Building a Dynamic Church

By Will Peña, MBA

Part I: Flexible and Dynamic Leadership

Introduction

We have all experienced the constant and changing needs of people around us; whether the needs in

our family, our group of friends, our workplace and our church. Most of these needs come from people

doing their best to manage their life circumstances, but falling short in various areas.

The driving force behind the choices people make in managing their life circumstances is a central

guidance system called values. These value systems are so strong that they affect every choice that a

person makes in all areas of life, from marriage, to parenting, to money, to church, etc.

Yet, these value systems are very different from person to person, which creates different life

circumstances between people; and ultimately a vast difference in the needs from one person to

another.

The question is, how do you meet the needs of so many different people, that come from so many

different backgrounds, cultures, upbringing; and have so many different values, beliefs, attitudes,

talents, expectations and opinions? More importantly, how do you help keep them in harmony with

one another in spite of all of those differences?

Considering this responsibility can be overwhelming. Some have attempted to meet the task, but they

have come to the realization, that though they have victories in one area, they realize failures in other

areas. This is because members of their groups hold so strongly to their different value systems, that

when one group of people get their needs met, it usually means another group feels like their needs are

not being met. It becomes a win-lose situation much of the time.

The solution for many group leaders, is usually to default to catering to only one or two main type of

needs. Unfortunately, other members, who don’t fall into this criteria, will have to settle for their needs

not being met. Consequently, members whose needs are not being met either settle for an unhappy

existence within the group, or have a limited, half-hearted committed to the group while they get their

needs met elsewhere.

The question is, is there a leadership model that can successfully meet the main needs of multiple

people within organizations, families or groups, while still respecting the deep value systems that make

them different?

In this essay, I am proposing a Flexible and Dynamic Leadership Model that is designed to meet the

needs of multiple people, at the highest level of importance, mainly, their value systems. The model is

designed to identify the global value systems of people, and create solutions to meet these needs within

each of those value systems.

This essay will also show how it can be applied in a church group setting, to create the best environment

possible for the growth of the members and the group as a whole.

The principles of this essay are based on the Spiral Dynamics Leadership Model developed by Don Beck,

and Christopher Cowan, and originated by Clare Graves.

Value Systems – Why We Do What We Do

We would all agree, that people are driven, at the highest level, by values they consider most important

in their life. Values influence our identity, our beliefs, attitudes, expectations, opinions and choices we

make in life. These value systems are created from experiences in one’s life and determine a person’s

global point of view.

These value systems become the driving force people use to make choices, and to prioritize what is

most important in their life. If situations go against their value systems, people respond by either

forcefully changing their circumstances, complaining and grumbling, isolating themselves, or leaving. On

the other hand, when people find situations that fit ideally with their value systems, it provides the most

healthy, happy environment for the individual to grow and thrive.

Much research has been done in the area of values, and a global set of Value Systems has been

identified, that most people on the planet adhere to. Whether in families, communities, organizations

or nations; people have historically fallen within the following Value System categories.

To facilitate the discussion of these value systems in this essay, we will categorize each Value System

through a color label for easier understanding. The global value systems are as follows:

Global Value Systems

Color Value System Basic Concerns

Tier 1 Purple* Magical – Mystical Safety

Red* Powerful-Impulsive Dominance and power.

Blue Purposeful –Rule based Meaning and order.

Orange Strategic – Opportunity Seeking Autonomy and influence.

Green Sensitive – Humanistic Equality and community.

Tier 2 Yellow Flexible – Integrative Flexibility, accommodation, win-win.

Turquoise* Holistic – Global Life and harmony.

*For purposes of this essay we will discuss only the Value Systems that commonly affect most churches.

We will not discuss the Purple, Red, and Turquoise Value Systems.

Conflicts in Organizations

The main challenges arise when, in order to meet the needs of their members, the leadership of a

church create an environment that strongly adheres to only one or two Value Systems in this list.

Leaders encounter conflicts when they run into members in their groups that adhere to completely

different Value Systems from the group they have established.

The common solution leaders use to resolve these problems, is to try to influence these people to adapt

to the main value system of the group. Unfortunately, since people cling so strongly to their own Value

System, to choose to adapt to the group creates in these members the feeling of a win-lose situation.

Over time, those in a different Value System from the main group will feel like their needs are not being

met, and they will ultimately: 1) try to change the system, 2) do nothing and complain, 3) settle for a

half-hearted commitment to the group and get their needs met somewhere else, 4) or leave.

In response, since most group leaders are not yet acquainted with the importance of Value Systems, in a

sincere effort for unity, they try to more strongly influence the people in the different Value System to

conform. Yet, by doing this, they continue to push those people with different value systems away,

which works against their efforts at unity, and creates even more disunity. It also creates a situation

where the strengths and talents of those people with other Value Systems are lost, which creates a loss

in resources for the entire group.

