Participant digital workbook
Study all nine Ms, reflect on what they mean for your church, complete each exercise, assess current practice and prepare your contribution to the church's shared work.
Digital workbook OR-NM-1.0 (prototype) · Nine M curriculum version 1.0
Your progress through the workbook
9 assigned modules, four lessons each, with a rated self-assessment and a 90-day plan per module.
0 of 36 exercises written · 0 of 45 areas rated (0%)
Every activity in the printed workbook can be completed here online. Your answers stay saved under your name, and the downloads give you the same complete workbook on paper.
M2 — Management (module 2 of 9)
Build a healthy governance and operating structure with clear authority, accountable leadership, effective meetings, documented policies, and dependable execution.
What this module produces
Church Management and Accountability Plan
- Governance and Authority Map showing spiritual oversight, governance body, executive leadership, and daily management
- Organization chart with named roles and reporting lines
- Role and Decision Rights Matrix (recommend, decide, execute, approve, informed) for ten recurring church decisions
- Role scorecards defining expectations, boundaries, and success measures for key positions
- Leadership-team standards for conduct, communication, and conflict handling
- Documented meeting and reporting rhythm with cadence, agenda structure, and follow-through owners
- 30-60-90-day Accountability Dashboard tracking decisions through to completed work
- Policy register listing existing, missing, and outdated policies by ministry area
- Key-Person Dependency and Policy Gap Register identifying single points of failure
- 90-day improvement plan with owners, due dates, and review checkpoints for closing the highest-priority gaps
Objectives
- Distinguish spiritual oversight, governance, executive leadership and daily management
- Define who recommends, decides, executes, approves and is informed
- Establish a meeting and reporting rhythm that completes work
- Reduce dependence on undocumented knowledge or one person
4 weeks · about 7 hours of leadership time
Lesson 1: Governance, Leadership, and Ministry Operations
What you will learn: Distinguish spiritual oversight, governance, executive leadership, and daily management so the church can name who holds each layer of authority.
75 minutes · Pastor, board or elder body, senior staff
Scripture lens — Exodus 18:17-23
17 And Moses’ father in law said unto him, The thing that thou doest is not good. 18 Thou wilt surely wear away, both thou, and this people that is with thee: for this thing is too heavy for thee; thou art not able to perform it thyself alone. 19 Hearken now unto my voice, I will give thee counsel, and God shall be with thee: Be thou for the people to God-ward, that thou mayest bring the causes unto God: 20 And thou shalt teach them ordinances and laws, and shalt shew them the way wherein they must walk, and the work that they must do. 21 Moreover thou shalt provide out of all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness; and place such over them, to be rulers of thousands, and rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens: 22 And let them judge the people at all seasons: and it shall be, that every great matter they shall bring unto thee, but every small matter they shall judge: so shall it be easier for thyself, and they shall bear the burden with thee. 23 If thou shalt do this thing, and God command thee so, then thou shalt be able to endure, and all this people shall also go to their place in peace.
King James Version (KJV) · Public domain
Draft material proposed for Pastor Lee Jenkins' review: Jethro observes Moses trying to judge every dispute alone and counsels him to appoint capable leaders over groups of people, reserving only the hardest matters for himself.
Materials and evidence you will use
- Church bylaws or constitution (if available)
- Current board or elder roster
- Any existing organizational chart, however informal
- Named holders for all four authority layers
- At least three orphan decisions identified
- Group discussion notes on blended authority risks
By the end of this lesson, you should be able to
- Leaders can name the four layers of authority and give a real example of each from their own church
- The team can identify at least one place where two layers are currently blended or confused
- A first draft Governance and Authority Map has been sketched with named individuals or bodies
- Leaders agree on which decisions require board approval versus pastoral or staff decision
Study reading
Understand the concept
Your work in this lesson focuses on this outcome: Distinguish spiritual oversight, governance, executive leadership, and daily management so the church can name who holds each layer of authority.
Clear authority is not about control; it is about making sure every decision has a rightful home so the church can move with confidence instead of guesswork.
Why it matters for your church
Without a clear map, staff and volunteers often guess at authority, leading to duplicated or contradicted decisions.
Blended authority in one person creates fragility if that person is unavailable for any period of time.
New board members or staff cannot be onboarded effectively without a shared picture of how authority flows.
Examine the evidence
Use Church bylaws or constitution (if available), Current board or elder roster, and Any existing organizational chart, however informal to compare your church's present practice with its stated intentions. Look for documented patterns, missing information, and differences between what people assume and what the evidence supports.
Your completed work should be supported by Named holders for all four authority layers, At least three orphan decisions identified, and Group discussion notes on blended authority risks. Record uncertainty honestly so your team knows what still needs to be verified.
