Success by numbers
I have recently been exploring the point of Twitter curious as to why people are interested in the intimate details of one’s life. But actually most of my experience of Twitter is much more about driving traffic to a website or blog. So it is one big brand/advertising machine. I followed one person who sent me the this typical automatic response:
Thanks for the follow! Do you want to know How To Dramatically Increase Your Followers & Make Money?
And then they were kind enough to provide me with a link to find out how I could ‘Dramatically Increase Your Followers & Make Money’ and perhaps even buy a potion that cures most ailments. Nice.
Now let me talk about followers/friends. In this social network world it is easy to find yourself defined by how many are following/friending you. Andrew Keen argues that more talent = more followers. Seth Goden hasn’t helped this by enthusiastically arguing that all of us are capable of leading a ‘tribe’ as he calls it. Well the reality is, most people won’t have 50,000 followers and won’t lead a ‘tribe’. What will happen is that a few will be hugely popular and the majority will not. To suggest that talent is defined by how many people are following you is one shallow metric.
And we in the church are also prone to equating success with numbers. The bigger the church the more successful the pastor? Well?
And here is a confession, I buy into that equation and that is wrong. I have been known to throw numbers around, to play the game. Actually what triggered this reflection for me was reading a blog post that mentioned the Anglican Cathedral of Second Life,
By the way, also found this online church in Second Life, The Anglican Cathedral in Second Life, with 7 services weekly and about 600 members in its associated discussion group.
Check it out at : http://digital.leadnet.org/
Well actually the numbers of active participants is closer to 300 and most services get between 5 and 25 participants each service which equates to around 100 people attending the services each week.
So the challenge for me is to engage with this culture without becoming seduced by it. To take the time to think critically and biblically.
So what of this particular issue, of success by numbers? Well Jesus certainly did address crowds as his popularity grew, but most of his attention was on his relationship with his Father (time alone) and then the disciples, of which there were only a few. And this pattern continues into the early church as recorded in the Epistles.
So considerable time should be spent investing in a small group of those close to us (including our family), and heaps of time relating to God through prayer and reading the Bible. And when the opportunity presents, speak out of these relationships to a larger audience. So we don’t seek a larger audience, we respond if one emerges. The key is that success is defined not by ‘followers’, but in relation to God, and to how well we influence the few closest to us.
What do you think?
Filed under Leadership, Personal | |
5 Responses to “Success by numbers”
Leave a Reply
When I was working as a youth pastor, it was SOOOO cliche that the first question people asked you at meetings was - “so, How many in your Youth Group?” We had a fun way to deal with it which was to say the first number that came into your head… sometimes it was 400 and people wanted to be your friend forever and other times it was 3 and people were scared that they would catch something from you and there would be a big Youth Pastor shaped whole in the wall…
I do ministry FOR other people - numbers come and go, but whoever I am working with or for deserves the best from me, so they get the same deal!
I think you’re exactly right, Mark. I’ve been tweeting for a while and have no desire to have every other tweet in the world follow me (or viceversa) - I’d much rather follow those with whom I have a relationship and who have a relationship with me (as opposed to those who hawk their goods).
The same goes for our church - I’d rather see people growing in their relationship with God and taking next steps with Him than be able to brag at a conference or meet-up about the sheer attendance numbers. Not to say that reaching more for the cause of Christ isn’t the goal, but that revolving numbers through a door isn’t what it’s all about here - it’s about depth of relationship & growth.
Good post!
I tried twitter last year, it wasn’t for me. I love social networking but there is only so much I want to know, or information one can handle.
On the numbers I think it simply reflects an issues of gifts, skills and experiences. Surely some are called to get the big numbers and to get people who don’t know Christ, to encounter him, and hopefully engage. Large numbers generate an excitement of their own, or as Darryl Kerrigan popularised, a vibe.
Numbers can be important for building a particular ministry to a specific market segment and to present the gospel to them in an environment in which they will get their message to them. Of course many still choose to reject Christ but these forums at least help get the message to them so they can make that decision.
Similarly and more importantly, discipleship and pastoral support are more effectively carried out in smaller numbers, even to the point of one to one. Even large churches acknowledge this with their small group ministries (home groups, cell groups etc).
So I would suggest that for some pastors is it all about numbers as it drives them, motivates them and the Lord blesses their activity. For other pastors it is all about restoring lives in body, mind and soul.
Vive le difference - I know its not a scriptural quote, but it does appear a Pauline biblical principal of one body, many parts.
I too am experimenting with twitter.
I think your points are very valid.
I also think that twitter is in its very early stages of development - and that it, and similar (eg. facebook) will develop into human search engines, contrasting with the formula-driven google etc.
It is good if Christians are there at the ground floor exploring this.
@liturgy
You make a good point, Mark.
Like Bosco I’m ‘experimenting’ with Twitter, because I tend to learn by doing it’s the only way I’m going to understand it!
Numbers can be enormously informative and helpful to future planning, they can also be completely misleading. When I worked in prison ministry, activity was measured in ‘regime hours’. One prisoner doing one activity for one hour = one regime hour.
The person before me had clocked up an impressive number of regime hours by cultivating a very small fan club who came to everything he put on. 10 people doing 8 actvities a week lasting approximately 2 hours each = 160 regime hours. But you’re still only reaching 10 people.
Now it may be that those 10 people were exactly who he should have been focussing on in discipleship terms, but you could assume from those numbers that the chaplaincy was reaching a large number of people - and it wasn’t.
In a work setting, effectiveness is always going to be measured and numbers are often the easiest thing to hand. But it’s a shame if we start seeing either our social lives or our Christian journey in terms of ‘reach’ and assessing ourselves in terms of success and failure.