LEADERSHIP ISSUSES OF CELL BASED

MINISTRIES
PH.D. Tutorials
Joel Comiskey

A Ph.D. Tutorial

Presented to Dr. C. Peter Wagner

In Partial Fulfillment of the

Requirements for the Degree

Doctor of Philosophy In Intercultural Studies

The School of World Mission

FULLER THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY

September 1996

 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
 How the Tutorial Fits into the Dissertation
 Purpose
 Goals
 Problem Statement for this Tutorial
 Research Questions
 Delimitations
 Definitions
 Assumptions
 Overview of This Tutorial
 CHAPTER 2: THE NEED FOR LEADERSHIP IN THE CELL CHURCH
 Rapid Multiplication Makes New Leadership Essential
 Mindset for Rapid Deployment Of Leadership
 Reliance on The Holy Spirit
 Deployment of Young Christians
 Deployment of Facilitators As Opposed to Bible Teachers
  Deployment of Women
 Willingness to Face Failure
 Leadership Giftedness
 CHAPTER 3:TRAINING MODELS FOR CELL LEADERSHIP
 Models For Training New Christians On The Path To Cell Leadership
 Ralph Neighbour’s Training Process
 Bethany World Prayer Center
 Models For Training Cell Leaders And Interns
 Serendipity Model
 Meta Model
 Cho Model
 Neighbour’s Training Model
 Personal Journey In Cell Training
 Conclusion On Cell Leadership Training Models
 CHAPTER 4:FOUNDATIONAL PRINCIPLES FOR CELL LEADERS
 Difficulty In Identifying Leadership Characteristics
 Biblical Leadership
 Old Testament Principles
 New Testament Principles
 Essential Church Growth Qualities
 Goal Setting
 Church Growth Attitudes
 Visionary Leadership
 The Devotional Life Of A Leader
 The Pastoral Role of the Cell Leader
 The Communication Role Of The Cell Leader
 Create Responsiveness
 Do Not Dominate The Cell Meeting
 Maintain The Flow Of Participation
 Guide The Group Into Deeper Levels Of Communication
 Respond Properly To Each Member
 Ask Stimulating Questions
 Conclusion
 CHAPTER 5:HELPFUL PARADIGMS FOR TOP LEADERSHIP IN CELL MINISTRY
 Shepherd/Rancher Paradigm
 Span Of Care
 Transitioning From Shepherd To Rancher
 Ranchers In The Cell Church Today
 Situational Leadership
 Description
 Application To Cell Ministry
 CHAPTER 6: DISTINCTIVENESS OF LATIN AMERICAN LEADERSHIP
 General Latin Leadership Traits
 Authoritarianism
 Assigned Status
 Idealism
 Comparative Studies on Latin American Leadership
 Research By Dr. Geert Hostede
 Research By Robert T. Moran And Philip R. Harris
 CHAPTER 7:CONCLUSION
 APPENDIX: DR. ROBERT CLINTON’S LEADERSHIP RESEARCH
 Emergence Theory
 Mentoring
 Definition
 Basic Characteristics Of Mentor—Mentoree Training
 Type Of Mentoring Models
 Co-Mentoring
 ENDNOTES
 REFERENCES CITED

Chapter 1: Introduction

Many believe that leadership is the key element behind successful cell-based ministry. My
conviction is heading in that same direction. In fact, a major part of my research in Latin
America will be attempting to discover those characteristics that distinguish effective cell
leaders from non-effective ones. That is, those cell leaders who are able to multiply their
group versus those who cannot.

From the outset of this tutorial, it is wise to point out that I will be focusing on church
growth leadership. Therefore, as much as possible, this study will be pragmatic. In other
words, my focus is on those leadership traits that get results. Perhaps Carl George sums
it up best when he talks about leadership that gets results,

…It means the willingness to put the inspiring of your people, getting them into action,
…In short, take responsibility for meeting the goals you set…. True leadership commits
to results. Leaders pour their energy, excitement, prayer, blood, and sweat into solving
the obstacles between them and the vision God has given for that church (1994:86).

Why am I concerned with church growth leadership as it relates to cell-based ministry?

Primarily because it is my conviction that cell-based ministry represents one
methodology in the broader field of church growth. In other words, my interest in cell-
based ministry stems from my enthusiasm for church growth. Although cell-based
 ministry only one method among many that God is using today, it is a method that God is
using mightily throughout the world today.

How the Tutorial Fits into the Dissertation

 In a general sense, this tutorial will give me an overview of leadership in the cell church.
Therefore, beyond my dissertation, I will benefit by having a better understanding of
how to identify and train effective leadership in the cell church.
 More specifically, this tutorial will provide much of the material for two chapters in my
actual dissertation. These two chapters are:

Chapter 6- Issues Of Latin American Leadership And Cell-Based Ministry (25 Pages)

Chapter 9- Leadership Patterns In The Case Study Churches (30 Pages)

Purpose

The purpose for this tutorial is to analyze leadership in the cell church. It will primarily
focus on the training of effective leadership from the new Christian to the head pastor. At
the same time, this tutorial will try to contextualize leadership training and theory to the
Latin American context (especially chapter 7).

Goals

I have at least three broad goals in this tutorial:

 To discover how best to train lay people for small group leadership
 To analyze the principles behind effective top leadership in the cell church
 To contextualize leadership training and theory to a Latin American context.

Problem Statement for this Tutorial

The central research issue of this tutorial is an analysis of cell-based leadership in the
Latin American context.

Research Questions

 What are the needs of leadership development in the cell church?

 What are some of the ways to train new Christians to eventually become cell leaders?
 What are the best training models for cell leaders?
 What are some of the key leadership principles for those who lead cell groups?
 What are some key leadership paradigms that might be helpful for top cell leadership
(section leaders, district leaders, head pastors, etc.) in the cell church?
 What are some of the patterns of Latin American leadership? (with the cell church in
mind)

Delimitations

The material on leadership is vast—both from a Christian as well as a secular point of

view. I have attempted to sift through a selected portion of that literature in order to
apply it to the topic of cell-based ministry, and more specifically, in a Latin context.

However, I am the first to admit that I have not covered all of the relevant literature.
Much more could be said and studied. My only excuse is that tutorials such as this one
must have a stopping point. I also felt that my contextualization of Latin leadership fell
short due to the limited amount of literature that I was able to find on the subject (note
1).

In this tutorial, especially, I felt like I needed to use inclusive language (taking into
consideration both male and female). Since so many cell leaders are women, I felt that it
simply was not right to constantly use he, his, and him when describing cell leadership.
On the other hand, I did not want to blow up every sentence with two pronouns.
Therefore, when referring to cell leadership, I decided to randomly choose to use she and
her, while at other times using he, his, and him. I hope that this style is not too “rough”
and bothersome to the reader.

Definitions

Throughout this tutorial, I will be describing characteristics of effective leadership, so at

this point I will only offer a few generalized definitions which will be more clearly defined
by the end of this tutorial. Actually, the study of leadership is a very complicated and at
times fuzzy science. This is due to the variety of factors that must be taken into account
when considering leadership effectiveness. For example, Warren Bennis and Burt Nanus
write,

Literally thousands of empirical investigations of leaders have been conducted in the last
seventy-five years alone, but no clear and unequivocal understanding exists as to what
distinguishes leaders from non-leaders, and perhaps more important, what distinguishes
effective leaders from ineffective leaders and effective organizations from ineffective
organizations (1985:4).

However, perhaps it is in order to attempt to define leadership here. Dr. Bobby Clinton
defines leadership like this, “A leader, as defined from a study of Biblical leadership,…is a
person, with God-given capacity and with God-given responsibility who is influencing a
specific group of God’s people toward God’s purposes for the group” ( Leadership
 1993:14). This idea of influencing a group of people towards God’s purpose is also taken
up by Dr. Peter Wagner while defining the leadership gift in the New Testament ( Rom.
12:8),

The gift of leadership is the special ability that God gives to certain members of the Body
of Christ to set goals in accordance with God’s purpose for the future and to
communicate these goals to others in such a way that they voluntarily and harmoniously
work together to accomplish those goals for the glory of God” (1994:149).

From the above definitions, we can safely say that leaders both set goals and successfully
influence people towards those goals. Since church growth thinking forms the underlying
philosophy of this tutorial, we will specifically be analyzing effective leadership from this
standpoint.

Assumptions

These are some of the assumptions that will play a large role in this tutorial:

 It is God’s will that His church grows.

 God uses a variety of methods to grow His church.
 Cell-based ministry is one of those effective methods that God is using today.
 Church growth leadership is the preferred style of leadership in the cell church today.
 Effective cell leaders are those who are able to multiply their cell groups

Overview of this Tutorial

In this tutorial I will:

 Establish the leadership need in the cell church

 Set forth various training models for cell leaders
 Establish important church growth leadership principle for the cell Leader
 Talk about leadership paradigms for top cell leadership
 Discover how Latin American leadership differs from North American leadership.

Chapter 2: The Need for Leadership in the Cell Church

In order for a cell church to experience dynamic growth, it must rapidly raise up new
leaders. If a cell church is going to fulfill the Jethro principle, a multiple layer of leadership
is needed. There must also be leadership progression. In other words, as successful cell
leaders demonstrate their talent for leading others, new, more challenging roles must be
made available to them. The cells must never become self-serving, inward-looking
enclaves of Christians seeking to be “discipled”.
Rapid Multiplication Makes New Leadership Essential

The rallying cry of the cell church is “born to multiply”. Successful leaders all seem to have
one thing in common. They are able to translate intention into reality and to sustain it
(Bennis and Nanus 1985:226). Eddie Gibbs says, “By multiplying cell groups the growing
church creates leadership positions and an ideal training ground for future leadership.
Wasdell describes cell groups as ‘leader-breeders’ (1981:260). I like that term “Leader
breeders” because this is exactly what must happen in a rapidly growing cell church.

I recently heard about a cell church in Medan, Indonesia that was established in the mid
1980s. It now has almost 10,000 members due to the fact that the cells never go over 15
in number. The goal of each group is to give birth every year. If it does not, the cell is
absorbed into the other cell groups. The goal is crystal clear in this cell church:
Evangelism first, then discipleship ( Davis 1996) (note 2). In this church, there is a constant
need to raise up cell leadership to serve the new cells. In fact, a 700 member “in house”
Bible School to was formed to train cell leaders, as well as church planters and
missionaries.

If we are going to release leadership rapidly to serve the needs of growing church, we
need to use every potential leader. Paul Cho is an example of someone who has done
that. Under his leadership, the church has grown to more than 625,000 members along
with 22,000 cell groups. Neighbour points out that because Cho’s church adds 140 new
members per day, the church has found it necessary to plant churches of 5,000 members
(Neighbor 1990:24). One of the chief reasons that Cho has been able to maintain such
rapid growth is that in his church there is a ratio of one lay leader to every ten to sixteen
church members (Hurtson 1995:68). For example, in 1988 alone, 10,000 new lay leaders
were appointed for ministry (Hurton 1995:194). It is this type of rapid deployment of
leadership that is needed in the cell church today. Yet, how is this accomplished?

Mindset for Rapid Deployment of Leadership

From my experience in cell ministry, in order to have a constant pool of leadership

available to lead the new groups, a new mentality must penetrate both the leadership
philosophy and the church philosophy.

Reliance on the Holy Spirit

In many churches, there is an underlying, if not stated, assumption that if a lay person is
going to assume leadership responsibility, he or she must be formally trained.

And yes, formal training can be very beneficial. Yet, a philosophy that relies on formal
training for new leadership oftentimes minimizes the work of the Holy Spirit. Paul the
apostle is a case in point. During the first century, when Paul established churches
throughout the Mediterranean world, he trusted in the Holy Spirit to work through the
young believers who he left behind to lead the new churches (Allen 1962:84-94). Speaking
of Paul’s method, Allen writes,

…the moment converts were made in any place ministers were appointed from among
themselves, presbyter Bishops, or Bishops, who in turn could organize and bring into
the unity of the visible Church and new group of Christian in their neighborhood
(1956:9).

Unlike the apostle Paul, we often hang educational nooses around the necks of our
potential leaders. No wonder, we can’t find enough to lead our cell groups! I’m personally
convinced that we should be risky when it comes to raising up cell leadership. We need to
rely on the Holy Spirit to work through those who show enthusiasm, clear testimony, and
desire to serve Jesus (Kreider 1995:41-53).

Deployment of Young Christians

Like Paul the apostle, Paul Cho uses young Christians in cell leadership. When he was
asked where he got his leadership for his 22,000+ cell groups, without even hesitating he
said, “We get them from our new Christians” (Galloway 1995:105). I do not believe that
this quote means that Cho immediately places these new Christians into leadership, but it
does mean that Cho understands that tomorrow’s cell leaders will come from the ranks
of today’s new believers, and he plans accordingly.

In fact, it is a well-known truth that new Christians are oftentimes the most effective
evangelists. Wagner notes that the potential for evangelism is much higher in new
Christians that mature ones (1976:91). This is primarily due to the fact that new Christians
still have contacts with non-Christians. Mike Berg & Paul Pretiz in their excellent book,
Spontaneous Combustion: Grass-Roots Christianity, Latin American Style, note that many
of Latin American’s grass roots churches are alive with new Christians. They say,

There is a quality of pristine faith in a believer’s first love that should emulated. With this
is the need to be more sensitive to the Holy Spirit’s illumination of the simple believer. We
can be grateful for new found perspectives by believers in the GR church (1996:127).

It is probably for this reason that Pete Scazzero, the pastor of a growing C&MA cell church
in New York, uses new Christians in cell leadership. Carl George dedicates six pages to
Pete’s church in his book Prepare Your Church for the Future. Here is what Pete says
about leadership in cell ministry,
Our future is limited by our leadership…Give me ten solid cell-group leaders, and our
attendance will grow by another 100, because we’ll have provided an environment where
the Holy Spirit is gifts can be released to do the work of the ministry…Several of the cell-
group leaders (X’s) and apprentices (Xa’s) are new Christians. ‘Young Christians who lead
cell groups grow like crazy…especially as they learn to base their identity in Christ instead
of in their ministries or on their egos (1992:203,204).

Personally, I’ve never placed brand new Christians into cell leadership positions.
However, I have utilized younger Christians that demonstrate purity and zeal in their
Christian life. Brand new Christians should be steered into a training track and then
encouraged to become interns in a cell group.

Deployment of Facilitators as Opposed to Bible Teachers

Perhaps, there would be more willingness to release leaders if we would remember that
cell leaders and interns are not Bible teachers but facilitators. A facilitator’s job
description focuses more on guiding the communication process, praying for cell
members, calls, visitation, and reaching the lost for Christ. George wisely adds, “…in the
church of the future a leader won’t be known for his or her ability to handle a quarterly or
written study guide so much as for a skill in relating to people in such a way that they
allow access into their lives (1994:68).

Because cell ministry focuses on raising up facilitators as opposed to Bible teachers, I do

not believe that it is essential that a potential leader be required to know large amounts
of Bible doctrine, be a gifted teacher, or even a recognized leader in the church in order
to lead a cell group. If a person has demonstrated his or her love for Jesus Christ and if
that person is walking in holiness, cell leadership is a distinct possibility.

Deployment of Women

Most of the most rapidly growing cell churches make extensive use of women in ministry.
This is not a new phenomenon. Back in the days when Wesley turned England upside
down through a powerful small group ministry, the majority of his cell lay leaders were
women (Brown 1992:39).

Today, Paul Cho is the prime example of a cell ministry that was launched by women and
that now uses women as the vast majority of cell leaders (1982:21-32). The women who
lead the cell groups in Cho’s church are not considered authoritative Bible teachers.
Rather, their authority is derived from their submission to pastor Cho’s leadership.
George wisely observes, “If a church focuses its groups as teaching ministries, some
people will have problems sitting under women. But if the groups are to encourage the
“one anothers” of spiritual life, the gender of the person facilitating the meetings or
leading the groups won’t matter (1991:135).

In fact, I have discovered that women can oftentimes guide the group into deeper
communication than men can. Generally speaking, women are better communicators
than men. Since participation that results in more in-depth sharing is one of the major
goals in the cell meeting, women should be called upon to lead groups as much as
possible.

Willingness to Face Failure

Soichiro Honda, the founder of Honda Motor, wrote,

Many people dream of success. To me success can only be achieved through repeated
failure and introspection. Im fact, success represents the 1 percent of your work which
results only from the 99 percent that is called failure (quoted in Peters 1987:315).

Bennis and Nanus have noticed that successful leaders learn from their failures and
become stronger as a result. They say, “…for the successful leader, failure is a beginning,
the springboard of hope” (1985:71). Peters believes that a company should promote
failure. He counsels executives to hold “Hall of Shame” parties, to give rewards to those
who have fouled up recently, to share freely (top executives) about their own failures, etc.
(1987:316-317). Peters promotes fast failure; “Fail and get on with it” is the motto. The
reasoning is clear. Without the freedom to make mistakes, there will be little innovation,
little progress, data will be faked, those at the top will be kept in the dark, little learning
will take place, and the fun will be drained from the company (1987: 320).

These principles from the business world have huge implications for the cell church. The
ever expanding needs of the cell church means that new, untested leadership will be
placed in leadership roles. After all, every leader starts somewhere. Some leaders will fail
and choose to withdraw. This is to be expected, and it is not the end of the world when it
happens. Some groups will be dissolved (note 3). However, the majority will learn from
their mistakes, correct them, and press on.

An over cautious, perfectionist attitude toward leadership must not be allowed to

dominate the cell church today. Although some groups will fail, with the proper control
and administration over the cell groups, we have found that the vast majority of groups
succeed.