Prepare for the shared exercise
Give leadership a documented, shared picture of who currently holds spiritual oversight, governance, executive leadership, and daily management authority. The Drafting the Governance and Authority Map produces the Governance and Authority Map, which contributes to the module's principal deliverable.
Before working with your team, consider this reflection: Where in our church's history has unclear authority caused a delay, conflict, or missed decision, and what would have been different with a documented map in place?
Key terms
- Spiritual oversight: The pastoral and elder responsibility for doctrine, discipline, and the spiritual health of the congregation.
- Governance body: The board, elder council, or trustees accountable for legal, financial, and strategic direction.
- Executive leadership: The person or team responsible for translating governance decisions into organizational action.
- Orphan decision: A recurring church decision that does not clearly belong to any documented layer of authority.
Failure patterns to avoid
- Treating the pastor's personal judgment as a substitute for documented governance
- Allowing governance bodies to rubber-stamp decisions without understanding their own decision rights
- Never revisiting the authority map as the church grows past its founding season
Ministry case — When Two Signatures Were Needed But Only One Existed
A mid-sized congregation discovered, after a facility contract went unpaid for two months, that no one had actually been designated to approve vendor payments above a certain amount. The bookkeeper assumed the pastor approved it verbally; the pastor assumed the board treasurer had it handled. Neither layer of authority had been asked to own that decision.
Only after mapping their governance layers did the leadership realize that 'approve vendor payments over $2,000' had never been assigned to governance, executive leadership, or daily management. It had simply fallen into a gap. The fix was not complicated once the gap was visible: the map made the invisible visible.
Lesson takeaway: Clear authority is not about control; it is about making sure every decision has a rightful home so the church can move with confidence instead of guesswork.
Exercise — Drafting the Governance and Authority Map (produces: Governance and Authority Map)
Give leadership a documented, shared picture of who currently holds spiritual oversight, governance, executive leadership, and daily management authority.
- List the four authority layers down one side of the worksheet: spiritual oversight, governance, executive leadership, daily management. Complete it online
- For each layer, write the name(s) or title(s) of who currently holds that authority in practice, not just on paper.
- List two to three decision types each layer is currently responsible for.
- Circle any layer held by the same person as another layer.
- Identify at least three 'orphan decisions' that do not clearly belong to any layer.
- Discuss as a group which blended or orphan items feel most urgent to resolve.
- Record the final map in the worksheet for inclusion in the Church Management and Accountability Plan. Complete it online
Worksheet columns: Authority layer · Current holder(s) · Typical decisions covered · Blended with another layer? · Notes / gaps
Saves as you typeGovernance and Authority Map
Complete the Governance and Authority Map here. Your answers are kept under your name and are waiting for you when you return.
Governance and Authority Map # Authority layer Current holder(s) Typical decisions covered Blended with another layer? Notes / gaps 1 2 3 4 5 6 Saving keeps it private to you; submitting shares it with your coach and church panel.Worked sample — Northgate Community Church (illustrative example — not actual church data) (illustrative, scored 18/20)
Northgate is a congregation of about 260 people led by a founding pastor who has served for fourteen years alongside a five-person elder board and a small paid staff.
Governance and Authority Map (Northgate Community Church, illustrative): Spiritual oversight is held jointly by the Lead Pastor and Elder Board and covers doctrine, discipline, and membership matters. Governance is formally the Elder Board's responsibility for budget and bylaws, though it currently overlaps heavily with spiritual oversight and needs an independent meeting rhythm. Executive leadership sits with the Lead Pastor for hiring, program direction, and vendor contracts, and currently overlaps with daily management in a way that creates single-point risk. Daily management is carried informally by the Office Administrator, whose authority for purchases and scheduling has not yet been documented in writing.
- Elder board will begin meeting independently each month before joining the pastor's staff meeting.
- Purchase authority up to $500 will be formally delegated to the office administrator in writing.
- A second check signer will be added so the pastor is not the sole approver on all vendor payments.
The map is complete and specific with named roles, uses real recent decisions as evidence, stays tightly aligned to the module's purpose of clarifying authority, and produces three concrete, owned next steps rather than vague intentions.
Discussion prompts
- Which of the four layers of authority is currently the most blended or unclear in our church?
- What decision have we recently made that, in hindsight, should have gone through a different layer?
- If our lead pastor were unavailable for three months, which layer would be most exposed?
- What orphan decisions did we identify today that need a home in next week's decision-rights work?
Reflection: Where in our church's history has unclear authority caused a delay, conflict, or missed decision, and what would have been different with a documented map in place?
Use these prompts to prepare your own response before the group discussion. Honest differences help the church identify where further work is needed.
