CHAPTER 3: TRAINING MODELS FOR  CELL LEADERSHIP         

            Dale Galloway says it well, “The most important job of the pastor and the pastoral staff is leadership development, training lay leaders who will build small groups. Leadership development is essential, and it must be top priority. It cannot be left to chance” (1995:118).  George adds, ASince the whole system depends on trained leaders being available, the number of groups cannot grow if you are not multiplying the number of Xs”[cell leader] (1994: 61)..

My interest in leadership development and cell groups is intimately linked with my passion for church growth. As Wagner so clearly brings out in his landmark book Leading Your Church To Growth, “In every growing, dynamic church I have studied, I have found a key person whom God is using to make it happen” (1984:61). This is also true in cell ministry. Behind a successful cell group is an  effective leader. ^[1]

In this chapter, my focus turns to leadership training models in the cell church , that is,  how  a cell church can effectively, yet   rapidly,  train leadership to meet the burgeoning needs of a growing church. I will cover leadership training for new Christians all the way to cell apprenticeship and internship.   

Models For  Training New Christians On The Path To Cell Leadership  

            We have already discussed the urgent need in the cell church to identify potential leaders in the cell church. Under this section, I will suggest some models for preparing  new believers to become cell leaders.

I  will be using the word  “training” in this section as opposed to “discipleship”. To me, the word “training”  speaks of movement and direction toward a goal. On the other hand, the word “discipleship”  often provokes images of inward growth and personal sanctification that is purely qualitative in nature. The training that I’m describing in this paper  is goal oriented and seeks to take the new believer from his present position to a practical, hands on ministry which contributes to the natural process of church growth.

            Under this section, I will analyze two models that are becoming increasingly well known  and probably the most widely promoted at this time.  This is largely due to the fact that Ralph Neighbour has his own publishing house and Bethany World Prayer Center  has become one of the most well attended cell conferences in the world. ^[2]  

Ralph Neighbour’s  Training Process  

            Ralph Neighbour has probably done more than anyone to connect new believer training  with cell group ministry. In industry terms, Dr. Neighbour has set the standard. Many cell churches are either using his material or have adapted it in their own context. 

General Training 

I recently bought the  Track Pack  from Touch Publications, Ralph Neighbour’s publishing house. This pack includes seven discipleship books (booklets) written by Ralph Neighbour. ^[3]   These booklets take the new believer from rethinking his  value system to learning to penetrate his own “oikoses” (friends, neighbors, and family) through leading small groups. 

            The main characteristic that  separates these training manuals from the “garden variety” discipleship booklets (i.e., Navigator—Campus Crusade variety) is that they are so intimately linked with the cell group. In the cornerstone booklet, The Arrival Kit, Week one, Day one informs the new believer,

Your Cell Group will be served in a special way. Some day, when you have matured, you may also shepherd others as a Cell Leader. There will never be more than fifteen in your family cell, and you will soon discover that each member is on a spiritual journey with you (1993:11).  

In the above quote, not only does Dr. Neighbour introduce new believer training and cell group involvement simultaneously, he also plants the seed that someday the new believer might become a  cell group leader.

Most of the material for new believers in the  Track Pack  is  foundational Biblical teaching designed to disciple new believers. However,  Neighbour takes those teachings and gives them new meaning in the light of the cell group. Take, for example,  the Biblical teaching on fellowship. A quote out of the booklet, Welcome To Your Changed Life,  says, 

There’s an event unbelievers look forward to, often called the ‘Happy Hour.’ It’s a time when friends get together for an hour or so and drink alcoholic spirits to ‘get happy.’ Perhaps you have shared in such events? Christians have the only TRUE ‘Happy Hour!’ It’s a special time, called a ‘Cell Group,’ when they get together to be with their Lord (1995:14).  

When talking about baptism, he urges the new Christian to talk with his cell leader as soon as possible (1993:41). When touching the Lord’s Supper, he says, “In your oikos, you will observe a special meal called ‘The Lord’s Supper’” (1993:41).

            The new believer is guided upon a track (a literal  railroad track) that attempts to take him from his worldly value system all the way  to conducting small groups and winning his non-Christians neighbors. With each new stage of ministry, Neighbour emphasizes a corresponding book or books of the Bible. The following diagram explains the process better.

