Systems theory as a model for small groups in the church

Below is a presentation/paper I developed as part of my group and public communication course. It looks at how systems theory presents a framework for analyzing Christian small groups.
~ DA

Systems theory as a model for small groups in the church

Presentation by Divine Agodzo to church small group leaders

Thank you for the opportunity to share some thoughts with you on how small group communication theory – specifically systems theory – can help inform your understanding and approach to your ministries as small group leaders.

OUTLINE

I will cover a number of areas in my presentation.  In my introduction, I will address the importance of small groups to church life and vitality and discuss why it’s important to study small groups from the perspective of group communication theory. Next, I will provide a rationale for systems theory as an ideal and biblically relevant theoretical framework for understanding and leading small groups. In the third part of my presentation, I will highlight some of the key tenets of systems theory. Finally, I will share some implications and applications of systems theory for church small groups.

INTRODUCTION

In The Big Book on Small Groups (Arnold, 2004), author Jeffrey Arnold shows the centrality of small groups in the Old and New Testament, the most obvious example of this being the Jewish disciple-apprentice model that Jesus adopted. Obviously, if Jesus used a small group to disciple his closest followers, then it is a model that the church must take seriously. Arnold (2004) also observes that the early church met in homes (Acts 5:42; 12:12; Romans 16:5) and we can infer, given the capacity limitations of typical homes, that these were small groups. Even the doctrine of the Trinity has theological significance for small group ministry, providing a picture of one God mysteriously revealed in Triune form, the number that scholars agree is the starting point for small groups (Strom, 2003, p. 169). There are many scriptural references that support small groups, but I won’t go into further detail on this, since I would be preaching to the choir.

In addition to its role in disciplining members (and helping them reach out to disciple others), research suggests church small groups can have other benefits. In one study of a large U.S. church (Dougherty and Whitehead, 2011), small group study was found to yield greater connection to the church, high attendance, and increased giving. Yes, I know we don’t do it for the money, but as small group leaders, you have the power to help your churches meet their budgetary goals!

But why do we need an understanding of communication theory to lead small groups? Doesn’t scripture provide us with everything we need to know? What can “secular” theories teach us about how to do church? First, as I will show later, systems theory has strong biblical mandates. However, to answer the question as to why we must turn to extra-biblical sources of knowledge, I will quote the words of John Wesley, who once told a gathering of church leaders: “To imagine none can teach you but those who are themselves saved from sin is a very great and dangerous mistake” (Wesley, 1952, p. 87).

Although we need to use discernment, the church can – and should – take advantage of scholarly knowledge and the field of communication is an especially important one for understanding groups. In fact, scholars suggest that “communication is the essential characteristic of a group” (Hackman & Johnson, 2004, p. 187). An excellent way to understand group communication behaviours (and their influences) is through the study of relevant theory. Theory can serve as helpful map for navigating an area of inquiry (Griffin, 2012, p. 5), in this case, small groups.

WHY SYSTEMS THEORY?

So, why systems theory? Before I answer that question, let’s look at some definitions. A system is “a complex set of relationships among interdependent components or parts” (Eisenberg, Goodall, & Trethewey, 2007, p. 106). The scholars who developed systems theory therefore viewed it as "a theoretical framework that was holistic, taking into account the interrelationships and interdependence between the parts of a system, as well as the relationship between systems and their environments" (Hammond, 2003, p. 11). A helpful way to understand systems theory is by reference to a biological organism, such as a tree. A tree is a system because its roots, stem, branches, and leaves are all connected and all these parts or subsystems are mutually dependent on each other for the survival of the tree. Systems theory uses this one-for-all and all-for-one principle and structure to help us understand groups. We’ll look more closely at other aspects of systems theory later in my presentation, but for now, I would like to address the question, “Is such a theory supported by scripture?”

Perhaps the strongest fundamental biblical argument for systems theory comes from the apostle Paul when he describes Christian community as a body – a biological organism. Paul writes:

4 For just as each of us has one body with many members, and these members do not all have the same function, 5 so in Christ we, though many, form one body, and each member belongs to all the others. (Romans 12:4-5, New International Version).

We come across the same theme in Paul’s first letter to the Corinth church:

12 Just as a body, though one, has many parts, but all its many parts form one body, so it is with Christ. 13 For we were all baptized by[c] one Spirit so as to form one body—whether Jews or Gentiles, slave or free—and we were all given the one Spirit to drink. 14 Even so the body is not made up of one part but of many.

15 Now if the foot should say, “Because I am not a hand, I do not belong to the body,” it would not for that reason stop being part of the body. 16 And if the ear should say, “Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body,” it would not for that reason stop being part of the body. 17 If the whole body were an eye, where would the sense of hearing be? If the whole body were an ear, where would the sense of smell be?

18 But in fact God has placed the parts in the body, every one of them, just as he wanted them to be. 19 If they were all one part, where would the body be? 20 As it is, there are many parts, but one body. 21 The eye cannot say to the hand, “I don’t need you!” And the head cannot say to the feet, “I don’t need you!” 22 On the contrary, those parts of the body that seem to be weaker are indispensable, 23 and the parts that we think are less honorable we treat with special honor. And the parts that are unpresentable are treated with special modesty, 24 while our presentable parts need no special treatment.