For example:

Most churches generally fall within either the Blue Value System, which appreciates systems, structure,

rules, hierarchy and order, for the purpose of fulfilling their higher calling. Or, they are more Green in

their Value System, and focus on family, and creating equality in the group by giving everyone a voice.

Many churches also fall within a mixture of the two.

The challenges come when someone in the Orange or Yellow Value System proposes changes to the way

things are, in order to improve them (I.e.: changing programs, adding technology, improving the

leadership methods, changing the rules, etc.). Conflicts also arise when the Orange/Yellow people, in

order to get their needs met, step “outside of the box” by doing things that, though not forbidden, are

not normally accepted within the Blue/Green organization (I.e.: disputable matters).

In such a situation, the Blue/Green people will see the Orange/Yellow people like they are Red (selfish,

prideful, rebellious, independent, etc.), while the Orange/Yellow people will see the Blue/Green group

as Purple (outdated, superstitious, traditional, stuck in their ways, Pharisees, etc.).

The result is that the group leaders, in a sincere effort to keep unity, create more disunity by trying to

get people in other Value Systems to conform to their own group’s Value System.

A New Flexible Dynamic Leadership Model

What I am proposing is a Flexible and Dynamic Leadership Model where the purpose of leadership is to

recognize people’s Value differences, and provide people solutions and resources that fit their Value

Systems. In other words, if people in the Blue Value System have problems, then provide them with

Blue solutions. If Orange has an issue, provide Orange solutions.

Here are some examples of how this would work in the typical church situation:

1. Blue – If Blue people are not satisfied with the communication of church events, then a system

correction effort can be implemented. Using the appropriate channels (small group leaders, bulletins,

emails, announcements, etc.), they can improve the system and make communication more efficient

and streamlined.

2. Orange – If Orange wants to try new ideas of how to adapt the Children’s ministry to the needs of

new and alternative parenting styles (Homeschooling families, Attachment Parenting Styles, etc.), then

the leaders can facilitate this by giving Orange people the resources to do so (i.e.: Provide an empty

room during Sunday services where they can experiment with their new program).

3. Green – If Green feel like ex-members should be reached out to and attempts should be made to

reintroduce them to the flock, the leaders can provide them with resources to do so, and facilitate the

process (I.e.: a Sunday service dedicated to inviting ex-members to church, campaigns created to

meeting with ex-members, etc.).

4. Yellow – If Yellow wants to introduce new programs to meet the different Value Systems of the

members of the organization, then the leadership can freely provide them with the resources to do so,

(use of the church building for workshops, opportunity to bring in experts to do church training, etc.).

The First Step

Since many church groups are usually grounded in the Blue/Green Value systems (Higher purpose,

order, family, etc.), to completely redesign the organization will go against what this essay is about.

What I propose is that the leadership of a church begin the process by first recognizing and honoring the

different Value Systems of the members of their organization. Like Paul said:

1 Cor 9:19-23

19 Though I am free and belong to no man, I make myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as

possible . 20 To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like

one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law. 21 To

those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God's law

but am under Christ's law), so as to win those not having the law. 22 To the weak I became weak, to

win the weak. I have become all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some. 23 I

do all this for the sake of the gospel, that I may share in its blessings. NIV

Though he was talking about being flexible and adapting himself to the needs of those that are lost, I do

expect he would also direct the same mindset to those who are saved.

In the same way, as leaders, we need to commit to meeting the needs of the flock, by more flexibly

adapting ourselves and the entire organization to recognizing, honoring and meeting the needs of the

different Value Systems of the flock. Like Jesus said:

Mark 2:27

27 Then he said to them, "The Sabbath was made for man , not man for the Sabbath…" NIV

Creating Greater Unity in God’s Church

Again, since churches are Blue/Green in nature, I propose the following Blue/Green solution in order to

create greater unity in God’s church:

1. Identify what the Value Systems Are Within the Members of the Organization

Use a Value Systems profile questionnaire to get a good idea where every member’s main Value System

lies within the Global Value systems list. The purpose is to know exactly what percentage of each Value

System is represented in the group.

Normally, churches revolve around the main Value System of the current leader of the group. Or

churches run on the left-over Value Systems of the original leaders that established the group, even

though the church was planted decades prior. The surprises come when the Value Systems profile

questionnaires are collected and the clear make-up of the group is revealed. Current leaders usually

think they know their groups (usually because they project their Value System to the group). But a

Value Systems questionnaire clarifies things pretty quickly.

2. Create a Structure Around the Main Value Systems and Set Standards

Once the main Value Systems of the group is determined, then clarifying the Ideal standards, and

working to meet those standards for each Value System is the next step.

