Note : The Following notes were initially included in the appendix of Home Cell Explosion. However, the editor decided not to include them. The Multiplication Questionnaire is provided in my book Home Cell Group Explosion, and the questionnaire also appears in my dissertation.
Cell Multiplication Factors
The primary motivation for this questionnaire was to discover essential variables associated with cell group multiplication. Because the questionnaire was administered specifically to cell leaders, most of the findings relate to leadership patterns.
administering the questionnaires, I obtained permission from those in
authority. Normally, the cell
leaders would fill out the questionnaires while I was present (e.g., in a cell
leadership training meeting).
I tried to make the anonymity issue very clear to the respondents,
telling them that there was no place for them to write their name. I urged them to answer the questions as honestly as possible.
I tried to make the questionnaire clear and easy to follow, knowing the
educational level of some of my respondents.
While they were filling out the questionnaires, I made myself available
to answer their questions.
purposely tried to disguise the dependent variables (cell multiplication
questions) by placing them at the end of the questionnaire and by not
announcing the importance of these questions.
However, this proved to be a limitation for two reasons.
First, those respondents who took more time felt pressured at the end,
due to lack of time, and thus some respondents skipped over the last
Another reason for the missing data was that these questions were
harder and required more thinking, and thus some decided to leave them blank.
If I were to do it over again, I would explain these dependent
variables more clearly and placed them near the beginning of the
key questions (dependent variables) are questions twenty-seven (whether the
group had multiplied), twenty-eight (length of time for a cell to multiply)
and twenty-nine (number of times the cell had multiplied).
All of the other questions (independent variables) will be analyzed
according to their correlation with these three questions.
I did not consider a correlation significant unless the probability
level was .05 or lower.
DESCRIPTIVE DATA FROM QUESTIONNAIRE
This was a very straightforward question, “Has your group multiplied yet?” There were only two responses, yes or no. Out of the 521 respondents, 398 said yes (sixty-three percent), 193 said no (thirty-seven percent).
next step was to try to determine the significant patterns related to those
who said yes versus those who said no. First,
there was no significant relation between country, gender, social class, age,
civil status, education, salvation, number of outside meetings, gifting,
personality, or homogeneity and whether the leader had multiplied the cell
the other hand, the statistics did show that there was significant correlation
between cell multiplication and the number of assistants in the group, number
of visitors in the group, and the cell leader’s devotional life, prayer
life, visitation, and goal orientation. Table
8 outlines those relationships.
According to these findings, it is imperative that cell leaders prepare themselves spiritually and intellectually, engage in visitation, instill an outreach orientation in the group, and have specific goals for cell multiplication. It is not possible to say that one of these aspects is more important than the other. However, taken together, they provide the cell leader with needed information about how to successfully multiply the group.
This correlation is based on question twenty-eight which asked the cell
leaders how long it took to multiply their cell group.
There was a significant relationship between the length of
multiplication time and the particular country, F (4,203) = 4.33, p< .0001.
For example, in Honduras it took an average of thirty-seven weeks to
multiply the group (mean = 39.5 ±
22.0), whereas in El Salvador it only took an average of twenty-one (mean =
22.4 ± 26.5) and Colombia only took an average of sixteen
weeks (mean = 18.1 ±
18.3). Table 37 adds clarity.
Just as important as what this question did say was what it did not say.
For example, the statistics showed no correlation between time that it
took to multiply a group and gender, civil status, age, occupation,
personality, or gifting.
The statistics did indicate that educational levels were significantly related
to multiplication length, F (4,199) = 3.03, p< .0187. Among the Latin American churches, an elementary educated
leader took forty weeks to multiply his group (mean = 40.3 ±
43.8) versus twenty-two weeks for a high school educated leader (mean = 22.3 ± 19.0).