Leadership Giftedness
Even though there is an attitude of risk and willingness to trust the Holy Spirit to raise up
new cell leadership, relatively few will ultimately serve in cell leadership positions. During
the Church Growth Lectures at Fuller Seminary in 1984, I was surprised to hear Paul Cho
himself say that only ten percent of his congregation have the proper gifts to be a cell
leader.

He believes that the gift of evangelism is the most important gift for a successful cell
leader to possess. For Cho, only those with the gift of evangelism will ultimately succeed,
and he has come to the conclusion that ten percent of the congregation has this
particular gift. To understand what the gift of evangelism is, Wagner’s definition is helpful,

the gift of evangelist is the special ability that God gives to certain members of the
Body of Christ to share the gospel with unbelievers in such a way that men and
women become Jesus’ disciples and responsible members of the Body of Christ
(1994:157).

After defining the gift, Wagner, like Cho, contends that approximately five to ten percent
of a church’s active members have this gift (1994:160).

Pastor Cho tried for a long time to stir up lay people with the enthusiasm to lead cell
groups, only to discover that after the initial pumped up excitement faded away, many of
the cell leaders became discouraged and could did muster up enough internal vision to
successfully multiply their groups. It wasn’t clear to me how he now finds those with the
gift of evangelism, but he does believe that the successful cell leaders will have that gift
(Cho 1984: lecture).

Although I highly respect Pastor Cho’s opinion, I disagree with his statement that only
those with the gift of evangelism can successfully lead a cell group. In my opinion, this
would be true only if the cell leader was personally responsible to bring the new
members to the cell group. However, the effective cell churches that I have studied
emphasize team evangelism rather than personal evangelism, net fishing versus hook
fishing.

From my analysis of cell churches, I would be more inclined to suggest that a successful
cell leader must excel at mobilization and leadership in order to motivate others to invite
their relatives and close friends. With this in mind, perhaps an effective cell leader might
have the gift of leader, apostle, prophet, pastor, or possibly even one of the serving gifts
(note 4).

Although I disagree with Cho’s contention that cell leadership must have the gift of
evangelism, he might be right about the percentage of lay people that will ultimately
serve in a cell leadership position. This fact, should liberate top leadership in the cell
church from demanding that everyone serve in a cell leadership position. Some lay
people are simply not called, nor gifted for the task. At the same time, like the issue of
God’s sovereignty and our need to evangelize, (note 5) oftentimes it is not initially clear
who will be a successful cell leader. Most of the time, the verdict must wait until the
person actually leads the group (note 6). It is my opinion that since it is not clear which
gifts (and I would add talents and acquired skills) are needed to successfully lead a cell
group, it seems logical to open the door for all lay people who are willing to try. Perhaps
future research (including my own) will provide information that will give greater
specificity to cell leadership selection (note 7).

Chapter 3: Training Models for Cell Leadership

Dale Galloway says it well, “The most important job of the pastor and the pastoral staff is
leadership development, training lay leaders who will build small groups. Leadership
development is essential, and it must be top priority. It cannot be left to chance”
(1995:118). George adds, “Since the whole system depends on trained leaders being
available, the number of groups cannot grow if you are not multiplying the number of
Xs”[cell leader] (1994: 61)..

My interest in leadership development and cell groups is intimately linked with my

passion for church growth. As Wagner so clearly brings out in his landmark book Leading
Your Church To Growth, “In every growing, dynamic church I have studied, I have found a
key person whom God is using to make it happen” (1984:61). This is also true in cell
ministry. Behind a successful cell group is an effective leader (note 8).

In this chapter, my focus turns to leadership training models in the cell church , that is,
how a cell church can effectively, yet rapidly, train leadership to meet the burgeoning
needs of a growing church. I will cover leadership training for new Christians all the way
to cell apprenticeship and internship.

Models for Training New Christians on the Path to Cell Leadership

We have already discussed the urgent need in the cell church to identify potential leaders
in the cell church. Under this section, I will suggest some models for preparing new
believers to become cell leaders.

I will be using the word “training” in this section as opposed to “discipleship”. To me, the
word “training” speaks of movement and direction toward a goal. On the other hand, the
word “discipleship” often provokes images of inward growth and personal sanctification
that is purely qualitative in nature. The training that I’m describing in this paper is goal
oriented and seeks to take the new believer from his present position to a practical,
hands on ministry which contributes to the natural process of church growth.

Under this section, I will analyze two models that are becoming increasingly well known
and probably the most widely promoted at this time. This is largely due to the fact that
Ralph Neighbour has his own publishing house and Bethany World Prayer Center has
become one of the most well attended cell conferences in the world (note 9).

Ralph Neighbour ’s Training Process

Ralph Neighbour has probably done more than anyone to connect new believer training
with cell group ministry. In industry terms, Dr. Neighbour has set the standard. Many cell
churches are either using his material or have adapted it in their own context.

General Training

I recently bought the Track Pack from Touch Publications, Ralph Neighbour’s publishing
house. This pack includes seven discipleship books (booklets) written by Ralph Neighbour
(note 10). These booklets take the new believer from rethinking his value system to
learning to penetrate his own “oikoses” (friends, neighbors, and family) through leading
small groups.

The main characteristic that separates these training manuals from the “garden variety”
discipleship booklets (i.e., Navigator—Campus Crusade variety) is that they are so
intimately linked with the cell group. In the cornerstone booklet, The Arrival Kit, Week
one, Day one informs the new believer,

Your Cell Group will be served in a special way. Some day, when you have matured, you
may also shepherd others as a Cell Leader. There will never be more than fifteen in your
family cell, and you will soon discover that each member is on a spiritual journey with you
(1993:11).

In the above quote, not only does Dr. Neighbour introduce new believer training and cell
group involvement simultaneously, he also plants the seed that someday the new
believer might become a cell group leader.

Most of the material for new believers in the Track Pack is foundational Biblical teaching
designed to disciple new believers. However, Neighbour takes those teachings and gives
them new meaning in the light of the cell group. Take, for example, the Biblical teaching
on fellowship. A quote out of the booklet, Welcome To Your Changed Life, says,
 There’s an event unbelievers look forward to, often called the ‘Happy Hour.’ It’s a time
when friends get together for an hour or so and drink alcoholic spirits to ‘get happy.’
Perhaps you have shared in such events? Christians have the only TRUE ‘Happy Hour!’
It’s a special time, called a ‘Cell Group,’ when they get together to be with their Lord”
(1995:14).

When talking about baptism, he urges the new Christian to talk with his cell leader as
soon as possible (1993:41). When touching the Lord’s Supper, he says, “In your oikos, you
will observe a special meal called ‘The Lord’s Supper’” (1993:41).

The new believer is guided upon a track (a literal railroad track) that attempts to take him
from his worldly value system all the way to conducting small groups and winning his
non-Christians neighbors. With each new stage of ministry, Neighbour emphasizes a
corresponding book or books of the Bible. The following diagram explains the process
better.

TABLE 1: NEIGHBOUR’S DISCIPLESHIP TRACK

(Neighbour 1995:4)
YOUR JOURNEY INTO A LIFETIME OF MINISTRY
1. Rethinking my value system Pentateuch
2. Learning to be a sponsor History/Poetry
3. Learning to use the john 3:16 diagram Major Prophets/Minor Prophets
4. Bringing “Type A” unbelievers to Christ Gospels
5. Being equipped for ministry and spiritual warfare Acts
6. Learning to conduct share/interest groups Pauline Epistles/Regular epistles
7. Learning to penetrate new oikoses Revelation

In my opinion, the strength of Neighbour’s training system does not reside in the
doctrinal/Scriptural teaching of his training material. The Navigators and other like-
minded groups probably have an edge on the market in this area. Rather, the importance
of these materials lie in the fact that Dr. Neighbour is the first one to link new believer
training so intimately with cell group ministry.

Sponsorship

I believe that the most unique, workable contribution of Dr. Neighbour to new believer
training is the concept of sponsorship within the cell group. Sponsorship is much like one
on one discipleship. However, the main difference is that the sponsor (or discipler) comes
from within the cell group and sponsors (disciples) someone who has been assigned to
the same group. However, Neighbour does not only believe that a Sponsor should
 disciple a new Christian. Rather, he believes that every newcomer to the group should
have a sponsor ( Sponsor’s 1995:5) (note 11).

The Sponsor-Sponsee relationship lasts from three to four months. Then the relationship
changes to partnership. It’s during this transitional time that the Sponsor trains the
Sponsee to become a Sponsor of others ( Sponsor’s 1995:5). The Sponsor is supposed to
do at least six things with the Sponsee ( Sponsor’s 1995:22-32). They are:

 Listening
 Interceding
 Modeling
 Teaching
 Setting the Pace or Leading
 Involving the Sponsee with other Christians

As far as I am concerned, the sponsorship idea should be implemented in every cell

group. Cell group leaders cannot do everything. Trying to lead and shepherd the group,
as well as care for the new converts is not only draining but ineffective. This idea, steals
the wealth of Navigator/Campus Crusade knowledge on discipleship, but takes it one step
further. It envelops the new believer in a close knit cell group.

Training for Outreach

Four booklets of the Track Pack focus on teaching the new believer to reach out to non-
Christians. Neighbour believes that the most effective outreach involves reaching friends,
neighbors, and family members which he labels our “oikos”. This is the Greek word for
house or household in the New Testament (1992:60-65). He also distinguishes between
“type A” unbelievers who are familiar with religious customs from “type B” unbelievers
who are “…are not searching for Jesus Christ, and show no interest in Bible study or other
Christian activities (1992:27).

For the “type B” unbelievers, Dr. Neighbour has designed a “non-Christian type” cell group
called Share Groups. These Share Groups do not replace the normal cell groups but
rather serve as an extension or outreach from the regular cell group. Those believers
who start or participate in Share Groups have the dual responsibility of attending their
normal cell group as well as a separate Share Group. Concerning these Share Groups,
Neighbour says, “This group should be free, informal, and spontaneous….It’s important
for all Share Group members to feel they can be themselves” (1991:60).

The idea of Share Groups is a sound one and obviously has been used by Dr. Neighbour
and others very effectively. However, I have personally discovered very few people have
time to be involved in a regular cell group, a celebration service, some type of cell training
activity, and then commit themselves to another activity—in this case, a Share Group. In
other words, I have found this concept more idealistic than practical in the life of a cell
church.

Bethany World Prayer Center

Bethany World Prayer Center holds the most promise for promoting and modeling the
cell church model in the United States (note 12). They have successfully adapted
Neighbour’s training methods for new believers to their own context and situation. First,
it should be noted that from the moment that the new convert enters the church, there is
cell group involvement. The process is best described in the following table format:

TABLE 2: STEPS FROM NEW BELIEVER TO CELL LEADER

(Adapted from Bethany Cell Conference Manual 1996:17)
LEADERSHIP DISCIPLESHIP TRACK
 First, the cell leaders are praying in back throughout the altar call
1. New Believer  Second, the cell leaders hear when the altar call is taking place. They then stand behind the
Orientation  Third, within 24 hours of the person accepting Christ a zone pastor and the cell pastor visit

 This step begins the moment the new believer enters a cell group. It involves nine steps as o
2. Discipleship Track below table

 It involves attending a class on doctrine that is offered on Wednesday night at Bethany Wo

Center. It is my understanding that this class covers essential Bible doctrine.
3. Foundation Class
 After taking the course, the person is ready to be an apprentice in the cell group (step six).

 A cell apprentice is simply one who attends the cell group on a regular basis and has been g
4. Apprentice in
ministry assignment within the cell group.
Touch Group
 This track has not yet been developed
5. Leadership Track
6. Intern in Touch  The intern and the leader work as a team.
Group
 An event in which section leaders, section pastors, and district pastors train potential cell le
7. Leadership Seminar
8. Touch Group  The person is now an official cell leader
Leader

As of June, 1996, Bethany had not yet developed their Leadership Track (Step five). The
most developed part of their new believer training is step two, the Discipleship Track that
begins the moment the new believer arrives at the cell group. The following table better
describe the process that step:

TABLE 3: BETHANY’S INITIAL TRAINING MODEL

(Adapted from Hornsby 1995:25)
THE BETHANY DISCIPLESHIP TRACK
 Step Two
1. Assign Sponsor Bethany tries to match the right sponsor with the person. Men sponsor men and women spo
2. Follow-up and Road to This is an actual visit to the sponsee’s house to determine the spiritual condition of the spon
Maturity interview is given.
3. Are You Going to This is a generic tract (from Christian Equippers) that is much like the four spiritual laws or
Heaven tract step track that leads the non-Christian to make a profession of faith.
A very good tract from Christian Equippers that emphasizes baptism as an act of obedience
4. Water Baptism tract
of our salvation.
This tract ( Christian Equippers) emphasizes the basic disciplines of Chrisitian growth: Wo
5. Follow-up tract
Fellowship, Witnessing, Spiritual Warfare, and the Victorious life.
6. Baptism in the Holy This tract teaches a person that to be baptized in the Spirit, one must speak in tongues. It is
Spirit tract Christian Equippers.
7. Bethany Touch Group
This tract is just about the touch groups at Bethany and how they function
tract
This is a training time. The Sponsor trains the Sponsee how to ask the two salvation questio
8. “Two Question” test
like the E.E. questions).
9. Evangelize with the
Here the Sponsee goes with the Sponsor to penetrate the “oikos” of the Sponsee.
new believer

Like most things at Bethany World Prayer Center, I really like their new believer to cell
leadership training model. Although it is still “under construction”, it seems to be
practical, thorough, and doable. I actually like the idea of using four simple tracts to cover
important Biblical truth rather than paying more money for an in-depth booklet
(Neighbour). It also seems a lot easier to train Sponsors with something as simple as a
tract.

Bethany should be commended for their creativity in combining personal cell group
training with classroom instruction (something that would be unacceptable to some cell
group purists— Ralph Neighbour). Bethany is also the model for effectiveness when it
comes to making immediate contact with the new believer and utilizing the cell leaders
immediately after the altar call.

Although I like their model and do not have any criticisms of it, I believe that it is not wise
for any cell church to follow verbatim someone else’s model of training. Every cell model
has to be adapted to fit the situation, the followers, and the leaders.

Models for Training Cell Leaders and Interns

In this section, I will primarily deal with the latter stages of cell leader training. That is, I
will be describing the various training models for cell leaders. My starting point will be
three of the four training model categories that Lyman Coleman uses in his 1993 manual
on small group ministry (note 13). However, I hope to expand on Coleman’s categories,
offer major corrections, (note 14) and add one more model. I believe that it is useful to
start with Coleman’s categories since most cell leader training will fall under one of them.

Serendipity Model

Serendipity has established itself as being a first class producer of small group material
for both cell leaders and cell group members. I have also found that Lyman Coleman’s
knowledge of small dynamics is the foremost in the field.

Balance between Up-Front and On-Going Training

The Serendipity Model of leadership training requires six sessions of up-front training
with periodic on-going training. That is, the potential leaders are required to take six
seminar type classes before they can lead a small group. Afterwards, they are required to
attend a monthly on-going leadership training meeting. Coleman takes pride in the fact
that his model takes into account the various types of groups in the church. For example,
support groups might receive more training than other groups (Coleman 1993: 5:19). The
requirements in themselves are sound and the once a month ongoing training takes into
account the busy life of the cell leader (note 15). It is my understanding that Coleman
does not promote the Jethro system in his model of small group ministry (notes 16).

Difficulty in Training Such Diverse Leadership

However, I have noticed one major difficulty. Serendipity encourages churches to initiate
a variety of small groups in the church (e.g., sports groups, choir groups, care groups,
etc.). For example, Dr. Coleman says, “It is not easy to categorize small groups. Often,
they have several different goals which cross the lines of categorization” (1993: 11).

Because the groups are so diverse, it is extremely difficult to offer unified training that
will meet the needs of each leader. For example, the leader of a sports team or a choir
group will not need to learn about lesson preparation or how to lead worship in the
group. Those issues are simply not relevant to them. Therefore, I have discovered that
ongoing leadership training in a church that promotes a wide variety of small groups is
very difficult to maintain and make relevant.

Meta Model

In the US the Meta Model of small group ministry seems to have the highest profile due
to the fact that two of the largest churches in the US are using it (WillowCreek and
Saddleback Community Church.

Less Up-Front Training

The Meta model requires less up-front training than the Serendipity approach. Coleman
says, “The up-front training of the Meta model is called an -apprenticeship, and it is
basically the associate, assistant, or co-leader who is ‘mentored’ while they are in the
group” (1993:5:19). George, the philosophical thinker behind the Meta Model, sets forth
his reasoning behind less up-front training in his recent book, The Coming Church
Revolution,

Those who plan training and leadership development in churches tend to overdo
orientation training and under do supervision. Why? Their own educational upbringing
has made them comfortable with orientation training but relatively unfamiliar with the
notion of supervision….any growing Christian…will be able to put together lots of the
pieces on a common-sense basis with only a small amount of instruction (1994: 83).

As a pragmatist, George realizes that no one model is laid in concrete. In other words,
although George would prefer to use an effective model of apprenticeship, he is willing to
change if the apprenticeship is not working. He says,

The poorer the supervision, the richer the orientation has to be. The thicker the
supervision, the thinner the orientation has to be. Adult learning that is rooted in
behavior change opts increasingly in favor of supervision and on the job training
rather than on orientation (1994:84).