If Blue, asking the questions:

What system needs repair?

What processes are not working as efficiently as they could?

What resources are needed for the church to run smoothly? Etc.

If Green, asking the questions:

Whose individual needs are not being met in the group?

How can we give everyone a voice in the group?

What teams/committees can be formed to take care of the needs of these groups?

What resources do we need to bring in to help meet the needs of the group? Etc.

If Orange, asking the questions:

What resources do people need to reach their goals?

What will bring out the best in each member?

How can we help each member to be successful in all the major areas of their life? Etc.

If Yellow ask the following questions:

How can we facilitate those who have the capability to lead to lead?

How can provide more freedom so that the influencers can influence others?

How can we help “big picture” strategic thinkers the opportunity to implement their ideas?

What roles will strategic and big picture thinkers play in the group, for the benefit of the group?

3. Create a Structure that Facilitates Multiple Options for Each Value System – Since the more options

you give people, the more resourceful they become; I propose creating a church structure that

encourages, and maintains multiple programs that will meet different needs for people in different

Value Systems. Also, it can be structured to facilitate the consistent creation and testing of new and

unique programs, and deleting old, ineffective, and outdated programs.

This Dynamic structure can be applied to all of the different church systems. Let’s use Children’s

Ministry for an example:

A Flexible Dynamic Leadership in Children’s Ministry Example:

1. Identify the dominant different parenting and education styles of the members, and community

(I.e.: Traditional, Homeschool, Parent Participation, Montessori, etc.)

2. Identify someone that is a pioneer or has a passion for this type of parenting/ educational style

and provide them a classroom, or area to test their program. Or, obtain outside consultants to

provide the expertise to set up such a program.

3. Get volunteers from those parents, or members that adhere to this parenting/educational style.

4. Review the program over time for effectiveness, and see if it can become a permanent program

that will meet the needs of other parents and children in the church, as well as visitors.

The Result - Parents with different Value Systems will have more choices for training their children,

and they will feel great about their children’s spiritual training. Visitors will have choices for where

to bring their children and feel great about the new church family catering to their specific needs.

4. Create Roles That are Aligned To People’s Different Value Systems.

We would all agree that different Value Systems are more aligned with different types of work within an

organization. Therefore putting the right people in the right roles, to do the work that is the best fit for

them, will provide the best results.

For example:

1. Blue (Appreciates rules, order, systems and structure) – They can be great administrators; managers

of operations, create systems, processes, finance roles, etc.

2. Green – (Community focused, socially conscious) – They make great Shepherds, caretakers of the

elderly, children program managers, identifying member needs, helping the poor, etc.

3. Orange (Innovators, risk takers, opportunity seekers) – They are great idea creators, great for

researching and testing new ideas and programs; entrepreneurs, income generators; great at

researching and implementing new technology, lead evangelistic campaigns, etc.

4. Yellow – (Integrative, Accommodating, Influencers) – Make the best group leaders, Strategic thinkers,

Program Planners, Program Evaluators, etc.

The Result - People will be placed in roles that are more aligned with their natural values. They will be

happy and passionate in their work. They will feel useful, significant and secure. They will be highly

motivated to continue to grow and contribute.

Conclusion

With all of the needs in a church organization, it’s a miracle that we all get along. But, with God’s help

we will continue to strive for unity through our unified purpose and love for God.

To assist in the goal of glorifying God through his church, we can take on Paul’s attitude to “become all

things to all men,” and honor each other’s Value Systems, and do our best to meet people where they

are at. By doing so, we will help each individual in God’s family to feel loved, useful and motivate them

toward love and good deeds, all for the glory of God.

1 Cor 12:24-26

But God has combined the members of the body and has given greater honor to the parts that lacked it,

so that there should be no division in the body, but that its parts should have equal concern for each

other. NIV

Part II – Flexible and Dynamic Discipling Relationships

A church structure that many churches have adopted, in an effort to organize and support their

members, is to partner members with other members (discipling partners) to help them manage their

spiritual and life conditions. The intention is based on the idea that members in similar life

circumstances will have common interests and will therefore be able to relate and help one another,

thereby facilitating more unity in the group.

Because churches are grounded in the Blue/Green Value system, the criteria used to pair members is

usually based on the following components:

If Blue is the dominate Value System (purpose, order, rules, structure) then they base their criteria on:

Spiritual Seniority – One more senior member in the group helping a newer member.

Life Conditions – People in similar life conditions helping one another (married, single, teen,

etc.).

Age – A member helping someone similar in age; or an older member helping a younger

member.

Proximity – People who live in the same city, town or neighborhood helping one another.

Similarities in career – Members in similar career industries helping one another.

