Churches of different sizes must plan differently. Schaller sets forth three separate planning strategies according to the size of the church--small, middle-sized, or large--because the single most significant factor in distinguishing church planning models is size. (Schaller, Growing Plans, 11)

In general, this paper is considering a planning model for churches of less than 250. This includes both small and medium churches. Schaller considers the small church as having an attendance of up to 85, with the middle-sized church having approximately 85-225. Womack uses 90 and 240 as the break points. Easily remembered break points are 100 and 200, as reflected in workshops designed to help churches break through these barrier points.

Others have identified subgroups such as "small medium"and "large medium." It is likely that no clear division occurs. Churches struggle with the transition from small to medium or medium to large, retaining some characteristics of a previous size and slowly developing the new characteristics necessary to maintain size and growth. Some churches never transition effectively, contributing to the idea of a "growth barrier" between the size levels.

Regardless of the specific size distinctions, it is important to observe that most churches in the United States are small. Approximately 2/3 of all churches have less than 100 present. Schaller claims as many as 50% have less than 40. My research among churches of Christ shows that about 1/4 have less than 35, and just over ½ have less than 75. Approximately 85% of churches of Christ nationwide have fewer than 200 members. (In comparison, the Presbyterians say that 95% of their congregations are less than 250.) This suggests the significance of this study. If we can develop a planning model for churches of less than 200, we are working on behalf of about 85% of our congregations.

What do these churches look like? The small church usually resembles a family and decision making resembles that found in family units. Power tends to be relational and is often centered in those who have earned it through a long period of service. Larger churches resemble a corporation more than a family and power tends to be in the hands of those officially appointed. Size considerations influence church planning. One factor to consider is that the presence of an eldership in the church leadership model seems to tend toward the extremes--either increasing bureaucracy or smoothing the way to more involvement by members. Certainly the need for delegation lessens with plural leadership. Why do churches tend to plateau in the 200s? A 1990 survey of churches of Christ showed only 636 congregations larger than 300. Is the challenge our planning model, our leadership model, or something else? The next chapter will investigate the nature, personality, and organizational structure of churches of Christ to suggest similarities upon which a church planning model can be based.

Back to top | Next: Chapter 3