The strategic shift needed for greater growth, healthier leaders, and flourishing churches
NB: This is the full article. A shortened blog-length version is also available here.
Measuring What Matters
How do you measure success? It is an age-old question. In the Church, the problem is we often think we know what to measure, but the very things we measure may actually be keeping us unhealthy and limiting our impact. The numbers matter, but they can also hide something more troubling. Beneath the surface of growth, many churches are struggling with fragile leaders, shallow discipleship, and declining impact in their communities.
This is the hidden failure behind our success. Numbers reassure us that we are moving forward, yet at times they keep us from asking the deeper questions. They can soothe us while masking dysfunction and ill health.
No one sets out for this to happen. No one desires it. Yet it continues because of what we choose to measure. When we measure only what is easy to count, we reward the wrong things. We mistake activity for impact and assume there is health behind our growth and substance beneath our size.
The challenge is not that leaders are failing, but that the way we measure success is failing us. Many of us have had a nagging sense deep down that there is something different we need to be measuring if we are to make a greater Kingdom impact. But we have not always known how to get there.
This article explores why this happens and how we can shift toward a healthier way of measuring what truly matters.
Drill Bits or Holes?
So, what are we measuring? We tend to measure the numbers. Sunday attendance, the number of life groups, weekly revenue, or the number of locations and campuses we have. Not only is this easy to do, it is also what most churches seem to be doing, so it makes sense to follow along. We can be lulled into thinking we are measuring the right things.
Now please do not mishear me — the numbers are important. They do tell a story. They just do not tell the whole story. Numbers tend to tell us about organisational viability, and this is crucial. At a basic level, we need revenue and personnel to pay the bills, maintain the staff, and carry out the activities of the church.
If we stop our measuring there, however, it assumes that viability is our primary mission. And that is the issue.
The story of the Boston Drill Bit Company illustrates this brilliantly. For years, they were industry leaders, known for crafting the finest drill bits in the world. But over time their market share plummeted. Despite doubling their marketing efforts, nothing improved. Eventually a new CEO gathered the managers together and asked them a key question:
“What are we really on about here at the Boston Drill Bit Company? What is our main purpose?”
The managers discussed it and confidently replied, “We are here to make drill bits — not just any drill bits, but the finest drill bits in the world.”
The CEO responded, “No. That’s not why we are here at all. We are here to make holes.”
That single shift in perspective changed everything. They began asking a courageous new question: “What is the best way to make a hole?” A drill bit makes a hole, but there are other ways. They moved into laser technology and recaptured the market.
In the church we can be so focused on what we do that we lose sight of why we do it. We can become absorbed in refining and perfecting our drill bits, but forget to measure the holes Jesus has called us to make. Drill bits are concrete and easy to measure, so we keep producing them. We can even measure our performance in creating the “finest drill bits,” yet fail to measure the “holes” that matter most.
Take Sunday services as an example. Their purpose is to worship God collectively, honour Him, help people grow spiritually, and deepen community. If we simply measure Sunday attendance, it tells us how popular we are but not how well we are fulfilling those purposes.
If we are to make a greater impact, we have to measure what matters. That means measuring our mission outcomes.
How the System Keeps Us Unhealthy
The challenge before us, however, is not simply a matter of realising this and creating different metrics. It is far more complex than that. The ecosystem in which pastors live and lead actively works against making this type of shift. We need to understand what is happening before we can explore how to change what we measure in order to empower a greater Kingdom impact in our churches.
As the old saying goes, “A system is perfectly designed to give you the results you are currently getting.” The question is, are these the results you actually want?
When we zoom out across Aotearoa, it becomes clear that ministry health is in crisis. On the surface, Sunday services continue, sermons are preached, and groups still gather. Yet beneath that surface, the data tells a sobering story:
- The percentage of Christians has been declining for decades, with population growth far outpacing the church’s reach. [i]
- There is a leadership pipeline crisis. In some denominations, replacement rates hover at only 30–50%.[ii] One large denomination reported only three new candidates in training two years in a row. That is nowhere near enough to replace current leaders, let alone foster growth.
- Pastors experience mental health challenges at higher rates than the general public.[iii] International research even shows that the longer someone remains in ministry, the more emotional intelligence tends to decrease. [iv]
This is not a matter of poor individual effort or leadership failure. It is a systemic problem. It is sobering to think that churches, elders, boards, denominations, and training institutions are collectively forming part of a system that is producing this crisis. The courageous question must be asked: What needs to change?
