1. Focussed on paving new ground
2. Change is quick
3. Results seen in increased reach (eg. numbers with newcomers, deeper repentance)
4. Characterised by innovation, movement, and problem solving
1. Focussed on strengthening what exists
2. Change is slow
3. Results seen in increased stability (eg. confidence in belief, regular attendance)
4. Characterised by repetition, stability and procedures
Application number 1:
Both require different kinds of investment. Dynamic involves *stretching* or extending those who will grow, where static involves educating them.
Application number 2:
A formula for describing a churches as whole entities:
Too much dynamic, not enough static => flaky, shallow church.
Too much static, not enough dynamic => stagnant, luke-warm church.
Well-proportioned static and dynamic growth => healthy, thriving church.
Not enough dynamic, not enough static => dying church.
Application number 3:
I reckon true static growth requires dynamic application of procedures and repetition. I think the best dynamic growth will follow a set of norms and patterns common in all entities characterised by dynamic growth. Where is your church?
Postscript: After I wrote this, I saw a great post about how growth interacts with healthy business in particular applying it to the word entrepreneur which is packed to the hilt with the idea I have described as ‘dynamic growth’ above.