If the organization is more grounded in the Green Value System (family, community), they use the

following criteria:

Spiritual Seniority – One more senior member in the group helping a newer member.

Life Conditions – People in similar life conditions helping one another (married, single, teen,

etc.).

Temperament/Personality – People who have similar personalities helping others with similar

personalities (Relator/supporters pairing up with Relator/supporters).

Problems/Issues – People who have undergone or going through similar problems working

together (Families with Teens, Families going through divorce, Families with special need

children, etc.).

Rapport/Trust – People that have an established friendship and have great rapport with each

other, pair up to help one another.

Most church groups tend to be a mixture of both the Blue/Green Value Systems and use a combination

of both of these lists of criteria.

Conflicts in Organizations

Conflicts arise in this model when members are paired using these criteria, yet, the members have very

different Value Systems from one another.

Here are 2 Examples:

In a group that uses a predominantly Blue model (purpose, order, rules, structure):

Conflicts in Pairing People When Using the “Spiritual Seniority” Criteria - a married member that has

years of greater spiritual seniority in the group may be strong in the Green Value System (family,

community), and so his or her priority will be to help the younger married member to focus on building

their family by using traditional values and principles.

The conflict comes when the younger member and their spouse are high in the Orange Value System, so

their desire to build family will be focused on spiritual growth, achievement, and personal development

based on new and advanced parenting values and principles.

The Green senior partner will feel as if the younger is not cooperative, and youthfully ignorant; and will

attempt to influence the younger to conform to traditional values. They will use their seniority (“I’ve

been around longer than you have,”) as a means to “talk some sense” into the younger member. The

younger Orange members will see the senior members as “old, outdated, and preachy” and will not

respect their advice, which creates further conflict and disunity.

Example 2:

In an organization that is based on the Green Value System (family, community):

Conflicts in Pairing People When Using the “Life Conditions” Criteria – One member that may be in the

same Life Condition situation (married, singles, teens, etc.) may be strong in the Blue Value System

(rules, order, structure). Their priorities include, meeting consistently with their partner, discussing

problems in their life conditions, establishing commitments and expecting accountability to and from

their partner.

The conflicts arise when their partner, from a similar Life Condition situation (married, single, teen, etc.)

may lean more highly toward the Yellow Value System (freedom, flexibility, independence). This

member will not commit to having one partner to work with, will not commit to a consistent meeting

schedule, is fully capable of reaching their goals on their own, and is interested in getting their needs

met through relationships with others in multiple Life Conditions.

The Blue member will feel as if their Yellow partner is rebellious, independent , prideful and does not

care. The Yellow member will feel as if their Blue partner is controlling, stuffy, dogmatic, and legalistic.

The Blue member will try to pin the Yellow partner down and will use the Authority of the bible to “set

him or her straight;” or show them the “unrighteousness of their ways.” The Yellow member will never

meet with their Blue partner, and be “pinned down;” but rather will go to other resources to get their

needs met. The Yellow member will stay away from the Blue member and the relationship will be

severed, creating more disunity.

A New Flexible Dynamic Discipling Model

What I am proposing in this essay is a Dynamic Discipling Model whose purpose is to match members

based on their Value Systems first, and then other criteria after. By doing so, conflicts will be reduced,

and people will have the best chance at growing and thriving in their Life Conditions.

Here is an example of the order of priority for matching members in the Dynamic Discipling Model. In

this example we are assuming that both members are committed and devoted Christians:

1. Value System – Find members that are strong in the same Value System(I.e.: Blue/Blue or

Green/Green). Or, find people with the same Value Systems mixture (Orange/Yellow – Orange/Yellow).

Once you identify these, then consider matching them in the other criteria, as follows:

2. Life Conditions – Married, parents, single, teen, etc.

3. Spiritual strengths – Finding individuals that want to grow from each other’s strengths.

4. Temperament/Personality – finding compatible temperaments. (I.e.: Either similar temperaments,

Driver-Driver; or compatible opposing temperaments, Driver-Cheerleader).

5. Proximity/Convenience – After the other criteria are met, consider how convenient it will be for them

to make the partnership work, and find solutions.

The most important criteria in this model is the Value Systems criteria. You can rearrange the priority of

the other criteria based on the purpose and goals of the group.

To give you a glimpse at what this looks like, consider John and Bob’s experience in the example below:

A Dynamic Discipling Relationship – John and Bob

A church group leadership team does an evaluation of what the Value Systems are of each member in

their group. They identify that John and Bob may be a good fit for one another based on their Value

Systems and other criteria. John and Bob are strong in the Blue/Green Value System (Blue – Purpose,

order, structure/ Green – family, community). The church leaders speak to John and Bob, and introduce

them to each other either in a group meeting or through a convenient lunch appointment.

