
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.Appendix B
Questionnaire:
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. Administration
of the Questionnaire
Before
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]
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.
Limitations
of the Questionnaire
I
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
questions.
[ii]
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
questionnaire.
Description of the Questionnaire Respondents
I
received a total of 521 questionnaires that I was able to use in my analysis.
Table 7 gives some descriptive background of these leaders.
Results
of the Questionnaire
The
key questions (dependent variables) are questions twentyseven (whether the
group had multiplied), twentyeight (length of time for a cell to multiply)
and twentynine (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. TABLE
1
DESCRIPTIVE DATA FROM QUESTIONNAIRE
Question Twentyseven: Whether the Group Had Multiplied
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 (sixtythree percent), 193 said no (thirtyseven percent). The
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
group. On
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.
TABLE 2 FACTORS CORRELATED WITH CELL MULTIPLICATION
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.
Question Twentyeight: Length of Time

AVERAGE LENGTH OF CELL GROUP IN EACH COUNTRY

Ecuador Colombia Singapore El
Salvador Perú Honduras
Korea 
43 weeks 53 weeks 54 weeks 61 weeks 68 weeks 95 weeks 130 weeks 
average length OF
CELL GROUP AMONG ALL SEVEN COUNTRIES: 68 weeks (1 year and 3 months) 

