Excellence

“Excellence” might not be the business leadership buzzword it once was, but it’s far from dead. A quick search at Amazon shows plenty of business titles with “excellence” in them. Even if the term isn’t the word of the day anymore, the concept has never waned.

This is because the business world understands that making what they do, and how they do it, better is essential for their survival in a competitive marketplace. Maybe that marketplace mentality is partly why ministry leaders sometimes view excellence as a “a business thing.”

But they shouldn’t.

Ambition in life is generally a good thing. Ambition in ministry is indispensable.

We have all heard the tired trope about pastors working only one day a week. It is sad when people repeat such drivel. It is tragic that some ministers have actually provided fodder for this criticism.

Yes, the ministry can, sadly, become a place for the indolent to hide. I’ve never understood why anyone with this mentality would seek the ministry to begin with, but some undoubtedly have.

Introduction

A. In 1982 a book appeared in the United States that revolutionized thinking about the way American corporations are run and the way business should be done in our country. That one book sold more than 6,000,000 copies and spawned a new effort to make business more effective and productive.

B. The book was In Search of Excellence by Thomas J. Peters and Robert H. Waterman, Jr.

Kaizen means improvement, or literally, good change. Identified by author Masaaki Imai as “the key to Japanese competitive success,”¹ kaizen is the philosophy undergirding continuous improvement at every level of the organization, and involving all personnel. As a philosophy, kaizen is the post-World War II driving force behind the success of a host of Japanese companies, led most notably by Toyota.

I once heard a story—I don’t recall where—of a builder who was commissioned by his employer to build a house. The builder’s employer gave specific instructions regarding the quality of the house. He wanted it to be excellent, but the builder tried to save money and effort for himself by cutting corners. The builder knew that he could hide his below-par craftsmanship so that it wouldn’t be discovered until years later.

In the end, the house looked good, but the low quality of the building left much to be desired. When the house was completed, the employer who owned the house handed the keys to the builder, and explained that he wanted to give the house to the builder as a show of gratitude for many years of service. Of course, the builder instantly regretted his laziness and poor workmanship.

In seeking to identify the seeds of excellence, there is a popular device (the Golden Circle) that traces the beginnings of excellence back to the question Why?

Using this model, we could critique the more common alternative of beginning with the outcome (the What) and arriving at the Why, rather than beginning with the Why. The idea is that before arriving at the process (How) and the outcome (What), it is of primary importance that we solidify the Why.

In a way the concept corresponds to reality, but there is a key piece missing. This model lacks the worldview follow-through to really work.