The Starfish & the Spider, Glocalization, and the Demise (and Rebirth?) of the Baptist Blogosphere

I've been interested in the power of networks and network theory for some time now (see a paper I wrote a couple of years ago called Emerging Network Theory). I believe that society is restructuring to a network based, decentralized organizational system as opposed to a hierachical, centralized organizational system. With the speed of information sharing through the internet, the ease of global travel, and the connecting of people with ideas from all over the world, we are truly stepping into a flat world, as Thomas Friedman tells us. This move to an interconnected world where barriers between people groups and nation states are falling is called Globalization.

Recently, I have been reading two books that have helped to articulate some of the things that I have been observing and sensing intuitively. The first is Glocalization (global + local) by Bob Roberts. I spoke about this book last month HERE. Basically, he takes Friedmans' thesis regarding the flattening of the world through interconnectivity and applies it to the on going, global mission of the church. He uses the fact that each one of us has the ability to be a Kingdom influence on our domains of life through local and global interaction as a wake up call to the church to step into the 21st century and engage the opportunities God has put before us. While fairly simplistic at times, it is an excellent primer on this concept.

The second book is The Starfish and the Spider: The Unstoppable Power of Leaderless Organizations, by Brafmon and Beckstrom. They use the analogy of a Starfish as a decentralized organization (you can cut off the leg of a starfish and a whole new starfish will regenerate), compared to a spider, which looks like a starfish, but if you cut off the head, the whole organism dies. They say that we are headed into a time where decentralized, organic organizations are becoming more effective and are basically unstoppable. Here are the characteristics of a starfish movement compared to a spider organization, which is basically the opposite of these things:

• There's no one in charge (not to say that there isn't leadership - there is , it just isn't centralized).
• There are no headquarters (decision making ability is diffused to the practicioners)
• If you thump it on the head, it doesn't die (if you take out the identified leadership, the movement keeps going and new leadership organically rises up)
• There's an amorphous division of roles (a lot of shared responsibility)
• If you take out a unit, the organization is unharmed
• Knowledge and power are distributed instead of centralized
• The organization is flexible instead of rigid
• Units are self-funding instead of being funded by the organization
• You cannot count the participants, as opposed to having identifiable membership rolls
• Working groups communicate with each other directly instead of through intermediaries

The authors also have 6 Principles of Decentralization:

1. When attacked, a decentralized organization tends to become even more open and decentralized
2. It's easy to mistake starfish for spiders. When people look at decentralized movements from a "spider" perspective, they tend to think that they are looking at spiders and that there must be a central nervous system or leadership core. They say, "Surely these people are taking orders from someone! If we can neutralize that leader, then the whole movement will collapse." Not so.
3. An open system (decentralization) doesn't have central intelligence; the intelligence is spread throughout the system.
4. Open systems can easily mutate - they can morph into something else organically
5. Decentralized organizations sneak up on you - "Because the decentralized organization mutates so quickly, it can also grow incredibly quickly. Spider organizations weave their webs over long periods of time, slowly amassing resources and becoming more centralized. But the starfish can take over an entire industry in the blink of an eye."
6. As industries become decentralized, overall profits decrease - the amassing of resources by the central organization is replaced by the sharing of resources across the spectrum of participants.

What links a starfish movement together is the power of an idea or the cooperative movement of people in a general direction because of shared values and goals. Paul Hiebert talked about directional versus positional organizations. Directional organizations get their impetus from people choosing to work together because they are all headed in the same direction and they share similar values. When someone starts moving in a different direction, they choose to leave. Positional organizations are more centralized and gain their power from everyone agreeing to the same positions. If someone disagrees on one of the many positions, they must be kicked out. They are not necessarily based on movement (think of centered vs. bounded sets, or, in the Chrisitan world, missional vs. institutional entities).