More Ongoing Training

To compensate for the lack of up-front training, each cell leader and intern in the Meta
model must attend on-going bimonthly leadership training (note 17). In other words, the
Meta Model requires that the cell leaders spend more time fulfilling on the job training.
Ideally, every other week, they are required to meet in a general leadership training event
called the VHS (Vision, Huddle, and Skill Training).

Cell leaders (both the leader and the intern) learn best through experience and reflection.
George rightly says, …the best possible context anyone has ever discovered for
developing leadership occurs because of a small group” (1994:48). If the small group is
the best context for a leader to gain experience, the bimonthly leadership training
session is the best place for leaders to reflect on their experiences. It is during these
leadership training meetings that the top leadership of the church can help in the training
process (George 1992: 119-152).

Change of Emphasis

In his book, Prepare Your Church for the Future, George strongly emphasizes the
bimonthly leadership gatherings (Vision, Huddle, and Skill Training) He dedicates some
thirty pages to describe these events in detail and how the Jethro system of care (D’s, L’s,
X’s, etc.) ties into these bimonthly leadership training meetings (1992:121-148). In that
book, George is very dogmatic about the necessity of having those bimonthly meetings.
On the other hand, there was very little said about the apprentice system of training
leaders.

However, in George’s most recent book, The Coming Church Revolution, he reverses
gears. Very little is said about the VHS . He even implies that an official VHS gathering is
not even necessary if you are providing the same type of training in another manner
(1994:128). He recommends that a church does not launch the VHS right away as a
program , but rather tries to identify the VHS functions already present in the church
(1994:203). On the other hand, lots of space is dedicated to raising up leadership from
among the lay people in the church. One example will suffice, “…the limiting resource for
most churches’ part of the harvest is usually the lack of trained leaders. The model we
increasingly find in healthy, growing churches is one of apprentice that leads to
leadership (1994:61).

Personal Observations

I personally believe that the change of emphasis from on-going training to apprenticeship
is the result of the difficulty in gathering together leaders from such diverse groups and
trying to offer them something relevant. This was the same criticism that I offered
concerning the Serendipity Model (note 18). As I have studied the Meta Model in five
flagship churches around the US, I have discovered that ongoing training has become
increasingly difficult, if not irrelevant (note 19).

However, it must be added that the Meta Model promotes a strong Jethro system of
leadership (see footnote under Serendipity Model). In my study of Meta Churches in the
US, I noticed an increasing reliance on the Jethro system, due to the difficulty of gathering
the small group leaders together for ongoing training.

Cho Model

According to Lyman Coleman, the Cho model requires no up-front training. Once the cell
group is formed, Coleman says that the leaders are required to attend a weekly training
event where they are given the notes to the pastors and discussion questions for Bible
application (Coleman 1993: 5:19). Coleman then proceeds to talk about what Dale
Galloway does, who Coleman labels as the major as the major advocate of the Cho model
in the US (Coleman 1993: 5:19).

Mistaken Analysis of the Cho Model

 I am not sure how Coleman arrived at these conclusions, but it does not appear that they
are true. First, in Dale Galloway’s recent book on his small group ministry called, The
Small Group Book, he talks about offering an initial training time for cell leaders and
interns that lasts three day event (1995:93). Second, the evidence seems to point to
Galloway being more of an advocate of the Meta Model than the Cho Model (note 20).

If by calling this training system the ‘Cho model’, Coleman is referring to the what Paul
Yonggi Cho actually does in Korea, he is also mistaken.

The Training Cho Actually Offers

Contrary to what Coleman implies, Cho does offer up-front training. Potential cell leaders
must attend an eight-week leadership training course that is taught on Sunday afternoon
in one of Yoida Full Gospel Churches’ small auditoriums (Hurtson 1995:75). Topics
covered in this eight-week course include: cell leader responsibilities, home cell-group
growth, Bible lesson preparation, etc. (Hurtson 1995:215). Cho believes that “…the
success of home cell groups depends on the guidance of the pastor, a trained lay
leadership and continual fellowship with the Holy Spirit” (1981:135).

Neither does Cho offer a weekly training session to his cell leaders at the church (since
1988 this has been discontinued due to the rapid growth). Rather, printed supplemental
materials are available before and after the Wednesday night services (Hurtson
1995:214).

The ongoing training now consists of semiannual cell leader conferences in which pastor
Cho personally addresses the cell leaders. Due to their large number, half of the cell
leaders attend the conference one day, while the other half attend the next day. Practical
tips and vision casting seem to be the main agenda for these conferences (Hurtson 1995:
75). However, the main ongoing training takes place as section leaders spend time with
group leaders both during ministry visits and during the actual group meetings (Hurtson
1995:75).

In summary, the original Cho Model (before it became impractical to train the cell leaders
on a weekly basis) consisted of:

 An eight week training course for potential cell leaders

 Strong implementation of the Jethro System
 Weekly Training for the cell leaders (this has now been cut back to twice per year)
The Cho Model Today

This original Cho model is followed precisely by Bethany World Prayer Center today. The
cell leaders and interns are required to meet every Wednesday night with their section
pastors and district pastors who train them in the cell lessons. Pastor Larry, after
delivering exegetical teaching to the congregation, meets with the cell leaders to pray for
them and stir them up with fresh vision. There is also a required cell leadership training
before one can lead a group. Like in Cho’s church, there is also a healthy Jethro system in
place.

Neighbour’s Training Model

Neighbour’s model of pre-training and ongoing training is unique. From my

understanding of Neighbour, there is no ongoing training after one has begun leading a
cell group. He believes that potential leaders must be trained from within their existing
cell groups through a combination of modeling and personal training (note 21). I believe
that Neighbour does promote a leadership training retreat in which potential cell leaders
are invited. However, my point here is that after the cell leader begins ministering, there
are no ongoing training meetings. Neighbour believes that the only way a cell church can
keep up with the constant need for new cell leadership is if each leader trains new
leaders (1990: 221).

Personal Journey in Cell Training

After describing the four training models, Lyman Coleman refers to the fifth model, that
is, the model that best describes your own personal situation. When my wife and I began
the cell system in Ecuador, I followed a small manual that we received from a fellow
missionary who was the head pastor of a C&MA church in Colombia. As I look back on it,
this manual promoted a very similar approach to the VHS (Vision, Huddle, and Skill
Training) model that is now promoted by Carl George (note 22). Apart from many helpful
hints in the manual, the core principle was holding bimonthly training session with all the
cell leadership present. We followed the general tenor of that model throughout our time
in Ecuador.

Before leaving Ecuador, a key co-worker (a fellow missionary with whom I had worked
side by side in the cell ministry) and I reflected back on our three and one half years s of
cell ministry. Both of us agreed that the bimonthly training sessions were the backbone
of our cell ministry and the key to our success. In my own cell manual, I call this
bimonthly meeting, the motor of the cell group ministry.

Our other ongoing system of training took place through the Jethro model. This idea was
unashamedly stolen from Carl George through his book, Prepare Your Church for the
Future. Following George’s teaching, we appointed D’s (myself), L’s (at one point we had
eleven), X’s (at one time 50 ), and Xa’s (at one time 50). This system offered mixed results.
It really depended on the commitment of the L (overseer of five cell groups), as to
whether or not the cell leaders received proper care.
 Our pre-training developed in two stages. In the initial stages of the cell ministry, I taught
a taught a Sunday School course entitled “How To Lead A Cell Group.” That was my first
attempt to put together a cell manual. Later, when the manual was more fully developed,
I offered a one day seminar for new leaders.

Conclusion on Cell Leadership Training Models

Among the five models discussed under this section, there seems to be more similarity
than dissimilarity, more agreement than disagreement. The following table gives an
overview of the four cell leader training models:

TABLE 4: SUMMARY OF CELL LEADER TRAINING MODELS

SERENDIPITY MODEL META MODEL CHO MODEL NEIGHBOUR

 No formal pre-training  No formal p
 Formal 8 week pre-training  Formal 8 week pre-training
 Apprenticeship within the  Apprenticesh
 No apprentice-ship in the  Apprenticeship within the cell
cell cell
cell  Weekly ongoing training (note
 Bimonthly ongoing training  No ongoing
 Monthly ongoing training 23)
 Well established Jethro  Well establis
 No Jethro system  Well established Jethro system
system system

The Serendipity Model appears to be the weakest in that there is not an emphasis on
apprenticeship within the cell group nor on the Jethro system. I also found Neighbour’s
model to be deficient, due to the lack of formal leadership training and ongoing training,
which I believe are both very important.

The Meta Model and the Cho Model have the most in common. However, the Cho model
includes both formal pre-training as apprenticeship training within the cell group, while
the Meta Model only offers apprenticeship training. With this in mind, it would appear
that the Cho Model offers the most complete system of cell training. It is also true that
the Cho Model has produced the most rapid church growth, which is another factor in its
favor.

Therefore, in summary, an effective cell leader training model should have:

 Some kind of pre-training for potential cell leaders before they begin leading their
groups.
 An apprentice system within the cell group in which potential leaders are in the process
of being trained from the moment they enter the group.
 A Jethro system in which every leader is pastored (note 24).
 Some type of on-going training (this training might be weekly, bimonthly, or monthly).

Chapter 4: Foundational Principles for Cell Leaders

In the last chapter, we discussed various cell leader training models which describe both
the pre-cell leader training as well as post-cell leader training. Now we turn to the content
of the training. What are the essential leadership principles that a cell leader or potential
cell leader needs to know in order to be effective?

Difficulty in Identifying Leadership Characteristics

Before I present some important cell leadership principles, it is important to remember

that lists of effective leadership characteristics abound. I did a comparison of leadership
characteristics listed in five popular leadership books and found a lot of variation. The
following table demonstrates what I am saying:

TABLE 5: LISTS OF EFFECTIVE LEADERSHIP TRAITS BY FIVE AUTHORS

Spiritual
Leadership that Endures in a World Leadership Style of
Leadership Learn to be a Leader Leaders Are
That Changes Jesus
by J. Oswald by G.S. Dobbins by Ted Engs
by John Haggai by Michael Youssef
Sanders
 Discipline
 Vision
 Wisdom
 Decisiveness  Integrity
 Vision  Good health
 Courage  Good rep
 Goal setter  Physically
 Humility  Faithful
 Lover  Courage attractive
 Integrity  Integrity
 Humility  Friendliness  Intelligent
 Humor  Visionary
 Self control  Tradition breaker  Superior
 Patience  Willingne
 Risk taker  Generous education
 Friendship obstacles
 High energy  Truthful  Clear ideals
 Prudence  Ability to
 Perseve-rance  Forgiving  Enthusiastic
 Inspirational correction
 Authority  Perseve-rance
 Decision Maker  Flexible
 Knowledge  Capacity to learn
 Listener  Committe
 Prayer warrior
 Reader
 Organizer

From my study of what other authors had to say about leadership characteristics, I came
up with a wide varieties of answers. I am not saying that such lists are useless, but I am
saying that they are certainly not conclusive. They seem to give validity to what Bennis
and Nanus say, “…leadership is the most studied and least understood topic of any in the
social sciences,…Leadership is like the Abominable Snowman, whose footprints are
everywhere but who is nowhere to be seen” (1985:20).

Actually, I think that one needs to be careful when promoting lists of leadership
characteristics because scholars like Stogdill (1948) and Fielder (1967) have already
demonstrated that leadership effectiveness is not only determined by a series of traits or
characteristics. It is much more complex. The followers, the situation, and the leader
must be studied as a unit to arrive at an accurate picture of effective leadership. Finney’s
comments are instructive here, “A leader emerges from within a certain set of
circumstances at a particular time. The context is all important. A small group can often
be instructive in providing a useful microcosm of a church or other larger assembly of
people” (1989:38).

Biblical Leadership

When considering the content of cell leadership training, I believe that the best place to
start is the authoritative Word of God. In order to avoid simply giving my own opinion
about what made a Bible character effective, I decided to do a study on those passages
which specifically declare God’s requirements for leadership.

Old Testament Principles

The following table presents various principles drawn from the Old Testament where the
text gives clear requirements to leaders:

TABLE 6: LEADERSHIP REQUIREMENTS FROM THE OLD TESTAMENT

II Samuel 23:3 &
Exodus 18:25 Deuteronomy 17:15-20 I Samuel 16:7
53
 God’s election (v.15)
 Committed believer (15)
 Leaders of virtue
 Dependent on God (16-17)  A dedicated heart to
 Delegation of  A reverence fo
 An obedient student of the Bible God
responsibility
(18,19)
 Humility (v.20)

When I do cell training, I know that I need to share the above leadership requirements
because God has explicitly directed them to potential or existing leaders. It seems that
the one requirement that stands out more than any other one is the necessity of
dependence upon God. A cell leader must be continually dependent upon God to give
wisdom, direction, love for the people, and power.

Anyone studying leadership in the Old Testament is obliged to take note of the life of
Nehemiah. The principles derived from the study of Nehemiah’s life can be very

very instructive for cell leadership. With this mind, I studied the man Nehemiah with the
hope of deriving various principles that might be helpful in my training of cell leadership.
Here are the principles that I wrote down:

TABLE 7: PRINCIPLES OF LEADERSHIP FROM NEHEMIAH

TABLE 7: PRINCIPLES OF LEADERSHIP FROM NEHEMIAH
A passion for the glory of God (1:4)
A dynamic life of prayer (1:5-11)
A willingness to fulfill his own prayer (1:11; 4:8,9)
A sacrificial life (2:1-7)
Wise plans (2:4-7)
A contagious vision ( 2:17, 18 & 4:1-14)
A just life ( 5:1-13)
A ministry of teaching ( 8:9, 18)
A hatred of sin (13:25)

Nehemiah is an example of someone who got the job done—from beginning to end. He
possessed God’s passion, was willing to get involved, knew what to get done, how to get it
done, and was able to motivate people toward the fulfillment of his goal. His vision was
so utterly contagious to complete his God-given task, he never allowed obstacles and
difficulties to deter him. Nehemiah’s first class leadership speaks to the cell church today.

New Testament Principles

Using the same technique for the New Testament, I simply included those references
which specifically are directed toward leaders and how they should behave. The following
table explains those passages:

TABLE 8: LEADERSHIP REQUIREMENTS FROM THE NEW TESTAMENT

Timothy 3:1-13
Mark 10:42-45 Acts 6:3 Romans 12:8
(Titus 1: 5-10)
 Social qualit
 A pure life (3
 A good reput
 Moral qualit
 ‘husband of o
 ‘not given to
 Mental quali
 Domination is the world’s leadership style  A good testimony
 ‘respectable’
 Servanthood is the leadership style of the disciple  Filled with the Spirit  Diligence
 ‘self controlle
 Service through the cell ministry  Filled with wisdom
 ‘Able to teach
 Personal qua
 Gentle (3:3)
 Hospitable (3
 Not a lover of
 Domestic qua
 house in orde
One characteristic of leadership that is unique to the New Testament is the concept of
servanthood. Jesus modeled this attitude so perfectly when he washed the feet of His
disciples (John 13). This characteristic is also highly desirable in the cell leadership.

Steve Barker points out,

To begin a cell group requires lots of service. Someone must decide who, when,
where, why and how. This means that someone has to make the calls, find the house,
set up the chairs, make the coffee, remind the people of the meeting, and introduce
everyone. Oftentimes it is a job without appreciation- but absolutely necessary. The
service required before the actual cell meeting begins often makes the difference
between the success or failure of the group (1985:44).

Effective leadership in the cell group requires a huge amount of service. Although it is
always good to delegate, ultimately the cell leader is responsible for the activities in the
group, the order of the meeting, where the group will meet, the refreshments, follow-up
on the newcomers, etc.

Essential Church Growth Qualities

As I stated at the beginning, this present study is biased toward church growth
leadership. It is my conviction that the best type of cell leadership is church growth
oriented. Bishop George Carey says,

You show me a growing church, where people are being added o the faith and growing in
it, and you will be showing me effective leadership…Churches and fellowships grow
because of visionary leadership. Conversely, when churches loses heart and fade away,
often, although not always, it is connected with ‘leaders’ who cannot lead (forward in
Finney 1989:ix).

As part of the larger church growth movement, much of the success within the cell-based
structure is due to church growth leadership. Normally, the top leadership has
implemented the cell ministry because they are interested in ever expanding church
growth. The most effective cell leaders are those who earnestly desire that their cell
multiply. The following are some of the foundational church growth qualities that I have
embraced and urge cell leadership to internalize and practice.

Goal Setting

I am a strong believer in goal setting. I will even be so bold to say that effective goal
setting is the primary catalyst behind successful church growth leadership. I believe that
in order for cell groups to multiply rapidly, the cell leader must set bold, clear goals for
the group. It is my strong suspicion that those cell leaders who have specific goals will
multiply more rapidly than those who do not.

Donald McGavran, the father of church growth, states, Nothing focuses effort like setting
a goal (1990: 265). In his study on leadership, Ted Engstrom concurs, “The best leaders
always had a planned course, specific goals, and written objectives. They had in mind the
direction in which they wanted to go…”(1976:106).

This confirms two significant research projects that measured church growth and
direction in leadership. First, John Wesley Hall Jr., who received his Ph.D. from Fuller
Seminary, studied urban church leadership in Latin American. John performed an in-
depth statistical analysis of pastors from both large and small urban churches
throughout Latin America. The statistics showed clearly that pastors of larger churches
were directive and future oriented in their leadership approach (1992:171-172). Second,
Kirk Hadaway performed a survey in which he discovered that sixty-nine percent of
growing churches set membership goals, as compared to forty-two percent of plateaued
churches and thirty-two percent for declining churches. He concludes,

Growing churches are goal-directed. They set measurable goals for attendance,
Sunday School classes, revivals, and for many other areas….Setting goals helps
churches to grow….Goals provide direction and ensure that priorities (which flow out
of purpose) are acted upon….Challenging goals have the potential for producing
motivation and enthusiasm. Big plans create a sense of excitement if they are
consistent with the mission and vision of a congregation and are not see as totally
impossible” (1994:120-121).