Why Course Correction Is Hard
Recognising the need to measure what truly matters is one thing. Making the shift is another. Within the church world, two compounding challenges make course correction especially difficult.
- We Are Captivated by Numbers
Pastors often acknowledge to me that, despite their theology, what gives them the greatest emotional sense of success is numerical growth. I remember one pastor of a large church reflecting on how difficult it must be for pastors of smaller congregations: “It’s hard if you don’t have the numbers.” Without pausing, I found myself saying:
“True. But sometimes the numbers can be an anaesthetic to dysfunction.”
I have spoken with leaders of growing churches who, when asked about spiritual depth, community impact, or new people coming to faith, discovered that most of their growth was simply transfer. Spiritual depth was unclear, and outreach impact was flat. But on the surface, the numbers looked great.
I have also seen churches where there was genuine growth, with people coming to faith. It all looked strong. Yet when you lifted the bonnet and look underneath, leaders were burning out, or staff and volunteers were being chewed up and spat out. Because the numbers looked good, no one asked the hard questions.
When leaders tell me they are not driven by the numbers (and if true, that is awesome), I will sometimes pose two scenarios:
- Scenario 1: Your church grows by 50% in three years, with all the staff and systems you need — but all of the growth is transfer, with no increase in spiritual depth or mission.
- Scenario 2: Your church decreases by 20%, but the remaining 80% go deeper in Jesus, and new people come to faith — but none of them join your church, so you receive no benefit from it.
Most pastors will tell me they know the “right” answer is Scenario 2. But despite that, they usually choose Scenario 1. That is the power our current metrics hold over us.
- We Are Psychologically and Systemically Committed to Numbers
Pastors tend to be caught in over-identification with their role, leading to their identity being deeply fused with the role outcomes. After decades of church decline, growth became a marker of success and then shifted to being a badge of success. It fuels comparison and, at times, unhealthy celebrity culture.
Research from Glenn Melville at the Baptist Union highlights this tension. One pastor described denominational reporting as “shame and blame stats.”[v] I have heard denominational leaders say, “It is not about the numbers,” and then, in another breath, “Now send in your numbers.” When the figures are released, pastors pore over them, unconsciously asking, “Where do I rank?”
Another pastor put it plainly: “There is an unspoken pressure around size and growth. If your numbers are declining, what does that say about you as a pastor? You are valued by the size and perception of your church.” [vi]
The issue is not the heart of denominational leaders. Many I know genuinely want health for pastors and churches. The problem is not them; the problem is the system.
This layered web of expectations creates a gravitational pull back to numbers, making course correction immensely challenging. It is not simply about convincing one pastor to think differently. Pastors remain under incredible pressure to maintain the current model. It is about shifting the system itself.
From Numbers to Impact: Measuring What Really Matters
Whenever the conversation shifts toward qualitative measures, a common objection usually arises: “Measuring the numbers (quantity) is easy. Measuring the mission (quality) is hard.”
There is some truth in that — but it is also a mindset. In reality, we do qualitative measurement all the time.
Take the example of a baby. When a child is born, we measure the quantitative — weight and length. Those numbers are important for physical viability. But when that same child graduates high school, no one says, “Sam Wilson, come on down! Sam, everyone, is six foot two and ninety-five kilograms. Let’s give him a round of applause. Your parents must be so proud.” Those figures tell us nothing about his academic or personal development. Instead, we know how to measure those qualitative aspects, and we do so constantly in every school.
Churches do the same, often without realising it. Even churches focused exclusively on Sunday attendance, will then meet on Monday or Tuesday to critique the service, with questions like:
- Were the welcomers warm and engaging?
- Was the worship seamless?
- Was the preaching inspiring with a call to action?
- Did people respond?
These are all qualitative assessments. And yet we can get stuck on statements like, “My church is 500,” or “My church is 1,000,” as though the only appropriate response is, “Oh wow, your parents must be so proud!” Size, not substance, becomes the badge of worth.
The problem is not that we cannot measure the qualitative. The problem is that we get stuck in a system that keeps us from intentionally measuring our mission. The real challenge is courage — courage to name the things that truly matter, and courage to measure them, even when they cannot be counted as easily or celebrated as publicly.
So how do we do it? The pathway forward begins by redefining success and building a measurement system around mission impact — the “hole” we exist to create.
- Name the Hole (Kingdom Outcomes)
The first step is to clarify the “hole” and our the mission impact. The church belongs to Jesus, so only He gets to decide what success looks like. I will often ask churches a seemingly simple question: If Jesus sat with your congregation, what would He say is success for this church? What would warm His heart to see? We then use their answers to build a strategy.