So, as I considered these things, I thought of the loose contingent of people who make up the Baptist Blogosphere. What is it? How does it function? Who are the leaders? The new IMB policies on baptism and private prayer language met the new technology of the blogosphere, and a firestorm of built up, but unvoiced frustration with the spider organization of the SBC emerged. It ran wild and every entity of the world's largest protestant denomination felt the effects. Some tried to say that it was all being organized by a few people, and if they went after those people (Wade Burleson, Marty Duren, Art Rogers, etc.), then the movement would disperse. But, that is not the case and those of us who participated knew it. The "leaders" of this protest movement in Baptist life never tried to gain or control a following, despite the accusations of some. It was truly a starfish movement and it exerted incredible influence. Then, it began to die.

As the baptist blogosphere began to uncover the incredible ineptitude and sluggishness of the spider-like, SBC, it became obvious that there was no end to the frustrating statements, positions, and actions of our "leaders." New posts were written everyday to chronicle some new shocking behavior or position. Many people jumped on it, myself included, and comments on single posts would roar into the hundreds. After a while, the starfish choked on the poison of the spider. While adaptable and organic, the incredible depth of the problems with the spider, and lack of ability to change it, caused the starfish to lose it's way. Protesting problems was not enough, because it became obvious that there would never be an end to their number. The starfish got entangled in the spider's web and lost a leg along with it's imagination. The spider studied the starfish and learned to either choke it's source of life (information), or blast it with information until the starfish was overwhelmed and became numb. Both have happened, in my opinion.

But, I sense that that leg is regenerating. More and more bloggers are writing redemptively instead of protesting. People are beginning to network in missional ways and are recognizing that our present system does not meet the challenges or opportunities provided by globalization and the ease of shared information and resources. We are realizing that it is impossible to reform the spider organization, so you have to go around it if you want to be effective. In the going around, we are bumping into one another. There are no leaders, just an emerging sense that there must be a better way, and we are endeavoring to find it. Few want to fully leave the SBC behind, but we want to make a difference in the world, and our denominational entities are often unresponsive to helping us do that in the way that fits us or the challenges of our time best. This isn't individualism, because we long for community and relationships. It is just us stumbling into the reality that with a cell phone and laptop, I can communicate with the whole world and I don't need an expensive, bureaucratic organization to fit me into their system. I want to do the work, not just pay others to do it for me.

In reality, the emerging power of networks mirrors the viral power of the church fueled by the unstoppable gospel. The church is to be nimble, organic, and adaptable. We are to infiltrate every strata of society by being yeast, salt, and light. We are to be a mobilized minority, a small rudder that steers the ship of culture and nations, not through control, but through the power of service, love, and the Holy Spirit. We are to value one another, open the doors of service, and walk arm in arm together, following our Lord. We are to embody the Mission of God and do whatever it takes to bring the Kingdom into our present realities.  I sense that the Baptist Blogosphere is morphing to facilitate a movement like that. If it does, it's influence will far outweigh what has happened previously through protesting the errors of the SBC. We'll get into God's movement, and instead of trying to reform a broken system, we will be Southern Baptists who launch from that system to change the world, locally and globally, from right where we are. Our influence will begin to change from it's focus being upon religious professionals in a denomination, to a desperate, hurting, lost world to bring salvation.

But, then again, what do I know? I'm not a leader or a head. I'm just moving with the starfish. 

   

 

Comments

[Paul]

Alan,

Good post here. I'm not entirely positive in my outlook about the future of the SBC, but I am extremely positive in my outlook about the future of many, like you, who are currently in the SBC but aren't obsessed with the organization and who controls it. I think the SBC of the future will be very different by the time my time comes to an end. I don't know what it will look like at that point. It may very well be a sad shadow of its present self, or it may become a starfish and increase its glocal influence exponentially. I'm not sure it has the courage for that, but one thing I do believe, regardless of the future of the SBC, the future of the Kingdom is brighter than ever.

[David Phillips]

Alan,

Great post. I think the blogosphere is moving from a high level of frustration to we're going to work and share and do what God is leading us to do without the need for the denomination as a whole. And I am excited about the opportunity to work with you and others on projects!

[Bryan Riley]

Good post. I never knew much about the Baptist Spider or about the blogosphere and mostly came to blogging through personal leading of the Spirit. It has been a wonderful blessing of God and has helped me through struggles with how I used the internet, the establishment of a new ministry, and a communication vehicle for the many who are supporting us in our journey. What an incredible blessing!