AVERAGE TIME TO MULTIPLY CELL GROUP IN EACH COUNTRY 
Colombia El
Salvador Ecuador Peru Honduras Singapore
Korea 
16 weeks 21 weeks 22 weeks 25 weeks 37 weeks 73 weeks 82 weeks 
Average LENGTH OF
TIME TO MULTIPLY CELL GROUP: 36 weeks (8 months) 
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 twentytwo 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<
0.000.
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 ±
11.6).
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 twentynine 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.
TABLE 4 FACTORS CORRELATED WITH MULTIPLICATION FREQUENCY
ASSISTANTS No. 8 
More assistants,
higher the frequency of multiplication, 
TRAINING No. 10 
More
knowledge/training, higher the frequency of multiplication, 
DEVOTIONAL LIFE No. 11 
More time spent by a leader in devotions, higher the frequency of multiplication, r = .25, p< .001. 
LESSON PREPARATION No. 13 
More time spent in lesson preparation, higher the frequency of multiplication, r = .11, p< ..038. 
CONTACTING MEMBERS No. 14 
More times the leader contacted the members of the group, higher the frequency of multiplication, r = .21, p< .001. 
OUTSIDE MEETINGS No. 15 
More times that
the leader met with the group outside the regular cell meeting, higher
the frequency of multiplication, 
VISITATION OF NEW PEOPLE No. 16 
More that the cell leader visited new people, higher the frequency of multiplication, r = .24, p< .001. 
EXHORTATION TO INVITE PEOPLE No. 17 
More the leaders exhorted the group to invite new people, higher the frequency of multiplication, r = .14, p < .007. 
NEW VISITORS IN GROUP No. 18 
More visitors in
the cell group, higher the frequency of multiplication, 
MULTIPLICATION GOALS No. 19 
More clarity about multiplication goal, higher the frequency of multiplication, r = .17, p< .001. 
Question twentynine asked the cell leaders how many times that they had
multiplied their group since becoming the leader.
Thirtyfive percent (172) said that they had not multiplied their
group, twentyeight percent indicated that the group had multiplied one time
(137), fourteen percent indicated they had multiplied two times (sixtyseven),
eleven percent indicated that had multiplied three times (fiftyfour), while
twelve percent (fiftynine) 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.
The
correlations coincide exactly with what was discovered under question
twentyseven 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 twentyseven 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:
Colombia 
59
( 11.3%) 
Ecuador 
125
( 24.0%) 
Peru 
54
( 10.4%) 
Honduras 
72
( 13.8%) 
El
Salvador 
80 ( 15.4%) 
Korea 
55 ( 10.6%) 
Singapore 
76 ( 14.6%) 
RELAX YOU DON’T NEED TO BE A SUPERSTAR
Social Standing
ü
There was no correlation between gender,
social class, age, civil status, or education. You don’t have to be someone
that you’re not.
Personality
ü
Nor did a particular personality type
help a leader multiply his or her group. Introverted as well as extroverted
leaders multiplied their cell groups.
Leadership Giftedness
ü
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
ü
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.
Goal
Orientation
ü
If you fail to set goals that your
members clearly remember, you have little more than a
5050 chance of multiplying your cell. But if you do set goals, you
chance of multiplying increases to three out of four.
ü
Cell leader who knew when their groups
would give birth consistently multiplied their group more often than goalless
leaders.
Training
ü
When
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.
Preparation
ü
Statistics
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
PREPARATION
v
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.
#27
Multiplied Yet?
Effect size
Significance 
Devotions e
= .
15 .02
1c 11.53c
< .005 Goals
e =
. 20 .04
2c 21.72c < .0005 Training
e = .04
.00 1c
.70c
n. s. Preparation
e = .02
.00 1c
.28c
n. s. 
ü
It
seems that clearcut goals helped a leader multiply his or her group. However,
regular devotional time was a close second.
#29
Number of times multiplied?
Effect size
Significance 
Goals
R = .18
31.36 2
15.68 9.16
< .0005 Devotions
r = .21
42.14 1
42.14 24.61
< .0001 Training
r =
.08 5.53
1 5.53
3.23
.07 Preparation
r = .00 .00
1 .00 .00
n. s. 
ü
Again,
devotions and goals are more important than training or preparation. Effective
cell leadership is more of a Spiritled adventure than a Bible study attitude.
REACHING OUT
Visitation of New People
ü
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 57 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%.
ü
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
ü
Those
leaders who consistently encouraged cell members to bring friends multiplied
their groups significantly more than those leaders who only occasionally did
so.
ü
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
ü
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.
HIERARCHICAL
ANALYSIS FOR REACHING NEW PEOPLE, EXHORTATION, AND VISITORS
Question 27Multiplication Yet
Effect Size
Significance 
Visit
New Ones E = .21 .04
1c 22.13c
< .0001 
Exhortation
E = .21
.04 1c
22.12c < .0001 
Visitors
E = .06
.00 1c
1.91c .16 
ü
Visitation
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 29Number Of Times Multiplied
Effect
Size
Significance 
Visit
New Ones R = .26
65.06 1
65.06 38.99
< .0001 
Exhortation
R = .17
28.41 1
28.41 17.02
< .0005 
Visitors
R =
.07 4.68
1
4.68 2.80
.09 
ü
Visiting
new people come out on top in this hierarchical analysis, but mobilizing the
cell members to invite their friends is a close second.
REACHING
IN
Prayer for Group Members
ü
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.
Outside Meetings
ü
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.
Assistants/interns
In Group
ü
Those who managed to gather a team
together doubled their capacity to multiply the cell group
Pastoring Those In The Group
ü
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.
HIERARCHICAL
ANALYSIS BETWEEN CONTACTING, PRAYER, AND SOCIAL MEETINGS
Question 27Multiplication Yet
Effect Size
Significance 
Assistants
E = .12 .02
1c 7.86c
< .01 
Socialmeeting
E = .05 .00
1c 1.56c .2 
Contacting
E = .05 .00
1c 1.51c
.2 
Prayer
E = .20 .04
1c 20.50c
< .0001 
ü
The
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 29Number Of Times Multiplied
Effect Size
Significance 
Assistants
R =.21 40.41
1 40.41
23.87 <
.0001 
Prayer
R =.13 17.16
1 17.16
10.14 < .005 
Socialmeeting
R =.16 25.58
1 25.58
15.11 <
.0005 
Contacting
R = .07
4.21 1
4.21 2.48
.11 
ü
Those
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
important.
HIERARHICAL FOR ALL SIGNIFICANT VARIABLES
#27MULTIPLICATION YET?
Prayer
e = .18 .03
1c 16.51c
< .0005
*Not exhortation e = .15
.02 1c
11.81c < .005
Goals e = .14
.02 2c
9.69c < .01
*visit new ones e = .13
.02 1c
9.01c < .005
*Assistants
e = .12 .02
1c 7.86c
< .01
*Devotions
e = .12 .01
1c 6.99c
< .01
Training e = .08
.01 1c
3.27c .07
Preparation
e = .06 .00
1c 1.86c
.2
Visitors
e = .05 .00
1c 1.36c
.2
Contacting e = .01
.00 1c
.08c n. s.
socialmeeting
e = .01 .00
1c .10c
n. s.
#29 MULTIPLICATION TIMES
*Assistants
r = .21 40.41
1 40.41
25.69 < .0001
*Devotions r = .18
32.66 1
32.66 20.76
< .0001
*visit new ones r = .15
22.73 1
22.73 14.45
< .0005
Training r = .13
15.44 1
15.44 9.82
< .005
socialmeeting r = .13
15.71 1
15.71 9.99
< .005
*Not exhortation r =.12
14.41 1
14.41 9.16
< .005
Prayer r =.08
5.95 1
5.95 3.78
.05
Goals R = .09
7.48 2
3.74 2.38
.09
Preparation r = .03
.62 1
.62 .40
n. s.
Contacting r = .06
3.36 1
3.36 2.14
.14
Visitors
r = .05 2.76
1 2.76
1.75 .2
ü
I
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).
ü
Praying
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 (seventythree percent) filled out question twentyfive (length of cell) and 111 did not; 397 people (ninetythree percent) responded to question twentyseven (multiplicationyes/no) and twentyseven did not; 336 people (seventynine percent) responded to question twentyeight (length of time for group multiplication) and eightyeight did not; 356 people (eightyfour percent) responded to question twentynine (number of times of multiplication) while sixtyeight did not.