Get Your Strategy On
In case you follow this blog in a feed reader, you may want to check out the comments on this post regarding branding. This is a great conversation. I’d like to go back and respond specifically to Jared’s question. Jared, first of all, what you’re witnessing is the freedom Perry has given me to shoot straight on this blog. You get my honest take of ministry and life. It isn’t just the company line.
You’ll never see me publicly question Perry’s leadership or vision, but I will reveal, from time to time, some areas where we’ve acknowledged we need to improve. One of those areas is how we handle branding. Another example where I’ve admitted we have fallen short and need improvement is our web strategy. I’m not going to try to sugarcoat it–our web presence is poor right now, but we’re taking steps to get it right.
Specifically, on the topic of branding, here are some additional thoughts to respond to your observations…
If you want an example from the marketplace, check out Google. Their products, for the most part, all include the "Google" name and specifically identify the product without requiring any guesswork. You can use Google Desktop or Google Maps or Google Finance or iGoogle or Google Video. The only real exceptions to their strategy are the companies they’ve acquired (like Blogger and YouTube) where there was already an established brand presence. You don’t see them taking one of their products and trying to create separate brands to define each product. (It’s not Mapilicious, as an example. It’s just Google Maps.)
In Church world, though, we’ve fallen into the trap of letting every ministry compete against each other for attention. That’s why we feel like we need to create a logo and a name for every ministry that exists in our churches. (There are some big, visible churches that have fallen into this trap.)
Here are the consequences of that decision. The staff leaders end up spending an inordinate amount of their time trying to promote their ministry ahead of the other ministries in the church instead of leading their ministry. Secondly, the people who are trying to make connections in our churches get bombarded with competing messages. From their perspective, it sounds like the ministries are shouting to get their attention and all we’re doing is adding noise to people’s already hectic lives.
By the way, as a side note, people don’t attend ministry programs or events because of slick promotions. They attend ministry programs and events because those events add value to their lives. You can do all the clever marketing you want, but, if the experience is stinky, people will not show up. That’s why staff should be focusing more on leading their ministries rather than promoting their ministries. If the experience is positive, people will tell and invite their friends–that’s how ministry programs grow.
If you want a good example of how all of this plays out in Church world, in my opinion, LifeChurch.tv has nailed it. Check out their website. The first thing you see when you go to their site is the promotions for their current series. Then, when you dig deeper to find next steps beyond the weekend, you have the choice of opportunities like LifeGroups, LifeMissions, LifeKids and LifeYouth. That’s brilliant. They’ve made it completely obvious to people what those other environments are all about. Even if I’m completely new to the church, I know that my kids go to LifeKids. How smart is that?
Folks, in case you haven’t figured it out, we’ve hit a huge passion area for me. The Church, including NewSpring Church, has an opportunity to move in a new direction that removes barriers that we are unintentionally creating. We need to make it easier for people to take their next spiritual steps in our ministries. Thankfully, God is bigger than branding. I’m still convinced there’s a place for marketing in the Church. But, too much marketing can create roadblocks for people who are considering their next steps.
Sorry for the long post. I guess I had a lot to say. Carry on the conversation.
Tony Morgan is a pastor and the Chief Strategic Officer at NewSpring Church where he develops creative solutions for communications, technology and NewSpring Ministries--the church's ministry that equips other church leaders.
[read more...]
Milan Ford
March 31st, 2008 at 11:39 am
Well said.
Ryan Day
March 31st, 2008 at 12:34 pm
Right on, Tony! You are exactly right. We struggle with this too. When I get to visit other churches (which is very seldom) I’m often left scratching my head trying to figure out what’s what. We are in the process of aligning everything so that it makes sense - this includes all ministries and promotions. We want them to fit in a logical easy to understand process. In fact we boil it all down to 4 words and that’s our pitch. however, we are still in process…
Chris Roberts
March 31st, 2008 at 2:45 pm
Great insight, Tony!
Jamie
March 31st, 2008 at 3:18 pm
How can I agree or disagree with you. I’ve never thought about stuff like that.
Yet another reason why I’m glad that you are in the position you are, doing the job you are doing.