Lesson 2: Roles, Responsibilities, and Decision Rights
What you will learn: Define who recommends, decides, executes, approves, and is informed for the church's most common recurring decisions.
90 minutes · Pastor, board or elder body, senior staff, key ministry leaders
Scripture lens — Acts 6:1-7
1 And in those days, when the number of the disciples was multiplied, there arose a murmuring of the Grecians against the Hebrews, because their widows were neglected in the daily ministration. 2 Then the twelve called the multitude of the disciples unto them, and said, It is not reason that we should leave the word of God, and serve tables. 3 Wherefore, brethren, look ye out among you seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business. 4 But we will give ourselves continually to prayer, and to the ministry of the word. 5 And the saying pleased the whole multitude: and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Ghost, and Philip, and Prochorus, and Nicanor, and Timon, and Parmenas, and Nicolas a proselyte of Antioch: 6 Whom they set before the apostles: and when they had prayed, they laid their hands on them. 7 And the word of God increased; and the number of the disciples multiplied in Jerusalem greatly; and a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith.
King James Version (KJV) · Public domain
Draft material proposed for Pastor Lee Jenkins' review: the apostles recognize they cannot personally oversee both preaching and daily food distribution, so the congregation selects seven qualified people and assigns them clear responsibility for that operational work.
Materials and evidence you will use
- Governance and Authority Map from lesson one
- Current staff and volunteer role descriptions, if any exist
- List of recurring annual and monthly church decisions
- All five decision rights named for each of the ten decisions
- At least one previously contested decision resolved with documented ownership
By the end of this lesson, you should be able to
- Leaders can explain the difference between recommending, deciding, executing, approving, and being informed on a decision
- A Decision Rights Matrix has been drafted covering at least ten recurring church decisions
- At least three key roles have a first-draft scorecard describing their responsibilities and boundaries
- The team can identify one decision that was previously contested and now has a clear owner
Study reading
Understand the concept
Your work in this lesson focuses on this outcome: Define who recommends, decides, executes, approves, and is informed for the church's most common recurring decisions.
A decision only moves smoothly through an organization when everyone involved knows their specific right in that decision, from recommending it to simply being informed once it is made.
Why it matters for your church
Ministries frequently duplicate purchases or announcements when decision rights are undocumented.
Volunteers burn out faster when they hold decision rights informally without any recognized authority or support.
New staff and board members ramp up much faster when scorecards exist for their role.
Examine the evidence
Use Governance and Authority Map from lesson one, Current staff and volunteer role descriptions, if any exist, and List of recurring annual and monthly church decisions to compare your church's present practice with its stated intentions. Look for documented patterns, missing information, and differences between what people assume and what the evidence supports.
Your completed work should be supported by All five decision rights named for each of the ten decisions, and At least one previously contested decision resolved with documented ownership. Record uncertainty honestly so your team knows what still needs to be verified.
Prepare for the shared exercise
Assign clear, named ownership across the five decision rights for ten recurring church decisions and document two or three pivotal role scorecards. The Building the Decision Rights Matrix and Role Scorecards produces the Decision Rights Matrix and Role Scorecards, which contributes to the module's principal deliverable.
Before working with your team, consider this reflection: Think of a decision our church made in the last year that caused friction. Looking at today's matrix, who should have held the decide right, and what would have been different?
Key terms
- Decision rights: The specific authority to recommend, decide, execute, approve, or be informed about a given decision.
- Role scorecard: A short document naming a role's core responsibilities, authority boundaries, and success measures.
- Approval threshold: The point, often a dollar amount, above which a decision requires sign-off from a higher authority.
Failure patterns to avoid
- Creating a matrix once and never updating it as roles or ministries change
- Assigning 'decide' rights to a whole committee, which usually means no one actually decides
- Failing to write down approval thresholds, leaving spending decisions to habit rather than policy
Ministry case — The Curriculum That Was Chosen Twice
One congregation's children's ministry director spent weeks researching and ordering a new curriculum, only to discover the discipleship pastor had separately approved a different curriculum for the same age group the same month. Both had genuinely believed they held the authority to decide.
Once the church built its Decision Rights Matrix, it became clear that curriculum decisions had never been formally assigned to either role; both had been informally 'deciding' for years without knowing the other was doing the same. Assigning the decide right explicitly to the children's ministry director, with the discipleship pastor holding an informed right, resolved the recurring conflict permanently.
Lesson takeaway: A decision only moves smoothly through an organization when everyone involved knows their specific right in that decision, from recommending it to simply being informed once it is made.
Exercise — Building the Decision Rights Matrix and Role Scorecards (produces: Decision Rights Matrix and Role Scorecards)
Assign clear, named ownership across the five decision rights for ten recurring church decisions and document two or three pivotal role scorecards.