This exercise consistently reveals the Kingdom Outcomes of the church. The answers tend to cluster around the Great Commandments and the Great Commission: loving God, loving one another, loving our neighbour, and making disciples. These provide a foundation for discerning mission impact together. Importantly, the church needs to do this work themselves to facilitate genuine ownership, that ready-made answers will not provide.
- Qualify the Outcomes (Qualities)
Kingdom Outcomes can inspire, but they can also be vague. They need to be translated into observable qualities.
For example, “People loving one another deeply”, the outcome might look like:
- Everyone is connected and cared for.
- Conflict is resolved quickly and well.
- Forgiveness is the norm.
- People respond to one another with respect and support.
Qualifying the Outcomes gives it practical expression.
- Quantify the Qualitative (Outcome KPIs)
Once the qualities are clear, they can be measured. These become Outcome KPIs — measurements of mission impact. They are things you can measure but not directly control.
Here, both size and substance are important. If you had a church of 1000 but no one liked each other, there is size but no substance. Whereas if there is one person who loves everyone deeply, there is quality in that person but without the numbers there is limited impact.
Outcome KPIs can be goals that are set or they can track progress. For example:
- 80% of people are in small groups, or steady growth in participation.
- Surveys showing people feel connected and cared for average 8/10 or trend upward.
- Complaints are handled promptly, with none left unresolved beyond a month.
- Action KPIs
Outcome KPIs must be paired with Action KPIs. These are controllable steps that can be done daily, weekly, or monthly. These are the actions most likely to lead to the desired outcomes.
Once outcomes are broken down into actions, they can be implemented and owned by more people. Vision then shifts from being a statement on the wall to a shared plan that the whole community carries together.
Conclusion: The Courage to Make the Strategic Shift
“A system is perfectly designed to give you the results you are currently getting.” (W. Edward Deming). The question is: are these the results you want? More importantly, are these the results Jesus wants for His church?
If the outcomes we celebrate are only numerical, we will continue producing tired pastors, fragile ministries, and shallow discipleship. But if we have the courage to name Kingdom Outcomes, qualify them in ways that can be observed, measure them with Outcome KPIs, and implement them with Action KPIs, we will open the door to greater Kingdom impact.
This is not easy, but it is essential that we measure what truly matters. Then we can continually ask of our mission means: Is this the best way to make the hole? Is this the best way to achieve the outcomes Jesus desires? In doing so, we align our efforts with His mission and genuinely seek to see more of His Kingdom come.
The challenge before us is clear: will we keep perfecting our drill bits, or will we focus on making the holes Jesus has called us to make?
If your church wants to move beyond numbers and clarify your Kingdom outcomes, I would love to walk with you in that journey.
Let’s make the strategic shift towards greater growth, healthier pastors, and genuinely flourishing churches.
👉 To explore how to begin, contact me at richard@thrivingchurcheshq.com.
[i] David Kinnaman, ‘Signs of Decline and Hope Among Key Metrics of Faith’, Faith and Christianity in State of the Church, 2020; Daniel Silliman, ‘Decline of Christianity Shows No Signs of Stopping’, Christianity Today, 2022; Georgina Campbell, ‘Census Data NZ: More Than Half of the Population Has No Religion.’, The New Zealand Hearld, 20 September 2023, https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/census-data-nz-more-than-half-of-the-population-has-no-religion/YT2KJBSTQNBDTPVDHJYHNALIZA/.
[ii] Barna Group, The State of Pastors: How Today’s Church Leaders Are Pursuing Resilience and Stepping into a Hopeful Future, vol. 2 (Barna Group, 2024), 68. Also, my personal communication with New Zealand denominational leaders.
[iii] Rae Jean Proeschold-Bell and Jason Byassee, Faithful and Fractured: Responding to the Clergy Health Crisis (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic, 2018), 37.
[iv] Christopher R. Gambill, ‘Emotional Intelligence and Conflict Management Style among Christian Clergy’ (Capella University, 2008), 99; Kelvin John Randall, ‘Emotional Intelligence: What Is It, and Do Anglican Clergy Have It?’, Mental Health, Religion & Culture 17, no. 3 (2014): 8.
[v] Glenn Melville, ‘Engaging Emotion: Using Critical Realism to Understand the Affective Well-Being of New Zealand Baptist Pastors, and to Design an Affective Well-Being Course’ (Thesis, Auckland University of Technology, 2022), 164.
[vi] Melville, 164.
