If your church that has experimented with technology and capital campaigns, I’d love to hear more about what worked and what didn’t (if you’re brave enough to share).

P.S. In case you don’t get the magazine, here is my joint editorial conversation with Ron Keener on church giving.

Title: 5 reasons churches limit the length of capital campaigns

Summary: Grounded in changes related to economic stability, needs, and expectations, churches are reducing the time they are willing to commit to fulfill upon capital campaign pledges. The traditional 36 month fulfillment period is being replaced with 12 or 18 month campaigns. This article explore the reasons why three church leaders choose to do so.

Read the article.

Download the article.

Is this shift a good thing?

I carry an iPad, iPhone, and am religiously committed to my MacBook Pro. I am almost paperless in everything I do. (In a desperate attempt to be faithful to being paperless when others attempt to make it impossible, I will scan documents instead of keeping them in a desk drawer file.) That means I need to disqualify myself because this research doesn’t tout the way I give which is, of course, electronically, as the primary means of giving. In fact, I have not given to organizations and causes because I wasn’t able to give online.

BUT…my clients don’t pay me to tell them about my preferences. They pay me to understand how to increase funds so that they can get on with their mission instead of being constantly distracted with trying to keep the doors open. That’s where this research is important.

For those of you with short attention spans, let me break it down for you in easy-to-read terms: Giving is not about you or your preferences. It is about the giver and his or her preferences.

This is what we know:

1. Donors, on a whole, still prefer direct mail and “good old” collection boxes.
2. Donors are not as committed to one platform as we might think they are. More than half who give online, also give through direct mail appeals.
3. 2 out of 3 donors give using traditional methods while only 1 out of 3 give online. (I anticipate that will change over time, but your operational expenses can’t be put on pause until it does.) Cut out traditional giving options, and you might just starve your organization.
4. Churches, specifically, should be careful to consider the cost (no pun intended) before canceling your offering envelope subscription program and eliminating passing the plate as part of your worship experience.

As pastor, you are the leader of the organization. But that doesn’t mean you get to tell the people in the pew how they will support the church. There are some things that will always be in the hands of the donor. That is, the funds you need to accomplish the vision God has placed on your heart.

It’s not about your preferences or predispositions. It is very much about your ability to fund the work you feel called to do.

After growing 7.7 percent in the first nine months of 2010, compared to the same period last year, overall contributions to charities and churches are expected to fall to $104.18 billion in the final three months of the year, down 1 percent compared to the same period last year, according to a new forecast.

What, if anything, can or should churches do in preparation for year-end giving? In addition to the things that I included in my post earlier this year, 11 ways to turn year-end statements into dollars, I believe there are three ways churches should respond:

1. Talk about it. Communication theory teaches us that until we speak it, it’s not real. This is true in interpersonal relationships as well as the relationship between an organization and the donor. That’s why marriage counseling places a high emphasis on talking and listening. Churches should be in constant dialogue with its membership, both individually and collectively. Don’t expect the person in the pew to know the same details or live with the same sense of urgency the church leaders does.

2. Do something! Stop wasting time in staff meetings talking for hours about what you COULD, MIGHT, or HOPE to do. Do it! Take action. Try something. Whether or not the predictions for year-end giving are strong or weak, churches still have to compete with the more than 1.2 million nonprofits who want the share of mind and share of dollar of the person in your pew.

3. Present a plan for impact. Treat the person in the pew as a potential shareholder or investor in your ministry. Put together a plan that offers them confidence in your ability to transform the dollars given into measurable ministry impact. The organization (not necessarily the church) who presents the best plan will get the dollar.

Don’t let the money God intended to fund his church go to fund anything but Kingdom growth.

No preparation needed. The interview would take about 30 minutes.

Has your church made this decision? Do you know one who has? If so, please respond in the comments section of this post.

Here are 7 reasons churches should talk more about money:

1. The people in your pew are already talking about it.

2. No Money. No Ministry.

3. Silence risks allowing the money God intended to fund His kingdom to go elswhere.

4. Your personal inhibitions do not justify your silence.

5. Giving is an important spiritual discipline. It is equal to prayer, fasting, Bible reading, etc.

6. Stewardship and generosity will change the culture of your church.

7. It is one of the most universal realities that can be used to build a bridge to a lost world.

Are you ready to join the conversation of money, mission, and ministry? (Hint: It’s not optional.)

…it’s uncomfortable for you…

…you’re afraid people will leave the church over it…

…you believe people don’t want to hear about money in church…

…then you are consumed with yourself rather than the spiritual growth, development, and discipline of the people you are called to lead.

OUCH! That’s hurts. I know. But it’s the truth.

Don’t believe me? Listen to a pastor’s wife who together with her husband gives away as much as 60% of their annual income says about leaders who don’t ask them for a gift of any size:

“There’ve been times I’ve been part of fund-raising activities, and the development staff didn’t ask me for a gift, probably thinking that because I work for a nonprofit, I wouldn’t have much to give. I felt really hurt by that. I was there because I wanted to give.”

While you’re silence about money in church preserves your ego and fans your flame of frustration over funding, people are being robbed of the opportunity to be faithful to the commitments they’ve made to fund the work of the Kingdom.

Maybe the problem in the funding equation in your church is you, pastor.

“We’re just a simple church made up of simple people.”

“We don’t have anyone in our church who has a lot of money to give.”

“Our people are maxed out in their ability to give.”

And every one of those pastors would be…WRONG!