This decisiveness that characterizes effective leadership must be connected with clear,
reachable goals. Engstrom supports this conclusion. He discovered that the most
effective goals were very reachable. Referring to a leader’s goals, he goes on to say, “They
[goals] must be reachable within a particular time frame… “(1976:139). Hocking advises
leaders to, “Set deadlines for your goals. When is a project completed? Most leaders find
that they are more productive when they have deadlines” (1991:248). I would also add
that goals should be visible (note 25). Tom Peter gives this same advise in his book,
Thriving On Chaos (1987:91).

However, many leaders refuse to make goals. They behave like the person who shot the
arrow and then drew the bulls eye around the place where the arrow landed. In other
words, there is no goal, no bulls eye out in front. These leaders meander aimlessly and
accept whatever happens–often very little. Talking about goal less leadership in
plateaued churches, Hadaway writes,
 …the pastor and laity in these churches may be working just as hard as their
counterparts in growing congregations. Yet there is something lacking. The
organization is not going anywhere, it is only seeking to maintain itself, rather than
striving to become something better and to reach even more person with the gospel.
Goals, when they exist at all, tend to be maintenance oriented rather than dealing with
membership, attendance, and outreach (1991:111-112)

One thing that I have noticed about Paul Yonggi Cho is that he is extremely focused. He
knows where his church is going and how it will get there. He is also very committed to
setting church growth goals. In fact he believes that it is essential for a church growth
leader to set clear, measurable goals (1984:144-204). Cho says, “The number-one
requirement for having real growth—unlimited church growth—is to set goals”
(1982:162). He recommends four principles for setting goals:

 Set specific goals

 Dream about those goals
 Proclaim those goals to the church
 Prepare for the fulfillment of the goals

In training cell leadership these four basic steps are a good place to start. Each cell leader
should know when (it is preferable to have the exact date) the group is going to give birth
to another group (note 26). The cell leader should then dream about that goal, proclaim
the goal to the cell members and top leadership, and make all the needed preparations
(as if the goal was definitely going to become a reality).

Cho believes so much in this principle that he requires that his cell leaders practice it as
well. Referring to the cell leaders in Cho’s church, Karen Hurtson writes, “Each cell leader
is to pray that God will give him a specific number he and his group are to win to Jesus
Christ that year” (1995:101).

John Mallison, the Australian small group expert, recommends that goal setting can be
aided by the group claiming the verse, ‘Unless the grain of wheat falls into the earth and
dies, it remains alone; but if it dies, it bears much fruit’ (John 12:24). Of course, by that
verse, he is referring to a group dying (not staying together) in order to give birth to a new
one. He writes,

Let the goal be to grow to 10 or 12 members by the end of the first year….This
becomes the group’s motivation for their life together—to grow to the point where
they lose their original identity by dividing at the end of twelve months, to become the
basis for two more groups with the same goal. As this process is repeated, so the
redemptive fellowship of the original small group is multiplied (1989:22).
 Church Growth Attitudes

Along with goal setting, church growth teaches that there are three essential attitudes for
leaders to possess. They are:

 Obedience
 This is obedience to the Word of God. Biblical obedience is primary. For this reason, I
covered the Biblical principles of leadership first.
 Optimism

There were twelve leaders who went to spy out the promised land (Numbers 13, 14). All
of them saw the giants and were faced with the same reality. However, only two of them
saw beyond the problem to the power of God. It was Joshua and Caleb who maintained
an attitude of optimism and urged the Israelites to trust God to defeat the giants
(Numbers 13:30-33).

Optimistic cell leaders are able to see beyond the many obstacles that confront them
week after week. They have the faith to lay hold on the God who “…calls things that are
not as though they were” (Romans 4:17). George Barna did a survey among leadership in
rapidly growing churches. He noticed this pattern,

In the churches that have grown rapidly, the leaders have learned to dream and have the
faith that the obstacles are opportunities. Negative attitudes are not permitted to
influence these leaders…They believe that God can do anything and for this reason they
make great plans and goals (1991:32,38).

On the other hand, cell leaders do get discouraged. Oftentimes, they are ready to throw
in the towel. For this reason, the ongoing training sessions are exceedingly important
(note 27).

Pragmatism

It was while reading Donald McGavran’s foundational work, Understanding Church

Growth that I became a church growth enthusiast. McGavran’s heartbeat for a lost world
won me over. I became convinced that church growth was a legitimate discipline that was
committed to evangelizing a lost world.

In my opinion, if there is one value that stands out about Donald McGavran, it was his
commitment to pragmatism. He writes,

Nothing hurts missions overseas so much as continuing methods, institutions, and

policies which ought to bring men to Christ–but don’t; which ought to multiply
 churches–but don’t; which ought to improve society–but don’t. We teach men to be
ruthless in regard to method. If it does not work to the glory of God and the extension
of Christ’s church, throw it away and get something which does. As to methods, we are
fiercely pragmatic–doctrine is something entirely different (quoted in Wagner
1973:146, 147).

I do not believe that there is one “right way” to lead a cell group. The “right way” is the
one that edifies the saints and attracts non-Christians to the group. If the cell leader has
managed to multiply his group, he or she has done it the “right way”. This pragmatic
attitude characterized the life and ministry of John Wesley. Wilke notes,

John Wesley changed his structures and methods, almost against his will, in order to save
souls. He didn’t want to use women, but he did in exceptional circumstances. The
‘exceptional’ became normal. He didn’t want to use lay pastors, but he did. They were
able to reach the unbelievers. He didn’t want to preach in the open air, but he did so that
more might hear the Word of God (Wilke 1986:59).

Tom Peters takes pragmatism one step farther when he says, “The best leaders…are the
best ‘note-takers’, the best ‘askers,’ the best learners. They are shameless thieves”
(1987:284). Instead of inventing something on your own, Peters recommends the title,
“Swiped from the Best with Pride” (1987:284). Cell leaders do well to take this advice by
stealing any information, methodology, or leadership style that will ultimately lead to the
multiplication of the cell group.

Visionary Leadership

Vision is one of those qualities that everyone want to have, but no one really
understands. Due to my lack of clarity on the subject, I often talk about vision, goal
setting, optimism, and faith interchangeably. And yes, there are many similarities. Yet,
there does seem to be one thing about vision which everyone agrees upon—it is the one
characteristic that all church growth leaders possess (Barna 1992:12). If this is true, it
behooves us to understand what vision is and then to pass it on to cell leadership.

Toward a Definition of Vision

When George Barna studied User Friendly Churches (1992), he became so impressed by
the relationship between church growth and visionary leadership that he wrote a book
on the subject entitled, The Power of Vision. In it, he describes vision this way,

Vision is a picture held in your mind’s eye of the way things could or should be in the
days ahead. Vision connotes a visual reality, a portrait of conditions that do not exist
currently. This picture is internalized and personal (1992:29).
The “picture in your mind’s eye” sounds strangely like what Paul Cho promotes in his
landmark book, The Fourth Dimension. Vision lies in the realm of the future and involves
our dreams and aspirations. Bennis and Nanus state,

To choose a direction, a leader must first have developed a mental image of a possible
and desirable future state of the organization. This image, which we call a vision, may be
as vague as a dream or as precise as a goal or mission statement. The critical point is that
a vision articulates a view of a realistic, credible, attractive future for the organization, a
condition that is better in some important ways than what now exists

God-inspired Visions

These dreams and visions are not concocted by our own human whims and emotions;
rather they come from God. William Beckham writes,

Vision in a Kingdom sense means passion, calling, a compulsion from God, an

oughtness. This kind of vision is not something I catch but something that catches me.
I do not act upon this vision, it acts upon me….A vision is something working in our
lives, not something we are working on (1995:223).

If God is the one who imparts dreams and vision, we must remember that His dreams are
oftentimes much larger than our own. He has the means to accomplish any dream that
He initiates. Barna says,

…His dreams are bigger than yours and that they call for you to expand the size of
your mental playing field to accommodate His vision…Dreaming big, through God’s
enablement, is also one means of allowing the church to see and to reflect God’s
power and majesty (1992:107).

Perhaps vision can be best described best in terms of the architect and the construction
workers. Before the actual construction can begin, there must be a blueprint. The
blueprint comes first; then the construction. This is the lesson that Stephen Covey would
have us to capture. He refers to vision as the first creation, the blueprint that must first
appear before reality comes into being. Covey believes that it is the leader’s first task to
nurture this first creation in the mind (1989:101ff).

Vision Separates Leaders from Managers

It is this distinction between the initial dream and the actual fulfillment that, perhaps
more than any other trait, separates leaders from managers. The leader spends his time
with the first creation, the vision. He meditates on the vision, he broadens it, he clarifies
it, he synthesizes it, and he communicates it. The manager on the other hand is like the
construction worker who follows the blueprint, who manages the existing direction.
Bennis and Nanus state,

We have here [vision] one of the clearest distinctions between the leader and the
manager. By focusing attention on a vision, the leader operates on the emotional and
spiritual resources of the organization, on its values, commitment, and aspirations. The
manager by contrast, operates on the physical resources of the organization,…(1985:92).

Cell leaders should be encouraged to dream about their cell groups, to ask God to show
them His desired direction for the group. This dreaming should cover the raising up of
future cell leaders, the multiplication of the cell group, and the spiritual communion
among members of the group. The cell leader should not spend all of his time doing the
work of the ministry, at the expense spending time before the Lord. Perhaps, this is why
leaders who pray often seem to be more effective in cell multiplication—they’ve spent
more time receiving God’s vision for their cell group (note 28). Barna says, “…the vision-
capturing process may be an ordeal. Hours and hours will be spent in prayer, in study,
….Some leaders find this period very lonely” (1994:148).

Communicating Vision

Effective leaders not only meditate on their vision, they also clarify it so that the followers
will respond. Bennis and Nanus say, “Leaders are only as powerful as the ideas they can
communicate” (1985:107). This is not an easy task. Followers are bombarded with a wide
array of images, signals, forecasts, and alternatives. However, this is where the genius of
leadership lies. The effective leaders are able to take from the wide array of ideas and
clarify a vision for the future which is easy to understand, desirable, and energizing
(Bennis and Nanus 1985:103).

This clarification might be in the form of pithy phrases or pictures. Bennis and Nanus call
it the ability of a leader to “position” the vision in the hearts and minds of the followers.
For example, Ray Kroc the driving force behind McDonald’s Hamburgers requires every
executive office to carry this sign,

Nothing in the world can take the place of persistence

Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful men with great talent

Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb

Education will not; the world is full of educated derelicts

 Persistence, determination alone are omnipotent

(Bennis & Nanus 1985:45).

Rick Warren says, “The #1 task of leadership is to continually clarify and communicate the
purpose of the organization (Warren 1995:10). He understands that great leaders use
symbols and slogans to communicate their vision. In his popular church growth seminars,
he makes a strong plea for pastors to clearly communicate their vision through slogans,
symbols, stories, and Scriptures (note 29). After the vision has been clarified and made
simple enough so that the followers can comprehend it, effective leaders use every
opportunity to communicate it. Barna says, “Those leaders who have been most
successful contend that you must take advantage of all opportunities, at all times, to
share the vision (1994:143).

The Practical Side of Vision

Vision should not be considered only some esoteric, spiritual experience. There are some
very practical considerations as well. First, a vision must be realistic and not overly
idealistic or the followers will become disinterested (Nanus 1992:168) (note 30). Second, a
vision must change to adapt to an ever-changing context. In his book, Visionary
Leadership, Burt Nanus talks about vision and change (1992:162-163). He believes that a
vision which is not adjusted to reality will probably fizzle out. To avoid this, the vision
should be monitored and tracked (1992:159-161). Peters notes, “The vision must act as a
compass in a wild and stormy sea and, like a compass, it loses its value if it’s not adjusted
to take account of its surroundings” (1987:488).

Finally, dreaming or having a vision is never an end in itself. Successful leaders all seem to
have this one thing in common. They are able to translate intention into reality and to
sustain it (Bennis and Nanus 1985:226). They are not content with merely dreaming. They
must see their dreams turn into reality.

Vision and Cell Multiplication

Multiplication does not naturally happen. Just the opposite. The actual tendency is for cell
groups to look inward. Close relationships have developed; fun times have been shared.
Why even think about forming a new group? It is precisely at this point that without a
vision the people perish (Proverbs 28:19). It is here that the vision for cell multiplication is
absolutely necessary. This vision can only come from one place: Leadership. I’m referring
to top leadership, section leaders (L’s), cell leaders, and intern leaders.

Cells will not multiply in the church unless the top leadership (pastoral team) intentionally
motivate the cells leaders to make cell multiplication the chief priority. This primarily
takes place in the ongoing training times, but it also should be heard in the
announcements, the sermon, and the award ceremonies (in honor of cell groups that
have given birth) Again, the goal of the top leadership is to instill this vision for cell
multiplication into the thinking of the cell leaders. Ultimately, the cell leaders are the
ground troops who make it happen.

How do the cell leaders actually make it happen? I’m sure there are many factors. My field
research will largely be dedicated to isolating some of those variables. However, I suspect
that much of it has to do with expectation that come from the God-given vision. By faith,
the cell leader expects that his group will multiply and constantly communicates this
expectation with the members of the cell. It is not enough to dream and pray. The
dreaming and praying must lead to expectation that results in practical step by step
planning (Cho 1982:166). In commenting on the miracle of Paul Cho’s church and how it
grew from twenty small groups to fifty thousand small groups, Hadaway says, “…the
numbers continued to grow because a growth strategy was built into each cell group”
(1987:19).

It is this type of ‘built in strategy’ or ‘ genetic code’ that is placed into the each cell group
through the leader’s vision and dreams. Karen Hurtson talks about one cell leader named
Pablo, who shares with the group his vision for multiplication before every meeting. The
people in Pablo’s group have a very positive idea about cell group multiplication. They see
the multiplication of their group as a sign of success (Hurtson 1995:12). Karen Hurtson
writes about another group in Shreveport, Louisiana, that baked a cake and had a party
before giving birth to a daughter cell. Hurtson comments, “…they understood that
multiplying was a sign that their group had been effective, an event worth celebrating”
(Hurtson 1995:12) (note 31).

The Devotional Life of a Leader

If there was one discipline that I could instill in the life of every cell leader, it would be the
discipline of having regular, daily devotions. I personally believe that this is the most
important discipline of the Christian life. I believe that all of my “successes” (family,
ministry, and life in general) can be traced back to my daily devotional life. It is during my
time with Jesus that he transforms me, feeds me, directs me, and shows me new
revelation. ChuaWeeHian writes, “Leadership is exciting and exacting, and spiritual
leaders have to give themselves unstintingly to meet the needs of their people. Unless
our inner lives are renewed and replenished, there will be little depth to our ministry”
(1987:94).

As the cell leader spends daily time with the King of Kings, he or she will be renewed with
optimism, filled with fresh vision, enabled to plan more effectively, and receive new
 guidance for the cell group. One of the questions that I will be asking cell leaders in Latin
America is about their daily quiet times in order to see if there is a connection between
this time and cell multiplication. I suspect that there is.

The Pastoral Role of the Cell Leader

Some people have trouble calling cell leaders “pastors”. I do not. It is my conviction that
cell group are mini-churches within the larger local church structure, and that the pastors
of these mini-churches are the cell leaders (note 32). After all, the cell leaders truly do the
work of a pastor. The cell pastor fulfills every Biblical principle required of a pastor:

 Care for the sheep (Acts 20: 28,29)

 The cell leader must visit, counsel, and pray for the sick flock. It is his responsibility to
care for his cell like a shepherd cares for his flock.
 Know the sheep (John 10: 14,15 )
 Effective cell leaders get to know each person who enters the group. Neighbour
recommends that the cell leader conducts an interview with the new member. He
says,
 Nothing can substitute for personal time with each member of your flock! It will be in
such private times that you will discern their value systems and deepest needs. While
you will usually have your Intern at your side whey you visit, there will be times when
more private sessions may help you gain special insights into each persons (1992:42).
 Seek the sheep (Luke 15:4)
 Jesus talks about leaving the flock of one hundred sheep to seek the one that has
gone astray. Knowing that a Satanic dominated world is always at work in the lives of
the cell members, a true shepherd will go after the sheep when they cease to attend.
 Feed the sheep (Psalm 23: 1-3)
 Although the cell group is not a Bible study, the Word of God always has a central
place. Normally, the lessons are based upon passages from Scripture that have been
broken down into relevant application questions. Oftentimes, the cell leader must
spend more times meditating on the Scripture beforehand for a cell lesson than a
Bible Study/Sunday School lesson. The cell leader must know the passage so well that
he can lovingly draw the group into clear understanding of how the Bible applies to
their daily lives. In this way, the sheep are fed and leave the cell group satisfied.
 Watch out for the sheep (John 10:10, Ephesians 6:12)

Satan walks about like a roaring lion hoping to devour God’s flock (I Peter 5:8,9). In many
churches, Satan has free reign to attack God’s flock because the span of care between lay
person and pastor is huge. In the cell church, every ten members is under the care and
guidance of the cell pastor and the cell intern, who are responsible to protect their sheep.
Paul’s advice to the pastors in Ephesus is helpful to every cell leader,
Keep watch over yourselves and all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you
overseers. Be shepherds of the church of God, which he bought with his own blood. I
know that after I leave, savage wolves will come in among you and will not spare the
flock. Even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth in order to draw
away disciples after them. So be on your guard! (Acts 20:28-31).

