Wednesday, February 07, 2007

When Brothers In Christ Won't Talk

Over a year ago when trustee leadership of the IMB went behind closed doors to make a recommendation that I be removed from the Board for 'gossip and slander,' I was stunned because nobody in leadership had given me the courtesy of a phone call, personal conversation, or even a short, 'Wade, I think you should know this is what I intend to do and why I intend to do it.' I was completely and absolutely blindsided. Of course, the recommendation was unanimously rescinded at the very next trustee meeting, but what still confuses me is why no brother in Christ ever approached me to talk with me about such drastic action. You would think brothers would do everything to communicate with brothers about any offense they may have.

The only analogy that seems appropriate to describe my experience in January of 2006 was that of 'being run over by a freight train.' I have made it no secret that I made a vow last winter that if I came across anyone in the SBC who had been mistreated, slandered, or abused by people in positions of power I would do everything I could to help the person who was 'run over by the proverbial freight train.' Dwight McKissic and I developed a friendship after I heard what happened to him because of a message he preached in chapel at SWBTS. There are a few who have tried to say that Dwight and I were friends before he preached the message, but both he and I know the truth, and those who say I put him up to preach that message to help missionary candidates who have a private prayer language are revealing their own lack of integrity by asserting as fact something Dwight and I both know is not true. However, I am now proud to call Dwight a friend.

One of these days I will tell people how I came to help Sheri Klouda, the former professor of Hebrew at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary. It was purely accidental (I would call it providential), and my contact with her that eventually led her to share a heart-wrenching story that spurred me to action seems to me to be a direct intervention by the Holy Spirit. No other person was involved but Sheri and me. In fact, it took me a while to find her in Indiana. Once I heard her story, I knew that I must do something to help her. We currently have raised and forwarded nearly $5,000 to Dr. Klouda to assist her family as they make their way through some difficult financial problems due to the unexpected and unfunded relocation, the difficult hardship of not being able to sell her home in Texas, and the struggle of Sheri's husband not being able to work. I want to publicly thank all those who have contributed.

However, what baffles me about the Klouda situation is the absolute lack of willingness for anyone responsible to talk with me about my offense with the way Sheri, her husband , and her daughter have been treated. Prior to making the post public I emailed the full transcript to Dr. Paige Patterson's office and asked him to read it, correct any factual errors (if any), or dispute the document itself. I also called and left my private cell number. In addition, several weeks prior to publishing the post I went by Dr. Patterson's office to meet with him personally. He was unavailable, so I left my private cell phone number. I never heard from him. I have now called his office five times, three prior to the Klouda post, and two after the Klouda post, and he has yet to call me. I have called Dr. David Allen, Dean of Students, twice and asked him to call me. I have never heard from him. I was told by a friend of mine that a SWBTS trustee called him to get me to 'back off.' I immediately called this trustee to visit with him personally. He was not available so I left my number and I have yet to hear from him. I have called Dr. Van McClain's office twice and he has not returned my phone calls. Dr. McClain, Chairman of the SWBTS Board of Trustees did email me a response back to my request to see the minutes of the business meeting where Sheri was hired. He refused until after the April 2007 SWBTS Board Meeting, and only then 'conditioned upon any action taken by the trustees.' He had earlier told the Dallas Morning News that the vote to hire Klouda was not unanimous and that fact was the 'inaccuracy' in my post. I believe the record will show it was unanimous, but it is very frustrating to not be allowed to see the very document that will prove the veracity of my post. Frankly, the practice of freezing minutes ought to send a chill down every Southern Baptists spine. Of course, if the record shows I am wrong, I will apologize for the error, but I find it interesting that the vote total for hiring Dr. Klouda was an insignificant fact in the Klouda post -- yet it was the only fact in the Klouda postdisputed by the one man who said the post was inaccurate.

There are three SWBTS trustees who have visited with me about Dr. Klouda, but all three did not even know who Sheri was, or that she had been an employee of SWBTS. In addition, all three initiated contact with me after I had made repeated attempts to contact people responsible. These three trsutees told me they were not informed enough to answer any questions, but looked forward to getting appropriate information themselves, and simply called to get some information from me. Those who are able to resolve this situation in terms of knowledge and action are not talking.

