisor at the time had sent us out with an elaborate step-by-step plan. Start by doing A and B and then C will happen. Don\u2019t worry about X and Y because Z is more important. \u00a0I\u2019ll spare you the details, but some of the missteps we inadvertently made because we were executing that rigid plan were still following us around a decade later.<\/p>\n Over the years I\u2019ve read countless books or listened to speakers with similar messages. Each one could be called \u201cHow to plant a church in 5 easy steps\u201d or something similar. Don\u2019t get me wrong, I\u2019m all for learning from others\u2019 experiences and consolidating best practices. But these books often leave me frustrated and occasionally throwing the books across the room because my team and I are already implementing the plans and advice they lay out. But ministry, as with any relational-oriented field, is not a predictable science. Slowly, over time, we have learned to adapt, to contextualize to the local culture and to allow results to happen in God\u2019s timing. While there have been seasons of lament when the fruit has been sparse, I have come to embrace 1 Corinthians 3:6-7 (NIV): \u201cI planted the seed,\u00a0Apollos watered it, but God has been making it grow.\u00a0\u00a0<\/sup><\/strong>So neither the one who plants nor the one who waters is anything, but only God, who makes things grow.\u201d God calls us to faithfulness and the fruit is in his hands.<\/p>\n The result of this long reflection is that I cheer alongside Margaret J. Wheatly as she champions systematic thinking and agility in the face of \u201cfrequent, unplanned changes.\u201d[6]<\/a> In a relationally driven work, the interconnectedness and the quality of our relationships matters all the more. In the same way, small steps forward can result in significant change in the long term. Wheatly explains, \u201cFrom a Newtonian perspective, our efforts often seem too small, and we doubt that our actions will make a difference. Or perhaps we hope that our small efforts will contribute incrementally to large-scale change. Step by step, system by system, we aspire to develop enough mass or force to alter the larger system.\u201d[7]<\/a><\/p>\n That brings me to the question of the butterfly effect. Developed by Edward Lorenz, Massachusetts Institute of Technology meteorology professor, the idea is to study complex systems. Lorenz theorized that \u201csmall variances in the initial conditions could have profound and widely divergent effects on the system’s outcomes. Because of the sensitivity of these systems, outcomes are unpredictable.\u201d[8]<\/a> I wonder what \u201cbutterfly\u201d could exist in a ministry context. Could a relatively small change in how or where my team and I spend our time bring us into contact with different people, maybe people who are seeking God? Could a slight shift in priorities result in greater fruitfulness? I\u2019m not looking for a magic bullet, but this line of thinking is encouraging me to take a risk and maybe try something new. Who knows what will happen?<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n [1]<\/a> Wheatley, Margaret J..\u00a0Finding Our Way : Leadership for an Uncertain Time, Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Incorporated, 2005. 22.<\/p>\n [2]<\/a> Ibid., 14.<\/p>\n [3]<\/a> Wheatley, Margaret J..\u00a0Leadership and the New Science : Discovering Order in a Chaotic World, Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Incorporated, 2006. 54.<\/p>\n [4]<\/a> Ibid., 158.<\/p>\n [5]<\/a> Ibid., 38.<\/p>\n [6]<\/a> Wheatley, Margaret J..\u00a0Leadership and the New Science : Discovering Order in a Chaotic World, Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Incorporated, 2006. 38.<\/p>\n