But God has put the body together, giving greater honor to the parts that lacked it, 25 so that there should be no division in the body, but that its parts should have equal concern for each other. 26 If one part suffers, every part suffers with it; if one part is honored, every part rejoices with it. 27 Now you are the body of Christ, and each one of you is a part of it (1 Corinthians 12: 12-27).

The concept of the Body of Christ is just one illustration suggesting general alignment between systems theory and scripture. Former Regent College professor Paul Stevens (Stevens, 1994) asserts that the depiction of the church as the covenantal bride of Christ (Ephesians 5:27; Isaiah 54:5; 2nd Corinthians 11:2) and as a God’s family (Ephesians 2:19) all point to a systems view. Indeed, systems theorists commonly use the family to exemplify a system made of separate but interconnected members. It is therefore instructive that scripture teaches that on conversion, Christians are adopted as sons and daughters of God (John 14:18; Romans 18:23) and become brothers and sisters in their relationship with each other (Mark 3:33-35; Matthew 12:46-50).

KEY TENETS OF SYSTEMS THEORY

I will now turn to some key tenets of general systems theory as it has been developed from its origins in the biological sciences (Hammond, 2003) to wider application across several disciplines, including communication.

The first concept, which I have already alluded to, is the inherent interdependence of systems. Systems are composed of parts and subsystems (such as the body’s respiratory or digestive subsystem) that are dynamically engaged with each other. Applied to small groups, this means that “the various components of the group process are interrelated in such a way that a change in one component will alter the relationships among all other components” (Beebe & Masterson, 2009, p. 40).  Related to systemic interdependence is the principle of holism – “a system has holistic principles not manifested by any of its parts….[and] the parts have properties not manifested by the system as a whole” (Skyttner, 2005, p. 100). It is helpful to contrast system interdependence with its two extremes, independence on one end and codependence on the other. Paul’s reference to the Christian community as a family is a perfect picture of interdependence. The various parts of the body (or members in a small group) are not codependent in that they maintain a distinction from each other or as Romans 12:4 says, “these members do not all have the same function.” But they are also not independent, living and functioning in isolation from the group. In effect, the Bible “holds in dynamic tension unity (togetherness) and the unique existence of each member (diversity)” (Stevens, 1994, p. 175). Therefore, the church small group, like the body system, is characterized by both full unity and full diversity; it is neither a melting pot, which represents unity with no diversity, nor a seed package, which displays no unity and no diversity (Stevens, 1994).

Another key feature of systems theory is openness to the environment. The body is affected by the environment (example changes in temperature) and depends on it for survival (example for air, food and natural resources). The body responds to the environment by dressing warmly in winter and lightly in summer. Related to a consideration of the environment is the idea of boundaries, which separate the organism from external forces and factors, but which also allow engagement with the outside world. To this end, “an open system that interacts productively with its environment tends to create structure, or more simply, to organize, whereas in a closed system there is little or no interaction with the environment” (Eisenberg, Goodall & Trethewey, 2007, p. 107).

As leaders, it is worth asking if the groups you lead are open or closed systems. Jeffrey Arnold (Arnold, 2004), in The  Big Book on Small Groups, identifies openness and an outward focus as fundamental features of church small groups, in contrast to cliques, which are closed and inward focussed. If your small group feels more like a clique, that’s a signal it’s probably not an open system. A group that is open to the environment permits input variables to make their way into the system. In the context of the small group system, these include members, resources such as tools and information, and influences from other groups and systems in the environment (Beebe & Masterson, 2009).

The next concept relates to process variables and feedback. “Process variables relate to the procedures that the group follows to reach its goals (Beebe & Masterson, 2009, p. 40). These processes are inherently complex because “a system is not simply an interdependent set of components; it is also an interdependent collection of processes that interact over time” (Eisenberg, Goodall & Trethewey, 2007, p. 109). Integral to systems processes is feedback, the “system of loops that communication and action” (p. 109). Feedback within the system and from the environment directs system processes towards growth and improvement goals.

Equifinality and synergy are two other systems theory concepts worth mentioning. “The principle of equifinality states that a system’s final state may be reached by multiple paths and from different initial states; there is more than one way to reach the goal” (Beebe & Masterson, 2009, p. 41). To illustrate this using the human body, two different bodies may each realize the same growth and strength goals from different initial physical conditions by following quite different sets of diet and exercise regimens. Synergy, on the other hand, is perhaps best captured in the famous words of Aristotle, the whole is more than the sum of its parts. Or to use a scriptural parallel, “A person standing alone can be attacked and defeated, but two can stand back-to-back and conquer. Three are even better, for a triple-braided cord is not easily broken” (Ecclesiastes 4:12). Synergy suggests that when individuals meet in a small group that is grounded in systems theory, an opportunity is created for an exponential spiritual outcome.