My purpose for persistence in calling the men who are either responsible for the Klouda removal at SWBTS or have the answers for why she was denied the opportunity for tenure review and defense is to offer a solution to the problem. It seemed to me that a couple of very concrete and specific steps could be taken to resolve the situation with Sheri Klouda and her family that would give the Kloudas a sense that an injustice had been corrected, as well as an opportunity for the President of SWBTS to change the direction and policies of SWBTS so that his desires could be implemented without subverting the current trustee approved policies and procedures for faculty tenure.

However, I am now washing my hands of this matter. There will be no more calls or attempts at resolving this matter with administration or trustees. I can only chuckle when people say that the 'proper process' has been bypassed when it comes to the Klouda issue. The process only works when brothers in Christ are willing to talk. I will continue to help Sheri and her family. If I hear of another person who is being mistreated by any political 'machine' in the SBC, I will do what I can to help. If people ask, "Where were you five years ago?" or any other questions that pertain to why I have not helped people prior to 2006, my response is this: I had absolutely no undestanding of relevant issues prior to January 2006. Now I do.

Those who may disagree with me on the issues are my brothers. I am not even asking them to agree or even see things the way I do. Just talk. Just dialogue. Tell me where I am wrong. Show me where I don't have it right. I can learn, but I also don't give up on correcting a wrong until I have good answers and either see the error of my ways, or find a good solution to the problem. And by the way, good solutions give me confidence in leadership and I will do everything in my power to keep good leadership in charge of our institutions.

When SBC brothers refuse to talk to SBC brothers, then it could be that someone other than family might have to intervene to resolve the offense. If, or when, that happens the only people who should be blamed are those brothers who refused to talk.

In His Grace,



Rob Ayers said...


You have it right. Thank you.


Bob Cleveland said...



davidinflorida said...

Pastor Wade,

Maybe they are not your brothers. Im sure you have seen the state of our SB churchs (low baptisms, lack of sharing the Faith, etc).

Why would we presume that SBC leadership committees would be any different than the profiles of our SB churchs?

Roger Ferrell said...

I was talking today with a fellow pastor about our lack of concern for the hurt, the disillusioned, and the downtrodden in Southern Baptist life. I don't mean our lack of concern for homeless people or the poor (this is a whole other issue). I mean the way we do not take care of our own.

For years, I have wished and wanted a system of care for SBC church planters who do not successfully plant a church (about 50% of them) and struggle with their failure. We should be talking with them, encouraging them, and making sure their families are okay. We should dust them off, put them back on their feet and help them take their first steps back into ministry. But for the most part, we don't.

My friend Sonny served for a few years as the Pastoral Care guy for a state convention and told me once that he got 40 to 50 calls a week from pastors who were struggling and hurting. Ministry is hard and we need to encourage and strengthen one another but for the most part, we don't.

We need to return phone calls, but for the most part we don't.

We need to mentor and coach instead of compete with those who come behind us, but for the most part, we don't.

We need to respect and honor those who go ahead of us, but for the most part, we don't.

We need to pray for other churches and pastors, and teach our churches to do the same, but for the most part, we don't.

And we need to let others in the body of Christ hold us accountable for our actions, affirm us when we are right, but rebuke us when we are wrong. And we need to apologize when we hurt others. For the most part, we don't.

Maybe the reason our brand of Christianity is not proving attractive to the lost is that they only want to be part of a group who love and live like Jesus.

For the most part, we don't.

But what if we did?

Kevin Bussey said...

It is hard to talk when the other person won't talk. I've been there too.


I've been on the wrong side of the 50%. I'd be glad to help in anyway.

Steve said...

Roger Ferrell hits the nail on the head for our getting used to just doing the "have-to-do's" and leaving the contacts, calls, and visits, the "should-have-dones" neglected. Our chances to be a blessing are getting away from us if we don't plan ahead to stay in touch with folks, although you preachers are better at it than the rest of us.

When I see leadership not respond to repeated attempts at contact, several assumptions come to mind, none of them constructive. Honest, heartfelt questions need to be addressed, whether they come from the "agin's" or the "fer's."

I can only hope that if it is ever my name, or my kids' names, at the top of an organization, that I/they will have the humility and the trust in the Lord to be available and answer things. That responsibility is not just between the leader and the everyday person; the responsibility and debt is between the leader and the Lord. I just pray that the leaders of SBC institutions feel that debt.

Denise said...

