Size Transition Theory And Practice Still Speaks

Mark Tidsworth, Pinnacle Team Leader

“What would we need to change to accommodate the next 50 people God wants to send us?”

 Alice Mann

I thought maybe its life-cycle was over. You know how concepts and practices tend to run their course, coming to the end of their usefulness. Remember the Seven Habits Of Effective People by Steven Covey or The Purpose Driven Life by Rick Warren? Certain concepts and practices speak to what a culture needs at just the right time, but then if they aren’t destined to become classics, they complete their life-cycle, aging out.

When Pinnacle first began, we did so many Size Transition Theory And Practice Trainings while also consulting with many churches on how they might navigate their move to the next size. Then the Modern to Postmodern Transition arrived, with Christianity falling from favor among many in American culture. Simultaneously, churches themselves began morphing, taking on new shapes and forming in different ways. Size Transition concepts started looking less relevant or helpful.

But I have to tell you, Size Transition Theory And Practice is not dead. There are churches who are numerically growing, still retaining enough of the traditional church paradigm that this way of understanding the changes inherent in numerical growth is very helpful to them. How do we know this? Mostly, from our coaching and consulting clients.

One coaching client is 2 years into this pastorate. The year before he arrived, the average Sunday Attendance was 132. The first year it bumped up to 156 and now this year they will likely end at 190 or so. Another coaching client has been in her call about 3 years. They need a second service because they are way over the 80% full, effectively turning away people since it doesn’t appear there is room for them. Both of these churches are right in the middle of the pastoral to program size church transition. Another church in which we do a variety of ongoing activities has now moved over the 1000 in attendance mark in worship. They are clearly a Resource size church, experiencing the growing pains described in Size Transition learning.

So, here’s the ongoing relevance of Size Transitions. Churches function like other groups in that they develop norms, habits, rituals, and ideally a coherent reinforcing culture to support ongoing movement. When these churches reach certain points in numerical growth, they outgrow their way of being church together. They are presented with a transition zone wherein the challenge and invitation is to release previous ways of functioning while living into new realities as congregations. When these transitions are navigated successfully, it’s a beautiful thing. When churches and their leadership are unaware of what’s happening, they will often default down to a smaller size when they bump up against the challenges inherent in numerical growth. Here are the four church sizes as originally identified in Size Transition Theory and Practice. These numbers are about average Sunday attendance at their combined worship services (ASA).

Family Size Church – 2-50

Pastoral Size Church – 51-150

Program Size Church – 151-400

Resource Size Church – 401-1000+

When churches know to expect the transitions inherent in numerical growth, they are equipped to manage these well, avoiding unhealthy or destructive reactions to the growth.

One of the best gifts of Size Transition Theory And Practice which served well in a retreat with one of the churches aforementioned is Alice Mann’s classic question.

“What would we need to change to accommodate the next 50 people God wants to send us?”

There are so many positive, forward-thinking assumptions upon which this focusing question rests. Can you imagine your church and its leadership asking this? Given the current religious landscape in these United States, we can’t assumer numerical growth is part of our church’s present or future. It may be that God is calling us to go and find them, rather than waiting for them to find us. On the other hand, I’m still an advocate of this question because of all the potential positives it raises for churches. I’m betting that simply engaging the question will produce some really good, substantive conversation about mission and ministry among your people. We would love to hear how this plays out for you, suspecting your discussion will lead to greater missional advancement.