I will cover two final concepts, homeostasis and entropy, and then we’ll move to some applications. If synergy is the positive outcome we want to see in small group systems, homeostasis and entropy are the negatives we would want to avoid. In family systems theory, homeostasis is used to refer to “the tacit collusion of family members to maintain the status quo” (Griffin, 2012, p. 183), even when the system has become unhealthy and its underlying relations dysfunctional. It is easy to see why a system and its members may be inclined towards homeostasis – it creates a false sense of stability. Change, even healthy change, can be difficult and uncomfortable. Entropy is “the measure of randomness or chaos in system” (Beebe & Masterson, 2009, p. 40). As entropy in a system increases, it moves toward decay. We can understand increased entropy in the small group context as characterized by disorganization, conflict and eventual fragmentation. Homeostasis and entropy are therefore helpful concepts that can be used to think critically about the health of church small groups.

APPLICATIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

How can these principles be applied to small groups? I would like to offer three ways to reflect on the implications of systems theory for small group ministry – an outside perspective, an inside perspective, and an upward perspective.

Outside perspective

A system-sensitive small group leader needs to have an outside perspective by being aware of environmental factors and adjust to them. He or she must also be sensitive to other systems that influence the activities of the small group. A prime example relates to demographic changes in the community. As the community becomes increasingly multicultural, due to immigration patterns, we can expect church small groups to change in their make-up. Are small group leaders ready for this change? How can mission-minded small group effectively reach people of other cultures?

Small groups also need to ensure that they don’t work in isolation but are connected to the larger church system, of which they are in reality a subsystem. Small groups need to be living and fulfilling the vision of the church, even though they may do this in their own unique ways. Systems theory also suggests that the various small groups in a church constitute interrelated subsystems. This means small group leaders across the church must work together and regularly exchange feedback, learnings, and best practices. A systems-minded small group leader is also careful not to view members of his or her small group in isolation, but as members of multiple systems. The natural family system of members, for example, has a significant impact on their lives. Small group leaders need to be able to discern how interrelations in these other systems might affect the spiritual lives of group members. A small group with an outside perspective is also mission-minded. In contrast, a closed-small group system is primarily or exclusively focused on the spiritual needs of current members. Without “input” from the outside, the body cannot grow.

Inside perspective

A system-minded small group leader also ensures that internal processes facilitate the growth of body. According to author Jeffery Arnold (Arnold 2004), group that reach inward work on discovering and releasing the spiritual gifts of members, developing leadership among members, and practicing effective care. The principles of system holism and interdependence call for small group leaders to foster cohesion while fostering difference and diversity. And equifinality suggests that small group leaders should encouraging members to contribute their varied talents and gifts because each, in its own way, will help the body grow.

Upward perspective

Last, but not least, systems-minded small group leaders need to maintain an upward perspective by being growth oriented and constantly monitoring progress in that direction. The goal of spiritual synergy is one that you must always keep your eye on, but you must also be mindful of forces that can hold you back and pull down, in the form of group homeostasis and entropy. According to systems theory, when one member of the group is unhealthy, the whole system is affected, which means group leaders must adopt a holistic approach to the spiritual wellbeing of the group. And because entropic forces (rooted in our human sinfulness and fallenness) are always at work against group spiritual health and goals, group leaders cannot take growth for granted.

CONCLUSION

To sum up, I have shown that key concepts of systems theory can contribute to effective small group ministry and leadership. These concepts are interdependence, openness to the environment, input, process, feedback, equifinality, synergy, homeostasis, and entropy. I have proposed that systems theory is aligns with Scripture, illustrating this with the Bible’s likening of Christian community as the Body, a family and a marriage covenant. And I have suggested three broad ways you can apply systems thinking as church leaders by always maintaining an outside, inside, and upward perspective.

I will now open the floor for discussion and questions.

 

References

Arnold, J. (2004). The big book on small groups (2nd. ed.). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.

Beebe, S. A., & Masterson, J. T. (2009). Communicating in small groups: Principles and practices (9th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education.

Dougherty, K. D., & Whitehead, A. L. (2011). A place to belong: Small group involvement in religious congregations. Sociology of Religion, 72(1), 91-111. doi: 10.1093/socrel/srq067

Eisenberg, E. M., Goodall, H. L., & Trethewey, A. (2007). Organizational communication: Balancing creativity and constraint (5th. ed.). Boston, MA: Bedford/St. Martins.


Griffin, E. (2012). A first look at communication theory (8th. ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Hackman, M. Z., & Johnson, C. E. (2004). Leadership: A communication perspective (4th. ed.). Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press.

Hammond, D. (2003). The science of synthesis: Exploring the social implications of general systems theory. Boulder, CO: University Press of Colorado. 

Stevens, R. P. (1994). Analogy or homology? An investigation of the congruency of systems theory and biblical theology in pastoral leadership. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 22(3), 173-181.

Strom, B. (2003). More than talk: Communication studies and the Christian faith (2nd ed.). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.

Skyttner, L. (2005). General systems theory: Problems, perspectives, practice (2nd. ed.). Hackensack, NJ: World Scientific Publishing.
 
Wesley, J. (1952). A plain account of Christian perfection. London, UK: Epworth Press.