Brother Wade,
I'm not a Bible Scholar like most of you, in fact, I'm just a newly rededicated Christian of 48 years of age but tonight I was studying in Judges and I came across a verse I feel led to share with you. you know it I'm sure but for some reason you and your endeavors with Dr. Klouda came to my heart and mind. Then i come on and read your post and just feel like I'm supposed to post this. I HOPE it only makes sense to you as it did to me.

Judges 19:30 (HCSB) "Think it over, discuss it, and SPEAK UP!"

My paraphrase where I see it is for you... "You thunk it over, you've discussed and you're speaking up, DONT GIVE UP! Keep speaking up. The squeaky wheel gets the grease as my granddaddy used to say!"

I'm glad you're speaking up and squeaking :)


P.S. We found a church :)

Anonymous said...

Dearest in Christ Jesus,

I am praying for you according to Ma 6:10-14 and Luke 11:3,4 and greet you according to Matt 18:35 and Matt 22:37-39.

At this auspicious time I introduce to you as Rev.Dr.Ch.V.Raju, from India now aged 60 years. But I am brave, more courageously working for Him for the last 35 years preaching the Glorious Gospel according to Mark 13:10, reaching the unreached, starting churches and congregations according to Matt 16:18. Lord blessed us 36 churches and congregations spread in various parts of Andhra Pradesh State that are being ministered with 35 co-pastors, conducting every day-to-day prayer meetings and Sunday worship services.

Part of spreading Gospel we take care of Orphan and widows according to Matt 18:4-6 and Matt 19:14 and looking after them praying according to Acts 9:39-42.

Ours is an independent Ministry having no help and support from within and abroad, but striving for Him with utmost faith only.
We got registered our Ministry with the Government under the name and style of CHRISTIAN FAITH MINISTRIES, and working as per the rules and regulations of the government.

You know Christians in India are living below poverty line and as our Ministry is small and its resources are very limited, we are not in a position to meet every need in conducting crusades, village outreach and planting churches.

As there is lot of work yet to be done and for the abundance of our ministry, we are much interested to join in your FELLOWSHIP AND strive for Him in India in reaching the unreached and to win many a perishing souls, with our combined efforts, and request you to keep us in your prayers.

We were all praying God to give you a call to visit India to share the burden of our Ministry and request you to join in prayer with us.
Praying for you, for your family and for the abundance of your ministry to spread its wings all over the Globe, and request you to pray for us, for our ministry, for our invitation to you to visit India to share the burden of our ministry with us.

Pray for a line in reply soon,
Sincerely In His service,


Bob Cleveland said...


I been thinking about this. The simple comparison is with Jesus, and what happened when folks approached Him seeking information. How many of them did He refuse to talk to?

I don't recall any. I know He occasionally left the crowd behind to be alone with His Father, but I don't recall anyone asking anything of Him, where He did not at least answer. Adulterous people, rich folks, powerful men, you name it. He always answered.

The only one I can think of is when He was being persecuted. He was silent before some of His accusers. That was part of His sacrificial actions ... to answer might have thwarted God's plan.

I hope that's not the mindset of those who will not answer you. Short of that, refusing to answer can hardly be deemed Christlike.

Anonymous said...

There is a difference between SB brothers and brothers in Christ. We all dichotomize and justify accordingly. But, we should be in Christ all the time and leave the justifying up to the Lord.

Writer said...


It's interesting to me that your experience of what I call being "stonewalled," is not unusual in the South, especially in the church culture.

Many times I have heard of issues in the church, not from those who have the issues, but from those to whom the talk has been spread. When I ask, "Why didn't they come and talk to me first?" I usually get a shrug. When I contact the alleged injured party, invariably they refuse to talk with me.

I have seen this behavior many times in churches from Texas all the way to North Carolina. Gossip and avoidance of problems in hopes that by ignoring them they will go away, seems to be the de facto standard approach.

Is it biblical? Absolutely not. I can't remember how many times I have preached on Matt. 18:15-17 about how to handle conflict, but to no avail.

I say all of this to say that I understand your frustration. Maybe you can take some solace in knowing that those who refuse to discuss issues exhibit behavior that is less than heroic.



James said...

There's always the option of going on a hunger strike. said...



That is definitely not an option for me. :)

Anonymous said...

Thanks, Roger, for your post.

Wade, none of this surprises me. You have been hurt and many before you have been hurt through the years. Love God, obey God, thank God in all things, and move on. It actually works!

Florence in KY

Michael said...

In what ways can we help?

Anonymous said...


