A New Look at Governance of the Church

As the Administrative Board of Brighton First works to develop its role in governing the mission and ministry of the church, it must examine its purpose and how it is structured to accomplish that purpose. The book Governance as Leadership: Reframing the Work of Nonprofits Boards by Richard Chait, William Ryan and Barbara E. Taylor offers valuable insights.

As part of my ongoing commitment to leadership development, I have recently studied the model for church governance proposed by these authors.

Governance as Leadership describes three types of governance used by boards of non-profits, including churches. The first is fiduciary governance. This includes overseeing the assets of the church, monitoring stewardship and financial discipline. With fiduciary governance, boards hear reports and keep the church is faithful to its mission.

The second type of governance is strategic governance. When boards function under this model, they create strategies for reaching the mission of the church (or more often approve the strategies offered to them). However, boards that attempt to govern through strategy, when they are used to fiduciary governance, often offer little challenge to the way things are already being done.

The authors suggest that while fiduciary and strategic governance are essential, a board that is effectively moving a church forward applies another style of governance, as well: generative governance. This style calls for much more than guarding assets and mission, hearing reports, and approving strategies and goals. In this style, board members become true leaders. Together, they move beyond using their meetings to examine "what is", to ask together "what can be?" They not only creatively tackle questions, they set the agenda for what questions will be asked.


There are challenges to any board that wants to try generative governance. First, the process is much more ambiguous than a formalized, regular agenda. Board members creatively ask questions that reframe thinking and offer ideas that can mean significant changes in future actions. Generative thinking boards are ready to tackle hypothetical situations, pose creative questions, and live with robust dialogue (where there is diversity of opinion and honest struggle).

Based on my observations in 24 years of ministry, this is not the model of "tried and true" United Methodist Church administrative boards and councils. The Board meets approximately 10 times per year. The agenda is structured for reports and some problem solving (management rather than governance). When there are items for action (taking a vote), they are most often actions required by the administrative structure of the church.

It is very seldom that I see a board work at governing the church through strategy and goal setting. I have never experienced a board prepared to move into a generative, creative dialogue. I do not, however, fault the many faithful church leaders that I've worked with. We have all approached the administrative structure of the church, including the administrative board, as the way it is supposed to be done.

I am intrigued by the model suggested in Governance as Leadership. And I believe that an integrated model using fiduciary, strategic and generative leadership could lead to powerful, dynamic ministry in the name of Jesus Christ.