Now on metrics there are direct metrics and indirect metrics and direct are the best but not always available so then we use indirect metrics. If we can actually get a count disiples then we should use that. An indirect count of disiples might be number of attenders, because we believe that the more people that attend, the more disciples we will create. Indirect metrics require an assumption of a relationship that should be verified before the metric is used. Impact on the community is also an indirect metric as it assumes that if we have more diciples then we will impact the community in greater ways. It also shows some maturity of the disiple in that the diciple is not just coming to Sunday worship, they are actively loving others, their community.

I could go on but this is a blog not a class.

Key metrics is a critical part of the strategic planning process and I like to have the organization identify 9-12 that act like the dash board of your car. You can glance down at the dash board and see how you are doing. How is the organization running. Are you making progress towards your mission?

But the question asked here is what are the 2-3 key metrics the tell us we are achieving our mission! I see alot of agreement that our mission is make diciples. The problem is we don't turn blue when we become a diciple so diciples aren't that easy to identify and count! Also, becoming a disiple is a journey with Christ and so when are we as individual there?

In the Church, graduates are the disciplers — the Paul's.

And in the academic world, the key driver being measured, is FTE… full-time equivalent student based on the number of hours of training.

Again, the system can have flaws such as the proverbial Career Student… always taking more & more training but never leaving the friendly confines of the academic 4 walls. Do we see that tendency inside the Church as well? Measure the Timothys actively committed to the core-training… including OJT beyond the walls.

Are we the local church actually accomplishing the Great Commission in our microcosm? [ie, go ye pervasively throughout our location, location, location?] Measure the percentage of homes/families within the shadow of our steeple, who have optimally heard/seen the gospel. [Notice I said optimally. Doorhangers and bullhorns don't count.]

By the way, I tend to measure the wrong things too.

But I do think its healthy when the team agrees on measurements.

–Terrace Crawford
http://www.terracecrawford.com
http://www.twitter.com/terracecrawford

But this post totally hurts my head!

It seems like there are two different perspectives to be considered.
How do you measure if you're reaching your goals?
Church (the corporation) goals… or Church (the body) goals?

Because while in a perfect world they'd be the same in this world I think they sometimes aren't. Church the Corporation has goals that aim to keep it "in business." If the corporation goes out of business, then what? And Church the Corporation often has to provide what the people "want" to receive tithes and boost attendance.

While Church the Body has other goals. Like moving people to live and act like Christ. To be more Christlike. (Church the Body isn't worried about paying for buildings, lighting, heat, salaries, etc). And didn't Christ generally rub "the religious leaders" the wrong way? Didn't he question the status quo, religious activities and general beliefs of his day?

I'm not a problem causer. I'm just a wife and mom who grew up in the church and lately finds it to be very corporate, watered down (sermons that don't push people out of their comfort zones, small groups that don't really DIG into the word) and finding it hard to attend. It just doesn't feel REAL anymore. GOD feels real. But the church (corporation) doesn't seem to be lining up with the church (Christ).

Obviously I'm confused. Just thought writing it down and sharing it here could lead to some clarity.