Systems of Staffing (by John Caldwell)

Having been in the ministry for more than five decades and having served churches of 30 to well over 2,000, I’ve hired a lot of staff members and also had to dismiss a few. I’ve learned that the most important decisions church leaders make are not the “what" decisions but the “who" decisions. Every situation is different. However, there are a few principles applicable to any size and situation.

In a day in which more and more staff are being hired out of the marketplace rather than Bible college or seminary, determination of Christian commitment – a personal relationship with Christ – is of foremost importance. Out of that flows godly character. A sense of God’s calling is essential as well, not just the need for a job and the ability to do it. A person being considered for the staff should totally buy into the leadership’s vision and sense of mission. Obviously, doctrinal agreement is a necessity.

From the leadership’s point of view a need must be identified and a job description determined. For a smaller church the need can be filled by a generalist, but as the church grows the particular job description becomes more and more specific. It is not only important that the person being considered has the ability to do the job, but perhaps even more that he or she has the ability to disciple and mentor people in that area of ministry. Thus the goal is to have the right people working in the right roles, tackling the right tasks. Few decisions other than hiring decisions have bigger or longer lasting implications for the church or Christian organization. Therefore, hiring the right person is far more important than hiring quickly, cheaply, or because of an existing relationship.

Again, it is so important to identify the need, not just fill an existing slot. Identify the need as well as what the desired outcomes should be. Could rearranging current staff positions accomplish the same thing more effectively? Could the need be met by a volunteer? Focus on needs, outcomes, and alternatives. A good screening process, including an application instrument, should identify strengths, spiritual gifts, education, experience, personality traits, and how that person sees themselves being the right person for that particular ministry. Of course, that presupposes a comprehensive job description based on not only those needs and outcomes previously mentioned, but by work expectations, to whom that person reports, and how their ministry will be evaluated.

There was a time when the search itself simply took the form of contacting Bible colleges and others in ministry for referrals, as well as receiving applications from those interested parties who had heard about the opening. However, as churches have grown and needs have developed that do not fit with past stereotypes, that traditional approach is often not adequate. There are even Christian “head-hunting” businesses who are anxious to assist. However, in such cases it is even more important that the vision, mission, and doctrine of the congregation be communicated and agreed to. Bible colleges and seminaries are still helpful sources, as is the use of social media. We all have personal networks of peers through whom we can seek recommendations. Do keep in mind, however, that the goal is to hire the right person, not necessarily the most readily available person.

A phone interview will often eliminate candidates that will no longer be interested after Iearning more about the position; or may cause you to choose not to pursue them. However, I highly recommend that any potential hire be asked to fill out an in-depth application instrument. That can even be done on-line. If that application does not eliminate the candidate, a personal interview with their staff supervisor and/or senior pastor would be the next step. Including their spouse would be desirable.

All references, background checks, and peer input should be thoroughly considered. I cannot emphasize too much that even if all of these things are in order, any and all candidates should be considered before any final decision is made. That is not so the candidates can be compared to each other but to determine who best fits the need, as was determined before the process began. Of course, the final decision will be determined by the individual church’s polity. Is the decision made by the senior pastor (he should at least have veto power), the elders, or in some cases a congregational vote? I do believe the latter should at least be applied in the call of a senior pastor.

There is much more to be said, but there are few things that contribute more to the health, vitality, and effectiveness of a church than hiring the right person to do the right thing and fulfill the right role in the right way.

John Caldwell.