God’s funding capacity is unlimited. If we serve in God’s church, then our funding potential is also unlimited.

The reality is that people give…

…at the level of perceived need.

…to causes and organizations that have a plan and demonstrate impact.

…to people they know, like and trust.

I have never met anyone who has run out of money because they decided to give. In fact, some of the wealthiest people I know are the most generous givers I know. And they don’t live the high life. Instead, they choose to live quiet, simple lives with quiet, simple people.

The people in your pews can give more than you think. Are you prepared to present a compelling plan that would cause them to direct those resources to your church?

The fallacy or risk in not strategically approaching the pre-campaign process is grounded in the assumption that everyone will say “yes” and support this new effort (mission project, new building, etc.). Even if you know the congregation on a whole will say “yes,” it’s common courtesy in a relationship to ask and not assume or demand anything.

Think about how weird it would be to get married without asking the other person to marry you. It doesn’t make sense in personal relationships, and it certainly doesn’t make sense when considering the relationship of the member to the church. No one…I mean no one…likes to be told what to do. A personal invitation will make all the difference.

Here are 4 things I recommend all church leaders do before you start any type of campaign:

1. Gain clarity about where your church is today. Jim Collins would say, “Face the brutal facts.” There is a HUGE chance that the perception of the person in the pulpit is SLIGHTLY different from the person in the pew. You need to know if the people in the pew (those who will execute and, ultimately, fund the effort) perceive the same need in the same way you do. The easiest way to accomplish this is through a guided discovery process that uncovers all financial, interpersonal, and ministry aspects of your church. This should be completed by an outside party because the church leader is too close to the situation to have any real perspective.

2. Meet with the people in your church who are your pillars of influence. Influencers may or may not be high-capacity givers. I would suggest that all your high-capacity givers are influencers but not all influencers are high-capacity givers. You need this group behind you. When you know you are on the same page, you have the confidence you need to move forward and you know others are ready to defend the direction you are heading when (not if) “the static” begins.

3. Examine your personal inhibitions about money. Few church leaders find it natural to address the subject of money. However, your personal objections and inhibitions don’t erase the fact that Jesus spoke more about money than he did about sin and salvation. Part of the responsibility of leading God’s church is cultivating the resources God intended to fund the Kingdom. Generosity/stewardship doesn’t just happen; it’s intentional. I’m convinced that a leader who can’t ask for financial support from his congregation is not ready to lead a campaign. Period. End of discussion.

4. Connect the campaign to Kingdom impact. There is a rising tide of what I call the hybrid campaign. All the elements of a traditional campaign exist accept the total amount raised is parsed out among international mission efforts, local mission efforts, and on-campus/multi-site improvement or expansion. Whatever the elements of the campaign are, the goal is not the work in and of itself. People don’t want to fund more busyness. Rather, the goal is to increase ministry impact, expand Kingdom initiatives, and multiply ministry opportunities. The goal should be to create a more sustainable, high-impact Kingdom footprint than the church has today.

If this sounds like a lot of work, it is! If you’re thinking about skipping over the pre-campaign process, let me caution you to do the homework necessary to be ready to ask your congregation to support the direction you are headed (that will probably cost millions of dollars) when they have plenty of alternative giving options available to them.

Are you ready to lead your church through your next campaign?

This report was recently featured in Christian Today: Churches losing out on funds because of poor preaching on giving. In my opinion, the key paragraphs in this article are:

Most Christians, the report noted, are no longer giving habitually but rather evaluating where and how they give, making it more important for charities to understand the dynamics of giving.

Kolaneci said: “Evangelicals are not a homogenous group; they have different priorities, different motivations for giving and different preferred ways of giving,” she said.

“Leaders and organisations need to abandon a one-size-fits-all model of fundraising to truly engage with them. For those that are prepared to make the effort, the rewards are still great.”

What should leaders be thinking about?

1. Opting out of preaching on money, tithing, stewardship, and generosity is not an option (and never has been). When the pastor refuses to talk about money, he leaves the person in the pew with only one voice to shape their thinking about money…culture.

2. The blind trust that weekly tithes and offerings are automatic and will “just happen” is the same kind of blind trust investors had in subprime mortgage-backed securities. Just as those subprime mortgage-backed securities failed, so will our ability to fund the work of the Kingdom if our strategy doesn’t change. The biggest shift should be in no longer resting our entire funding strategy in weekly tithes and offerings.

3. The person in the pew is giving in the context of a new “normal.” The giver wants more information, direct access to senior leadership, input in how money is being spent, and holds expectations he or she will be informed about the ministry impact made as a result of their giving. (Think shareholders report, not simply another night of “open mic” testimonies.)

4. It’s about the giver, not about you. I tell pastors regularly, “People don’t have a giving problem, they have a giving to your church problem.” Why is that? Giving is an emotional decision. Applying a manufacturing lens (one-size-fits-all) to your approach to money and giving in your church, leaves little room for individualization and personalization of appeals. Just as we minister to people in different ways, we should deal with money in ways that are appropriate to the individual giver. You don’t talk to a high-capacity giver about suffocating debt, and you don’t talk to someone suffocating from debt about giving large sums of money for a special project.

The message of the article and report should leave pastors with a sense of hope. If we believe that God is provident, then we must also believe he will fund whatever he has called us to do. It’s the job of the leader to cultivate the gifts provided in the person in pew. I love the focus on the possibilities instead of the numerous “the sky is falling, the sky is falling” reports that have become commonplace these days.

When was the last time you preached on giving?