[Kevin Bussey]

Alan,

I agree. I think I'm going the way of David Phillips and you. I'm tired of it all. I want to be redemptive-period.

[Gary Snowden]

Alan,

I appreciate the comments about the decentralization of the missionary task. I need to get a copy of Bob Roberts' book and read it. I heard him many years ago when he had just been at NorthWood Church a short time, but it was already exploding with growth. In a similar vein, I'd commend to you Bill Tinsley's book "Finding God's Vision: Missions and the New Realities."

Bill heads up WorldconneX, a missions networking agency under the auspices of the Bapt. General Convention of Texas. He has assembled an outstanding staff and they're really doing some innovative things along the lines that you are talking about in terms of connecting folks and churches who are interested in missions and bringing them together in collaborative endeavors.

To find out more about their organization, you can visit their website at http://www.worldconnex.org/

I continue to be blessed and challenged by your posts. Keep up the outstanding work.

[Alan Cross]

Gary,

I met Bill at an Intersection Conference in Seattle in Oct., 2005. His organization seems to be doing some great things. Maybe he's pointing to the future in a way that we can all learn from. Thanks for reminding me of him.

[Guy Muse]

What an excellent post! I loved your summary and conclusions drawn from "The Starfish and the Spider". This is a book that all of us need to read and digest. I haven't yet read Roberts book, but look forward to getting my hands on a copy in the near future.

You write above, "We are realizing that it is impossible to reform the spider organization, so you have to go around it if you want to be effective. In the going around, we are bumping into one another. There are no leaders, just an emerging sense that there must be a better way, and we are endeavoring to find it." I think you have really hit upon one of those tidal wave ideas that have already taken place. Many are already on board with what you suggest is taking place and they are the ones who will make a difference in today's global missions scene.

Again, a really valuable post. Thanks for taking the time to synthesize these ideas into a great post.

[Alan Cross]

Thanks, Guy. I meant to insert in the post that you and David Phillips recommended that I read this book, but I forgot. I ordered it soon after and it has been very valuable. Thanks for the recommendation!

[David Cecil]

Alan,

This has really been some food for thought. Your post is so deep that I had to read it through three times to really get it all in.

One thing that hit me, in regard to the starfish, is that, when a leg is severed, an entirely new starfish is made, so that there are now two where there was only one. Two new, autonomous entities, not just an adapting single entity (like the T-1000 from the Terminator 2 movie, which could morph and move around). I think we see this in the Baptist blogs, where there are those who still focus on the problems, but the leg that was cut off is doing its own thing now.

This reminds me of my own thoughts about the reformers, and how they tried to reform their churches, but eventually had to create a new work. The starfish is not really about reforming, but simply growing a new entity out of the part that was cut off. Or, conversely, regrowing the leg and not dieing when it is cut off. At least, that is was it seems like to me.

I feel some regret about this, so I suppose that I am still enamored with the spider even though I am part of the "starfish" of the SBC. Most of us still pray for the spider to change, even though we strongly doubt it can or will. However, the illustration of the starfish seems to instruct us to accept the separation, and to move on as a new movement in our own direction. Historically, this might be a good answer for those who ask why there are so many different denominations.

Here's a thought: Do starfish retain some connection with each other, even though they are physically separated? Does a starfish only work with its own physical structure, or do numerous starfish, even ones that formed out of broken pieces of other starfish, have the ability to associate and work with one another?

I realize that the illustration of the starfish is more about not being able to destroy the leadership or central knowledge base, but I just could not help but see the further implications of the new growth.

I am probably making more out of this than I should...

Man, I just need to think about this some more...

Have I said that this is a good post?

[Marty Duren]

Alan-
Good stuff, Mr. Network. There is no doubt that the long term mission of SBC churches has to be separated from concern about the long term mission of the SBC itself. The two are not the same. The work of God will continue through the local churches whether there is an SBC mechanism or not.

IMO, if the SBC does not find a way to "starfish" itself, then it will most certainly go the way of the headless spider at some point.