- List ten recurring church decisions down the left side of the worksheet. Complete it online
- For each decision, name who currently recommends it.
- For each decision, name who currently decides it, ensuring only one name or body holds this right.
- For each decision, name who executes it, who must approve it if applicable, and who needs to be informed.
- Flag any decision where two people believe they hold the same right, and resolve it together in discussion.
- Select two or three pivotal roles and complete a short scorecard for each covering responsibilities, boundaries, and success measures.
- Record the finished matrix and scorecards for inclusion in the Church Management and Accountability Plan.
Worksheet columns: Decision · Recommends · Decides · Executes · Approves · Informed
Saves as you typeDecision Rights Matrix (Ten Recurring Decisions)
Complete the Decision Rights Matrix and Role Scorecards here. Your answers are kept under your name and are waiting for you when you return.
Decision Rights Matrix (Ten Recurring Decisions) # Decision Recommends Decides Executes Approves Informed 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Saving keeps it private to you; submitting shares it with your coach and church panel.Worked sample — Northgate Community Church (illustrative example — not actual church data) (illustrative, scored 17/20)
Building on lesson one's map, Northgate's leadership tackled ten recurring decisions that had repeatedly caused confusion over the past year.
Decision Rights Matrix Extract (Northgate Community Church, illustrative): For facility use requests, the Office Administrator recommends, decides, and executes; the Lead Pastor's approval is required only when the requesting group is not part of the church; the facilities volunteer team is informed once approved. For vendor selection over $2,000, the Office Administrator recommends and executes, the Executive Pastor decides, and the Elder Board Treasurer must approve before any payment is issued.
- The Office Administrator is now the sole decider for facility use requests, with the Lead Pastor's approval required only for outside groups.
- A $2,000 approval threshold was formally set for vendor selection, requiring Treasurer sign-off above that amount.
- Role scorecards will be written for the Office Administrator and Executive Pastor within the next two weeks.
The matrix is complete across all ten decisions with specific named roles, draws directly on a real documented conflict as evidence, stays aligned to clarifying decision rights, and produces three concrete near-term actions with implied owners and timing.
Discussion prompts
- Which of the ten decisions in our matrix has caused the most past confusion or conflict?
- Is there a role in our church currently holding a decide right with no formal recognition of that authority?
- What would change for a key volunteer if they had a written scorecard for their role?
- Which approval threshold, if any, is missing or unclear in our current spending decisions?
Reflection: Think of a decision our church made in the last year that caused friction. Looking at today's matrix, who should have held the decide right, and what would have been different?
Use these prompts to prepare your own response before the group discussion. Honest differences help the church identify where further work is needed.
Lesson 3: Meetings, Accountability, and Execution
What you will learn: Establish a meeting and reporting rhythm that converts decisions into completed work rather than repeated conversation.
75 minutes · Pastor, board or elder body, senior staff, key ministry leaders
Scripture lens — Nehemiah 4:16-23
16 And it came to pass from that time forth, that the half of my servants wrought in the work, and the other half of them held both the spears, the shields, and the bows, and the habergeons; and the rulers were behind all the house of Judah. 17 They which builded on the wall, and they that bare burdens, with those that laded, every one with one of his hands wrought in the work, and with the other hand held a weapon. 18 For the builders, every one had his sword girded by his side, and so builded. And he that sounded the trumpet was by me. 19 And I said unto the nobles, and to the rulers, and to the rest of the people, The work is great and large, and we are separated upon the wall, one far from another. 20 In what place therefore ye hear the sound of the trumpet, resort ye thither unto us: our God shall fight for us. 21 So we laboured in the work: and half of them held the spears from the rising of the morning till the stars appeared. 22 Likewise at the same time said I unto the people, Let every one with his servant lodge within Jerusalem, that in the night they may be a guard to us, and labour on the day. 23 So neither I, nor my brethren, nor my servants, nor the men of the guard which followed me, none of us put off our clothes, saving that every one put them off for washing.
King James Version (KJV) · Public domain
Draft material proposed for Pastor Lee Jenkins' review: Nehemiah organizes the workers rebuilding Jerusalem's wall into shifts, assigns specific stations, and sets up a signal system so the whole team can respond together when trouble arises, converting a large task into disciplined, coordinated execution.
Materials and evidence you will use
- Decision Rights Matrix from lesson two
- Recent meeting notes or calendar records
- Any existing reporting templates the church already uses
- Every current meeting evaluated against decision needs
- A defined meeting rhythm with review points for the dashboard
- At least one honestly flagged behind-schedule item with a follow-up action
By the end of this lesson, you should be able to
- The team can name the specific meetings that should exist and what each one is responsible for producing
- A meeting audit has identified which current meetings are effective, redundant, or missing entirely
- A 30-60-90-day Accountability Dashboard has been drafted for at least five active decisions
- Leaders agree on how unfinished action items will be surfaced and followed up on
Study reading
Understand the concept
Your work in this lesson focuses on this outcome: Establish a meeting and reporting rhythm that converts decisions into completed work rather than repeated conversation.