Satan doesn’t only attack from without; he also raises up self-proclaimed leaders from
within who use a Christian small group gatherings to create division with the goal of
attracting a following. Problem people are common in small groups and the cell shepherd
must be careful that their behavior does not negatively affect his cell flock (George
1990:105, 110).

The Communication Role of the Cell Leader

The cell leader has a unique role. His job is not to preach, teach, nor lead a service.
Rather, the goal is communication, interaction, and participation among the members of
the group. Because of this, I have found that the more training that a potential or
experienced cell leader can receive in the art of small group dynamics, (note 33) the more
effective she will be as a leader. David Hocking says, “Communication is the name of the
game! It’s not an option or a creative alternative—it’s essential for good leadership!
Without communication, leadership cannot exist” (1991: 56).

Create Responsiveness

The leader would be wise to note that his actions, attitudes, and responsiveness will
either stimulate others to share and communicate or cut them off (Hamlin 1990:51-80).
This responsiveness is often communicated through gestures of the cell leader. Does the
cell leader respond with a smile, a nod of the head, an offer to help or does he have a
scowl on his face, show little responsiveness, and delay acting upon the needs of those
present. The leaders own responsiveness through actions and gestures will set the tone
of the cell meetings.

Another essential link to creating responsiveness is listening. One chapter in Tom Peters
book, Thriving On Chaos, is called ”Become Obsessed With Listening”. He understands
that for a company to make it in such a competitive, ever-changing world, it must know
the needs of its customers and respond accordingly. Listening is the key that provides
needed customer information. Peters says, “Listening to customers must become
everyone’s business. With most competitors moving ever faster, the race will go to those
who listen (and respond) most intently” (1987:176).

The leader must have the same attitude in the cell group. What the cell members have to
say during the cell meeting is the most important part. And cell members know when the
cell leader has listening or not listened carefully. Stephen Covey hits a common flaw in
our human nature when he says, “Most people do not listen to understand; They listen in
order to answer. While the other is talking, they are preparing their reply” (1989:239).
How often have I watched a cell leader rustling through his notes in preparation for the
next question, while a cell member was attempting to answer the question raised by the
cell leader. When the cell member senses that the leader is not listening he or she will be
hesitant to respond to the next question.

Do not Dominate the Cell Meeting

This is where most cell leaders fail. I cannot count the number of small groups that I have
attended in which the cell leader has controlled and dominated the entire meeting (note
34). The cell was more like a mini-Sunday church service with the pastor performing his
preaching role.

In contrast, effective cell leaders are communicators. His goal is to draw out the other cell
members. In Ecuador, I remember asking one of my key section leaders to speak at one
of our leadership training meetings. He told the cell leaders present that the goal of the
leader during the cell meeting is to talk ten percent of the time and stir up the members
to speak ninety percent of the time. Perhaps, these figures are high, but the point is clear.

The following table presents principles that are helpful reminders to cell leaders seeking
to lead their groups into greater discussion and participation:

TABLE 9: PRINCIPLES TO INITIATE GREATER CELL PARTICIPATION

 The leader should not answer her own questions  Give others a chance to answer

 After asking the questions, the leader should give the group
 Normally people to think through a number of p
time to think

 The leader should not fear silence in the group  Cell leaders tend to fear silence more than the ce

 After the first response, the cell leader should ask the group if  Some people get warmed up slower than others.
there are additional responses should not move on too quickly.

Maintain the Flow of Participation

In order to maintain the flow of communication among all participants in the cell group,
the cell leader should be trained concerning how to draw out more participation. She
must know how to tone down the talkers and draw out the non-talkers. Richard Price and
Pat Springle wisely advice,
 Excessive talkers will drain the life of a group. First, no one has an opportunity to
contribute while they are talking. Second group members will come to resent his or her
comment and behaviors….As the leader, you need to deal with the situation created by
the excessive talker. You can begin with a subtle approach, but later you may need to be
more direct 1991:116, 117).

The subtle approach involves:

 Sitting next to the one who talks to much in order to give the person less eye contact
 Calling on other people to give their opinion
 Redirecting the conversation away from the talker when he or she pauses

However, if the indirect route does not produce results, ultimately the leader must
directly deal with the talker. First, one on one, and if that doesn’t work, the leader will
need to inform the section leader.

 On the other hand, there are those who have more trouble communicating their
thoughts and feelings. The leader can draw out these people by:
 Looking at them more often during the cell meeting
 Calling upon them by name to comment on the topic

Guide the Group into Deeper Levels of Communication

Although the cell meeting does not have to be a “feeling oriented” meeting, there should
be transparency. Perhaps, this word transparency or intimacy helps to distinguish
between the Sunday celebration service and he cell group. During he celebration time, it
is okay to be unknown and lost in the crowd. In the cell group, each person becomes
known.

The cell group should provide the atmosphere in which each person is free to express his
or her true self. At first, the sharing might cover the latest weather or sports. However,
the cell leader should direct the conversation to deeper levels. There are several way to
do this.

First the leader herself should know about the various levels of communication. Judy
Hamlin explains these various levels in the following manner (1990:54-57):

 Level One: Climate, family, etc.

 Level Two: Information or facts
 Level Three: Ideas and opinions
 Level Four: Feelings
 Level Five: Sharing what is truly happening in our lives
She gives an excellent example of these various levels in the following table:

TABLE 10: ILLUSTRATION OF THE VARIOUS LEVELS OF COMMUNICATION

LEVEL I LEVEL II LEVEL III & IV LEVEL V
Mary: Hi
Rebecca, How
was the
weather in
Florida? Rebecca: Yes, I did, but you know I was Mary: Yes, for me it is a very sad Rebecca: Fo
thinking about the famine in Ethiopia situation. When I see all the famine is n
Rebecca: Most and it really made me think about the hungry people on television, it that I just s
of the time it serious problems in the world. Do you really makes me sad. Especially television. M
was just great. think much about the fact that many because we’re not doing more to became an
people die for lack of food? the change the situation.. month , she
Mary: You
must have
had a great
time.

Understanding the levels of communication will help the cell leader to know where to go.
However, transparency will never happen unless the leader herself is willing to share
some of her own deep struggles. If the leader always wants to give the best impression of
herself, the other cell members will do likewise. Hocking says,

Learn to admit your mistakes in the presence of the group and to apologize sincerely
when things go wrong or do not turn out the way you expected….admitting failure in the
midst of success is a key to good leadership. Learn to be open and honest before others.
They’ll love you for it (or at least fall over backwards out of shock!) (1991:63).

Respond Properly to Each Member

I touched on this point earlier, but it is so important that it deserves more analysis. The
leader must be careful to give a positive answer to the one who responds. If the cell
leader criticizes someone’s response, others will be more hesitant to respond (note 35).
There is always a way to respond positively, even if someone’s answer is wrong.

It is also helpful for the leader to give a brief summary of the responses before moving
on to the next question. This will give a sense of finality to the discussion.

Ask Stimulating Questions

 If participation is so important in the cell group, it behooves the cell leader to make sure
that her questions are interesting. At Bethany World Prayer Center, the questions are
prepared by Pastor Larry Stockstill, but they are tested in a small group before being
presented to the cell leader. This is the ideal.

The leader should at least have in mind two principles about the questions that she asks:

 Open-ended questions are preferable to closed-ended questions.

 There are might be a few questions that illicit a yes/no, right/wrong response, but the
majority of the questions should allow the cell members to share their opinions and
experiences.
 Application questions are preferable to observation/interpretation questions.
 Proper Bible study involves Observation, Interpretation, and Application. Although all
are essential to good Bible Study, in the cell group, application is primary (note 36).
Therefore, if the passage is about forgiveness, the questions should allow the cell
members to share experiences when they needed to forgive someone or when they
felt forgiven, etc.

Conclusion

Rather, than an information gathering time or an adult Bible study, the cell group is a
dynamic event in which the “church can be and experience the church” while ministering
one to another. The cell leader’s chief role is to guide the group into participation and
interaction which leads to true Christian fellowship (note 37). This is not an easy task.
North American culture places a high value on personal sharing and vulnerability, but this
is not the case in Latin America. In Latin America, there is more ‘image’ pressure (tough
guy) that hinders the Latin American from opening up. However, in both cultures, the
more a perspective cell leader can learn about small group dynamics the better equipped
he or she will be in successful cell leadership.

Chapter 5: Helpful Paradigms for Top Leadership in Cell Ministry

In the last chapter, I had cell leaders in mind when setting forth various leadership
principles. Here, I move up one level to top leadership (i.e., section leaders, zone leaders,
district leaders, and senior pastors). This is primarily because the following paradigms
only apply best to upper level leadership (e.g., the Shepherd/Rancher concept).

Shepherd/Rancher Paradigm

The Shepherd/Rancher concept was first coined by Lyle E. Schaller (Wagner 1984:59). This
paradigm has many similarities to the Jethro model, but perhaps is easier to grasp—
especially for pastors who are trying to pastor their congregation on their own. The
background of this concept is the real world of pastors and ranchers. Simply put, a pastor
cares for individual sheep while a rancher cares for those who are caring for the sheep. A
pastor of a single flock of sheep gives individual attention to each of the sheep in the
flock. Such a pastor is limited by his physical capacity to care for the sheep. In contrast a
rancher has a number of pastors or sheep hands under his care who do the actual work
of shepherding the flock. Both the shepherd and the rancher care for the sheep; the
difference is that one does the actual caring and the other administer those who do the
actual caring.

Span of Care

Most pastors in North America and Latin America behave like pastors of individual flocks.
They feel responsible to care for each and every sheep under them. However, they can
only physically and spiritually care for so many before the task becomes unmanageable.
How many people can an individual pastor truly care for? Some would say up to two
hundred people (Wagner 1984:58). However, Carl George disagrees. After talking about
how most lay people depend on the pastor figure, he says,

The underlying assumption behind these attitudes is that a pastor or skilled lay leader
can provide adequate care for a group of 50-100. In reality, he or she cannot. What
actually transpires is a limited intimacy and a limited accountability. Over time, many
people grow dissatisfied and disillusioned, not understanding why it’s so hard to go
deeper in feelings of caring and belong (1990:67).

My point here is that even if an individual pastor thinks that he can care for an entire
congregation, in reality he or she cannot provide adequate care for the entire flock.

If a pastor tries to care for the entire church by himself, studies have proven that the
church will probably not grow beyond two hundred people. Peter Wagner says, “But in
order to get through the 200 barrier and sustain a healthy rate of growth, the pastor
must be willing to pay a price too high for some: he or she must be willing to shift from a
shepherd mode to a rancher mode” (1984:58-59).

Transitioning from Shepherd to Rancher

To better understand the transition process from pastor to rancher, it is helpful to

examine the characteristics of both pastor and rancher. The following table helps us to
see the differences:

TABLE 11: CHARACTERISTICS OF PASTOR VERSUS RANCHER

(Adapted from George 1993:85-108)
Traditional Pastor Rancher
 Tries to personally satisfy all of the needs
 Believes that he is responsible for everything
 Participates in every meeting
 Depends on the compliments of the others
 Does not delegate much
 His vision is limited by what he can do
 See the congregation as individuals and not as groups of 
people
 Does not possess clear church growth goals for the
church.
 Focuses on small groups to care for the church
 Is the leader of the church and is not afraid of making c
 Delegates with flexibility. Is more concerned with the r
process
 Is able to say NO to ministry opportunities, if there is s
can do it.
Creates roles for the congregation to fill
 Wants the people to be free from dependence upon him
 Is an excellent administrator. Reserves time for plannin
 Raises up and trains the leaders of the small groups

There are several key changes that must be made if a pastor is going to move from being
the sole pastor to a rancher. First, he must be willing to delegate. This is very difficult for
many pastors today. A pastor’s self worth is often derived from the dependence that the
congregations displays towards him. There is a feeling that the church could not go on
without him or her. However, to become a rancher, there must be the willingness to
pastor the church through other people. Today’s ranchers, or large church pastors, still
have a heart for the sheep. However, they like physical ranchers, realize that they must
do it through under shepherds.

A second major change is to train lay people to do the work of the ministry. This is
Scriptural. Paul says in Ephesians 4: 11,12, It was he who gave some…to be pastors and
teachers, to prepare God’s people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be
built up.” According to these verses, a pastor’s role is to train others to do the work of the
ministry. The opposite is also true. The pastor must not do it all himself. A true rancher
will spend the majority of his time training others (George 1993:105).

Ranchers in the Cell Church Today

I believe that the rancher paradigm is uniquely suited for cell ministry today. George
wisely says, “The goal of the pastor whose church is based on cells is to pastor those who
are pastoring the church” (1993:196). In the cell church, the senior pastor does not even
attempt to develop face to face, pastoral relationships with individual members of the
congregation. Rather, he is committed to meeting face to face with those who are caring
for those who are caring for the congregation (note 39). This is why it is not uncommon to
hear of cell churches that have between 30,000 and 700,000 people. In these churches
there is a hierarchical system of care which touches lives in a personal way. I believe that
the cell church offers the best hope for smoothly transitioning a pastor from the
Shepherd Motif to the Rancher Motif.

Situational Leadership
Hersey and Blanchard have popularized a model of leadership called situational
leadership (1988:170). This model could be very beneficial for top leadership in the cell
church.

Description

According to this model the leader must study every situation to determine how he or
she should lead. In other words, there is no one style of leadership that will always be
effective. The effectiveness of the leader is determined by how well he sizes up the
situation and then applies the correct leadership style to meet the needs of his followers
in that particular situation.

Although most leaders have a propensity for being either task oriented or relationship
oriented (Anderson and Mylander 1994:100), it is also possible to adapt one’s style of
leadership as the need arises. The situational leader, therefore, tries to determine how
much task guidance the followers need and then to balance that with the proper amount
of relationship support. The amount of task guidance and relationship support that the
leader gives is dependent on the maturity of the follower (s).

By task guidance I’m referring to the leader’s responsibility to give “expert” guidance so
that the follower can successfully complete his task. This might be described as one way
communication from the leader to the follower (Hersey and Blanchard 1988:172). By
relationship support I’m referring to the leader’s responsibility to give emotional/social
support to the follower while he is completing the task. This could be described as two
way communication (Hersey and Blanchard 1988:172). The maturity level of the follower
is determined by his ability to complete the task (knowledge & skill concerning what to
do) and his willingness to complete the task (level of confidence, desire, and
commitment).

The “task” does not necessarily need to be measured in terms of quantity (although this is
often true of management). The task might be seen in a variety of ways including:
educating students, helping God’s people grow in spiritual maturity, developing leaders,
training children, etc.

Hersey and Blanchard have developed a chart which helps the leader match the
follower’s level of maturity with the appropriate amount of task/relationship behavior the
leader needs to demonstrate in order to effectively lead. The following table will help
clarify the relationship between relationship and task guidance:

TABLE 12: HERSEY AND BLANCHARD SITUATIONAL LEADERSHIP

(Adapted from Hersey and Blanchard 1988:182)
3 HI RELATIONSHIP HI TASK 2 4 LOW RELATIONSHIP HI TASK 1
 LOW RELATIONSHIP
LOW RELATIONSHIP LOW RELATIONS
LOW TASK
Turn over responsibility for
Explain decisions and Provide specific
Share ideas and facilitate decisions and
provide opportunity for and closely supe
in decision making implementation
clarification performance

PARTICIPATING DELEGATING
SELLING TELLING

TASK BEHAVIOR RELATIONSHIP BEHAVIOR

 The extent to which the leader engages in defining roles telling  The extent to which a leader engages in two-wa
what, how, when, where, and if more than one person, who is communication, listening, facilitating behaviors
to do what in: socioemotional support
 Goal-Setting  Giving
 Organizing  Communicating
 Establishing Time Lines  Facilitating Interactions
 Direction  Active Listening
 Controlling  Providing Feedback

In the above boxes, the TASK (HIGH OR LOW) and RELATIONSHIP (HIGH OR LOW) refers
to how the leader responds to the follower in each situation. For example, if the follower
has the ability to perform a particular task, but lacks confidence in doing it, the leader will
want to be very supportive (high relationship), but give little direct guidance (low task), as
is seen in the upper left box.

The idea of Hersey and Blanchard is that as the maturity level increases the leader can
move from telling to selling to participating and finally to delegating (Hersey and
Blanchard 1988:177-179). Neil Anderson adds an important clarification,

It is important to note that a good leader never stops being a loving, relational person,
regardless of the maturity of the followers. The point is that immature people need
instruction and supervision. As they mature, they want and need more involvement in
the decision-making process. As they start to assume more responsibility, they need the
emotional support of their leader. When they have been fully delegated the
responsibility, they may resent the constant interference and intrusion of the one who
entrusted the ministry to them….On the other hand, if you are new in your ministry, do
you appreciate it if your senior pastor is unavailable to you, leaving you alone to sin, or
swim? (1994:97).

Application to Cell Ministry

The great thing about this leadership model is that it does not prescribe only one kind of
leadership style. It says that an effective leader adjusts his style according to the needs of
the follower. If the person is competent and highly motivated, the leader should not lead
in a directive, authoritative way. Rather, he should show respect, support, and confidence
toward the person. If the unmotivated and incapable, the directive style is needed (note
40).