TABLE 1  

NEIGHBOUR'S DISCIPLESHIP TRACK

(Neighbour 1995:4)  

             In my opinion, the strength of Neighbour’s training system does not reside in the doctrinal/Scriptural teaching of his training material. The Navigators and other like-minded groups probably have an edge on the market  in this area.  Rather,  the importance of these  materials lie in the fact that Dr. Neighbour is the first one to link new believer training so intimately with cell group ministry.  

Sponsorship  

            I believe that the most unique, workable contribution of  Dr. Neighbour to new believer training is the concept of sponsorship within the cell group. Sponsorship is much like one on one discipleship. However, the main difference is that the sponsor (or discipler) comes from within the cell group and sponsors (disciples) someone who has been assigned to the same group. However, Neighbour does not only believe that a Sponsor should disciple a new Christian. Rather, he believes that every newcomer to the group should have a sponsor (Sponsor’s 1995:5). ^[4]

            The Sponsor-Sponsee relationship lasts from  three to four months. Then the relationship changes to partnership. It’s during this transitional time that the Sponsor trains the Sponsee to become a Sponsor of others (Sponsor’s 1995:5).  The Sponsor is supposed to do at least six things with the Sponsee (Sponsor’s 1995:22-32). They are:

1.     Listening

2.     Interceding

3.     Modeling

4.     Teaching

5.     Setting the Pace or Leading

6.     Involving the Sponsee with other Christians

            As far as I am concerned, the sponsorship idea should be implemented in every cell group.  Cell group leaders cannot do everything. Trying to lead and shepherd the group, as well as care for the new converts is not only draining but ineffective. This idea, steals  the wealth of Navigator/Campus Crusade knowledge on discipleship, but takes it one step further. It envelops the new believer in a  close knit cell group.   

Training For Outreach  

            Four booklets of  the  Track Pack  focus on teaching the new believer to reach out to non-Christians. Neighbour  believes that the most effective outreach involves reaching  friends, neighbors, and family members which he labels our “oikos”. This is the Greek word for  house or household in the New Testament (1992:60-65).  He also distinguishes between “type A” unbelievers who are familiar with religious customs from  “type B” unbelievers who are “…are not searching for Jesus Christ, and show no interest in Bible study or other Christian activities (1992:27).

For  the “type B” unbelievers, Dr. Neighbour has  designed a “non-Christian type” cell group called  Share Groups.  These Share Groups do not replace the normal cell groups  but rather serve as an extension or outreach from the regular  cell group. Those believers who start or participate in Share Groups have the dual responsibility of attending their normal cell group as well as a separate Share Group.  Concerning these Share Groups, Neighbour says, “This group should be free, informal, and spontaneous….It’s important for all Share Group members to feel they can be themselves” (1991:60).

            The idea of Share Groups is a sound one and obviously has been used by Dr. Neighbour and others  very effectively. However, I have personally discovered very few people have time to be involved in a regular cell group, a celebration service, some type of cell training activity, and then commit themselves to another activity—in this case, a Share Group. In other words, I have found this concept more idealistic than practical in the life of a cell church.  

Bethany World Prayer Center  

            Bethany World Prayer Center holds the most promise for promoting and modeling the cell church model in the United States. ^[5] They have successfully adapted Neighbour’s  training methods for new believers to their own context and situation. First, it should be noted that from the moment that  the new convert enters the church, there is cell group involvement. The process is best described in the following  table format:  

TABLE 2  

STEPS FROM NEW BELIEVER TO CELL LEADER

(Adapted from Bethany Cell Conference Manual 1996:17)  

            As of June, 1996, Bethany had not yet developed their Leadership Track (Step five). The most developed part of their new believer training is step two, the Discipleship Track that begins the moment the new believer arrives at the cell group.  The following table  better describe the process that step:

TABLE 3  

 BETHANY'S INITIAL TRAINING MODEL

(Adapted from Hornsby 1995:25) 

      Like most things at Bethany World Prayer Center, I really like their new believer to cell leadership  training model. Although it is still “under construction”, it seems to be practical, thorough, and doable. I actually like the idea of using four simple tracts to cover important Biblical truth rather  than paying more money  for an in-depth  booklet (Neighbour). It also seems a lot easier to train  Sponsors with something as simple as a tract.