Nick
March 31st, 2008 at 3:24 pm
Great post!
I don’t know how many times I have fallen in the trap, and the biggest pain is the time spent thinking up all of the branding.
Name of the Group/Activity…Why the name - What does it mean?…Logo for Marketing…Purpose Statement for the Group/Activity…Etc…
Before you know it, the thing that matters most (people) are being neglected due to all of the time it takes to create our brand.
I couldn’t agree with this more! “By the way, as a side note, people don’t attend ministry programs or events because of slick promotions. They attend ministry programs and events because those events add value to their lives.”
Billy Chia
March 31st, 2008 at 4:04 pm
Tony,
Amazing post. The why/how you guys do branding was very revealing and helpful.
The ability to admit that you guys face challenges in the honest, yet mature way you have done above is very encouraging.
Davey
March 31st, 2008 at 9:48 pm
Tony, I read this post while I was writing a paper on the history of my home church for a Wesleyan Church history class I’m in. It was depressing realizing once again how irrelevant my ministry classes are. Keep rocking my world and everyone else’s with your strategic blog posts. It’s so refreshing!
Rebecca Moon
March 31st, 2008 at 10:55 pm
great insight. i love when you write long posts; no apology necessary. if there were no long posts, there would be no examples like “Mapilicious.” that should be the secret word at the Unleash blogging breakout next year. :)
Nick
March 31st, 2008 at 11:51 pm
I guess the churches that brand & name everything that I’m thinking of don’t have them all competing for attention. And, it definitely appears they spend more time leading than promoting. The branding is more about ownership of that environment and not about grabbing attention. The branding communicates quality and helps keep language consistent. You can call a children’s environment by it’s name, rather than let “Sunday School” be the label - which communicates a totally different thing.
I like the LifeKids, LifeMissions, etc, but names that aren’t that easy to identify with their purpose can work as well, as long as signage is excellent.
It’s true that people may continue to attend programs or events because they add value to their lives, but they don’t know that until they attend. People may have been more enticed to attend The Man Series because of the promotion, and the same could be true for any program or event.
So, I guess what I’m saying it that it’s not either/or, but both/and. I think churches need to lead well AND promote/brand well. Great thoughts Tony.
Sean Pritzkau
April 3rd, 2008 at 10:25 pm
well put tony.
one of my favorite posts from you.
Kirt Manuel
April 10th, 2008 at 2:25 pm
American Idol is multiple years running now. The promotion and brand establishment invested in it has been enormous, and enormously successful. It really wouldn’t matter what network ran it. It’s a winner because people want it.
In the church, the “people want it” effect seems to grow *only after* aggregated, individual experiences; word-of-mouth buzz; and repeated positive encounters with the ministry. Right?
Thus, wouldn’t the branding priority be that “the New Spring experience” is a powerful one, no matter if it’s weekend, men’s ministry, junior high, or whatever?
For a church message series, it helps me to think of “co-branding” or something like that–i.e. “The Man Series: New Spring Gets Hairy and Sweaty.” The top of the branding hierarchy is not “The Series” but rather “The Series: Powerful Stuff at New Spring.” Maybe it’s easier for me to think like this: the brand is New Spring. The top priority event/activity I’m communicating is Man Series. You can’t really build a “brand” out of something that’s gone in four weeks, can you?
Over time, the actual content of the series matters less than the church’s overall impact in the lives of people far from Christ, coming to Christ, or growing in Christ. I hope our churches can build brands that are instantly recognized and loved in our communities because those communities have been changed forever by us.
When we reach that point our “management of perception” will be irrelevant and our brand will be truly priceless.
Mitch Bolton
April 10th, 2008 at 5:02 pm
I just have to say, based on the Lifechurch example, that you shouldn’t name your children’s ministry “New Kids” :)
“…people don’t attend ministry programs or events because of slick promotions. They attend ministry programs and events because those events add value to their lives.” That’s what I’ve been trying to communicate to people, and those are the words I need.
Adam Gregory
April 12th, 2008 at 12:18 pm
I disagree…
With the above comment that is. Totally name it “New Kids” just cause that would be freaking awesome. LOL