“Focus is the key to achieving excellence and making an impact. Each ministry environment should be designed to do no more than one or two things well.” – Andy Stanley
What does this look like? Here’s an example.
A church runs a playgroup. What is the focus for this playgroup?
You might say: “all of the above!”. But let’s face it, you can’t do everything well, and some of these goals contradict each other, or pull resources in multiple directions. A group that is inwardly focussed (supporting Christian parents) is going to look different to a group that has an evangelistic focus.
Both are worthy – but you need to focus on one or the other, or be willing to settle for doing neither well.
Narrowing the focus is helpful for (at least) two other reasons.
1. It clarifies what resources are needed.
For example:
2. It clarifies ‘the win’.
As Andy Stanley explains:
“It is impossible to know if you are making progress if you are not clear about your destination. This means examining each and every event and program and asking the question, When all is said and done, what is it we want to look back on and celebrate?”
If developing relationships is the focus for the group, but the church parents are so busy setting up, teaching, preparing morning tea, etc. that they aren’t able to chat with anyone and build relationships – then the playgroup would ultimately be a failure.
On the flip side, if relationships are built, the ministry could be deemed successful – regardless of numbers, or the skills the kids acquired, or how diverse the activities were, or how tasty morning tea was.
I think it’s refreshing to have a narrow focus because the people involved in the clear ministry know what they’re working towards, what’s important, what can be dropped, how to pray, and on what basis they will celebrate and give thanks to God at the end of the year/event.
See also: Activity isn’t (necessarily) progress.
Advertise here with Beacon Ads
“Over the summer of 2012, a small team of us teamed up with the guys at Arkhouse Church and spent some time at the beach down in St Kilda.
Along with doing Free Psalm Readings, we asked people what they would want to ask God if they had only 1 question. This is what they said…”
See the last item in this list? I think it’s a nice (and Biblical) touch from Merrylands Anglican.
There was a big response to the poll: ‘How does your church use the screen during sermons?‘.
Today I’d like to ask the following question: What presentation software does your church use?
Back in 2010, I put together a list of 42 different products, and the list continues to grow. Logos recently launched Proclaim – a web-based presentation solution. There’s a lot of options – what does your church use, and is it working for you? If not, what would you like to see it do/not do?
Nice idea on the new website for Mars Hill Church:
Jeremiah 29:11.
100 million visitors to the site in 2011 alone.
Watch this short infographic summary of last year at BibleGateway:
I love hearing stories of lives changed by Jesus. Nice soundtrack too – you can download the tracks here.
Stories Of Change from Sojourn Community Church on Vimeo.
From Andy Stanley in ‘7 Practices of Effective Ministry‘:
“The tendency in business, or in church work for that matter, is to mistake activity for progress. We think that just because people are busy and doing a lot of stuff that we are being successful. The fact of the matter is, if all that activity isn’t taking you where you want to go, then it’s just wasted time.”
I’m sure you don’t want to waste your time.
So, are your ministries, events and gatherings taking people to where you want them to go?
This question is what prompted the REVEAL survey:
“Are all the things that we do here at Willow Creek that these people so generously support really helping them become fully devoted followers of Christ— which is our mission—or are we just giving them a nice place to go to church?”
Let’s face it, churches can have suites of ministries that rival the programming at the Olympic games. But these (usually very) good things, can be implemented in an ad hoc manner, without clear direction, purpose or means of evaluation.
So, how do you assess your church’s activities to know if they really are helping people to progress, or are just an extra ingredient in the pot of well-intentioned but directionless activity?
More and more churches are using cloud-based services to assist with their administration and operations. For example:
These services provide tremendous benefit to churches – I’ve written about these on more than a few occasions.
However, when I wrote the article “3 excellent church database solutions“, a concern was raised with me as to the potential privacy issues that exist with these cloud-based services, and whether these issues preclude churches from using them. It’s a good question, and I decided this was a topic worth exploring further, given the relevance to Australian churches.
At the heart of the matter is the fact that many of the cloud-based services used by churches (and other organisations, for that matter) store data (including personal information) on servers outside Australia (often in the United States). Where the information is hosted matters, because privacy legislation differs in different countries.
In Australia, the Privacy Act (1988) contains 10 National Privacy Principles (the NPPs) which specify how organisations should handle personal information. NPP 9 specifically enables the transfer of personal information from Australian boundaries if certain conditions are met, such as
Does this legislation apply to churches?