Bethany should be commended for their creativity in combining personal cell group training with  classroom instruction  (something that would be unacceptable to some cell group purists--- Ralph Neighbour). Bethany is also the model for  effectiveness when it comes to making immediate contact with the new believer and utilizing the cell leaders immediately after the altar call.

            Although I like their model and  do not have any criticisms of it, I believe that it is not wise for any cell church to follow verbatim someone else’s model of training. Every cell model has to be adapted to fit the situation, the followers, and the leaders.           

Models For Training  Cell Leaders And Interns  

            In this section, I will primarily deal with the latter stages of cell leader training. That is, I will be describing the various training models for cell leaders. My starting point will  be three of the four training model categories that Lyman Coleman uses in his 1993 manual on small group  ministry. ^[6] However, I hope to expand on Coleman’s categories, offer major corrections, ^[7] and add one more model.  I believe that it is useful to start with Coleman’s  categories since most cell leader training  will fall under one of them.  

Serendipity Model  

            Serendipity has established itself as being a first class producer of small group material for both cell leaders and cell group members. I have also found that Lyman Coleman’s  knowledge of small dynamics is the foremost in the field.  

Balance Between Up-Front And On-Going Training  

The Serendipity Model of leadership training requires six sessions of up-front training with periodic on-going training. That is, the potential leaders are required to take six seminar type classes before they can lead a small group. Afterwards, they are required to attend a monthly on-going leadership training meeting.  Coleman takes pride in the fact that his model takes into account the various types of groups in the church. For example,  support groups might receive more training than other groups (Coleman 1993: 5:19). The requirements in themselves are sound and the once a month ongoing training takes into account the busy life of the cell leader. ^[8] It is my understanding that Coleman does not promote the Jethro system in his model of small group ministry. ^[9]

Difficulty In Training Such Diverse Leadership  

            However, I have noticed one major   difficulty.  Serendipity encourages  churches to initiate a variety of small groups in the church (e.g., sports groups, choir groups, care groups, etc.). For example, Dr. Coleman says,  “It is not easy to categorize small groups. Often, they have several different goals which cross the lines of categorization”  (1993: 11).

Because the groups are so diverse, it is extremely difficult  to offer unified training that will meet the needs of each leader. For example, the  leader of a sports team or a choir group will not need to learn about  lesson preparation or how to lead worship in the group. Those issues are simply not relevant to them. Therefore, I have discovered that ongoing leadership training in a church that promotes a wide variety of small groups is very difficult to maintain and make relevant.  

Meta Model  

            In the US the Meta Model of small group ministry seems to have the highest profile due to the fact that  two of the largest churches in the US are using it (WillowCreek and Saddleback Community Church). 

Less Up-Front Training  

The  Meta model requires less up-front training than the Serendipity approach. Coleman says,  “The up-front training of the Meta model is called an -apprenticeship, and it is basically the associate, assistant, or co-leader who is ‘mentored’ while they are in the group” (1993:5:19). George, the philosophical thinker behind the Meta Model,  sets forth his reasoning behind  less up-front training in his recent book, The Coming Church Revolution,

Those who plan training and leadership development in churches tend to overdo orientation training and under do supervision. Why? Their own educational upbringing has made them comfortable with orientation training but relatively unfamiliar with the notion of supervision....any growing Christian...will be able to put together lots of the pieces on a common-sense basis with only a small amount of instruction (1994: 83).  

As a pragmatist, George realizes that no one model is laid in concrete. In other words, although George would prefer to use an effective model of apprenticeship, he is willing to change if the apprenticeship is not working. He says,

The poorer the supervision, the richer the orientation has to be. The thicker the supervision, the thinner the orientation has to be. Adult learning that is rooted in behavior change opts increasingly in favor of supervision and on the job training rather than on orientation (1994:84). 

More Ongoing Training  

To compensate for the lack of up-front training, each cell  leader and intern in the Meta  model must attend  on-going bimonthly leadership training. ^[10]   In other words, the Meta Model requires that the cell leaders spend more time  fulfilling on the job training. Ideally, every other week, they are required to meet in a general leadership training event called the VHS (Vision, Huddle, and Skill Training). 