As soon as John and Bob talk, they immediately find common ground in their thinking, and build instant

rapport and trust. They appreciate that they are in the same life conditions (married with teenage kids),

and they also recognize and appreciate strengths that each other have, and how they can learn from

each other. They also feel comfortable with each other’s personality since it is compatible with their

own. Last, though they feel like it may be inconvenient to meet at each other’s homes, they make a

commitment for 3 months to meet in a central location, at a set time period to help one another to

grow to the glory of God.

After the 3 month testing period is over, they find that they have grown through their time together,

and they greatly enjoy each other’s company. They then commit to continuing their relationship for

another 6 months. Ultimately, they, their spouses, their kids, the church and God, all benefit from their

continued relationship.

Creating Greater Unity in God’s Church Through Dynamic Discipling

As mentioned previously, Since churches are Blue/Green in nature, I propose the following Blue/Green

solution in order to create greater unity in God’s church:

1. Identify what the Value Systems Are For Each Member of the Organization

Using the Church Value System Profile questionnaire will give you the information you need to identify

each member’s Value System mix. To make this easier, you can use the same information from the

previous questionnaire used from the Flexible and Dynamic Leadership section.

The goal is to identify as accurately as possible the Value System Mix for each member of the group. If

more detail is required, the information can be collected on a one-on-one basis by the small group

leaders in the church. A 30 minute to 1 hour meeting will be enough to gather all of the information you

need.

2. Organize all of the Members that are in Similar Value Systems, and Life Conditions.

Begin organizing the data from your Value System Profiles in the following criteria (again this is assuming

all members are devoted Christians):

1. Value System Mix – Most people are usually a combination of Value Systems. The best results come

from the closer matches in Value Systems you can identify.

2. Life Conditions – Match them in terms of Life Conditions as closely as possible. (Parents with multiple

children working together, is a closer match than Parents with differing amounts of children).

3. Spiritual Strengths/Growth Interests – Next, identify the main life areas (Spiritual, Emotional, Physical,

Career, etc.) that members would like to grow in, and match them with members that have success in

these areas; that are within the first two criteria listed above.

4. Temperament/Personality – Match members in terms of compatible personality types (Driver-Driver,

or opposite compatibility, Relator – Cheerleader, etc.).

5. Proximity/Convenience – Consider their circumstances to see if it is practical. Offer solutions on how

they can make it work.

Again, after the Value Systems criteria, there is flexibility in the order, or type of the other criteria.

3. Approach members to Consider a Test Period for the Relationship

1. Once you match up a potential relationships, approach both of them and suggest a trial relationship

basis. If you do not get agreement, consider other compatible relationship options. If you get

agreement, suggest a meeting, and a 3 month commitment that is acceptable to both members.

2. Monitor and support the members throughout their trial period. Suggest improvements over time.

3. At the end of the 3 months, approach members to see if they would like to continue for another 6

months. If they agree, attain a 6 month commitment that is acceptable to both members. If not,

suggest other compatible relationships for them, for another 3 month trial.

4. If after 6 months it proves successful, let them continue the relationship at their own pace. If it is not

successful, suggest other compatible relationships for them, for another 3 month trial.

5. Monitor loosely, over time and suggest improvements.

4. As New Members are Added, Go through the Same Process All Over Again

As new members enter the group, follow the same steps listed above.

Conclusion

I believe church leaders have the right idea in trying to help their flock by partnering them to help one

another. The challenges come in the criteria that is used to pair members, and the priority of that

criteria. Since Value Systems tend to be the main driving force in people’s lives and life choices, I

suggest a Dynamic Discipling Model that puts Value Systems as the first criteria and set other criteria

after. By having members that are unified in their spiritual purpose, unified in their strongest values, as

well as unified in their Life Conditions, and purpose; it will create the best environment for them to grow

and thrive, and honor God with their lives.

Eph 4:15-16

15 Instead, speaking the truth in love, we will in all things grow up into him who is the Head, that is,

Christ. 16 From him the whole body, joined and held together by every supporting ligament, grows and

builds itself up in love, as each part does its work. NIV

Part III - Minimizing Conflicts In God’s Church Through Dynamic Conflict

Resolution

Introduction

One of the challenges most churches face, in their efforts at unifying their members, are the conflicts

that arise between members in the church, or conflicts between the church leadership and its members.

The conflicts can be minor, in that it leads to disharmony among members, or minimized influence

between the church leadership and its members. Or, the conflicts can be major in that they lead to

members separating themselves completely from the church group.