While this legislation only applies (with some exceptions) to organisations with an annual turnover of $3 million or more (unless the organisation is related to another business with an annual turnover of more than $3 million), as this document by the Sydney Anglican Diocese (I think rightly) explains:
“If a person has a genuine grievance about the way in which a parish has handled his or her personal information, it is unlikely that the grievance will be satisfactorily resolved by relying on an exemption from the legislation. While reliance on an exemption may mean the parish avoids the risk of a financial penalty for a breach of privacy under the legislation, a grievance which is not satisfactorily resolved may lead to damaged relationships which, in serious cases, may affect the mission of the parish.”
Therefore the privacy legislation is relevant for Australian churches and the question then needs to be asked:
“What are the privacy implications for Australian churches using cloud-based services and what standards should be observed if they are to be used?”
1. The relevance of the USA PATRIOT Act
You’ve probably never heard of the USA PATRIOT Act (signed into law in the U.S. in 2001), but it is a relevant concern. Why?
The Act “dramatically reduced restrictions on law enforcement agencies’ ability to search telephone, e-mail communications, medical, financial, and other records; eased restrictions on foreign intelligence gathering within the United States”, and more. This means that data housed on servers in the U.S. could be accessed by the U.S. government without the user knowing. This has caused major concerns in Europe and Canada, both of which have legal regimes to manage the use of personal information, like Australia. As of December 2011, a bill awaits U.S. Congress that:
“would include a provision that would prevent any service provider from disclosing a customer’s personal data with any agency, even under government order, without notification and consent of the customer.”
The existence of this Act creates some uncertainty for information managers in Australia, given that some organisations may be required to ask some complex questions:
There is a lot of debate around how the PATRIOT Act relates to the NPPs, and similar legislation in other countries. The debate is complicated because of at least three other reasons:
From the extensive reading that I’ve done (and I’m not a lawyer – see disclaimer below), it seems that the PATRIOT Act adds complexity to the issue (and many are arguing that this be resolved ASAP), but the existence of the PATRIOT Act doesn’t in and of itself mean that Australian organisations hosting data in the U.S. are breaching the NPPs. I’m yet to read anything that would suggest otherwise – apart from those who have a vested interest in the PATRIOT Act resulting in these restrictions.
I found it interesting that the PATRIOT Act isn’t mentioned at all on the website for the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner, nor in a 2010 speech on the topic of cloud computing and privacy by a representative of the Office.
2. Requirements for transferring and hosting information offshore
I believe that the NPPs provide requirements for dealing with organisations that host data offshore, rather than ruling this activity out all together. Indeed, the title for NPP9 ‘Transborder data flows’ appears to envisaged that this will and may occur. Practically, this trend will continue to increase, as organisations rely on cloud-based services to efficiently handle their information needs and systems.
The NPPs require that if personal information is transferred to someone in a foreign country (other than the organisation or the individual), that the organisation transferring the information satisfy a number of conditions. As one expert explains:
“Moving this data overseas isn’t arbitrarily banned…provisions of the Privacy Act 1988 National Privacy Principles 9 (Transborder Data Flows) allow for movement of personal information offshore as long as the destination jurisdiction adheres to similar privacy principles; the individual involved has consented to the transfer, usually as part of service terms and conditions; and the transfer is necessary to benefit the individual.”
I think it’s beneficial to refer to a speech in September 2010 by Andrew Solomom who was at the time, Acting Assistant Commissioner, Operations, Office of the Australian Information Commissioner, to the Cloud Computing Conference and Expo. He said this:
“Cloud service providers are frequently based outside Australia and thus may not be subject to Australian legislation or it may be difficult for a regulator to enforce action against the organisation if something goes wrong. This means that it is very important that Australian organisations ensure, when they enter into a contract with a cloud service provider, that the terms of the contract enable them to continue to meet their obligations under the Privacy Act and that there is minimal risk in relation to the protection of personal information.”
Mr Solomon does not discourage let alone state the view that the NPPs prohibit Australian organisations from using cloud-based service providers. Rather, his discussion centres on using them with caution and employing risk minimisation when engaging their services. Besides, cloud-based data storage can be much safer than storing data on a local network:
“Stories about security breaches due to lost or stolen laptops and USB devices, or inappropriately secured enterprise computing systems abound. Storing data in the cloud, rather than on these devices or on an inadequately secured in-house system, if done well, may reduce these risks.” The challenge, in order to take advantage of these new opportunities, is to ensure that personal information can be moved to a third-party service provider’s facilities securely and that those facilities are also appropriately secure.”
