Dreamers, heretics, gadflies, mavericks, and geniuses!" This headline from an IBM advertisement caught my eye. Organizations—business and church—have always had a difficult time making room for creative, independent thinkers. How does IBM, the model of the modern corporate structure, relate to such people?
The ad went on to explain: "The story goes that Henry Ford once hired an efficiency expert to evaluate his company. After a few weeks, the expert made his report. It was highly favorable except for one thing.
" 'It's that man down the hall,' said the expert. 'Every time I go by his office he's just sitting there with his feet on his desk. He's wasting your money.'
" 'That man,' replied Mr. Ford, 'once had an idea that saved us millions of dollars. At the time, I believe his feet were planted right where they are now.' "
The ad continued: "At IBM, we have 46 people like that, and we don't worry about where they put their feet either. They are the IBM Fellows.
"They earned the title by having ideas that made a difference. Their job is to have more ideas like that, but under a very special condition.
"It's called freedom.
"Freedom from deadlines. Freedom from committees. Freedom from the usual limits of corporate approval.
"For a term of at least five years, an IBM Fellow is free to pursue any advanced project of value to IBM, even if chances for success may seem remote.
"As a result, some of the great innovations of our time have come from IBM Fellows.
"We may not always understand what they're doing, much less how they do it. But we do know this: The best way to inspire an IBM Fellow is to get out of the way."
Church mavericks
Is there room for mavericks in the church? Can the church—with its structure, its policies, its rules, its committees—tolerate nonconformists?
The word maverick entered the English language courtesy of Samuel Maverick, a Texas cattleman who refused to brand his cattle since he ranched on an island. However, his cattle did wander at times, and the term carries nuances both of their straying and of their owner's independence and refusal to follow custom. Today it refers to a person who takes an independent stand.
Is there room in the church for people who take independent stands? Must individuals obey every policy and code? Must they gain approval from some committee for every project before investing time and money? Can a pastor change the worship service, ignore the Church Manual, flirt with innovative ideas, and still be loyal to the church? Can a local conference change its constitution so as to be radically different from its sister conferences?
All of us know of some creative individual who grew impatient with the slow-grinding cogs of church machinery and left formal church employment to set up an independent ministry. Maybe that is the best way having two streams, one being the official church structure, ponderous, glacial, safe, and sure; the other being independent ministries, each run by some individual with a vision, unfettered by decades and even centuries of tradition. Though distinct, these two streams may be linked by canals, and they may share common tributaries.
The Bible seems to favor this dual approach. In Old Testament times, the prophets, rather than the rulers or the priests, tended to be the dreamers, the gadflies, the mavericks. And while God called these individuals to fill the roles in which they served, He also blessed structure and organization even to the extent of inventing new ones when the old ways were no longer adequate.
Jesus—a maverick?
Perhaps Jesus was history's greatest maverick. The Pharisees considered Him a maverick because He would not conform to the traditions of the elders. The Sadducees considered Him a maverick because He would not acknowledge their authority. Pilate considered Him a maverick because He would not defend Himself. The common people considered Him a maverick because He spoke with authority and not as the scribes and Pharisees. His disciples considered Him a maverick because He would not allow Himself to be crowned king. His family considered Him a maverick because He would not conform to their wishes. The devil considered Him a maverick because He was the only human being that he could not bring under his sway.
Yes, Christ was the world's greatest nonconformist, the greatest maverick. He did not choose to be different in order to be difficult; He did so to reveal a better way. With unfailing kindness He at tempted to show that structure should always serve people. He never acted more like a maverick than when He said of the Sabbath that it "was made for man, not man for the Sabbath" (Mark 2:27, NIV).
The church and the state eventually crucified this Maverick, for most organizations cannot long tolerate the nonconformist. They consider that policies are written to be followed, not flouted; obeyed, not objected to; heeded, not hindered; enforced, not eradicated.
No organization can long exist with out structure to support it or rules to guide it. Yet IBM found a way to combine the strengths of the organization with the strengths of the independent operator. The church too must wrestle with the challenge of encouraging the dreamer, learning from the heretic, tolerating the gadfly, and accommodating the maverick. It needs them as certainly as does IBM.