In the Bible, unity is a principle that God has clearly expressed as one of greatest importance to him. He

has expressly communicated his desire for believers to become “One” in heart, spirit and action. As

Jesus says:

John 17:20-23

20 "My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message,

21 that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so

that the world may believe that you have sent me. 22 I have given them the glory that you gave me, that

they may be one as we are one: 23 I in them and you in me. May they be brought to complete unity to

let the world know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me. NIV

Unfortunately, the churches of today are experience many levels of disagreements that lead to disunity.

For example:

1. Members purposely do not fellowship with one another, or avoid one another in group meetings –

because they feel like they “just can’t get along” with another member.

2. Members will gossip about one another, which leads to further prejudgments from other members,

and more disunity.

3. Members will begrudgingly conform to the church leadership’s direction, but privately criticize the

leadership, internally and to others. They will also make a half-hearted effort to support the church

leadership, which minimizes the influence the leaders have.

4. Church leadership will add negative labels on difficult members of their church groups, which leads to

prejudgments of what that member does and says, ultimately leading to further disunity.

Is Disagreement Healthy?

Most people would agree that disagreements are part of human relationships. We would also agree,

that although sometimes negative, disagreements also lead to many benefits. For example some

benefits disagreements lead to include: 1) expanding one’s perspective by being exposed to someone

else’s beliefs; 2) helping one another learn how to resolve conflict, 3) teaching people patience, humility

and unconditional love; and 4) helping one be more accepting of different people’s opinions, values and

beliefs.

Yet, when does disagreement become unacceptable?

Unacceptable Disagreements and Conflicts in God’s Church

Taking Things Personally

We know from scripture that disagreements become unacceptable when we use them as a motive for

choosing to separate ourselves in heart, spirit, and body from other members of God’s church. When

we choose to like, care for, give to, be devoted to, or love someone less, because they do not agree with

our beliefs and values, we have violated God’s desire for our lives. Like Paul says in Colossians:

Col 3:12-14

12 Therefore, as God's chosen people, holy and dearly loved, clothe yourselves with compassion,

kindness, humility, gentleness and patience. 13 Bear with each other and forgive whatever grievances

you may have against one another. Forgive as the Lord forgave you. 14 And over all these virtues put on

love, which binds them all together in perfect unity. NIV

What would cause people to pull their love away, for something as simple as a disagreement of opinion?

It is because people value certain beliefs and opinions so highly. We refer these high level beliefs as our

Value Systems. Our value systems are so important to us, that when someone else disagrees with them,

we feel highly offended, and consider it a blatant violation. Because we “take things personally,” we

feel this offense at a deep emotional level, and we respond by retaliating, separating or falling into deep

sadness and depression.

From the perspective of the other person that disagrees with us, in their mind, they were only sharing

their beliefs based on their Value System. Their intention was never to hurt us, but only to share their

opinion of what they consider right and true. Regardless, because we see our own Value System as the

only truth, we refuse to accept their explanation and hold onto our emotional pain, which leads to

bitterness, resentment and ultimately separation.

Arguing Over Disputable Matters

Disagreements also become an obstacle to unity, when they are stem from pride. This form of pride

manifests itself in the lack of acceptance of different people’s Value Systems in the church group. In

other words, when members believe their own Value System are the only truth, they tend to not be very

accepting of other Value Systems. They even go as far as condemning other value systems as wrong.

And, just like in the previous example, it leads to unhealthy and unnecessary conflicts in God’s church.

The Apostle Paul talked about his experience with this situation, when he said:

Rom 14:1-5

14:1 Accept him whose faith is weak, without passing judgment on disputable matters. 2 One man's

faith allows him to eat everything, but another man, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables. 3 The

man who eats everything must not look down on him who does not, and the man who does not eat

everything must not condemn the man who does, for God has accepted him. 4 Who are you to judge

someone else's servant? To his own master he stands or falls. And he will stand, for the Lord is able to

make him stand. 5 One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every

day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. NIV

Here we see disunity caused by the lack of acceptance of other people’s beliefs, opinions and values, in

areas that were disputable. Disputable, meaning that there was no concrete direction from God for

these matters. But rather, they were left to each individual to determine its importance in their life; as

long as it did not violate scripture or the consciences of others. As Paul also said:

Gal 5:13-14

13 You, my brothers, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the sinful nature;

rather, serve one another in love. 14 The entire law is summed up in a single command: "Love your

neighbor as yourself." NIV

Conflicts arise, when in absence of the Bible’s concrete direction in many modern life issues (disputable

matters), members set up their own standards (Value Systems), and condemn one another’s actions. It

ultimately leads to resentment, bitterness, discouragement, hurt feelings and disunity.

In this essay I will be discussing a Dynamic Conflict Resolution Model whose intent is to create unity

between all the different Value Systems you generally find in a church group. First, we will identify the

needs of each Value System; second, we will look for Common Ground between the different Value

Systems, and third, I will suggesting a plan of action for individuals for managing disagreements in their

day to day life.

