Assimilation vs. Discipleship vs. Leadership Development

I’ve noticed in some churches a slight misunderstanding of the differences in Assimilation, Discipleship, and Leadership Development—all critical strategies for organizational health, growth, and effectiveness—and all having overlap.

 

Let’s begin by defining the terms, and I’ll admit, the lines between them can get blurry. These definitions may be a bit arbitrary, but you can adjust them to your particular context.  

Assimilation

Assimilation is the process by which an “outsider” becomes an “insider”—that is, how someone who is not part of a community becomes an accepted and included member, typically adopting its customs, beliefs, and language. In evangelical circles, this became an argument decades ago for the “belonging-before-believing” approach. In practical terms, that methodology was more acculturation than assimilation, more of a “two-way” street rather than the “one-way” street of assimilation. The challenge is: how long can one continue to hold on to their original culture before fully adopting the new one? For instance, how long could a Wiccan retain their practices and culture before becoming deeply absorbed into a Christian community?

I’ll let you argue your particular red line for your context, but the main idea is that the person becomes an active, fully engaged, and integrated participant in the community.

Discipleship

Discipleship is the method by which a person is transformed into the likeness of Christ. This followership of Jesus is about reorienting one’s lifestyle around the teachings of Jesus based on an internal “second birth” of the Spirit. When I was pastoring, we defined a disciple simply as a “surrendered and transformed person who loves God and others.”

Leadership Development

Leadership development is the process by which someone is trained, empowered, and authorized to lead a particular group of people toward a defined vision or goal. As an organization becomes more complex and multilayered, the lines blur a bit more between leaders and managers. In general, though,

• leaders align people toward a vision, while managers organize and staff;

• leaders establish an organization’s direction; managers specify how to accomplish the direction;

• leaders assess motivation; managers assess performance. 

If a person entering the community is at square one, the process is fairly linear, following a pattern like this—and note the critical points of overlap:

The distinctions between these three systems must be clarified, with key strategies aimed at achieving specified outcomes for each one. This is where things typically get muddy in churches: not only is there a lack of clarity regarding each key progression, but the process and strategems are often not established—not to mention an understanding of what happens in the overlapped areas.

In your church or organization, are these processes clarified? Do people understand what their next steps are—is there a roadmap? And how well are these systems developed?

These are great questions to tackle with your leadership team—your organization’s health, sustainability, and growth are dependent on your answers. 

Dave Workman | The Elemental Group

---

Want to receive these posts weekly in your inbox? Subscribe for free here.