Top leadership in the cell ministry (section leader, zone leader, district leader, and upper
level pastor (s) must understand the maturity and confidence levels of those under them
in order to lead more effectively. With new or uncertain cell leaders, the top leadership
must give precise, step by step leadership (telling). With those cell leaders who know
what they are doing and are very motivated, top leadership can simply encourage and
provide a respectful support.

For example, suppose a section leader had five different cell leaders under her care. Two
of those leaders are highly competent and very motivated, two of them lack proper
understanding of how to lead a cell but want to learn, and the final cell leader lacks both
motivation and expertise. The section leader can spend less time with the two highly
competent and motivated leaders (showing admiration and support is often sufficient). In
fact, perhaps the section leader might delegate other responsibilities to them. For the
two who are willing but lack expertise, the section’s leaders style become very relational
but also provides the needed information. Finally, with the cell leader who is not
confident and lacks the proper skills, the section leader gives directive, step by step
counsel on how to lead the cell group, but does not go to great length to establish a
personal relationship with the person.

In Latin America, some leaders feel they have to be the strong, authoritative caudillo
leader at all times. The situational leadership model provides a needed correction to this
mentality. On the other hand, North American leadership tends to being overly
democratic. At times, the leader must behave in a directive, authoritarian style—
depending on the needs of the followers.

Chapter 6: Distinctiveness of Latin American Leadership

As a missionary to Latin America, this particular chapter is very important. As I minister in

Latin America for the next four years, I realize that all of the great leadership theories will
be meaningless to my ministry if do not apply to the cultural traits that exist in Latin
American leadership. Moran and Harris have concluded that, “Leadership is learned and
is based on assumptions about one’s place in the world. Managers from other business
systems [cross-cultural] are not ‘underdeveloped’ American managers (1982:62). We shall
see that culture plays a significant role in shaping leadership style.
General Latin Leadership Traits

Olien reminds us that, “Anthropology has divided the world into ‘cultural areas’ for the
purposes of study. A culture area is a geographical space within which the people share a
number of traits at a given point in time” (1973:2). Just as anthropology generalizes
cultural traits across a large area, in this section, I will attempt to make some broad,
general statement about Latin American leadership. However, I am also very aware that
not all Latins will precisely fit into these stereotypes.

Authoritarianism

Latins are generally very authoritarian. Usually, there is a clear distinction between leader
and follower. In fact, this characteristic is one that has been passed down from
generations past—namely, the Spanish conquistadors.

Emphasis on Control and Power

There seems to be built into the Spanish psyche a desire to control, to be in charge. Dealy
feels that it is this goal that drives the Latin American, in contrast to being a successful
doctor, lawyer, businessman, or any other profession (1992:62). Dealy says, “Only a
vigorous public power stance fully satiates the Latin’s desire for acclaim, just as the
economic category ‘millionaire’ uniquely approaches gratification of the capitalists sense
of total success (1992:62-63). He goes on to say,

In North American eyes good government would make the Post Office turn a profit; in
Latin American eyes a good firm would, like a strong political movement, establish a
monopoly of power over every competitor” (1992:107).

Geyer confirms this,

In Latin American politics, it has been not the man who seeks to unite and to
compromise and to heal wounds who was admired but rather the man who wielded
total power—that classic Spanish type, the caudillo or strongman. Power could not be
shared;.. (1970:96).

Caudillo Style Leadership

The spirit of the conquistador is now seen in the Latin American caudillo. The caudillo in
Latin America’s history refers to the self-proclaimed military officer that were supported
by nonprofessional armies (Silvert 1977:25). However, in a general sense, the caudillismo
has popularly come to refer to any highly personalistic regime which is under the control
of a charismatic leader (Silvert 1977:25). Gereats defines this term by the words, ‘daring’,
‘aggressive’, and ‘strong’ (1970:47).
 It is this spirit that guides much of the leadership in Latin America. There is a tendency to
exercise control and domination instead of leading by example and servanthood (note
41). Gareats says, “Most Latin American leaders, whether in the political sphere or in
ordinary life, give the appearance of being strong men” (1970:48) (note 42).

Christian Caudillo Leadership

For the most part, Christian Leadership follows the same pattern of authoritarianism in
Latin America. It is not uncommon to find strong, caudillo type leaders in pastoral
positions in Latin America. Wagner says, “Speaking of Latin America, a culturally-relevant
leadership pattern which has evolved there is that of the caudillo….in a Christian way,
their leadership system follows the pattern of the secular caudillo (1984:90-91). Berg and
Pretiz have observed the same phenomena in the grass roots churches that they have
analyzed throughout Latin America. They say, “…the authoritarianism of the GR pastor is
comfortable for people accustomed to their country’s power-wielding President, or even
perhaps dictatorships” (1996:144).

However, the rigid, controlling, and negative element of the secular caudillo pattern has
been largely transformed by Christian virtues. Wagner calls it a transformed “servant-
caudillo” pattern (1984:91) and others call it “charismatic caudillismo” (Deiros 1992:169 in
Berg & Pretiz 1996:215).

Another way of describing the pastor role in Latin America is that of the “godfather” or
the benevolent patron (Berg & Pretiz 1996:215). In the days when haciendas were much
more common, the owner-boss was the ultimate authority. At the same time, he
protected his workers, defended them in legal problems, and stood as their “godfather”
at family occasions. For the most part, Latin American pastors are looked up to,
respected, and obeyed. Berg and Pretiz write, “In the lower-socio-economic levels, people
trust the pastor who may even hold all church properties in his name. They are “used to
authority,” said a Peruvian pastor” (1996:215). Like most everything, there is a negative
side to an absolutist, controlling pastoral image and caution is needed on the side of both
laity and clergy.

Assigned Status

Latins respond to leadership in a much different way than North Americans. In Latin
America, there is a much greater respect for position and status than competency .
Lingenfelter and Mayers describe the Latins propensity toward assigned status in these
four ways:

 Personal identity is determined by formal credentials of birth and rank.

 The amount of respect one receives is permanently fixed; attention focuses on those
with high social status in spite of any personal failings they have.
 The individual is expected to play his or her role and to sacrifice to attain higher rank.
 People associate only with their social equals.
Climbing the Ladder

Perhaps the ladder concept can shed light on the Latin American’s concept of social
status. In North America, people aspire to climb the ladder of success. Employees are
encouraged to dream and plan to rise rapidly in the company. However, in Latin America,
one’s assigned status oftentimes prevents that from happening.

The concept of social status in Latin American culture means that each person is placed
on a particular rung of the ladder in relationship to everyone else (Mayers 1976:23).
There is no ‘climbing the ladder’ because of the assigned social status that each one
receives at birth.

North Americas often say that if anyone, regardless of race or social status, will simply
‘pull himself or herself up by the bootstraps’, there are unlimited possibilities. The
upward ladder is there for any worker to become the boss, president of the company, or
even president of the United States. In contrast, Latin America has removed that ladder.
A person is assigned his or her status from birth onwards. Geyer perhaps judgmentally
states, “… Latin America has far fewer racial attitudes; but it does suffer from a closed and
inviolate class system (1970:7) (note 43).

Spanish Supremacy

As in many Latin American countries, there are a tiny minority of pure Spanish descent
who wield tremendous leadership power. They are the ones who steer the major centers
of power in Latin America, course both politically, economically, and socially (Ecuador in
Pictures: 1987: 38)

Historic Development

This disparity did not develop over night. The process began years ago when the Spanish
conquered the Indian population. For almost four hundred years the strong, soldierly
Spaniards live along side their conquered Indian slaves. An inevitable attitude of
superiority began to develop (Weil 1973:101,102). . Schodt writes, “The grafting of Spanish
rule onto the conquered Inca society established a colonial system with a large Indian
underclass and a small Hispanic elite… (Schodt 1987: 17).”
Even though binding ties have been severed with Spain, yet the spirit of elitism still
strongly remains through her descendants. The idea that a person’s blood line positions
him or her for power is still widespread throughout Latin America. Dealy states,

…while our forefathers [North Americans] alternately ignored the Indian, stole his
land, or drove him out, Spanish settlers inducted them into a social hierarchy: They
became a personal work force to till the soil and were brought into homes as
mistresses and table servants” (1992:62).

This social hierarchy is still very important in Latin America today. Rangel calls this social
structuring the cancer of Latin American society today (1987:16). Instead of ignoring the
Indians or extermination them (as in the case of the North Americans), the Latin
Americans grafted them into their society. They became indispensable.

Privileged Status

For example, the “whites” who occupy the top rungs of power in Ecuador place a high
emphasis on purity of race-whether or not this can be proven. Within the white group,
even more important than one’s exact racial traits, is one’s socioeconomic status and
evidence of an urban European life-style (Weil 1973:66). Many of these creoles or pure-
bloods are vocal about their pure blood and resulting privileged status (Urbanski
1978:170).

The Underclass

I use this terminology simply to describe those under the ruling class white race.
Although these could be divided into middle and lower, those distinctions do not always
hold true in Latin America due to the importance placed upon blood lines and a person’s
position at birth.

Mestizo

Underneath the umbrella of this small elite upper class is a large underclass consisting of
Mestizos, pure Indians, and Negroes. Mestizo status falls somewhere between the white
higher class and the Indian lower class. Although they are below the white race, they are
mixing with it. (Weil 1973:66). The Mestizo race came as a result of the mixed marriages
between the Indian woman and the conquistadors. Yet, it is probably more accurate to
say that most of the offspring were less the result of formal marriage as the result of rape
and concubinage (Elliott 1984:201).

Indigenous Peoples

The pure Indians are at the bottom of the totem pole when it comes to authority and
power. The government has tended to disregard their distinct differences and customs
and lump them together as a “depressed group” (Weil 1973:67). This attitude of
powerlessness can clearly be seen in their behavior towards whites. Indians, while talking
with whites remove their hats, lower their heads and speak in soft tones. They assume a
passive, submissive role which has been instilled in them from childhood. However, in
their own communities, the whites and Mestizos are the butt of their jokes (Weil 1973:67).

Assigned Status and Cell Ministry

There are a few considerations that this concept of Latin American assigned status
presents for effective cell ministry.

Formation of Groups

It behooves cell groups in Latin American to be organized along homogenous lines so

that communication in the cell might be maximized and that non-Christians will be
readily attracted. Potential members should be allowed to pick their own cell group
according to personal preference. Any type of forced gathering of members into
heterogeneous groups is not wise in Latin America (note 44).

Giving Birth

These status considerations must also be taken into account in the birth of a new group.
It would be a fatal mistake to force a group to give birth against natural cultural lines
(whites with indigenous people, etc.). Rather, the new cell groups should be formed
according to natural cultural patterns.

Idealism

This cultural aspect especially affects how Latin leadership set goals. Basically, Latins have
a far more idealistic view of life than do North Americans. In other words, Latins are not
eternal optimists like many North Americans. Nida states, “Latins have been preoccupied
with death and are very pessimistic due to the decades of suffering” (1974:43).” Latin
Literature reflects this way of thinking. Rarely does a Latin novel have a happy ending—
the hero usually dies, the romance falls apart, or the “bad guy” wins.

North Americans are known for their pragmatism, their propensity to act now and think
later. Just the opposite is true with regard to Latin Americans. Nida notes that Latin
American’s tend to be far more philosophical (1974:43). Concerning this quality, Plaza
says,

Another basic Latin American characteristic derived from both the Indians and the
Iberians is the emphasis on contemplation rather than action. The cultural
anthropologist Kusch has pointed out that in Quechua the verb ‘to be’ means ‘to stay
put.’ The Latin American has traditionally tended to have a static outlook, because for
 him time is an ever-recurring phenomenon, with no connotation of urgency. This is
directly contrary to the dynamic concept expressed by the Anglo-Saxon saying ‘Time
waits for no man’ (1971:23) (note 45)

There is a tendency for Latin Leadership to set high, unrealistic goals. They might feel that
a lesser, more reachable goal would not be worthy to dream about or declare to the
congregation.

North American pragmatism and optimism does not have to be at odds with the idealism
of Latin American. I believe that it can be complimentary. However, there must be give
and take and lots of sensitivity to bring about a working solution.

Comparative Studies on Latin American Leadership

Most of the material analysis of Latin leadership thus far has been more general and
anecdotal in nature. However, there are some scientific studies on leadership styles is
various cultural contexts. I will be focusing on those aspects that are most relevant to this
current tutorial.

Research by Dr. Geert Hostede

I am indebted to the work done by Dr. Geert Hofstede on cross-cultural leadership

patterns. Dr. Hofstede looks at four aspects of cultural values as they relate to
organizations and leadership. These are: Power Distance, Uncertainty Avoidance,
Individualism, and Masculinity.

Power Distance

Power distance deals with the style of leadership decision making, the liberty of a
subordinate to disagree with his boss, and what kind of style the subordinates prefer
(Hofstede 1990:92). High power distance refers to a large gap between the leader and
follower (true in Latin America); whereas low power distance suggests close relationships
(nearness) between leader and follower (true of U.S.). The research done by Hofstede in
this area suggests that the level of power distance is more culturally determined than
anything else. Different societies place different values on such areas as prestige, wealth,
and power (1980: 92). Hofstede discovered that places like Mexico and Venezuela have
double the power distance than places like the U.S. or most European countries
(1980:104) (note 46). A study in 1967 of Peruvian workers and U.S. workers showed
clearly that Peruvians were not nearly so concerned as U.S. workers that their boss
demonstrate democratic, participation oriented style leadership (Hofstede 1980:115).

The following table shows some of the authoritarian—democratic values between

countries with a high power distance level versus those with a lower level: (note 47)
 TABLE 13: SUMMARY OF POWER DISTANCE VALUES
(Adapted from Hofstede 1980:119)
Countries with High Power Distance: Mexico, Perú,
Countries With Low Power Distance: U.S., Netherlands
Venezuela, Colombia, etc,
 Managers show less consideration  Managers show more consideration

 Employees fear to disagree with their boss  Employees less afraid of disagreeing with their boss

 Managers see themselves as practical and systematic;

 Managers see themselves as benevolent decision makers
need for support

 Subordinates favor a manager’s decision making style to  Subordinates favor a manager’s decision making styl
be more autocratic-paternalistic consultative, democratic, and give and take

 Close supervision positively evaluated by subordinates  Close supervision negatively evaluated by subordinat

 Higher and lower educated employees show similar  Higher educated employees hold much less authorita
values about authority lower-educated ones.

 Students put place high value on conformity  Students place high value on independence

The research done by Hostede only confirms the earlier comments concerning the
tendency in Latin America to be more authoritarian and power conscious. I see this is as
one of the reasons why the hierarchical cell church structure (Jethro system) works so
well. At the same time, it explains why it is so hard for cell leaders not to dominate the
meeting. They are accustomed to maintaining distance between themselves and those
under their charge. Oftentimes, there is a greater desire to control the group rather than
serving it.

Avoidance/Uncertainty Paradigm

The name that Dr. Hofstede has coined is certainly not self explanatory. The idea here is
how a culture deals with change and tradition Is there a tendency to live with change
( US) or avoid it ( Latin America). The issues that he researched were (1980:164):

 Rule orientation: Agreement with the statement: A companies rule should not be
broken—even when the employee thinks it is in the company’s best interest.
 Employment stability: Employees statement that they intend to continue with the
company a) for two years at the most b) from two to five years.
 Stress, as expressed in the answer to the question, “How often do you feel nervous or
tense at work?”.

As was the previous case, the countries in which I will be doing my case study research
scored very high in the uncertainty/avoidance continuum in comparison with the more
industrialized nations as the US and most European countries (note 48). The following
table gives a summary of the values in high uncertainty/avoidance countries versus low
ones:

TABLE 14: VALUES OF UNCERTAINTY/AVOIDANCE ACROSS CULTURES

(Adapted from Hofstede 1980:176-175)
HIGH UNCERTAINTY AVOIDANCE COUNTIRES: Perú, LOW UNCERTAINTY AVOIDANCE COUN
Mexico, Colombia, Venezuela Sweden, Denmark, India
 Pessimism about people’s amount of initiative, ambition, and  Optimism about people’s amount of initiativ
leadership skills leadership skills

 Initiative of subordinates should be kept under control  Delegation to subordinates can be complete

 Competition between employees is emotionally disapproved of  Competition between employees can be fair

 Conflict in organization is undesirable  Conflict in organization is natural

 Preference for clear requirements and instructions  Preference for broad guidelines

 Less risk taking; fear of failure  More risk taking; Hope of success

 Lower ambition for individual advancement  Higher ambition for individual advancement

 Managers should be selected on the basis of seniority  Managers should not be selected on the basis

 Loyalty to employer is seen as a virtue  Loyalty to employer is not seen as a virtue

 More emotional resistance to change  Less emotional resistance to change

 More worry about the future  Less worry about the future

It must be remembered that Greece, Belgium, and Japan scored higher than any of the
Latin American countries. However, these points add insight concerning how Latin view
leadership, ambition, competition, change, and general leadership skills.