The Dynamic Conflict Resolution Model

1. Identifying All of the Main Needs of Each of the Global Value Systems

The ultimate purpose of people’s Value Systems is to meet a need that will help them best manage their

life condition. In the book, Spiral Dynamics, Don Beck has identified 7 Global Value Systems that exist

throughout history and that you common find in organizations today. People use each of these Value

Systems to meet a core need they feel they lack in their Life Conditions:

Color Value System Description

Basic Concerns Basic Needs They Are Trying to Meet

Tier 1 Purple* Magical – Mystical Safety Survival

Red* Powerful-Impulsive Dominance and power. Control

Blue Purposeful –Rule, structure based

Meaning and order. Security and Certainty

Orange Strategic – Opportunity Seeking

Autonomy and influence. Freedom and Prosperity

Green Sensitive – Humanistic Equality and community. Love and Connection

Tier 2 Yellow Flexible – Integrative Flexibility, independence, accommodation, win-win.

Influence and peace.

Turquoise* Holistic – Global Life and harmony. Unity and harmony.

When people feel like their needs are not met, it creates major emotional turmoil that leads to deep

emotional conflict. As you can see, all of the Value Systems represented have different needs to fulfill.

Conflicts arise when members judge each other based on their own Value System; and try to give

solutions to someone in a different Value System (I.e.: Blue trying to apply a Blue solution to Orange and

their Orange problem.).

On the other hand, successful unity can be achieved by helping members in each Value System get their

needs met in their respective Value System. In other words, helping Blue find a Blue solution that meets

their Blue needs; or helping Orange find the Orange resources to solve their Orange problem.

The Tiers

In the example above, the Global Value Systems have been divided into Tier 1 and Tier 2 for a specific

reason. The different tiers represent:

Tier 1 – People in the Tier 1 Value Systems generally believe their value system is the “right” or best

Value System. They believe it is the way that everyone around them should be living. They also tend to

believe the other Value Systems are inferior or “wrong,” and even go as far as condemning people in

other Value Systems.

People in the Tier 1 Value Systems are the ones that generally experience the most conflict,

because of their lack of acceptance of the other value systems.

Tier 2 – People in Tier 2 Value systems, are those that have fully accepted that all Value Systems are

valid and are all useful in their own way.

People in Tier 2 Value Systems are the most flexible and adaptable, and are the most

predisposed toward unity and harmony in groups, organizations and nations.

People in Tier 2 Value Systems generally grow to have the most influence (and become the most

effective leaders) because they are able to help others in other Value Systems. This is because

they “put themselves in other people’s shoes,” to understand the other Value Systems

thoroughly. Also, they are able to help people with challenges find solutions within their

respective Value Systems. Last, they are the most skilled at helping people in different Value

Systems resolve conflict, and find win-win solutions, which ultimately breeds more unity.

2. Helping the Global Value Systems Find Common Ground

Identifying and meeting the needs of the different Value Systems is just the beginning. The challenges

arise upon joining a new church group, members become involved with people from completely

different Value Systems, and they have to get along with them. Combined with the fact that each

person in Tier 1 believes their Value System is the only “right” Value System, it sets the stage for

inevitable disagreement and conflict.

The question is how do you help unify different people, with different Value Systems, who believe their

way of seeing the world is the only trusht, and who have a habit of taking disagreements personally?

Here are a few keys that have proven successful in helping churches full of people with opposing values,

come to agreement:

Key 1: Help them remember their united purpose.

Most people in church would agree that their common purpose is to love and glorify God in their lives.

Unfortunately, conflicts arise when people completely disagree on the way to fulfill that purpose.

Reminding people of their purpose helps them to realign their priorities in such a way that makes

agreement possible. When a person’s is reminded of their greatest motivation, they are more apt to

default to making choices based on their greater motivation, and be more willing to let go of petty

differences.

Conflicts can also occur when people choose very different criteria to fulfill their purpose. When people

have the same purpose, yet are still having disagreements, chances are there is a mismatch of the

criteria they are using to fulfill that purpose. For example, a group of people could all believe that loving

and glorifying God is their greatest purpose. Now, in order to fulfill that purpose, one member may

value church worship more highly, while another will value the church’s children’s ministry more.

Conflict would inevitably arise, if a situation came up that resulted in the church’s resources being

directed more toward one than the other.

Ultimately, these lower level disagreements end up distracting them from their main purpose of loving

God and glorifying him. In other words, because they “cannot see the forest from the trees,” they slip

into nit picking about petty items while losing their attention from fulfilling their main purpose.

Reminding members of their greatest, unified purpose will help people to begin to see things differently,

and be more open to agreement.

