When it comes to leading church or any organisation there are lots of decisions to be made regarding how it should be set up and run. We could write about so many different things here but one of the big decisions that needs to be made is whether that organisation will operate as a centralised or decentralised organisation.

What do I mean by those definitions?

A centralised organisation is one where the thinking, decisions, ownership, and implementations are held by a few in the middle. Creativity at the fringes is not necessarily discouraged but it is often limited due the amount of rope given.

A decentralised organisation is one where the thinking, decisions, ownership, and implementations are minimally held by a few in the middle but instead are encouraged amongst the many. Creativity at the fringes is expected and a lot of rope is given to everyone involved.

Most organisations are rarely at one extreme or the other. They usually operate with a mixture of the two approaches across different departments but they usually will have a lean to one way or the other.

I’m writing about this because I have been thinking through both approaches. Ultimately I am a decentralised leader. I prefer to see people lead rather than follow. I love development, and I enjoy seeing ideas work that I didn’t start. However, there are parts of that approach which can be so challenging and sometimes I find myself dreaming of the centralised setup. I began to think through both approaches.

So why might someone choose to set up their organisation with a centralised approach?

• Consistency – the bigger an organisation gets the harder it can be to maintain culture. What was able to happen relationally when things were smaller can struggle as growth occurs. Centralising decisions and choices can prevent cultural drift and create more consistency throughout the organisation.
• Efficiency – when the central experts are making the decisions, writing the material, deciding the workflows etc. it saves time for others in the organisation. Because these things are decided centrally, others further out in the organisation don’t have to spend time thinking how to respond to each problem and can devote their time to their unique tasks in their setting.
• Safety – it’s hard to fully eradicate mistakes whatever system we choose but logic would suggest that less people with more experience making the big calls and disseminating the information outwards, are less likely to make mistakes than many people with less experience doing the same.

Ok, and what about a decentralised approach. What are the advantages of that?

• Ownership – because people have more ability and authority to make decisions they are more likely to take ownership of what they do and how they do it. There is less chance of people developing a ‘them and us’ relationship.
• Creativity – the more that decisions and expression is pushed to the fringes the more that people will try things that could end up being incredible solutions for the organisation.
• Speed – when an organisation is centralised decision making and communication can be slow. By the time all the leadership groups meet, discuss, and decide a way forward, never mind disseminating that information down to the rest of the organisation, the moment can have passed or leverage was missed. Decentralisation means that people on the ground can make decisions in real time and respond more quickly to what the issues are.

We could keep writing lists of these but I guess the real skill is deciding what needs to be central and what needs to be decentralised. Things like vision and values are in my mind central. These are the things that are the most important and aren’t really up for discussion or further creativity. It’s not that they won’t change or edit over time but they aren’t constantly up for discussion and tinkering. Change here comes about slowly and after much discussion and prayer.

However how the vision and values get worked out in the everyday is something I believe can move out from the centre. In fact I think it’s vital that they do. I know that every organisation is different but I want to trust teams to understand the vision and values and then create from there. There will be some bad ideas and some great ideas and that’s a part of the mystery but people will thrive and grow in this.

I feel like this is how Jesus led. The core teaching of the Kingdom and the way His followers should live was not up for debate but when it came to the nitty gritty, the everyday choices, freedom seemed to be granted. This is often what brought Him into conflict with the more traditional, more central, approach of the religious leaders. The early church spread quickly because there wasn’t a centralised structure organising every move and setup operation.

If you are a leader you will need to make your own choice here. Neither approach is perfect, both have their ups and downs, but as a leader I believe it is important to understand how we will lead in order to fully lead in the way that the Lord has called us to.