Youth With A Mission

Never before in history has the concept and practice of decentralization been so widely and successfully practiced. Where once YWAM was a rare exception in its decentralized approach to organizational structure and leadership, it is now an increasingly popular model in the world of business and organizational development. And yet, much of the church still firmly resists decentralization, especially where authority and leadership are concerned. But even more disconcerting is that YWAM is subtly, but markedly moving away from it as well.

The emergence of decentralized power-houses such as Wikipedia, Alcoholics Anonymous and Facebook demonstrate that there is incredible potential to achieve significant impact with a fraction of the expense, infastructure and effort. Strangely, unlike the motives of a market driven culture, these new expressions emerged largely for the benefit of humanity, with financial success a by-product.

The true commitment of any groups commitment to a given value is best measured by its adherence to that value on the grassroots, day to day level. While YWAM still functions under this value of decentralization on the macro-level, the closer you get to local expressions you find that value exercising less and less influence. Further, that negative trend is slowly moving to "higher" regional levels in some areas of the organization. These shifts are not always obvious, but nonetheless undermining to the faithfulness of the mission to its values.

For example, I was recently discussing regional structures and leadership with a fellow YWAMer (whose location & region will remain anonymous). My friend- let's call her Jill- shared that prior to a recent gathering of YWAM centres in her region, there was a preliminary meeting where the largest of these centres met. The assumption exposed in this gathering and its articulated purpose, no matter how well intentioned, was that YWAM ministries with larger schools, more staff, more programs, etc. had a achieved greater level of success and therefore had resulting authority that smaller bases do not have.

Jill's ministry is a much smaller ministry, but not for lack of success, but due to the nature of the ministry, the local context and the other guiding values they embrace. In fact, this ministry is a prime example of what YWAM seek to be- apostolic, innovative, service and relationship orientated. And yet, influenced by prevasive definitions of success held in our wider culture, the regional leadership failed to see the great authority and potential that this and other small ministries had to contribute.

I share this, not in an attempt to attack these regional leaders, but rather to highlight a common danger of what happens over time as a movement becomes an institution. It is often said an idea becomes a movement, a movement becomes an organization, an organization becomes an institution. After nearly 50 years, YWAM has firmly established itself as an organization. However, it has maintained (at least in places) many of the attributes of a movement, in large part due to its commitment to the value of decentralization.

However, as the organization grows and further establishes, the draw towards institutionalization becomes stronger. As Salvation Army General Bramwell Tillsley, speaking of this trend, stated, "Regimentation and organisation set in. Human plans and programs tend to replace the leadership of the Spirit. Enthusiasm and spontaneity begin to wane. Testimony loses its sparkle. Sermons become dry and dull" (This Mind In You). While I do not think we have arrived at this stage yet, I do not think we can ignore how prevelant this pattern is in other organizations. Regardless of how Spirit led our origins and values are, we would be foolish to deny our vulnerability this trend.

This is why I believe the embracing of the concept of "spiritual eldership" is so critical to the mission. But what is the nature of this eldership? Loren Cunningham introduced the concept and theology behind this value, affirming that such authority does not simply come from age or position. The tension between this non-hierarchal approach to leadership without abandoning sense of authority is not easy to navigate. Fleshing this idea out is something that we need to wrestle with.

In their incredible book "The Starfish & The Spider: The Unstoppable Power Of Leaderless Organizations" Ori Brafman and Rod A. Beckstrom explore these ideas as they have and are working themselves out in many different aspect of the world. Their primary example is one from which we would do well to draw olur own understanding of spiritual eldership: the Apache Nant'ans.

When Spanish Conquistadors arrived in the New World, they confront several indigenous people groups such as the Aztecs and the Incas, both of which had achieved a level of sophisticated civilization that rivaled much of the Western world. Despite this, it took very little time and effort for the Spanish to conquer (and ultimately destroy) them, preying on their centralization- water source, wealth, location, government, etc.. And yet, the Spanish met their match in a comparitively "primitive" tribe, the Apaches. Why would they pose a challenge where the other great indigenous empires could not?

Where the Aztecs and Incans had achieved their "civilizations" through rigid forms of hierarchy and centralization of power, resources and community, the Apache were the perfect example of decentralization, with no central city, no overall leader, no centralized economy. They were not, however, completely without leadership, but rather embraced a form of leadership that did not rely on position or power. Unlike so many other tribes, they did not even rely on chiefs, but rather on the Nant'ans.

Nant'ans were spiritual and cultural leaders who did not exercise authority by position or coersion, bur rather by respect and honour earned through example. They were followed voluntarily, so even if one were removed, corrupted and killed, there were others to step into place. If an entire community was destroyed, a task in itself for the often nomadic groups with no centralized locale, it would not significantly impact the overall people group. Their decentralization, specifically the nonhierarchical nature of their leadership, helped them survive against an army with far "superior" technology, training and knowledge. In fact, they even fought back, pushing the Spanish back into the Mexican frontier.

Within YWAM, as we seek to practice spiritual eldership, we must resist adopting this value as an addition to our existing models, but rather need to embrace it on every level, willingly and intentionally dismantling the unnecessary hierarchies that would make us vulnerable to our own capacity to lose our vision and values. Lynn Green, in his endorsement of Jim Collin's book "Good to Great in the Social Sectors" quotes the book, "True leadership is more prevalent when defined as getting people to follow when they have the freedom not to." Again, while this is often embraced on the macro-levels of the mission, on the regional and local level it will "cost" us a great deal. However, unless we do so, I believe we will ultimately pay a higher price.

In my next article on YWAM Foundational Value #7 I will explore in more details the practical implications of walking this out within the mission.