Cell leaders (both the leader and the intern) learn best through experience and reflection. George rightly says, …the best possible context anyone has ever discovered for developing leadership occurs because of a small group” (1994:48).  If the small group is the best context for a leader to  gain  experience, the bimonthly leadership training session is the best place for leaders to reflect on their experiences.  It is during  these leadership training meetings that the top leadership of the church can help in the training process (George 1992: 119-152).  

Change Of Emphasis  

In his   book, Prepare Your Church for the Future,  George strongly emphasizes the bimonthly leadership gatherings (Vision, Huddle, and Skill Training)  He dedicates some thirty pages to describe these events in detail and how the Jethro system of care (D’s, L’s, X’s, etc.) ties into these bimonthly leadership training meetings  (1992:121-148). In that book, George is very dogmatic about the necessity of having those bimonthly meetings. On the other hand,  there was very little said about the apprentice system of training leaders.

However, in George’s most recent book, The Coming Church Revolution, he reverses gears.  Very little is said about the VHS . He even implies that an  official  VHS gathering is not even necessary if you are providing the same type of training in another manner (1994:128). He recommends that a church does not launch the VHS right away as a program , but rather  tries  to identify the VHS functions already present in the church (1994:203). On the other hand, lots of space is dedicated to raising up leadership from among the lay people in the church. One example will suffice, A“…the limiting resource for most churches’ part of the harvest is usually the lack of trained leaders. The model we increasingly find in healthy, growing churches is one of apprentice that leads to leadership (1994:61).  

Personal Observations  

            I personally believe that the change of emphasis from on-going training to apprenticeship is the result of the difficulty in gathering together leaders from such diverse groups and trying to offer them something relevant. This was the same criticism that I offered concerning the Serendipity Model. ^[11] As I have studied the Meta Model in five flagship churches around the US, I have discovered that ongoing training has become increasingly difficult, if not irrelevant. ^[12]

            However, it must be added that the Meta Model promotes a strong Jethro system of leadership (see footnote under Serendipity Model).  In my study of Meta Churches in the US,  I noticed an increasing reliance on the Jethro system,  due to the difficulty of gathering the small group leaders together for ongoing training. 

Cho Model  

            According to Lyman Coleman, the Cho model requires no up-front training. Once the cell group  is formed,  Coleman says that the leaders are required to attend a weekly training event where they are given the notes to the pastors and discussion questions for Bible application (Coleman 1993: 5:19). Coleman then proceeds to talk about what Dale  Galloway does, who Coleman labels as the major as the major advocate of the Cho model in the US (Coleman 1993: 5:19).  

Mistaken Analysis Of The Cho Model  

I am not sure how Coleman arrived at these  conclusions, but it does not appear that they are  true. First, in  Dale Galloway’s recent book on his  small group ministry called,  The Small Group Book, he talks about offering an initial training time for cell leaders and interns that lasts  three day event (1995:93). Second, the evidence seems to point to Galloway being more of an advocate of the Meta Model than the Cho Model. ^[13]If by calling this training system  the ‘Cho model’,  Coleman is referring to the what Paul Yonggi Cho actually does in Korea, he is also mistaken.   

The Training Cho Actually Offers  

Contrary to what Coleman  implies, Cho does offer up-front training. Potential cell leaders must attend an eight-week leadership training course that is taught on Sunday afternoon in one of  Yoida Full Gospel Churches’  small auditoriums (Hurtson 1995:75). Topics covered in this eight-week course include: cell leader responsibilities, home cell-group growth, Bible lesson preparation, etc. (Hurtson 1995:215).  Cho believes that “…the success of home cell groups depends on the guidance of the pastor, a trained lay leadership and continual fellowship with the Holy Spirit” (1981:135).

Neither does Cho offer a weekly training session to his cell leaders at the church (since 1988 this has been discontinued due to the rapid growth). Rather,  printed supplemental materials are available before and after the Wednesday night services (Hurtson 1995:214).

            The ongoing training now consists of semiannual cell leader conferences in which pastor Cho personally addresses the cell leaders. Due to their large number, half of the cell leaders attend  the conference one day, while the other half attend the next day.  Practical tips and vision casting seem to be the main agenda for these conferences (Hurtson 1995: 75). However, the main ongoing training takes place as section leaders spend time with group leaders both during ministry visits and during the actual group meetings (Hurtson 1995:75).