The study showed multiplication length was significantly related to the number
of times the group met outside the normal cell meeting, F (4,197) = 3.58,
p<.007. Those leaders who did
not meet with their group outside the regular meeting took significantly
longer to multiply than those who gathered their group occasionally for
outside activity. It is
interesting that Colombia rated significantly higher than any of the other
countries with regard to number of outside meetings, F (4, 14.2) = 21.5, p<
Homogeneity was also significantly related to the time it took to multiply a
cell group, F (4,162) = 7.67 p< .0001.
Those leaders who said that there was a medium level of homogeneity in
the group (mean = 24.4 ±
24.1) took significantly longer to multiply their group that those who
indicated a high level (mean = 11.0 ±
The study also
indicated that newer Christians tended to multiply their groups faster than
those who had been believers for a longer period, F (4,201) = 1.99, p<
.094. Those who were believers
for more than three years (mean = 29.3 ±
28.9) took an average of twenty-nine weeks to multiply the group versus
those who were believers six months (mean = 5.8 ±
2.8) and took an average of only six weeks.
Question twenty-nine asked the cell leaders how many times that they had
multiplied their group since becoming the leader.
Thirty-five percent (172) said that they had not multiplied their
group, twenty-eight percent indicated that the group had multiplied one time
(137), fourteen percent indicated they had multiplied two times (sixty-seven),
eleven percent indicated that had multiplied three times (fifty-four), while
twelve percent (fifty-nine) said that their group had multiplied four or more
times. This question is important
because it goes beyond whether or not the group had multiplied to determine
what factors were significant for those leaders who continually multiplied
their group. Table 38 highlights
these multiplication factors.
correlations coincide exactly with what was discovered under question
twenty-seven in the following areas: number of assistants, training,
devotional life, lesson preparation, contacting members and newcomers,
exhorting group to invite friends, number of visitors in the cell group, and
goals for cell multiplication. This
question did show a positive correlation between salvation and cell
multiplication and the number of outside meetings and cell multiplication
while question twenty-seven did not.
This statistical study has demonstrated a consistent
statistical relationship between a cell leader’s success in multiplying his
or her group and the time spent in training, devotions, preparation, and
visitation (members and newcomers). It
also clearly showed that the number of assistants, the goal orientation of the
leader, and the number of visitors that the leader is able to attract to his
cell group, all play a significant role in whether or not that leader will
successfully multiply the group.
The following statistical comments are based on 521 questionnaires quite equally divided among the seven churches:
RELAX YOU DON’T NEED TO BE A SUPERSTAR
There was no correlation between gender,
social class, age, civil status, or education. You don’t have to be someone
that you’re not.
Nor did a particular personality type
help a leader multiply his or her group. Introverted as well as extroverted
leaders multiplied their cell groups.
This finding was the most surprising to
me. Many, including David Yonggi Cho, teach that only leaders with the gift of
evangelism are able to multiply cell groups. In my study, I found that there
was no correlation between cell multiplication and spiritual gifts. Those with
the gift of teaching, pastoring, mercy, leadership, and evangelism equally
multiplied their cell group.
THE LEADER'S IMPACT
The Devotional Life
The statistics pointed to a direct
correlation between time spent in devotions and cell multiplication. Those who
spent 1 ½ hours or more in devotions multiplied their groups twice as much as
those who spent less than ½ hour. As time with the Lord increased, so did the
leaders capacity to multiply his or her cell.
If you fail to set goals that your
members clearly remember, you have little more than a
50-50 chance of multiplying your cell. But if you do set goals, you
chance of multiplying increases to three out of four.
Cell leader who knew when their groups
would give birth consistently multiplied their group more often than goal-less
the cell leader felt better trained than the average cell member the group
multiplied more rapidly. However, when compared with the leaders devotional
life and goal orientation, this point was not as important.
seemed to show it’s more
important to prepare the heart through prayer and time with God than to
prepare the lesson.