You said: "When SBC brothers refuse to talk to SBC brothers, then it could be that someone other than family might have to intervene to resolve the offense."

Would you care to elaborate?


irreverend fox said...


I'm most surprised by Dr. Allen. I've meet Dr. Allen, basically spent a week with him and was a guest in his home (with about five other “pioneer area” missionary couples) back in 2005. He seemed very open, sincere and genuine. His wife was somehow even more sincere and genuine…sister Allen is a very warm and lovely women. (I pick up on phoniness and insincerity very quickly…I can’t stand it…I can always tell when someone is sincere and when someone is a politician…the Allen’s are the “real deal”…if he saw me on the street he might not remember my name right away…but he’d remember me…that’s my impression of the Allen’s)

He was at that time the pastor of Macarthur Blvd Baptist church and my wife and I were part of their annual encouragers not only were we guests in their home, but I spent a great deal of time with Dr. Allen during that week in small group settings, classes and interaction both prior and after each evening worship gathering.

I really like Dr. and sister Allen.

Regardless if a trustee has asked him to speak with you, I wouldn't be one bit surprised if there are other influences telling him to stay hushed up. said...

No elaboration needed.

Anonymous said...


I have had similar experiences in my contact with the IMB board, with seminary presidents and with Dr. McClain (I wrote a couple of very gracious e-mails and got a total of three sentences in response basically telling me that your blog post was inaccurate). The reply you got in requesting minutes was the same reply I got, word-for-word.

These are our brothers and sisters. If my biological brothers refused to speak to me any counselor worth his salt would say that we have a dysfunctional relationship going on. How these folks (who we have entrusted with leadership responsibilities) can act as if this is either the biblical thing to do, or even the healthy and mature thing to do, is beyond me. This is why I have lost faith in the system.

Now, perhaps those who beat the "proper channels" drum would like to see if they get a response from our brothers that is any different. I hope they will and then I hope they will come on here and share with us all what they think of the "proper channels" afterwards.

Tim Sweatman said...

I don't want to put words in anyone's mouth, but to me it seems that those who keep insisting that the "proper channels" be followed are really saying that we should let our entity trustees do whatever they want with no interference or questioning from us. said...

Paul and Tim,

I am asking those who disagree with you to explain to me the illogic in your reasoning. Several have been vocal and consistent in saying 'follow the system.' I would like for them to explain how the system can be followed in light of your comments.

I am listening.

Bob Cleveland said...

Isn't a "channel" really just a rut?

I guess you could also make a case for it having been a "channel" that Joseph got tossed into by his brothers......

OC Hands said...

You are to be admired for standing up to the "powers that be" and for calling for accountability in these matters. I don't see your questions as demanding that they answer to you--but to the many thousands of us who deserve an answer.Unfortunately, there seems to be a certain predictability in SBC life that runs like this--the higher your position, the more freedom you have to do as you plesae, and the less accountability you have toward those whom you are serving and who are ultimately responsible for having put you in that position.

It appears to me that a resistance to answer some basic questions regarding actions toward fellow Christians indicates that the parties involved do not wish this to be discussed openly, in dialogue, as you suggested, or privately, which you also suggested. This could mean that there were actions, illegal or certainly un-Christian, that they wish to keep hidden. Or, it could mean that they do not feel that they should have to answer to you, or to anyone other than trustees, or their superiors.
In these cases, I think it is both, which is very unfortunate and unwise on their part. But I do think you are wise to put it aside, pray for all concerned, and leave it in the hands of the Lord. I do believe he will deal with it in his own time and way. That is not an excuse for doing nothing. ON the contrary, I believe praying for each of those involed, as I have been doing, will accomplish far more than we could ever imagine.

I do believe you are right to call these matters to our attention, and I believe it is our responsibility to pray that God would bless and give wisdom to all concerned. I am convinced that we will see his resolution to these problems sooner than later. So, even if you do not get any response to your questions, remember that there is a hgher judge and we all will have to answer to him--no matter our position.

Anonymous said...

The silence has spoken loud and clear from Ft. Worth and many in the SBC across our country has heard it.

Anonymous said...


Well said. Thank you for standing for this lady and her family.

Karen Scott

Tom Parker said...

What needs to be done to begin the dialogue? Not talking will not constructively solve the issues that need to be addressed. Is it possible for Baptists to agree to disagree about certain non-Salvation issues? said...