Key 2: Help them be more accepting of different Value Systems.

As they consider their higher purpose, people tend to be more open to the idea that different people

will use different Value Systems in their efforts at fulfilling that purpose. By helping them more clearly

see that because of people’s different upbringing, beliefs, opinions and experiences, people will pursue

their purpose in a different way - most people would be more open to accepting other people’s different

Value Systems.

Key 3: Help them find common ground.

The goal of The Dynamic Conflict Resolution process is to help 2 or more people find a compromise,

without making one person feel like they’ve lost something by being in agreement. In other words, the

goal is to create a win-win situation between members, where they both feel like they can come to an

agreement, while still feeling like they have honored their respective Value Systems.

Once they are open to accepting other Value Systems, it sets the stage for finding common ground

between members. One way of doing this is to help brainstorm more options that the members have

not considered. People tend to pursue the best option based on the choices they have. Unfortunately,

if they feel like their options are limited, it prevents them from making very spiritual or resourceful

choices. But, if after remembering their purpose they are open to brainstorming new options, they can

more easily find win-win solutions, increasing the chances at finding a satisfying compromise.

Now, this will take creativity on the part of the mediator. Also, you will have to be prepared if a suitable

option may not be discovered in one meeting. But, if you continue to look for a great option that suits

both parties, praying about it, and not giving up, the chances of finding a mutually beneficial

compromise is almost certain.

Key 4: Help them clarify what is the most important to them, and trade off on

the least important.

Most of us tend to generalize our beliefs as having the same level of importance. If we were to prioritize

them, we would realize that there are things that we value very much, and we also have things that are

much less important. Though we may be less willing to compromise on the higher value items, there are

many low level items that we would be happy to be flexible with, if it helps us to create more unity in

God’s church.

What we may also realize is that our low level items may be the high level items of another person. By

being flexible on low level items we can help someone else get their highest needs met. This then

influences them to be even more flexible, and reciprocate by fulfilling one of our higher level items. The

end result is greater unity.

3. Training Members On How To Approach And Resolve Disagreements On A Day To Day Level.

Along with resolving existing conflicts, by training members how to resolve their own disagreements

before they escalate, it will minimize future conflicts in the church group. Here are some successful

principles from the bible that have been effective tools for the resolution of personal disagreements:

1. Choose Compassion - Realize that if you feel hurt by another person, that we have also hurt

others, God and Jesus. In other words, choosing compassion because, just like the other person

is subject to weakness we are subject to weakness . (1 Timothy 1:16)(Heb 4:16)

2. Admire Intention – Choose to believe that the person, being a Christian, has only good

intentions, and that they are just trying to do their best to please God and get their needs met.

(Romans 15:14)

3. Seek to Genuinely Understand, then to be Understood - Try to put yourself in their shoes, and

see through their eyes (remember they have a different Value System than you do). Convey

what they are trying to communicate back to them, namely, what you think they are saying and

what you think they are feeling until you get agreement. (Philippians 2:1 – 4)

4. Help Them Get Their Needs Met - Help the person get their needs met using their resources,

within their respective Value System (I.e.: Give Blue a Blue solution).(Galatians 6:2)

5. Get Your Needs Met – Find ways to get your needs met either in or outside of this situation.

Once you do the steps above you will have enough influence to get what you need in the

situation. Sometimes, though, you cannot get your needs met in the situation, so look for ways

to get your needs met outside the situation.

Conclusion

Disagreements and conflicts are part of life. Yet, unless we handle those disagreements and conflicts in

a way that builds unity, they will work to destroy it. God has clearly expressed in Scripture his desire for

his church to be unified in heart, mind, spirit and action. Therefore, any disagreements or conflicts that

work against that aim, will prevent us from loving God and fulfilling his purpose in our lives.

As Christians we need to work toward minimizing disagreements and conflicts, as well as resolve existing

ones in ways that lead to mutual edification. The most harmful disagreements and conflicts generally

come from members taking things too personally, especially when they feel like their Values are

violated. Unnecessary disagreements and conflicts also come from choosing to not accept people’s

differences of opinion, belief and values, and even condemning them.

The Dynamic Conflict Resolution Model I propose in this essay will prevent these harmful disagreements

and conflicts because it is designed to create an environment of acceptance of other people’s Value

Systems. It does this by resolving conflict through: 1) Identifying the needs of each member’s Value

System, 2) Finding common ground between the different Value Systems 3) and training people to

resolve their own disagreements on a daily basis.

With the help of God, the Holy Spirit, and Jesus who promised to help us, we can truly fulfill Jesus’s

prayer on the Mount of Olives, and fulfill God’s purpose in our lives, all to the glory and love of God.

John 17:23

May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me and have loved them

even as you have loved me. NIV