Meetings exist to move decisions into completed work; a documented rhythm and a tracked dashboard are what keep that movement from silently stalling.
Why it matters for your church
Without a defined rhythm, urgent items crowd out important strategic conversations in every meeting.
Volunteers lose confidence in leadership when decisions discussed in meetings never visibly happen.
A missing quarterly governance review often means financial or strategic risks go unnoticed until they become urgent.
Examine the evidence
Use Decision Rights Matrix from lesson two, Recent meeting notes or calendar records, and Any existing reporting templates the church already uses to compare your church's present practice with its stated intentions. Look for documented patterns, missing information, and differences between what people assume and what the evidence supports.
Your completed work should be supported by Every current meeting evaluated against decision needs, A defined meeting rhythm with review points for the dashboard, and At least one honestly flagged behind-schedule item with a follow-up action. Record uncertainty honestly so your team knows what still needs to be verified.
Prepare for the shared exercise
Match the church's meeting structure to real decision needs and build a tracking tool that follows active decisions through to completion. The Meeting Audit and Accountability Dashboard produces the Meeting Audit and 30-60-90-day Accountability Dashboard, which contributes to the module's principal deliverable.
Before working with your team, consider this reflection: Think of a decision our church made in the past year that quietly stalled. If it had appeared on a 30-60-90-day dashboard from the start, at what point would the delay have become visible?
Key terms
- Meeting rhythm: A documented, layered cadence of meetings, each with a defined purpose and frequency, that together cover execution, coordination, and governance.
- Accountability Dashboard: A tracking tool showing an initiative's owner and expected status at 30, 60, and 90 days.
- Meeting audit: A review of all current recurring meetings to identify overlap, gaps, and alignment with actual decision needs.
Failure patterns to avoid
- Running every meeting at the same cadence regardless of the type of decision being discussed
- Building a dashboard once and never returning to update it at the next meeting
- Allowing meetings to become status-reading exercises rather than decision and follow-through checkpoints
Ministry case — The Outreach Initiative That Was Approved Three Times
A congregation's board approved funding for a new community outreach initiative in January. By April, the initiative still had not launched, and in May the board found itself discussing and 're-approving' the same initiative because no one remembered the original approval had already happened.
Once the church implemented a 30-60-90-day dashboard, the outreach initiative was tracked with a named owner and clear checkpoints. The team discovered the actual blocker was a single unordered supply item, something that would have been caught and resolved within thirty days if the dashboard had existed from the start.
Lesson takeaway: Meetings exist to move decisions into completed work; a documented rhythm and a tracked dashboard are what keep that movement from silently stalling.
Exercise — Meeting Audit and Accountability Dashboard (produces: Meeting Audit and 30-60-90-day Accountability Dashboard)
Match the church's meeting structure to real decision needs and build a tracking tool that follows active decisions through to completion.
- List every current recurring meeting along with its stated purpose, frequency, and attendees.
- Mark each meeting as effective, redundant, or needing restructuring against the decision needs identified in lesson two.
- Design the target meeting rhythm with a clear purpose and frequency for each layer.
- Select five active decisions or initiatives to track on the dashboard.
- For each, name the owner and describe what should be true at 30, 60, and 90 days.
- Assign a status marker to each item and decide which meeting will review it going forward.
- Record the completed audit and dashboard for inclusion in the Church Management and Accountability Plan.
Worksheet columns: Decision / initiative · Owner · 30-day status target · 60-day status target · 90-day status target · Current status
Saves as you type30-60-90-Day Accountability Dashboard
Complete the Meeting Audit and 30-60-90-day Accountability Dashboard here. Your answers are kept under your name and are waiting for you when you return.
30-60-90-Day Accountability Dashboard # Decision / initiative Owner 30-day status target 60-day status target 90-day status target Current status 1 2 3 4 5 Saving keeps it private to you; submitting shares it with your coach and church panel.Worked sample — Northgate Community Church (illustrative example — not actual church data) (illustrative, scored 16/20)
Following the outreach approval confusion, Northgate's leadership audited its meetings and built its first Accountability Dashboard covering five active initiatives.
Accountability Dashboard Extract (Northgate Community Church, illustrative): The new member onboarding process rewrite, owned by the Discipleship Pastor, is currently behind schedule against its 30-day target of a staff-reviewed draft. The 60-day target of piloting the process with one new-member class remains in place, with a revised 30-day target to be set at next week's staff meeting. The community food pantry launch, owned by the Missions Director, remains on track with supplies ordered and volunteer recruitment underway toward a one-day-per-week opening.