I did not mean my comment to offend you or anyone else. It expresses the way I feel and I have put in several phone calls in an attempt to dialogue about the issue. However, I do agree with your point that it has nothing to do with this comment string and have removed it. I am attempting to discuss the issues with people in private.


wade said...

I am sure Dr. Allen is a good man. However, to move from former Chairman of the Trustees when Patterson was hired to Dean of the School after Patterson was hired -- an administrative position at SWBTS -- seems to me to be a huge conflict of interest. I won't even mention the actual Chairman of the Search Committee.

We should have a policy that forbids any search committee or trustee being given jobs by the President hired under their watch. NAMB better be very careful about who they bring before the Board as the candidate for President. People are watching much more closely than we used to regarding these matters. Conflicts of interest abound.

This does not negate the character of Dr. Allen. I, too, know him to be a fine Christian man.

He just seems to have allowed himself to be placed in a very, very awkward position.

Anonymous said...


The devil is up and about. This could signal the end, rapture. There's a move to have God's word, the Bible declared a hoax. What they have to offer is on the internet at:

This needs to be addressed and destroyed asap.

Anonymous said...

As an ethnic minority working for the "Organization," we are always afraid of what might happen if we do not tote the line.

Sometimes it has to happen to one personally before they know what it is others are going through. Ethnic jokes are made in my presence and it would be useless if not precarious to make a comment about them.

I ask you as a trustee, how many ethnic minorities are represented among the trustees, how many minorities have any type of Regional Leadership position around the world? Is it that those that are in these positions are not capable of holding down such responsibilities or could there be some other sinister reason?

For you to "wash your hands," of this matter simply means they have worn you down. THEY HAVE ONCE AGAIN WON. Their silence is their biggest weapon and they have swung it mightyly in your case.

You feel as though you have "fought against the windmills" but these are not imagined and these have taken their toll.

Prayerfully consider this.

A servant said...

Mr. Anonymous,

Thanks for your comment, but I think you understand. To wash my hands of this matter does not mean my hands will not remain busy correcting a problem in our convention.

It means I no longer will be an advocate or defender for the Seminary in seeking to rectify a wrong.

I attempted to resolve it in a Christian and open manner. Now, others will intervene to solve it for us and I will have nothing to do with it.


Anonymous said...

Bro. Wade:

Someone years ago, in seminary, quoted a piece of advice to young preachers from Dr. James Sullivan, then president of the Sunday School Board: "Men, trust the Lord and tell the people."

Transparency is hard to maintain when the mission is wresting governance, creating intellectual/theological/ecclesiastical homogeneity, and building a personal legacy designed for emulation.

While hoping, praying, asking, seeking, working for the transparancy of others, I congratulate the transparancy of motive and method you seek to demonstrate.

Charles C.

Anonymous said...

I think read on a past blog about Talcott Parsons. He had a systems theory that went something like this:

"Organizations are creates a tools for humanity. Over a period of time they take on a life of their own(and go through a life cycle of sorts). Eventually the structure does not serve the people the people serve the structure."

Change is hard and, at times, impossible so the organizational structure must be dismantled and/or replaced.

I thought that the conservative resurgence reversed that process... but it looks as if it only the names of the caretakers changed.

Dialogue by it's very nature assumes that two parties interact openly and honestly.

It assumes that both parties seek understanding of each others position.

Both parties are open to the possibility that they may be wrong (even though they believe they are right)

Both parties seek to discover the truth in love, humility, and grace

When either side backs away from these goals...then any interaction is just whistling in the wind.

It seems that the the "SBC organization" does not foster an evironment condusive to dialogue...those who are apart of the machinery believe it is not needed because they are right (because they can influence the organization..more than a lost and dying world) That troubles me.

Th SBC has not fostered that type of environment in a long time (even before 79).You can still find pockets of it on the local, associational, and state levels though it is not as common as it should be.

If baptist polity worked the way it should (from the bottom up) things would change....

But...we have allowed a top down approach (buisness model) to become the norm

Somewhere along the line something got lost in the translation

If Parsons was right...then decline is inevitable...if it is be it.

Silence between "brothers" and among the "majority" are two sides of the same coin

On one side you have some that will not dialogue because they do not care about the other side. So the other side stops trying to make their voices heard.

Part of what made the resurgence so effective (whether we admit it or not) is that they average Joe FELT like they were finally being heard.

Did we make a difference or were we manipulated?...the fundies say we made a difference. The moderate say we were manipulated.

