Churches spend a lot of time and energy – and money – developing
and implementing outreach strategies and seeking to motivate members to engage
in witnessing. And in the early years of a new century, faced with a largely
technological-savvy population, they have learned to put a lot of focus on quality
and excellence.
Churches spend a lot of time and energy – and money – developing
and implementing outreach strategies and seeking to motivate members to engage
in witnessing. And in the early years of a new century, faced with a largely
technological-savvy population, they have learned to put a lot of focus on quality
and excellence.
Even so, they may be overlooking one key avenue of outreach, a recent study
indicates.
Simply put, they may not have anyone covering the phones. Indeed, research
indicates fewer and fewer do.
In December, Barna Research Group workers sought to contact 3,400 randomly-selected
Protestant churches across the nation.
The timing of the study was important. Churches put a lot of emphasis on reaching
persons during the Christmas season – and the holidays bring many people
to the point of crisis and need that lead them to turn to the church for help
as well.
Nevertheless, Barna researchers were unable to reach a human being at 55 percent
of the churches involved in their study.
The breakdown of that 55 percent gives further cause for concern –
Almost one-fifth of the churches (19 percent) had neither a person
nor an answering machine responding to calls – and not just once. Researchers
attempted to call each church on up to five occasions at different times of
the day during business hours and over the course of two weeks – but all
to no avail for these churches.
One out of every six churches (16 percent) had an answering machine
responding to all five attempts.
One-fifth of churches in the study (20 percent) had either an answering
machine or no answer at all during the initial five attempts.
All in all, that leaves less than half of the 3,400 churches (45 percent) where
researchers actually were able to reach a human being.
Of course, some types of churches were more responsive to incoming calls than
were others.
The most responsive groups among those measured were United Methodist (64 percent
provided a human response), National Baptist (62 percent) and Southern Baptist
churches (61 percent).
As a group, mainline churches also were more responsive than average –
63 percent had a person answering the phones during the initial five call attempts.
(Mainline churches include American Baptist, United Church of Christ, Episcopal,
Evangelical Lutheran, United Methodist and Presbyterian Church U.S.A. congregations.)
The churches least likely to feature human contact were Baptist churches other
than Southern Baptist or National Baptist (no person ever answered the phone
after five attempts at 65 percent of those churches), Holiness churches (62
percent non-human response), Church of God in Christ (56 percent), and the Christian/Church
of Christ congregations (56 percent). (Holiness churches include those associated
with the Nazarene, Christian and Missionary Alliance, Church of God – Anderson,
Wesleyan, and Free Methodist denominations.)
Churches most likely to have neither a human response nor an answering machine
were the Holiness group (30 percent), Church of God in Christ (27 percent) and
Baptist churches other than Southern Baptist and National Baptist (24 percent).
Research also indicated differences in church accessibility by geographic region.
The most reachable churches were those in Mountain and West states, where almost
two-thirds of the churches (65 percent) provided a response by a human being.
The toughest area in which to make personal contact was the South. Indeed,
only one-third of the churches in southern states (36 percent) resulted in human
contact within five attempts.
Meanwhile, about half of the churches in the Midwest (49 percent) and in the
Northeast (52 percent) offered a human response.
These study numbers serve as a challenge to the church, lead researcher George
Barna indicated.
For one thing, they show that much of the hard work churches put into reaching
people may be negated by peoples inability to establish contact with someone
at the church within a reasonable time frame, he said.
And despite the breakdowns, that is a challenge that remains for all churches,
Barna reminded persons.
“Instant communication has become second-nature in our world,” he
emphasized. “With cell phones, instant messaging, and other high tech means
of facilitating immediate contact with others, organizations that seemingly
defy people to penetrate their fortress quickly become an afterthought in their
lives.”
Indeed, busy schedules and other factors make it unlikely that persons –
especially those not connected with a church – will endure the frustration
of trying to get in touch with someone again and again, Barna said.
“If ministry is based on relationships and interaction, then, many churches
might find it easier to penetrate the community if they were more accessible
to the people who are showing an interest in the church,” he said.
In other words, think of those frustrating times of trying to contact someone
– anyone – at a loan or credit company or a hospital or the telephone
company or the insurance company or a department store even or any other range
of large businesses.
Think of all the times when a message was left – and no return answer
came.
Think of those persons who simply do not wish to leave messages, who do not
know their extension, who may not even know what department they wish to contact.
They simply have a question, a concern, a problem, a need.
Think.
Then, go find someone to answer the phone.
(This article was written by LBM Associate Editor C. Lacy Thompson and includes
information from the Barna Research Group at www.barna.org.
The Barna study has a maximum margin of sampling error of plus or minus 2 percentage
points, putting it at the 95 percent confidence level)