- The weekly staff meeting will now open every session with a five-minute dashboard review of all five items.
- The Discipleship Pastor will bring a revised 30-day target for the onboarding rewrite to next week's staff meeting given the current delay.
- The quarterly governance meeting will formally begin next quarter with the elder board's independent rhythm as its first standing agenda item.
The dashboard covers five real active items with named owners and specific staged targets, draws on the actual onboarding delay as evidence, stays aligned to the module's execution focus, and produces concrete near-term actions, though the onboarding revision still needs a firm new date.
Discussion prompts
- Which of our current meetings would we keep exactly as is, and which would we restructure?
- What is one decision from the past year that we now realize was never actually tracked to completion?
- Who should own the responsibility of updating the Accountability Dashboard between meetings?
- What would change in our culture if every leader trusted that decisions made in meetings would actually get done?
Reflection: Think of a decision our church made in the past year that quietly stalled. If it had appeared on a 30-60-90-day dashboard from the start, at what point would the delay have become visible?
Use these prompts to prepare your own response before the group discussion. Honest differences help the church identify where further work is needed.
Lesson 4: Continuity, Policies, and Leadership Health
What you will learn: Reduce the organization's dependence on undocumented knowledge or any single person by identifying key-person risks and closing policy gaps.
90 minutes · Pastor, board or elder body, senior staff
Scripture lens — Deuteronomy 31:1-8
1 And Moses went and spake these words unto all Israel. 2 And he said unto them, I am an hundred and twenty years old this day; I can no more go out and come in: also the LORD hath said unto me, Thou shalt not go over this Jordan. 3 The LORD thy God, he will go over before thee, and he will destroy these nations from before thee, and thou shalt possess them: and Joshua, he shall go over before thee, as the LORD hath said. 4 And the LORD shall do unto them as he did to Sihon and to Og, kings of the Amorites, and unto the land of them, whom he destroyed. 5 And the LORD shall give them up before your face, that ye may do unto them according unto all the commandments which I have commanded you. 6 Be strong and of a good courage, fear not, nor be afraid of them: for the LORD thy God, he it is that doth go with thee; he will not fail thee, nor forsake thee. 7 And Moses called unto Joshua, and said unto him in the sight of all Israel, Be strong and of a good courage: for thou must go with this people unto the land which the LORD hath sworn unto their fathers to give them; and thou shalt cause them to inherit it. 8 And the LORD, he it is that doth go before thee; he will be with thee, he will not fail thee, neither forsake thee: fear not, neither be dismayed.
King James Version (KJV) · Public domain
Draft material proposed for Pastor Lee Jenkins' review: Moses, nearing the end of his leadership, publicly commissions Joshua before the whole community and reminds the people that the mission does not depend on Moses alone, since the same faithfulness that carried them will carry Joshua's leadership forward.
Materials and evidence you will use
- Governance and Authority Map from lesson one
- Decision Rights Matrix from lesson two
- Any existing personnel, finance, or facility policies
- At least three key-person dependencies identified by name and role
- A policy register covering at least four major ministry or operational areas
- Top priorities assigned a named owner and due date
By the end of this lesson, you should be able to
- The team has identified at least three key-person dependency risks by name and role
- A policy register lists existing, missing, and outdated policies across major ministry areas
- A 90-day improvement plan has been drafted with owners and due dates for the highest-priority gaps
- Leadership-team standards for communication and conflict have been documented or affirmed
Study reading
Understand the concept
Your work in this lesson focuses on this outcome: Reduce the organization's dependence on undocumented knowledge or any single person by identifying key-person risks and closing policy gaps.
Protecting the church's mission means making sure no single person's absence can bring critical operations to a stop; documentation and cross-training are acts of stewardship, not distrust.
Why it matters for your church
Undocumented financial processes create both fraud risk and continuity risk if the person handling them leaves.
Missing or outdated child protection policies expose the church to serious safety and liability risk.
A leadership team without agreed standards tends to handle conflict inconsistently, damaging trust over time.
Examine the evidence
Use Governance and Authority Map from lesson one, Decision Rights Matrix from lesson two, and Any existing personnel, finance, or facility policies to compare your church's present practice with its stated intentions. Look for documented patterns, missing information, and differences between what people assume and what the evidence supports.
Your completed work should be supported by At least three key-person dependencies identified by name and role, A policy register covering at least four major ministry or operational areas, and Top priorities assigned a named owner and due date. Record uncertainty honestly so your team knows what still needs to be verified.