“Stories about security breaches due to lost or stolen laptops and USB devices, or inappropriately secured enterprise computing systems abound. Storing data in the cloud, rather than on these devices or on an inadequately secured in-house system, if done well, may reduce these risks.”
The challenge, in order to take advantage of these new opportunities, is to ensure that personal information can be moved to a third-party service provider’s facilities securely and that those facilities are also appropriately secure.”
Let me share with you a couple of snippets from the speech that are relevant to Australian churches. You can read the whole speech for yourself here.
“It is important, therefore, that individuals are informed given appropriate notice that their information will be stored in facilities provided by a third party.” “Organisations should ensure that cloud service providers they intend to use offer personal information security measures that are at least equal to their own and will enable them to continue to meet their obligations under the Privacy Act.” “Organisations should question the permanence of data they move to a cloud service provider and ensure that they are able to continue to meet their obligations concerning the disposal of personal information that is no longer required.”
“It is important, therefore, that individuals are informed given appropriate notice that their information will be stored in facilities provided by a third party.”
“Organisations should ensure that cloud service providers they intend to use offer personal information security measures that are at least equal to their own and will enable them to continue to meet their obligations under the Privacy Act.”
“Organisations should question the permanence of data they move to a cloud service provider and ensure that they are able to continue to meet their obligations concerning the disposal of personal information that is no longer required.”
Based on my reading of the NPPs and the commentary on these laws contained in Mr Solomon’s speech, it seems to me (and again, this isn’t legal advice) that Australian churches can host data offshore and adhere to the NPPs as long as they:
In addition, it would also be prudent to advise members of where their personal information may be stored through a privacy policy or statement.
It is clear that as the world is changing fast and more services are being provided online, there is some clarity lacking in how aspects of Australian privacy legislation applies to Australian businesses, including churches. Ultimately, this is something that churches need to consider for themselves as their particular circumstances demand.
I will be asking the Sydney Diocese (of which my church is a part) to produce a formal legal statement explaining how the Privacy Act applies to local congregations, to provide greater clarity for Anglican churches.
I’m confident (and this SMH article agrees) that as cloud computing develops and becomes even more popular and beneficial, that the law will become clearer and improve the legal controls for the transfer of data in a way which does not stymy the use of cloud based technologies, yet which appropriately safeguards a person’s personal information. This will enable churches to continue to use these tools – in an appropriately managed way that balances the competing tension between organisational management and efficiency and a person’s privacy interests - for the advancement of the gospel and the glory of God.
I found a couple of articles helpful in the preparation of this article:
A big thank you to Todd, for his help in thinking this complex topic through.
Disclaimer: The material contained on this article is by way of general commentary only. It is not legal advice, nor should the reader rely on it without seeking legal advice. Communicate Jesus and the author excludes all liability or any loss suffered in connection with any reliance on the information contained in this article.
This is a question I’ve been wrestling with as I’ve been considering another question, namely:
“What’s the best way to use the screen during the sermon?”
You can’t determine the best way to use the screen, until you work out the end point, the goal of preaching a sermon. The use of the screen should complement this goal.
So what is the goal of preaching a sermon? I asked this question on Twitter:
David said: “Same as the journalist’s job: to comfort the disturbed and to disturb the comfortable.” “For those who hear to worship Jesus.” – Matt “Magnify the glorly of God in Christ Jesus.” – Mike “To impart a revelation.” – Darren “To create or build upon an existing relationship with Jesus.” – Peter “Changed lives thru faith in Christ, maturing faith in those who trust in him, learning that leads to service & action. ” – Kris
David said: “Same as the journalist’s job: to comfort the disturbed and to disturb the comfortable.”
“For those who hear to worship Jesus.” – Matt
“Magnify the glorly of God in Christ Jesus.” – Mike
“To impart a revelation.” – Darren
“To create or build upon an existing relationship with Jesus.” – Peter
“Changed lives thru faith in Christ, maturing faith in those who trust in him, learning that leads to service & action. ” – Kris
What would you suggest is the goal?