As we reflect on the experiments with neighborhood models it is clear that ABF-style adult classes on campus on Sundays, or a well-integrated, well-led small group network, a geograhic/neighborhood model is fragile. Without such components it becomes relationally weak and growth-challenged.

One option is off-campus medium-sized groups (like the Pastorates model used by Holy Trinity Brompton in London and in some Canadian churches). Members gather at least monthly on groups of 30 or so form connection, a few moments of teaching, and then some engagement. Many homes, even smaller ones, can accommodate 20-30 people, especially if there is sub-grouping. But the other elements are present (groups and/or classes) for intentional formation.

Another approach is an organized network of groups for spiritual growth within the broader geographic context. Many churches are using a small group structure but organized geographically. These include affinity groups, serving teams, meal groups, recovery, bible studies, etc. Without such a clearly integrated group network (as opposed to simply allowing small groups to form and exist independently), our observation was less than 20% of people connected to a neighborhood community after 2-3 years.

I will keep you posted on the progress being made in place-based models as churches continue to experiment. One thing is certain—there is no one model or system. The more rigid the structure, the less transferable the model is.

Last post in series.

Church plants using a place-based approach utilize geographic small groups since facilities are scarce. Most organize these geographically, or use a house-church approach. People gather regularly and can experience a closer connection based on proximity. But proximity and spontaneity do not ensure the experience of formational community. Intentionality is key. That is why new churches are utilizing smaller groups of all kinds, woven into a broader, regular communal life where meals are shared and needs are met.

I have spoken with a few churches doing this. Two are in or near large cities where facilities are scarce and costly. Group life becomes essential for specific spiritual growth components of the church. Emerging churches (Solomon's Porch for example) emphasize a 24-7 community, within which are a number of regular, functional gatherings akin to small groups. But not all gatherings are small groups, in the traditional sense.

If you lead a newer church or are planting a church with place-based community, shoot me an e-mail. We are eager to learn and share these discoveries with others in the kingdom adventure.

 To be continued...

So what makes neighborhood work from a reality-based strategic perspective? Here’s what churches trying the model are learning.

Traditional churches often have the space or the real estate needed for on-campus gatherings, or they add these spaces like Pantego Bible Church, combining a building program with the addition of portable facilities. (Compare this with North Point, which did not base their new building design on space for adult classes, but rather used a strong small group infrastructure.)

The neighborhood model that uses classes is more like an ABF model (Adult Bile Fellowships) with a twist—geographic neighborhood relationships and connections. The neighborhood gatherings are less formal, more social, and group life is de-emphasized.

Class-based approaches to community building have merit. Many folks look forward to connecting with 20-30 people every week for relationships, learning and other activities. But fewer churches can afford this. Brick and mortar (and the real estate to put it on) is getting increasingly costly. And it communicates that if you want community, come to the church campus. Not bad; just limited. If you have space and money, like some large suburban churches, you can take a shot at it.

 To be continued...

Recent years have witnessed a buzz around place-based community and the various models for expressing it—house groups, geographically organized small groups, missional communities, serving teams, and so on. Missional communities seem to be cracking the code and expressing this most biblically and realistically. Combining intentional spiritual formation, relationship-building and a geographic strategy, missional communities are flexible enough to engage the culture without being stuck in a rigid model.

Neighborhood models are another attempt though they are heavily dependent on a highly formalized structure. The values and awareness of being with and serving neighbors is the real win. Building relationships, initiating spiritual conversations and meeting needs is the big win – but intentional formation is not as strong without a variety of specific group-based gatherings within the geographic area. What we discovered is that 1 of 2 things (or both) must be present to make this model work.

Either you must have weekly on-campus mid-sized classes akin to Sunday Schools (organized geographically), or you must have a strongly integrated network of small groups to bring depth to the loosely affiliated neighborhood relationships and activities. A neighborhood-focused model also seems to work better with certain neighborhoods and not with others. It is not transferable church-wide unless the entire church demographic is already clustered into self-identifying neighborhoods.  Start-ups churches using the model rely on intentional small groups to provide depth, and traditional churches often have classes for adults. Either one of these must be present to bring strength to the model.

Let’s look closely at what makes this model work or flounder, based on feedback from churches who are trying it, and the recent experience of Willow Creek.

To be continued...

There are three primary solutions most churches use to connect all four types of the unconnected, and many employ a mix of all three. None of them are “wrong” but one of them is undeniably “right.” Choose the blend of approaches that work for you, but lean heavily on the last one.

 

Rely on Information and Petition
Tell people you have groups (information) and beg God to help them find a group (petition). This works for the Relentless. A well-designed brochure on a conveniently located table is all they need. Tell them where the groups are and include the emails or phone numbers of the group leaders. The Relentless will do the work.

Design a Robust Assimilation System
This is a complex solution requiring detailed design and flawless execution. Data collection (pew cards, fill-in brochures, Web forms) provides the input (“I want to be in a group”) to be stored and manipulated in a centralized database. A network of dedicated volunteer or staff Assimilators (remember the Borg: “We… will… assimilate… you…”) makes innumerable phone calls and incessant emails to both group leaders and potential members to get the two together. This is the eHarmony approach. Ultimately, people can wind up in a group. Or not. Expect a sustained success rate of 20-40%, and a lack of trust to develop in the system… and the church.

Create Self-Assimilating Groups
All the information, data collection, and systems in the world will not reach all of the Ready, entice the Reluctant, or convince the Resistant. The only way to consistently connect the unconnected is to make your groups open, inviting, and welcoming communities that pull people towards them like campers to a campfire.

To be blunt, your groups need to suck.

Pushing people towards groups from the pulpit is one thing. A compelling vision, beautiful brochures or Web sites, and a well-implemented assimilation system will reach some. But the only solution that gives every unconnected person multiple chances to join a loving community is repeated, sensitive, caring invitations from group members themselves. If every small group in your church strives to be the kind of community that continuously welcomes others into their fellowship, your groups will suck… they will pull in the Relentless, the Ready, and the Reluctant… perhaps even the Resistant!

Self-assimilating groups are easy to identify. Their members are on the lookout for anyone who is not in a group and are ready to invite them in or to help them find a home in another group. They are the ones who invite neighbors to group social gatherings. They attend church events wearing buttons that say “Ask me about my small group.” They set up displays or tables to show off what they are doing in their own group… social gatherings, work projects or trips, samples of books they have studied together, photos of people they have served. The unconnected are drawn to that kind of community.

Want to reach Reluctant Postmoderns? Your groups need to suck… to draw people in to see the life of Christ up close and personal. Want to quickly engage the Ready you never knew existed? Your groups need to suck… to be “inviting machines” that continuously pull people in. What single strategy will eventually overcome the lack of trust and disinterest of the Resistant?

Equip your groups to suck… to assimilate for themselves. It’s the ultimate assimilation solution.

Last post in series.