            In summary, the original Cho Model (before it became impractical to train the cell leaders on a weekly basis) consisted of:

1.     An eight week training course for potential cell leaders

2.     Strong implementation of the Jethro System

3.     Weekly Training for the cell leaders (this has now been cut back to twice per year)  

The Cho Model Today  

            This original Cho model is followed  precisely by Bethany World Prayer Center today. The cell leaders and interns are required to meet every Wednesday night with their section pastors and district pastors who train them in the cell lessons. Pastor Larry, after delivering exegetical teaching to the congregation, meets with the cell leaders to  pray for them and stir them up with fresh vision. There is also a  required cell leadership training before one can lead a group. Like in Cho’s church, there is also a  healthy Jethro system  in place.   

Neighbour’s Training Model  

            Neighbour’s model  of pre-training and ongoing training is unique. From my understanding of Neighbour, there is no ongoing training after one has begun leading a cell group. He believes that potential leaders must be  trained from within their existing cell groups through a  combination of modeling and personal training. ^[14]   I believe that Neighbour does promote a leadership training retreat in which  potential cell leaders are invited. However, my point here is that  after the cell leader begins ministering, there are no ongoing training meetings. Neighbour believes that the only way a cell church can keep up with the constant need for new cell leadership is if each leader trains new leaders (1990: 221).           

Personal Journey In Cell Training  

After describing the four training models, Lyman Coleman refers to the fifth model, that is, the model that best describes your own personal situation.  When my wife and I  began the  cell system in Ecuador, I followed a small manual that we received from a fellow missionary who was the head pastor of a C&MA church in Colombia. As I look back on it, this manual promoted a very similar approach to the VHS (Vision, Huddle, and Skill Training) model that is  now promoted by Carl George. ^[15] Apart from many helpful hints in the manual, the core principle was holding bimonthly  training  session with all the cell leadership present.  We followed the general tenor of that model throughout our time in Ecuador. 

Before leaving Ecuador, a  key co-worker  (a fellow missionary with whom I had worked side by side in the cell ministry)  and I reflected back on our three and one half years s of cell ministry. Both of us agreed that the bimonthly training sessions were the backbone of our  cell ministry and the key to our success. In my own cell manual, I call this bimonthly meeting,  the motor of the cell group ministry.

Our other ongoing system of training took place through the Jethro model. This idea was unashamedly  stolen  from Carl George through his book, Prepare Your Church for the Future. Following  George’s teaching,  we  appointed  D’s (myself),  L’s (at one point we had eleven),  X’s (at one time 50 ), and Xa’s (at one time 50).  This system offered mixed results. It really depended on the commitment of the L (overseer of five cell groups), as to whether or not the cell leaders received proper care.

Our pre-training developed in  two stages. In the initial stages of the cell ministry, I taught a taught a Sunday School course entitled “How To Lead A Cell Group.” That was my first attempt to put  together a cell manual. Later, when the manual was more fully developed, I offered a one day seminar for new leaders.  

Conclusion On Cell Leadership Training Models  

Among the five models discussed under this section, there seems to be more similarity than dissimilarity, more agreement than disagreement. The following table gives an overview of the four cell leader training models:  

TABLE 4  

SUMMARY OF CELL LEADER TRAINING MODELS  

       The Serendipity Model appears to be the weakest in that there is not an emphasis on  apprenticeship within the cell group nor on the Jethro system. I also found Neighbour’s model to be deficient, due to the lack of formal leadership training and ongoing training, which I believe are both very important. 

The Meta Model and the Cho Model have the most in common. However, the    Cho model includes both formal pre-training as  apprenticeship training within the cell group, while the Meta Model only offers apprenticeship training. With this in mind, it would appear that the Cho Model offers the most complete system of cell training. It is also true that the Cho Model has produced the most rapid church growth, which is another factor in its favor.

Therefore, in summary, an effective cell leader training model should have: 

1.     Some kind of pre-training for potential cell leaders before they begin leading their groups.

2.     An apprentice system within the cell group in which potential leaders are in the process of being trained from the moment they enter the group.

3.     A Jethro system in which every leader is pastored. ^[17]

4.     Some type of on-going training (this training might be weekly, bimonthly, or monthly).