Is the silence a symptom of the sickness of the convention?

Or is it the calm before the storm?

I do not know...and I am beginning not to care...In some ways that bothers me most of all.

Almost 38

Anonymous said...

It's very odd how we who are supposed to love Christ and love his church can be so cold to one another. I just spent two days on a business trip with a dear brother from the Disciples of Christ. Despite our different theological heritage we can openly discuss those differences and enjoy one anothers company because we serve the same Lord and love one another. Why can't we be open even if we don't agree on a particular subject? It grieves me.
Harold M

Unknown said...


Their silence is speaking volumes to the whole SBC community… They might not like to think so, but we are listening… and what their silence is saying is “ARROGANCE!”

Grace to all,

Anonymous said...

This comment is not to minimize the pain caused to Dr. Klouda or to anyone else who is treated in such a way, but another consideration when people are treated badly by "Christian" entities is the witness. What kind of witness to non-Christians (or even those who waver in their faith) is it when people or entities who call themselves Christian treat others badly, often in ways that would be considered wrong or illegal by the secular world?

Another aspect of this is that the people treated badly often do not use available remedies (legal or otherwise) against the entity who harmed them because they do not want to cause problems or hurt others or even the very entity which hurt them. Could it be that those who do such things count on the people they hurt being unwilling (because they are Christians) to cause trouble on their own behalf?

I am glad that you have raised this issue on Dr. Klouda's behalf.


Rex Ray said...

You said, “Could it be that those who do such things count on the people they hurt being unwilling (because they are Christians) to cause trouble on their own behalf?

I believe you are 100% right. It’s like authorities count on, ‘You can’t defend yourself because that would hurt the Baptist image.’

They probably count on Scripture of not taking your brother to court to do their illegal deeds. The devil has quoted Scripture more than once.

Their silence is a rope that is slowly turning into a noose.
Rex Ray

Bob Cleveland said...


There may be instances where God used one Godly tribe to gently correct another, in Israel, but I'm unaware of it. What I am aware of, though, is what He told Habakkuk when he was apparently upset about injustice in their midst:

Habakkuk 1:5-6: "Look at the nations and watch-- and be utterly amazed. For I am going to do something in your days that you would not believe, even if you were told. I am raising up the Babylonians, that ruthless and impetuous people, who sweep across the whole earth to seize dwelling.... (NIV)

Hmmmm ... does that mean when God's people stray, and won't clean up their act, that God can and will use any and all means to get their attention? And maybe whip them back into line? When they won't listen to the prophets in their midst?

Wouldn't surprise me one bit.

Anonymous said...

bob cleveland

You are so right. God is going to unleash the greatest of terrors on earth real soon, rapture no doubt. The anti Christ of prophecy is walking among us at this very minute. He leading people away from God claiming the sacred Bible is a hoax. God will not allow His holy words to be reviled. The anti Christs like Judas is necessary so prophecy can be fullfilled. Make ready for the coming!!!

The anit Christ has a web site called hoax buster, ( He's gaining many followers just like Revelation says he will.

Unknown said...


I think that Wade's post is to let everyone know that we have reached the point where "any and all means" are exactly what is about to happen...

By the way I always enjoy your comments...

Grace to all,

Anonymous said...

I think it was Jimmy Carter who said: it's often easier for a baptist to talk to a catholic than it is for a baptist to talk to a baptist, or a catholic to talk to a catholic. Something like that.

Anonymous said...

Leading Healthy Teams and Healing Unhealthy Teams (or, As a Leader Among Us, Wade Must . . .):

When the Team Becomes Unhealthy . . .

1. Be human.

2. Demand debate.

3. Force clarity and closure.

4. Confront difficult issues.

5. Focus on outcomes.

When the Team is Healthy . . .

1. Congratulate diversity;
resolve conflict; maintain open communication.

2. Adjust practices to achieve maximum results.

3. Leaders serve the team;
the team serves its tasks.

4. Match strengths to tasks.

5. Stay focused on mission.

(Info from Patrick M. Lencioni, and from Team Resources/Triaxia--Atlanta)

We've become so embroiled in conflict in the SBC that to lead a healthy team almost sounds boring. That's mighty sad!

David Troublefield
Wichita Falls, TX

Anonymous said...

vdomus, all to often it's impossible to talk to ourselves, admit we're wrong when we're worng, accept the difficult to accept. They call that going into denial. The one denied is ourselves when we do that.