Individualism

This term needs little definition. It involves how cultures view self-orientation versus
collective orientation. It is not surprising that out of the thirty-nine countries studied in
this statistical analysis, the US rated the highest on individualism. On the opposite
extreme the Latin American countries were among the least individualistic (note 49). It is
interesting to note that the US had one of the lowest power distance ratios and highest
individualism ratios (not much separation from leadership and follower—and high
individualism ) while most of the Northern Latin American countries had high power
distance and low individualism (lots of separation between leader and follower and lots
of conformity and group orientation). In Latin America there is a definite ‘we’
consciousness instead of the ‘I” consciousness so prevalent in the US. The following table
will help clarify these distinctions:

TABLE 15: SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUALISM AMONG CULURES

(Adapted from Hofstede 1980:230-231)
HIGH INDIVIDUALISM: US, Great Britain, Canada, Australia LOW INDIVIDUALISM: Venezuela, Perú, Colom
 Need to make specific friendships  Social relationships predetermined in terms of in

 Individual initiative is socially encouraged  Individual initiative is socially frowned upon; fa

 Managers endorse “modern” points of view on stimulating  Managers endorse “traditional” points of view, n
employee initiative and group activity employee initiative and group activity

 Emotional independence from company  Emotional dependence from company

 Managers aspire to leadership and variety  Managers aspire to conformity and orderliness

 Students consider it socially acceptable to claim pursuing their  Students consider it less socially acceptable to c
own ends without minding others their own ends without minding others

The group consciousness so prevalent in Latin America help us understand why small
group ministry works so well in Latin America. This study confirms my suspicion that cell
group evangelism would be far more acceptable and effective in Latin America than an
individualistic approach. On the other hand, cell group multiplication needs to be
handled with great care in that change seems to be more difficult and long term
commitment to the group is far higher .

Masculinity

Here Dr. Hofstede examines the role that gender plays in the leadership of society. He
states, “The predominant socialization pattern is for men to be more assertive and for
women to be more nurturing” (1980:261). He goes on to say, “Male behavior is associated
with autonomy, aggression, exhibition, and dominance; female behavior is associated
with nurturance, affiliation, helpfulness, and humility (1990:263).

Interestingly enough, there was not a distinct, noticeable difference between US culture
and Latin American culture (note 50). Under this category, I will not even provide a table
because I do not believe that it would be helpful. However, Hofstede does provide
excellent insight into his findings and the machismo factor so common in Latin America
by the following comment,

The one concept from the anthropological literature which can be directly associated with
masculinity is “machismo” (a need for ostentatious manliness) which is usually attributed
to Latin American countries, especially Mexico….The Latin American female counterpart
to machismo is “Marianismo”: a combination of near-saintliness, submissiveness, and
frigidity (Stevens, 1973). In the HERMES data, some Latin American countries score far to
the masculine side— Venezuela, Mexico, and Colombia—which fits with the machismo
image. Argentina and Brazil, however, score in the middle, while Peru and Chile score
more feminine. Private discussions with Latin American spokesmen confirm that
machismo is more present in the countries around the Caribbean than in the remainder
of South America (Hofstede 1980:289).

The three previous categories presented by Hofstede have challenged me to rethink my

own cultural leadership style in the light of Latin American culture. However, this category
had the opposite affect. Perhaps, the machismo paradigm of Latin America is overplayed.
According to this study, North Americans are just as masculine oriented as the majority of
Latin American countries.

With regard to women in cell leadership roles, It remains to be seen how Latin culture
(specifically thinking of Ecuador) will accept their ministry—especially as it involves
women leading mixed groups of both women and men.

Research by Robert T. Moran and Philip R. Harris

North Americans trying to do business in Latin America have come to realize that
understanding Latin leadership patterns and attitudes is absolutely essential. Robert T.
Moran and Philip R. Harris, two experts in the field of international management believe
that success in business only comes when North Americans “…try and enter into the
foreign manager’s life space and perceive situations as that person might do” (1982:298).
They offer an excellent synthesis of the differences between North American business
patterns versus Latin American business patterns. The following table represents just
some of the cultural patterns presented in their analysis:

TABLE 16: BUSINESS PATTERNS IN BOTH NORTH AND LATIN AMERICA

(Adapted from Moran and Harris 1982: 299)
EXAMPLE
ASPECTS OF NORTH AMERICAN
ALTERNATIVE ASPECTS OF LATIN CULTURE BUSINESS
CULTURE
AFFECTED
 The individual can influence the future  Life follows a preordained course and human action is
 Planning
“where there is a will there is a way” determined by the will of God

 An individual should be realistic in his

 Ideals are to be pursued regardless of what is reasonable  Goals se
aspirations

 We must work hard to accomplish our  Hard work is not the only prerequisite for success;  Motivati
objectives (Puritan ethic) wisdom, luck, and time are also required bargaini

 Commitments should be honored (people  A commitment may be superseded by a conflicting  Negotiat

 request, or an agreement may only signify intention, and
will do what they say they will do) have little or no relationship to the capacity of bargaini
performance

 One should effectively use his time (time  Schedules are important but only in relation to other  Long- an
is money which can be saved or wasted) priorities [people and family are often the priorities] planning

 A primary obligation of an employee is  The individual employee has a primary obligation to his  Loyalty,
to the organization family and friends and mot

 Motivati
 The employer or employee can terminate
 Employment is for a lifetime commitm
their relationship
company

 Employm
 The best qualified persons should be  Family considerations, friendship, and other
promotio
given the position available considerations partially determine employment practices
Selection

 A person can be removed if he does not  The removal of a person from a position involves a great
 Promotio
perform well loss of prestige and may only rarely be done

 All levels of management are open to

 Education or family ties are the primary vehicles for  Employm
qualified individuals (an office boy can
mobility and prom
rise to become company president)

 Competition stimulates high

 Competition leads to unbalances and to disharmony  Promotio
performance

 Tradition is revered and the power of the ruling group is

 Change is considered an improvement  Planning
founded on the continuation of a stable structure

 Persons are evaluated but in such a way that individuals

 Rewards
 Persons and systems are to be evaluated not highly evaluated will not be embarrassed or caused
 Promotio
to “lose face”

These comparisons further add and confirm what has been said thus far about Latin
authority patterns, change dynamics, group consciousness, and the priority of people and
family over work and prosperity.

Chapter 7: Conclusion

Admittedly, at times this study has seemed very broad. For example, I am aware that
entire tutorials have been written on Biblical leadership, church growth leadership, and
situational leadership. Here, I have simply included them as important issues.

Although the leadership topics have been broad, the ever present challenge in this
tutorial has been to include only the leadership theory that best applies to the cell
church– and more specifically to the cell church in Latin America. My hope is that this
tight relationship is evident throughout.

As we have seen, in the cell church there are a variety of applications to leadership
models and theory. We looked at the ever present need for new cell leadership in a
church which is rapidly multiplying cell groups. We saw that in the cell church, leadership
training begins when a new covert is added to the cell group for the first time. Instead of
creating an additional structure to care for the new convert, the cell church emphasizes
“in-house” or “in-cell” training. The goal is to turn the zealous new convert into an
effective cell leader who will in turn train others. A number of leadership models were
also examined, and it was determined that the Cho model is the most complete.

Beyond models of training, we delved into the content of the training. Specifically what
kind of content is needed to raise up unapologetic church growth leadership within the
cell church. Throughout this tutorial, I have not tried to hide my bias toward church
growth leadership. As I have mentioned many times, I view cell-based ministry as a very
important methodology in the larger discipline of church growth, and not as an end in
itself. Keeping in mind the various levels of leadership in the cell church, I tried to apply
principles to cell leaders and paradigms to top leadership, although these categories are
more fluid than stringent.

For me, the most important part of this study was the last chapter. I have become
increasingly aware of the need to deeply understand Latin culture in order to properly
apply leadership theory and principles. Too often, there is a wholesale application of
North American leadership to Latin culture that fit no better than Saul’s armor on the boy
David.

Since I have tried to apply leadership theory to cell based ministry along the way, I will not
repeat myself here. Simply to say that cell-based ministry offers some exciting leadership
challenges. Perhaps cell-based leadership can best be described as extended leadership
since a giant net of leadership is needed. Although strong, charismatic leadership is
essential in the cell church, there is no such thing as the super pastor—the one who does
everything himself. Rather, leadership in the cell church is distributed throughout, so that
it reaches down to the lowest denominator. From this study, I think we can conclude that
although the need for leadership is great in the cell church, the potential is even greater
for raising up an army of church growth leaders through the cell church.

Appendix: Dr. Robert Clinton’s Leadership Research

To be honest, I was not sure where to place Dr. Clinton’s research on leadership. It does
not qualify for pure church growth leadership theory, nor does it apply specifically to one
particular level of cell leadership. Nor do I believe that knowledge of Clinton’s literature is
essential for success in the cell church today. Rather, I view his research as more
qualitative and reflective in nature. It gives a leader the chance to examine his or her life
from the perspective of God’s sovereignty. It can bring clarity as the leader’s giftedness
and future ministry focus. weakness, and possibilities for the future.

Clinton has written and taught on a number of areas which include: Leadership Theory,
Leadership Giftedness, Leadership Training Models, Leadership Philosophy, Leadership
In The Bible, Change Dynamics, Mentoring, and Leadership Emergence. In this appendix, I
will include only two areas of Clinton’s research that I feel might most directly apply to a
cell leadership or top leadership in the cell church (i.e., section leader, zone leader,
district pastor, or senior pastor).

Emergence Theory

Perhaps, the concept of Emergence theory can best be described by the quote, “If you
know that God will be developing you over a lifetime, you’ll most likely stay for the whole
ride” (1988:23). His basic thesis is that, “God develops a leader over a lifetime.

His theory comes from studying some 800 leaders (note 51). Clinton sees 5 major stages
of leadership development. The following chart helps clarify :

TABLE 17: CLINTON ‘S STAGES OF LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT

(Adapted from Clinton 1988)
 Sovereign
 In this phase, God is working in the leader personality to make him the man that God wants hi
Foundations

 Inner-Life  Usually, in this stage, the leader receives some kind of training. It might be Bible School. Yet,
Growth part, God is preparing the leader.

 In this stage, the leader gets more ministry experience. This is often more incidental than inten
 Ministry
first three stages, God is concentrating on the leader. God is more interested in the inward deve
Maturing
leader himself.

 In this stage, the leader identifies his gift-mix and uses it with power. “God uses one’s life as w
 Life Maturing
influence others. This is a period in which giftedness emerges along with priorities.” (1988:32)

 He views convergence as that place in which everything works together. Gift-mix, location, ex
temperament all seem to flow together during this stage. He gives a warning, “Not many leade
convergence. Often they are promoted to roles that hinder their gift-mix. Further, few leaders m
what they are. In convergence, being and spiritual authority form the true power base for matu
 Convergence
(1988:33)
 He talks about leaders becoming stagnant in ministry. They fail to move on any further. “Lead
tendency to cease developing once they have some skills and ministry experience. They may b
continue their ministry as is, without discerning the need to develop further (1988: 115)”
 That development is a function of the use of events and people to impress leadership
lessons upon a leader. This development of a leader (or processing) is central to Dr.
Clinton’s leadership theory. He has discovered that all leaders can point to critical
incidents in their lives where God taught them something very important” (1988:24). One
of the key concepts in Clinton’s Emergence theory is how God uses tests, challenges, and
trials to mold us and shape us. These tests are called process items. Clinton states, “Upon
successful completion of the ministry task, the leader is usually given a bigger task”
(1988:34). He then adds, “Can you be faithful in little things? You may not see the
importance of small tasks now, but can you do faithfully what is given you? If you can,
then you’ll be given greater things. If not, God will have to teach the same lesson again”
(1988:35).

He elaborates on a number of tests that he has noticed in the lives of great leaders. Some
of them include:

 Integrity testing
 Will the leader respond honestly?
 Obedience test

Will the leader be obedient to the voice of God? He says, “A leader who repeatedly
demonstrates that God speaks to him gains spiritual authority” (1988:69). A leader first
learns about personal guidance for his own life. Having learned to discern God’s direction
for his own life in numerous crucial decisions, he can then shift to the leadership function
of determining guidance for the group that he leads (1988:127).

 Submission test

Will the leader submit to that person that God has placed over him? He writes, “A
developing leader will usually struggle with someone who is in authority over him.
Learning submission is critical to learning what authority is, so emerging leaders must
first learn to submit” (1988:81). He goes on to say, “An important thing to keep in mind is
that the ultimate assignment is from God, even if the ministry task is self-initiated or
assigned by another” (1988: 83).

TABLE 18: IMPORTANT PRINCIPLES FOR LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT

(Adapted from Clinton 1989)
SIX CONCEPTS FOUR CHALLENGES
 Effective leaders maintain a posture of learning  When Christ calls leaders, He plans to develop all of their p
throughout their lives. leader is responsible to continue developing him or herself
 Effective leaders value spiritual authority as their possible potential. .
power base.  One of the key functions of leadership is raising up new lea
 Effective leaders make the selection and formation  Leaders should develop a philosophy of ministry which ho
of new leadership a chief priority. values, is relevant to the times, and encompass the leader’s
  Effective leaders that have been productive
throughout their lives have a clear, dynamic
philosophy of ministry.
 Ministry flows from being. A leader must continually deve
 Effective leaders evidence a growing knowledge of
spiritual power.
their sense of destiny.
 Effective leaders perceive their ministry in future
terms in an ever-increasing way.

Leadership development theory can be very helpful in the life of cell leadership. It is
always beneficial to meditate on how God has prepared us through His sovereign
working. This theory can also suggest future direction as well.

Mentoring

The reason that I chose mentoring among Clinton’s research is because it might help a
cell leader more effectively raise up the cell intern. Clinton has written an important book
on the subject called, The Mentor Handbook (1991).

Definition

Clinton defines mentoring as: A relational process,

 In which someone who knows something, the mentor

 Transfers that something (the power resources such as wisdom, advice, information,
emotional support, protection, linking to resources, career guidance, status)
 To someone else, the mentoree,
 At a sensitive time so that it impacts development (2-4)

Basic Characteristics of Mentor —Mentoree Training

There are some basic considerations in the mentor-mentoree training process:

 Attraction of the mentoree to the mentor

 People have a tendency to try to live up to the genuine expectations of those they
admire and respect. The attraction must be both ways.
 Accountability
 Relationship
 Responsiveness

Type of Mentoring Models

Clinton has demonstrated that mentoring covers a wide variety of relationships. The
following chart will help to clarify those categories:
TABLE 19: TYPES OF MENTORING MODELS
(Adapted from Clinton 1991)
ACTIVE
 Discipler
 A mature follower of Christ
helping a immature Christian
grow in the Christian habits
 Spiritual Director
 A spiritual person developing  This is your normal gifted teacher who teaches
a person who needs to
develop spiritually
 Coach
Clinton says, “A relational
process, in which a person
who knows how to do
something very well,
imparts that capacity to
someone who desire to
learn” (5-3)
OCCASIONAL PASSIVE
 Counselor
 Very much like a normal counselor. One finds  Contemporary Model
formalized counselors who make a profession of  Oftentimes, we’ll be attrac
helping the body of Christ through counseling. person who has gifts like o
There are others who counsel on a more informal says, “Gifted people attrac
basis (6-3). people” (9-10).
 Teacher  Historical Model
 His basic point here is that
knowledge to people with a specific need to learn mentored vicariously by th
who are motivated by the teacher to put their gone before us.
knowledge into action  Divine Contact
 Sponsor
 This is a person with influence who lifts up a Clinton says, “ God somet
young, emerging leader. He might do this by
along a divine contact to m
encouraging him/her or recommending him/her.
 Clinton says, “Frequently there are good potential some special way whethe
leaders within an organization waiting to be not. We should be prepar
discovered by those above. Without that recognize them and respo
discovery they may never rise to their potential accordingly to God’s empo
and contribute to the organization. Either they
through them” (11-1).
will languish or leave the group for greener
pastures” (8-1).

As the chart demonstrates, mentoring might be an active discipleship relationship, an

occasional contact, or even a relationship with a person via books or example. I believe
that this is a helpful clarification.

Co-Mentoring

I have found this section one of the most helpful. Co-mentoring is when two people come
together on a regular basis to hold each other accountable. Clinton says, “It seems that
because both parties are at about the same developmental level in terms of age,
situational pressures, spiritual maturing and ministry experience that there exists the
possibility for more honest openness to come into play” (13-1). The relationship is the key
dynamic here. It’s not the type of mentoring. There must be an attraction and respect for
one another. It should be ‘fun’ to be with that person. Clinton says, “Relaxed times
together are just as important as serious times together” (13-2).

As I mentioned previously, the need for new leadership in the cell church is enormous.
A cell leader should know how to mentor someone from within the group who will
eventually lead another group. The relationship that the cell leader has with his intern
will vary according to the situation and needs of the intern (situational leadership).
 Therefore, Clinton’s study on mentoring gives the cell leader new, more creative
options.

