The 14th Multi-Site Practicum put on by the NewThing Network concluded today without a hitch. It was completely sold out with over 100 in attendance this time around—they just keep getting bigger and bigger! I was extremely excited to be a part of it once again, pitch in where I could, and sit through the sessions all over again. Each and every time it seems there’s something new that sticks out to me and challenges me to think through a new aspect of what this thing in San Francisco is going to look like especially in relation to a leadership and reproducing culture. (I get more and more excited as the day approaches!)
I also had the chance to catch up with my friends Tim & Dennis from North Point Church who are progressing down the road towards multi-site. They’ve been making several stops along their way to various learning events and it looks like they’ve got a great grasp on where they’re heading! I can’t wait to see what God does through them and North Point!
Related posts:
- leaving a legacy… and creating one too.
- feeling a little loved and wanted…
- cookie-cutter communities?
- it is finished. (reflections)
- the coming week…
Maybe some day our fantasy draft will look like that.
I could easily see church becoming totally “multi-site” not just in buildings but in homes, etc. My main problem is what makes this much different than denomination planting, or church planting done my other mega churches. They spin off the same product over and over again, then I think that defeats the purpose I believe.
Also what happens when the other site differs in views, opinions, etc from the mother ship? I like the idea but still am very skeptical. Cant wait to visit SF some day, take in a niners game and see how you guys are doing out there!
You raise some really good questions about Multi-Site, Jason; questions that many leaders, thinkers and practitioners are wrestling through every single day. Multi-Site is a new movement within the evangelical church and right now is really focusing in on what it looks like to create new campuses that meet in buildings… however, this isn’t the end-all-be-all, just the beginning.
Community is actually in the throws of moving beyond multi-site and endeavoring into brand new territory of what it would look like to be “poly”-site. Meaning, how can we reproduce faster than we can locate (not build) buildings. Fleshing this out a little more, Community believes (as influenced by Hirsch’s book Forgotten Ways) that the way they are doing church now will only be able to reach out to and will be attractive to only 67% of the population, leaving 33% who desire a more organic approach to spirituality. So, how can we reach those remaining 33% in a more organic fashion? The answer could quite possibly be “poly”-site.
So, ultimately it’s not about the same product–although that does help create alignment and through a strong alignment you can create a movement of people all lined up to tackle the same issues (think Mars Hill and how they’re aligned to tackle the issues in Grand Rapids, etc.)
You also, don’t have the issues of differing views, opinions, etc becoming divisive, creating a “spin-off” congregation because of this alignment and the nuances of reproducing leaders… (I could go on for a while, but this is probably a good start…)
Thanks for the start, sounds like we need to have a coffee sit down some day soon!
Hey another thought to pick your brain on…how do you move from the 85% budget to building care and salaries, 10% to programs, 4% to misc, and 1% to mission work. These were numbers from Dan Kimball’s research, in They Like Jesus, Not The Church book.
Sounds like a plan to me! I’d love to.
I’m not necessarily sure it’s completely about moving the percentages as it is to utilizing those resources to truly make a difference.
I certainly think there’s room for improvement (a lot of improvement) on the 85% to buildings, building care, and salaries… I think the majority of that 85% goes to buildings. But what if instead of building a building (that takes up 60-65% of your budget) you rented the local school–it would certainly be cheaper, but instead of throwing the money away, you’re actually reinvesting back into the community. The school gets added income to invest into education, supplies, etc… and instead of purchasing amazing sound equipment and lights, etc, that just sit in a trailer all week long, you donate it to the school that you’re renting out not only as a sign of goodwill, but as a way of improving the schools arts programs (a completely under-resourced area of schools). This reduces the 60-65% towards buildings for sure—but more importantly it now is being reallocated towards community improvement.
I’ve got more ideas like this… but this is certainly the start of saying that we don’t have to throw the baby out with the bath water, we just have to view how we use those resources to truly make a greater impact…