by Bob Whitesel D.Min., Ph.D., 10/24/15.
I’ve written about how research reveals you can prevent group exits in churches by altering two “triggers” during the process of introducing a new idea. The first trigger you must alter is called a “negative Legitimizing event.” Here a person in leadership (usually a pastor) legitimizes a new idea and the “change proponents” begin to run too fast with their new idea. This headlong speed will eventually lead to “status quo congregants” feeling left behind and polarized. The result is polarization in the church between the change proponents (who you need for cultivating new ideas) and the status quo (who you need because they control the finances and have experience).
I have written a book describing this (Staying Power: Why People Leave the Church Over Change What You Can Do About It, Abingdon Press) as well as created a short introduction in my “Preparing for Change Reaction: How to Introduce Change in Your Church (Wesleyan Publishing House) at this link.
But, a negative legitimizing event is very different from a “negative decision.” And, often my students confuse the two.
So, I thought I’d share a little bit more clarity on what comprises a Negative Legitimizing Event. This is because at first reading, students can miss-identify the “negative legitimizing event” as simply a “negative decision.” It is really more than that with many of you correctly identifying a “negative legitimizing event.”
But, for further clarity let me explain how I once addressed the difference between a “negative legitimizing event” and a “negative event” with a student. You see, sometimes students don’t find the “negative legitimizing event,” but instead describe a “negative decision” a leader has undertaken.
Here is an example of what a student once said:
”My Negative Legitimizing Event: The senior pastor at the time felt that the church financially could not sustain a full time assistant pastor. So, in order to pay bills and for the church to be financially stable, the senior pastor and the local board of administration, decided to eliminate the position of the assistant, which was for all purposes, the position of a youth pastor, one specializing in the ministry towards teens from ages 12 to 18.” This person is a good student, but was thinking I was asking for a “negative event” and thus described a “negative decision event.”
Here is my response:
A “Negative Legitimizing Event” is different. It is a decision by someone in power (Pastor Jim in the textbook, Whitesel, 2007, p. 158, para. 1) who legitimizes a change, without first building broad support for it. A “Negative Legitimizing Event” probably happened in this student’s story, but he did not make it clear when and by who.
Thus, if you have questions (or if you are a student, before you post your answer to this week’s questions) reread pp. 157-158 (Whitesel, 2007), plus look at the Questions for Group Study on pp. 157 (especially “Trigger 2”). This should help you identify who/when/where did someone in power legitimize a change without first building broad support. And, thus the leader’s “legitimizing” of a change, would result in a “negative” outcome and lead the church down ROUTE A to group exit.
For more info see Preparing for Change Reaction: How to Introduce Change to Your Church, by Bob Whitesel 2010. The figure is from Staying Power: Why People Leave the Church Over Change What You Can Do About It, Abingdon Press, 2003, p. 177).