HIERARCHICAL ANALYSIS FOR LEADERSHIP
Important: When analyzing the following
sequential or hierarchical analysis, it's important to remember that all of
the variables showed significance in and of themselves.
But when compared to each other, some lose statistical significance.
seems that clear-cut goals helped a leader multiply his or her group. However,
regular devotional time was a close second.
Number of times multiplied?
devotions and goals are more important than training or preparation. Effective
cell leadership is more of a Spirit-led adventure than a Bible study attitude.
Visitation of New People
There was a direct correlation between
how often the cell leader contacted new people and his or her success in
multiplying the group. If the leader contacted 5-7 new people per month there
was an 80% chance that he or she would multiply the cell group. When the
leader only visited 1 to 3 people per month the chances dropped to 60%.
Those leaders who visited 8 or more new
people per month multiplied their group twice as much as those who visited 1
or 2 new people.
Exhortation In Cell Group To Invite Friends
leaders who consistently encouraged cell members to bring friends multiplied
their groups significantly more than those leaders who only occasionally did
Those cell leaders who weekly encouraged
the cell members to invite visitors multiplied their group twice as much as
those who did so occasionally or not at all.
Growing Cell Groups Consistently Receive Visitors
I discovered that there is a direct
relationship between number of visitors in the group and the number of times a
leader was able to multiply his or her group.
ANALYSIS FOR REACHING NEW PEOPLE, EXHORTATION, AND VISITORS
Question 27--Multiplication Yet
and exhortation are equally important in the multiplication process.
Interestingly enough, it seems that the flow of visitors is secondary. Perhaps
this tells us that just having visitors in the cell doesn't guarantee that
they’ll come back. The way the cell leader cares for the group tells more
about visitor retention.
Question 29--Number Of Times Multiplied
new people come out on top in this hierarchical analysis, but mobilizing the
cell members to invite their friends is a close second.
Prayer for Group Members
The statistics showed that those cell
leaders who prayed daily for their cell members were more likely to multiply
the cell groups than those who only prayed once in a while.
Those who had 6 or more social meetings
per month multiplied their group twice as much as those who did not have
social meetings or those who might have only had one social meeting per month.
Those who managed to gather a team
together doubled their capacity to multiply the cell group
Pastoring Those In The Group
My study discovered that regular
visitation of those within the group help consolidate the group and thus
prepare the group to give birth. But as we'll see, in a comparative sense,
there are other more important factors to consider.
ANALYSIS BETWEEN CONTACTING, PRAYER, AND SOCIAL MEETINGS
Question 27--Multiplication Yet
data indicates that prayer for group member is the most important work of the
cell leader in unifying and strengthening the quality of his or her group.
Building a team is a close second.
Question 29--Number Of Times Multiplied
leaders who multiplied their groups built a leadership team, established a
strong social atmosphere in the group, and prayed for cell members
consistently. Regular visitation of each cell members doesn’t seem to be as
HIERARHICAL FOR ALL SIGNIFICANT VARIABLES
#29 MULTIPLICATION TIMES
gather from the analysis that essential features of multiplying groups are
leadership devotions (chapter 2), leadership outreach (chapter 3), group
outreach (chapter 3), and building a team (chapter 4).
for team members and setting goals are essential in order to multiply the cell
at least once, but they don't necessarily help a leader to multiply his or her
group several times
Leadership Training and holding social meetings are necessary for continuous multiplication.
[i] The exception was Perú, where the head pastor distributed the questionnaires to those cell leaders who were present at one of the Sunday morning worship services.
[ii] Three hundred thirteen people (seventy-three percent) filled out question twenty-five (length of cell) and 111 did not; 397 people (ninety-three percent) responded to question twenty-seven (multiplication-yes/no) and twenty-seven did not; 336 people (seventy-nine percent) responded to question twenty-eight (length of time for group multiplication) and eighty-eight did not; 356 people (eighty-four percent) responded to question twenty-nine (number of times of multiplication) while sixty-eight did not.