A Warning for Those Considering Co-Leadership (Part II of II)
Bob Doan, a leader chewed up by a co-leadership model, once lamented, “Because of an inherently flawed design, a co-leadership arrangement is not ‘fixable.’” His advice to those in co-leadership structures? “Get out. Resign, walk away.”
One well-regarded venture capitalist steers clear of companies with co-leadership because of her belief that “At least 50 percent of early-stage startup failures are rooted in co-founder conflicts.”
While my last article told how and why Greg and I chose to become co-lead pastors, I’ve also experienced plenty of frustration as a co-leader. Greg and I have very different personalities. Among those differences is my propensity to plan every detail and Greg’s propensity to have a go-with-the-flow approach.
One time, having returned from vacation and enjoying a final day with my family locally before I returned to church the following day, I was catching up on communication while shopping with my family. As my girls strolled the aisles of Marshall’s, I scrolled through the team’s communication only to freeze when I saw that Greg had changed the main offertory announcement for Sunday.
I gritted my teeth. Greg, stay in your lane, I thought. I have a plan six months out for what we will highlight during our offering time, with each week strategically planned. “Can we please keep the offering as it is?” I messaged our team, frustrated. I can’t even leave for a week, I self-righteously concluded. Greg texted, “Can we talk?”
I picked up the phone, and we chatted. He had a very good reason for changing the offertory focus. Because of confidentiality he couldn’t share that with the team. He was completely right. I was wrong in my assessment of Greg’s decision and his character. I had been self-righteous and uncharitable. By God’s grace, Greg acted with kindness and forgiveness.
Co-leaders have had their relationships dissolve over far less.
In the last post, I tried to convince you of some of the merits of co-leadership. But co-leadership is not all rainbows and lollipops. While I believe plurality of leadership is biblical among the pastor-elders of a church, I certainly don’t believe that co-leadership with two lead pastors is usually the best situation for most organizations. For co-leadership to work, there must be a delicate balance of sameness and difference with a foundation of trust and character.
The similarities begin with theology and philosophy of ministry. To be successful co-leaders, there can’t be any significant gaps in your theology and philosophy. Each leader must trust the other leader to speak, even off the cuff, in a manner that reflects his principles and values. The congregation needs to hear consistent truth spoken from the same basic lens from their co-leaders. The co-leaders must also align their philosophy of ministry. You’ll exhaust the church if you don’t have a basic agreement on the approach to worship, children’s ministry, care, and leadership development.
You have to have an aligned mission. You must be steering in the same direction. You will wear each other out and confuse your church if you’re aiming at two different destinations, even if they are only distinguished by a few degrees. Just like kids will pick up on parents who have different perspectives of what the family values, so will a congregation pit two leaders against each other if they have slightly different missions. It won’t work to have one pastor trying to develop a culture of care and discipleship while the other pastor is pushing toward an outreach-oriented strategy.
Here’s where it can get tricky. While there must be a shared theological understanding and mission, co-lead pastors also need to be sufficiently different. Co-leadership doesn’t work when two leaders have the same gift sets. The leaders must bring different organizational strengths and then align their roles with those strengths. And on the one hand, there must be clear roles and responsibilities. But on the other hand, if lanes are too distinct, that can be problematic. Co-leaders need to have the opportunity to lead together so that the congregation is clear that they aren’t choosing between leaders but being led by unified under-shepherds.
This means that both leaders need to know their strengths and weaknesses. One guarantee in co-leadership is that your weaknesses will be more obvious. My propensity to plan meetings weeks out and schedule my days down to the minute can be a strength—that is until someone walks in off the street and wants to talk to a pastor. I’m grateful that Greg can go with the flow, step into crises, and release his plan to the demands of the day. At my worst, I can be rigid and unmoved by the direction of the Spirit. I’m grateful to have a partner that balances this weakness.
The foundation for co-leadership is built on trust and character. Yet I’m convinced that co-lead pastors need to be friends, and it won’t truly work if you are mere colleagues. Friendship must be in the foundation along with trust and character. In addition, the necessity for humility is increased in co-leadership. You must be willing not to be the favorite of some in your church. If given the choice, they might choose the other leader as their supervisor or prefer the other leader as a speaker. You must be willing to have ideas you thought of or organizational change you helped lead credited to the other person. David wrote seventy-three psalms, while the Sons of Korah wrote eleven. Which of the Sons of Korah wrote which? We don’t know. All leaders know that much of their work will never be noticed or recognized, but this lack of individual acknowledgment becomes multiplied among co-leaders.
You must be willing to work through conflict in a healthy way. Biblical peacemaking is hard, but if co-leaders allow conflict to fester, the infection will spread through the organization. If it is true that God has given all Christians a “ministry of reconciliation” (2 Cor. 5:18), then that ministry of reconciliation must begin in the co-lead relationship.
Three final areas are important for alignment:
Both leaders need to have public-facing responsibilities. As pastors, we believe we need to share the preaching responsibilities as the primary preacher will have more opportunities to earn congregational trust and be considered the “real leader.” A leader needs the opportunity to gain trust, an essential commodity for any leader. Public perception needs to comport with reality.
There must be clear accountability structures. What happens when there is a disagreement? Who will arbitrate? Who will make sure the leaders are following through on their commitments? Accountability structures need to be put in place. For Greg and I, we have quarterly counseling and coaching sessions with external counselors and coaches, coupled with at least bi-annual reviews with our elder team.
Decision-making must come through consensus. Who will have the “final” say? If your system allows one of the co-leaders to hold the final say consistently, you aren’t actually functioning in a co-leadership model. Along with many other churches, our elders serve by consensus. We don’t take votes; we make sure that all elders agree when making decisions. This alignment might sound impossible. How can elders agree on every decision? By choosing to trust the group and navigating conflict with humility.
In Philippians, Paul urges the church, “Do nothing from selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves. Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others. Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus” (Phil. 2:3–5).
As co-leaders, this invitation is ever-present. As Greg and I make decisions, we recognize that there are times when one of us feels more strongly about a decision than the other, and we choose to support their conviction. Of course, this is doubly challenging because there can’t be “Greg’s decisions” and “John’s decisions” in co-leadership. There can only be “our decisions.” So, co-leadership invites us to choose humility not only in the decision-making process but also in the communication of and continued support for the decision.
Co-leadership is hard. We expect this season at our church, New Life, to be unusual, but we are grateful for it. We even believe it’s unlikely New Life will experience a similar season in the future, but we thank God for allowing us to partner in his purposes together. It has been a challenge personally, but it has borne great fruit in our hearts and at New Life.
Perhaps God might be doing a similar work in your context. I’d encourage you to be open to co-leadership should God lead your church in that direction.
* To read Part I of this series, click here.
John Beeson serves as co-lead pastor at New Life Bible Fellowship in Tucson, Arizona. He attended Gordon College and Princeton Theological Seminary and is married with two kids. He blogs at The Bee Hive. He is the coauthor of Blogging for God’s Glory in a Clickbait World and the forthcoming Trading Faces: Removing the Masks that Hide Your God-Given Identity