Endnotes

350. I spent one day at the huge L.A. public library trying to find characteristics of
Latin leadership and came up with very little.
351. Taken from an e-mail from Don Davis, who is a Cross Cultural/Educational
Consultant for Greater Asia Training Enterprises. He wrote this to Dan Gibson on Abril
12, 1996.
352. In the C&MA it seems that we are willing to take great risks in planting new
churches. Many of these churches die because the initial foundations were so weak. I’ve
arrived at the conclusion that we should only start churches when we have a good
chance of succeeding. In contrast, I believe that we should not hesitate to launch new
cell groups. From my experience, I have discovered that it is far less devastating to both
leader and followers when a cell group dissolves than when an entire church has to
close the doors.
353. I will be asking cell leaders in Latin America to describe their own spiritual
gifting. I hope to find some giftedness patterns among those leaders who have
successfully multiplied their cell group.
354. Since we do not know who God has chosen to be saved, we must evangelize all
non-Christians.
355. When I was at Bethany World Prayer Center, I talked to a very shy man named
Carl, who is now a section leader in Bethany’s cell ministry. Carl became a section
leader because he had multiplied his own cell group six times. Pastor Larry Stockstill
uses Carl as an example of how God even uses very shy people to successfully lead cell
groups.
356. When I was at Bethany World Prayer Center, I talked to five leaders (cell leaders
and top leadership) who gave me four different answers concerning why some cell
leaders are able to multiply their groups while others are not.
357. Again, the major part of my research in Latin America will involve trying to
determine the characteristics of effective cell leaders in contrast to those who are
ineffective.
358. This year they are preparing for 3,000 pastors to travel to Baton Rouge to
attend their five day seminar.
359. Jim Egli is co-authored The New Believer’s Station. These booklets are
distributed through Touch Publishing House—1-800-735-5865.
360. For those who are already Christians, he recommends that the Sponsor use the
booklet, The Arrival Kit. This booklet talks about areas such as: kingdom values, being
filled with the Spirit, spiritual bondage, etc. I’m not sure if I would personally use the
 ‘sponsoring’ concept with everyone that arrives in a cell group. Again, this seems more
idealistic than practical.
361. Recently I heard from Jim Egli, a director at Touch Outreach, that while their
seminar ministry is not seeing great results, Bethany World Prayer Center is being
swamped with pastors attending their cell seminars.
362. In this 1993 manual Coleman goes into great detail in describing the Meta
Model, the Cho Model, the Serendipity Model, and the Covenant Model (which I will not
use here because it is not really a church growth model.
363. From what I know and have read about Paul Cho’s model of training leaders,
Coleman is way off in the way that he describes it.
364. Bethany World Prayer Center requires that the cell leaders and interns attend a
weekly training session.
365. That is, cell leaders are cared for by leaders over them. The leaders over the cell
leaders also have leaders over them and the process continues up to the senior pastor.
366. At this time, very few Meta Churches insist on bimonthly ongoing leadership
training (since the Meta Model has now been proven in the market place).
367. From my research, I have discovered that the lines are increasingly difficult to
distinguish between the Serendipity Model and the Meta Model. Both offer a plethora
of small groups and both have a very difficult time training leadership on an ongoing
basis.
368. In my tutorial on Cell Group Strategies (June, 1996), I discussed this issue.
369. In my tutorial on Cell strategies, I describe New Hope Community Church in
greater detail. The reason that I believe that New Hope Community Church has
modeled the Meta Model more than the Cho Model is due to their wide variety of small
groups, the fact that George set forth the Meta paradigm after studying Galloway’s
church, and the fact that Galloway openly promotes the Meta Model in his seminars.
370. I’m referring here to the training offered in the Track Pack.
371. It is also true that there is nothing new under the sun, and I suspect that Carl
George simply gave new life to an already existing bimonthly cell training model.
372. The weekly ongoing training was the original model that the Yoida Full Gospel
Church practiced for years. As was mentioned earlier, this weekly training time has now
become biannual due to the rapid growth of the cell groups.
373. Neighbour points out that this is one aspect that is common to all of the cell
churches. In his book, Where Do We Go From Here (1990:73-80),
374. Much of the church growth success that we experienced at the El Batán Church
in Quito, Ecuador had to do with the passion that possessed the leadership team to set
clear, specific church growth goals and then to visibly display those goals on a huge
plastic poster board.
375. This is one of the questions that I will be asking cell leaders throughout Latin
America, “Do you know when your group is going to give birth to another one?”
376. I noticed that Larry Stockstill encourages his leaders every Wednesday. He gives
them words of vision, encouragement, hope, and appreciation. At times, I am sure that
Larry feels like he is repeating himself. Yet, I have become increasingly convinced that
this ongoing vision casting time will make or break a cell ministry.
377. I will never forget the response of Carl, a leader at Bethany World Prayer Center
who multiplied his cell group six times. When I asked him the reason for his success, he
dogmatically asserted—prayer, prayer, amd prayer.
378. On the other hand, Barna in his book, The Power of Vision, advises the leader
not to use slogans. He feels that slogans have a tendency of trivializing the vision rather
than simplifying it (140). One of the subheadings reads, “Shelve the Slogans” (139).
379. This seems to be a constant problem among Latin leadership. When working
through their goals for the future, I have noticed a tendency to be highly unrealistic.
380. I visited a cell group multiplication party at Bethany World Prayer Center in
Baker, Louisiana.
381. Martin Bucer, who utilized small groups during the reformation, and Philip
Spener, who effectively used them right after the reformation, never allowed their
small groups to be called the church. To them, the word “church” could only
legitimately refer to the state church which gathered on Sunday morning. They would
not allow communion and other sacraments to be performed through the small group.
Although I believe that cell groups should be connected to larger celebration events, I
believe that they can perform all of the functions of the larger church.
382. Small Group Dynamics has become a discipline or science in its own right.
Before I ever became interested in small group ministry, I remember taking a secular
college course on small group dynamics—how to relate in a small group and how to
improve communication in a small group. Practically all secular organizations hold
small group meetings, from boards to task forces. Therefore, there is a plethora of
information concerning how to encourage small group interaction, which is generally
referred to as “Small Group Dynamics”.
383. I am beginning to realize that this is especially true in Latin America where the
spirit of the Caudillo (macho domination) is so common. Control seems to be more
important in Latin America.
384. I will never forget one cell meeting that I observed ( Republic Church in Quito,
Ecuador). The leader had a small correction for every answer—the answer was almost
right but not quite right. Towards the end of the meeting
385. The expository teaching of the Word of God and various Sunday School classes
all have their proper place in the church facility. However, in the home cell group, it
seems best to emphasize Bible application.
386. I am referring here to the normal believer oriented cell meetings here. If the
emphasis is on unbelievers, the goal will not be intimate fellowship.
387. Normally, in the cell church if one has arrived at a top leadership position, it is
because he or she has mastered and been successful in leadership principles at the cell
leader level.
388. In many cell churches today, there are upper levels of management, so that the
pastor actually trains for those who are over five cells, etc. and not the actual cell leader
personally.
389. When we first arrived in Ecuador, we were highly motivated and prepared (lots
of pre-training). A senior missionary was assigned to us who treated us like babies who
needed to be told everything and watched over. This person’s leadership style was
offensive to us and was not effective. However, some new missionaries who lacked
confidence and talent might have needed this time of directive leadership style.
According to Hersey and Blanchard, the effective leader is able to adapt his leadership
style according to the needs of the follower.
390. In the El Batan Church I saw several of these ‘power confrontations’ first hand
between the board (made up of successful businessmen and the pastors). I was
amazed by the open boasting among these ‘powerful people’ of their power and
influence. The situation became so pronounced that in June, 1996 this powerful board
left the church (partly asked to resign by the national church) along with 200 people
and formed their own new church under Alfredo Smith.
391. This is especially true with regard to cell-based ministry. The issue of authority,
both from the pastoral leadership perspective as well as it relates to cell leadership,
seems to come up on a repeated basis.
392. This has been confirmed in my own personal experience. We ministered in the
El Batán church in Quito, Ecuador. This church happened to be more middle to upper
class. Yet, I soon discovered that the higher class people of that church struggled with
accepting and submitting to the national pastors who came from a lower class. I
witnessed this superior attitude and disrespect time and time again. In fact, the only
pastor that the upper class of the church has ever accepted was an Argentine who
appears very ‘white’
393. We divided our cell groups into the major departments in the church
(University, young married couples, adults, etc.). This worked well and members with
similar backgrounds were free to join the group of their choice.
394. Perhaps another aspect of this conflict between idealism and realism is the
tendency to say ‘yes’ when there is no concrete intention to fulfill that commitment
How often did we forcefully agree on a plan of action in the pastoral staff meeting, only
to see those plans fall by the wayside. How often did various workers tell me they were
going to fulfill something only to have a change of plans later on. Again, I must be very
careful here not to over generalize, yet, it does seem that there is a wider gap between
idealism and realism in Latin America than in North America
395. For example, the Power Distance scores for Mexico were 81, Venezuela 81,
Colombia, 67, and Perú, 64; whereas the USA had a power distance level of 40, Great
Britian, 35, Denmark, 18.
396. Hofstede lists 18 characteristics. Here I have only listed those values that relate
most to my present study on leadership.
397. Some scores: US-46; Great Britain-35; Sweden-29; Australia-51; In contrast to
Perú-87; Colombia-80; Venezuela-76; At the same time, this study was not so easy to
label because of countries like Belgium-94; Greece-112; Japan-92.
398. Here are some of the scores most relevant to who I am as an American and a
missionary to Latin America: US-91; Great Britain-89; Canada-80; Italy-76 versus
Venezuela-12 (the lowest); Colombia-13; Perú-16; Mexico-30.
399. Here are some examples of scores: US-62; Japan-95 (highest); Austria-79;
Switzerland-70 in comparison with Latin American countries: Mexico-69; Colombia-64;
Peru-42; Venezuela-73; Spain-42; Chile-28.
400. I have become increasingly concerned about the lack of distinction between
leaders and non-leaders in Clinton’s framework. For example, Clinton talks about God’s
preparation in the life of a potential leader through various checks. However, are not
those checks used in the life of Christian non-leaders? At times, it seems that Clinton is
simply reiterating what the Bible says about every Christian—not necessarily Christian
leadership. He has arrived at his theories by using the grounded research technique
(discovering patterns and similarities among leaders). However, he has not used
grounded research to study non-leaders, so I wonder how specifically his research
relates to leadership.

References cited

 Anderson, Neil T. and Charles Mylander

 1994 Setting Your Church Free. Ventura: Regal Books.
 Barker, Steve, Judy Johnson, Bob Malone, Ron Nicholas and Doug Whalen.
 1985 Good Things Come In Small Groups. Illinois: InterVarsity Press.
 Barna, George
 1991 User Friendly Churches. Ventura: Regal Books.
 1992 The Power of Vision. Ventura: Regal.
 Beckham, William A.
 1995 The Second Reformation. Houston: Touch Publications.
 Bennis Warren and Burt Nanus
 1985 Leaders: The Strategies For Taking Charge. New York: Harper Perennial.
 Bethany Cell Conference
 1996 Syllabus of the Bethany Cell Conference. Baton Rouge, Louisiana: Bethany
World Prayer Center
 Berg, Mike and Paul Pretiz
  1996 Spontaneous Combustion: Grass-Roots Christianity, Latin American Style.
Pasadena: William Carey Library.
 Brown, William
 1992 “Growing the Church Through Small Groups in the Australian Context.” D.Min.
dissertation, Fuller Theological Seminary.
 Cho, Paul Yonggi
 1979 The Fourth Dimension. Miami: Logos International.
 1981 Successful Home Cell Groups. Miami: Logos International.
 1984 Recruiting Staff For A Large Church. Church Growth Lectures. Audio tape 2.
Pasadena, CA: Fuller Theological Seminar, School of World Mission.
 Clinton, Dr. J. Robert
 1988 The Making of a Leader. Colorado Springs: NavPress.
 1989 Leadership Emergence Theory. Altadena: Fuller Seminary.
 1991 The Mentor Handbook. Altadena: Barnabas Publishers.
 1993 Leadership Perspectives. Altadena: Barnabas Publishers.
 1993 Developing Leadership Giftedness. Altadena: Barnabas Publishers.
 1995 Strategic Concepts. Altadena: Barnabas Publishers.
 Covey, Stephen
 1989 Seven Habits of Highly Effective People. Simon & Schuster.
 Davis, Don
 1996 E-mail to Dan Gibson. April 12.
 Dealy, Glen Caudill
 1992 The Latin Americans Spirit and Ethos. San Francisco: Westview Press.
 Dobbins, G. S.
 1969 Aprenda A Ser Líder. Argentina: Casa Bautista De Publicaciones.
 Elliott, J.H.
 1984 “The Spanish Conquest and Settlement of America” in The Cambridge History of
Latin America. Vol I. Leslie Bethel, ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
 Engstrom, Ted W.
 1976 The Making Of A Christian Leader. Grand Rapids: Zondervan.
 1980 Leaders Are Made, Not Born. Minneapolis: Editorial Betania.
 ” Ecuador in Pictures-Visual Geography Series.”
 1987 Minneapolis: Lerner Publications, Geography Department.
 Galloway, Dale
 1986 20/20 Vision. Oregon: Scott Publishing.
 1995 The Small Group Book. Grand Rapids: Fleming H. Revell.
 Geyer, Georgie
 1970 The New Latins. New York: DoubleDay Company.
 Geraets, C.H.
 1970 “Cultural Considerations.” In Shaping a New World:. Edward Cleary. ed. Pp. 27-
79. Maryknoll, New York: Orbis Books.
 George, Carl
 1991 Prepare Your Church For The Future. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House.
 1993 How To Break Growth Barriers. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House.
 1994 The Coming Church Revolution. Grand Rapids: Fleming H. Revell.
 Gibbs, Eddie
 1981 I Believe in Church Growth. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Company.
 Fielder, Fred E.
 1967 A Theory of Leadership Effectiveness. New York: McGraw Hill.
 Finney, John
 1989 Understanding Leadership. London: Daybreak.
 Hadaway, C. Kirk
 1987 Home Cell Groups and House Churches. Nashville: Broadman Press.
 1991 Church Growth Principles: Separating Fact from Fiction. Nashville: Broadman.
 Haggai, John
 1986 Leadership That Endures In A World That Changes. El Paso: Editorial Mundo
Hispano.
 Hall, John Jr.
 1992 Urban Ministry Factors In Latin America. Ph.D. dissertation. Fuller Seminary.
 Hamlin, Dr. Judy
 1990 The Small Group Leaders Training Course. Colorado: Navpress.
 Hersey, P. and Blanchard K.
 1988 Management of Organizational Behavior. New Jersey, Prentice Hall.
 Hian, ChuaWee
 1987 The Making of a Leader. Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press.
 Hocking, David
 1991 The Seven Laws of Christian Leadership. Ventura: Regal Books.
 Hofstede, Geert
 1980 Culture’s Consequence. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.
 Hornsby, Billy
 1995 Leadership Discipleship Track. Baton Rouge: Bethany World Prayer Center.
 Hunter, George G. III
 1996 Church for the Unchurched. Nashville: Abingdon Press.
 Hurston, Karen
 1994 Growing the World’s Largest Church. Springfield: Chrism.
 1995 “The Importance of Small Group Multiplication” in Global Church Growth. Vol.
XXXII, no 4, p. 12.
 Lingenfelter, Sherwood G. and Marvin K. Mayers
 1986 Ministering Cross-Culturally. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House.
 McGavran, Donald
 1990 Understanding Church Growth. 3rd ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
 Moran, Robert T. and Philip R. Harris
  1982 Managing Cultural Synergy. Vol. 2. Houston: Gulf Publishing Company.
 1987 Managing Cultural Differences. 2 nd ed. Houston: Gulf Publishing Company.
 Nanus, Burt
 1992 Visionary Leadership. San Francisco: Jossey Boss Publications.
 Neighbour, Ralph
 1990 Where Do We Go From Here A Guidebook for the Cell Group Church. Houston:
Touch Publications.
 1991 Building Groups Opening Hearts. Houston: Touch Publications.
 1992 The Shepherd’s Guidebook: A Leader’s Guide for the Cell Group Church.
Houston: Touch Publications.
 1993 The Arrival Kit. Houston: Touch Publications.
 1995 Welcome To Your Changed Life. Houston: Touch Publcations.
 1995 New Believer’s Station. Houston: Touch Publications.
 1995 Sponsor’s Guidebook. Houston: Touch Publications.
 Nida, E.
 1974 Understanding Latin Americans. Pasadena: William Carey Library.
 Olien, Michael D.
 1973 Latin Americans: Contemporary Peoples and Their Cultural Traditions. New
York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc.
 Peters, Thomas J.
 1987 Thriving on Chaos. New York: HarperPerennial.
 Plaza, Galo
 1971 Latin America Today and Tomorrow. Washington, D.C.: Acropolis Books, Ltd.
 Price, Richard and Pat Springle
 1991 Rapha’s Handbook for Group Leaders. Houston: Rapha Publishing.
 Rainer, Thom S.
 1993 The Book of Church Growth. Nashville: Broadman Press.
 Rangal, Carlos
 1987 The Latin Americans Their Love-Hate Relationships With the United States. New
Brunswick: Transaction Books.
 Richards, Lawrence and Clyde Hoeldtke
 1981 A Theology of Church Leadership. Grand Rapids: Zondervan.
 Sanders, J. Oswald.
 1967 Spiritual Leadership. Chicago: Moody Press.
 Silvert, Kalman H.
 1977 Essays In Understanding Latin America. Philadelphia: Institute For The Study
Human Issues
 Schodt, D.
 1987 Ecuador – An Andean Enigma. London: Westview Press.
 Stogdill, Ralph Melvin
  1948 “Personal Factors Associated With Leadership: A Survey of the Literature” in
Journal of Psychology, pp. 25, 35-71.
 Urbanski, Edmund Stephen
 1978 Hispanic America And Its Civilizations. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.
 Wagner, C. Peter
 1973 “Pragmatic Strategy for Tomorrow’s Mission” in God Man and Church Growth.
Grand Rapids: Baker.
 1976 Your Church Can Grow. Ventura: Regal.
 1979 Your Spiritual Gifts Can Help Your Church Grow. Glendale: Regal.
 1984 Leading Your Church to Growth. Ventura: Regal.
 Warren, Rick
 1995 How To Build A The Purpose Driven Church. Saddleback Seminar Workbook.
 Weil, T.E.
 1973 Area Handbook for Ecuador. Washington, U.S. Government Printing Office.
 Wilke, Richard B.
 1986 And Are We Yet Alive? Nashville: Abingdon Press.
 Youssef, Michael.
 1986 The Leadership Style of Jesus. Canada: Victor Books