Self-Led Capital Campaigns

Perhaps you have asked these common questions:

Why should a church bring in an outside consultant to lead its capital campaign?
Will an outside Consultant harm its people with undue pressure?
Doesn’t the church have enough organizational and marketing people itself to lead its own campaign?

There is usually the temptation among some church leaders to lead their own capital campaigns. They see this as a way to save money on the initial cost for a campaign consultant, and there are usually some fears about bringing in an outside consultant.

A self-led campaign assumes the victory of the campaign is in its organizational structure, in doing the tasks, and in the marketing aspects of the campaign, while ignoring the real truth that the victory of the campaign is the change in the hearts of its people before it goes to their checkbooks. Why start on page two? Most churches need help to start on page one. This is where TLC shines!

When leaders think about leading their own campaign, they assume their people will give the same with or without a consultant, and the only difference is help with the organizational structure. History shows that very few churches can raise nearly as much on their own as they can with an outside consultant.

The TLC Stewardship Consultants can usually raise two to four times as much as a church can raise on its own. But there is a lot more to this issue than the amount of funds raised.

A few churches and church leaders have had positive experiences in leading their own campaigns, but it is not the normal response we hear from those in the trenches. When church leaders are honest with themselves, there are several common threads they experience in a self-led campaign. The following comments are greatly condensed from pastors who have led their own capital campaigns, and shared with Dr. Hallett:

They have raised less money, creating a much greater total cost either in the amount of money spent on interest, or in increased construction costs from the delays in their building schedules;
They have involved relatively few people, with the same few who have been doing everything will be the same ones to do everything in their self-led campaign;
It has consumed the time and energy of the pastor and staff, whose perceptions have been changed from being pastors to becoming uncomfortable fund raisers, and seeing themselves as lightning rods for problems;
Their people do not listen as well to their own leaders (“you know too much about me” comments), unless there is an outside “expert” who can bring direction and accountability to the campaign;
They have made many mistakes that could have been avoided, and there will be no second chances for a consultant-led capital campaign for at least another 3 to 5 years;
Many self-led campaigns have had a heavy emotional cost with negative feeling tones that have caused tension issues within the churches; and
A self-led campaign assumes all your people already support the church’s vision, that they understand and have already resolved stewardship issues, and that they already have this high level of commitment to give sacrificially – this level of commitment is rarely the case prior to the capital campaign!

Every capital campaign, whether self-led or consultant-led, will have to answer the question of – “What will it take for your people to change their living, spending, and giving patterns to allow them to give at a sacrificial level?” Without significant change in those patterns, the church will not receive the additional funds they need for their facilities.

Even generous givers are not enough to develop more responsive stewardship disciples because people can be generous without it changing them, but they cannot be sacrificial without it changing them. Most of your people need to have a change of heart to give sacrificially now, and to be better givers and stewards for the rest of their lives.

Pastor Dan Cook

Lakewood, New York

Self-Led Capital Campaigns