Prepare for the shared exercise
Identify the church's highest-risk single points of failure and missing policies, and translate them into a prioritized 90-day improvement plan. The Key-Person Dependency and Policy Gap Register produces the Key-Person Dependency and Policy Gap Register, which contributes to the module's principal deliverable.
Before working with your team, consider this reflection: If you personally were unexpectedly unavailable for thirty days, what would be hardest for someone else to pick up in your absence, and what is one step you could take this month to make that easier?
Key terms
- Key-person dependency: A situation where critical knowledge, access, or relationships exist with only one individual, creating organizational risk if that person is unavailable.
- Policy register: A documented inventory of a church's policies by area, noting which exist, are missing, or are outdated.
- Leadership-team standards: Written agreements about how a leadership team communicates, handles conflict, and holds one another accountable.
Failure patterns to avoid
- Waiting until a key person actually leaves before attempting to document what they knew
- Writing a policy once and never revisiting whether it still matches actual practice
- Treating leadership health as a personality issue rather than a structure that can be intentionally built
Ministry case — The Password Only One Person Knew
A church's longtime volunteer treasurer managed all banking access personally for over a decade, a service given faithfully and without any complaint. When she was unexpectedly hospitalized for several weeks, the church could not access online banking, could not verify whether bills had been paid, and had no backup process in place.
The crisis passed once she recovered, but it prompted the board to build its first Key-Person Dependency and Policy Gap Register. They discovered four other similar risks across the church, each resolved not by replacing faithful volunteers but by documenting processes and adding a second authorized person to each critical system.
Lesson takeaway: Protecting the church's mission means making sure no single person's absence can bring critical operations to a stop; documentation and cross-training are acts of stewardship, not distrust.
Exercise — Key-Person Dependency and Policy Gap Register (produces: Key-Person Dependency and Policy Gap Register)
Identify the church's highest-risk single points of failure and missing policies, and translate them into a prioritized 90-day improvement plan.
- List each identified key-person dependency by role and name.
- For each, describe what would break if that person were unavailable for thirty days.
- Rate the risk level of each dependency as low, medium, or high.
- List each major policy area and mark whether a policy exists, is missing, or is outdated.
- Select the two or three highest-risk items across both dependencies and policies to prioritize.
- Assign an owner and due date to each prioritized item for the 90-day improvement plan.
- Record the completed register and plan for inclusion in the Church Management and Accountability Plan.
Worksheet columns: Risk item (person or policy) · What breaks if unresolved · Risk level · Priority for 90-day plan? · Owner and due date
Saves as you typeKey-Person Dependency and Policy Gap Register
Complete the Key-Person Dependency and Policy Gap Register here. Your answers are kept under your name and are waiting for you when you return.
Key-Person Dependency and Policy Gap Register # Risk item (person or policy) What breaks if unresolved Risk level Priority for 90-day plan? Owner and due date 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Saving keeps it private to you; submitting shares it with your coach and church panel.Worked sample — Northgate Community Church (illustrative example — not actual church data) (illustrative, scored 18/20)
After the earlier check-signing and password concerns surfaced across the module, Northgate's leadership built its first full dependency and policy register.
Key-Person Dependency and Policy Gap Register Extract (Northgate Community Church, illustrative): The Office Administrator currently holds sole access to all online banking, email, and ministry software accounts, rated high risk given the church's inability to operate these systems if that access were lost. The Executive Pastor will document all credentials and establish a second authorized user within 30 days. The absence of a written child protection policy is rated high risk for its safety and legal implications, with the Board Chair leading the drafting and adoption of a formal policy within 60 days.
- The Executive Pastor will document and securely store all account credentials with at least one backup authorized person within 30 days.
- The Board Chair will lead drafting of a formal child protection policy for adoption within 60 days.
- The conflict-of-interest policy will be addressed at the next quarterly governance meeting rather than within this immediate 90-day window, given the top three priorities.
The register is complete across both people and policy risks with specific ratings, draws on a real prior incident as evidence, directly serves the module's continuity purpose, and assigns clear owners and due dates for the top priorities identified.
Discussion prompts
- Which key-person dependency in our church feels most urgent to address, and why?
- What policy did we discover today is missing or badly outdated?
- Have we ever written down how our leadership team handles disagreement, or has it always been assumed?
- What would success look like in ninety days for the two or three priorities we are choosing to focus on first?
Reflection: If you personally were unexpectedly unavailable for thirty days, what would be hardest for someone else to pick up in your absence, and what is one step you could take this month to make that easier?
Use these prompts to prepare your own response before the group discussion. Honest differences help the church identify where further work is needed.
Rate this module
Rate each area from 0 to 4 as the church is today, not as you hope it will be.
- 0 — Not Established: Nothing is in place for this area today.
- 1 — Emerging: Something has been started but it is informal and inconsistent.
- 2 — Developing: It works in parts of the church but is not documented or dependable.
- 3 — Established: It is documented, consistently followed and reviewed.
- 4 — Exemplary: It is a strength others could learn from, with evidence to prove it.
1. Governance Clarity
Weighted 20% of the Management score.
What this represents: The governance map is documented, taught to leaders, and consistently followed, with clear escalation for edge cases.
Reference points for your rating
- 0 — Not established:
- No one can describe, without disagreement, who has final authority over major decisions; spiritual oversight and governance are blended into one undefined role.
- 2 — Developing:
- A governance map distinguishes spiritual oversight, governance, and executive leadership, though a few decision types remain contested.
- 4 — Exemplary:
- Governance clarity is reinforced in onboarding, referenced in meetings by name, and reviewed annually for fit as the church grows.
Use the closest reference point, then select 1 or 3 when your church falls between two descriptions.
2. Role Clarity
Weighted 20% of the Management score.
What this represents: Every recurring decision and key role has a documented owner, scorecard, and decision right, understood by the people involved.
Reference points for your rating
- 0 — Not established:
- Roles exist only informally; several people believe they own the same decision, and some decisions have no clear owner at all.
- 2 — Developing:
- A decision-rights matrix covers the most common decisions, though a number of secondary or seasonal roles remain undefined.
- 4 — Exemplary:
- Role clarity is actively maintained; new roles are added to the matrix as ministries grow, and role scorecards are reviewed with each person annually.
Use the closest reference point, then select 1 or 3 when your church falls between two descriptions.
3. Leadership Health
Weighted 20% of the Management score.
What this represents: Leadership-team standards are documented, modeled by senior leaders, and actively used to guide meetings and resolve conflict.
Reference points for your rating
- 0 — Not established:
- Leadership meetings are inconsistent, conflict is avoided or handled poorly, and there are no shared standards for how leaders treat one another.
- 2 — Developing:
- Leadership-team standards exist and are referenced occasionally, though follow-through on holding one another accountable is inconsistent.
- 4 — Exemplary:
- Leadership health is measured and discussed openly; new leaders are coached into the standards, and the team shows a track record of healthy conflict resolution.
Use the closest reference point, then select 1 or 3 when your church falls between two descriptions.
4. Execution Discipline
Weighted 20% of the Management score.
What this represents: A documented meeting rhythm and 30-60-90-day dashboard reliably move decisions to completed work with named owners and dates.
Reference points for your rating
- 0 — Not established:
- Decisions are made in meetings but rarely tracked afterward; the church cannot say with confidence what was decided last month or whether it happened.
- 2 — Developing:
- A meeting and reporting rhythm exists and a dashboard tracks some decisions through completion, though gaps remain between quarters.
- 4 — Exemplary:
- Execution discipline is a visible part of church culture; leaders expect and receive regular status updates, and stalled items are surfaced and resolved quickly.
Use the closest reference point, then select 1 or 3 when your church falls between two descriptions.
5. Continuity and Policy Readiness
Weighted 20% of the Management score.
What this represents: Core policies are documented and accessible, key-person risks are named with mitigation steps, and a 90-day plan is closing remaining gaps.
Reference points for your rating
- 0 — Not established:
- Critical knowledge exists only in one or two people's heads; there are no written policies covering finance, personnel, or ministry operations.
- 2 — Developing:
- A policy register identifies major gaps and a key-person dependency list has been started, though few gaps have been closed yet.
- 4 — Exemplary:
- Policies are reviewed on a set cycle, succession plans exist for critical roles, and the church could absorb a sudden leadership departure without losing operational continuity.
Use the closest reference point, then select 1 or 3 when your church falls between two descriptions.
90-day plan for Management
Name the first three moves, who owns each one and when it is due.
Completion checklist
- • All four lessons marked complete
- • All four exercises submitted
- • Required evidence uploaded
- • Named principal deliverable generated and approved
- • 90-day action plan created with owners and dates
- • Coach review recorded
0 of 4 exercises written · 0 of 5 areas rated
Pastor Lee Jenkins
2
Participant Workbook
Sample contents created by Allan Bell - CPA, CMA, MBA, for illustrative purposes.
What happens to these answers
Approval sits with people, not the software.
- Individual answers are held for the coach. Church reporting, board packs and the printed workbook show compiled scores and themes only.
- Nine M methodology, content, exercises and deliverables by Pastor Lee Jenkins.
- Prototype: responses live in this browser session only. No invitations, emails or text messages are sent, and nothing is written to a server.
A partnership between Pastor Lee Jenkins, the Stewardship Coach, and Allan Bell - CPA, CMA, MBA, Nsites founder and creator.