What's Best Next

You are here: Home / Archives for 2 - Professional Skills

In Defense of Buzzwords … Sort Of

by

It’s not uncommon for people to say “I don’t like that word — it’s overused.” For example, I think the word “synergy” may have gotten burned out back in the 90s or so. Words like “strategy” and others are today’s victims.

It is important to be original. We should continually be coming up with new ways of saying important things. That not only keeps things interesting, but also advances thinking and stimulates new ideas.

Let’s just not forget that the concepts behind the words that we feel are over-used usually remain valid and significant. Don’t let the concepts be devalued in your mind because you don’t like hearing the words again and again.

And if the bulk of things in your life need to be new in order to be meaningful, you are going to get exhausted. Because even the concept of “newness” can become old. Avoiding cliches can become cliche.

And in the meantime, you’ll also be left with a reduced vocabulary for communication. Buzzwords came to exist for a reason: they do communicate something. Every field has its jargon — the medical field, sports, the business world, the world of work. Without buzzwords, there are certain things that are going to be more complicated to explain, wasting time.

Come up with new, un-buzzword-like ways of saying things continually. But you can’t reinvent the whole field of buzzwords at once. You will always have to use them in some way or another.

The problem is when people use buzzwords without really understanding what they mean, as an attempt to appear credible simply because they’ve used a certain word. That’s ugly, and to be avoided. But the intelligent, thoughtful use of a buzzword sometimes is what keeps the ideas clear and facilitates effective conversation. Maybe, when used in that way, they aren’t even buzzwords after all.

This is probably a bit of risky post — it sounds like I’m devaluing the concept of newness and originality. But I’m saying the opposite: namely, let’s make sure we don’t become unoriginal in our opposition to lack of originality.

Be the Kind of Person Who Says "You Can't Make Things Tough Enough for Me to Complain"

by

It is so tempting to complain. There were a whole mix of things today that made my wife and I just want to throw up our arms in frustration.

But our motto (borrowed from our former pastor in Iowa) is “you can’t make it tough enough for us to complain.” Actually, she is better at that than I am — much better. I am still learning and making progress.

Everybody encounters things like this all the time. The best solution is to have the attitude “I will not complain, no matter how frustrating things get.”

And then there is a second component, which is just as important: Be a person who always strives to be part of the solution to other people’s problems.

When someone comes to you for assistance, and you don’t know the answer, it’s tempting to just pass them off. Try not to do that. Life is tough enough.

Fight the frustration of life by working on behalf of others, even when it doesn’t come easy (or it may not be “your” job). Try to figure out something you can do, even if it’s not obvious at first.

And in the times when you truly can’t take the time, or truly are incapable of doing anything, at least express that “I really wish I knew of a way to find the answer here, and I really hope you can get this figured out.”

Effective Communication Requires Both Advocacy and Inquiry

by

A great point made by Patrick Lencioni in his latest email newsletter that is worth remembering:

Chris Argyris, a professor at Harvard, came up with the idea years ago that people need to engage in both ‘advocacy’ and ‘inquiry’ in order to communicate effectively. Advocacy amounts to stating an opinion or an idea, while inquiry is the act of asking questions or seeking clarity about someone else’s opinion or idea. Frankly, one part advocacy and two parts inquiry is a mix I like to see on teams.

Very insightful. This has implications not only for communication (and teams, the direction Lencioni takes it), but also learning. When I think about how I learn best, this really gets to the heart of things. You learn by inquiring, and you also learn by advocating.

Advocating, in other words, has value not simply as a means of convincing others to your point of view. It is also a means of learning in itself. By having a position on a matter and advocating for it, we come to understand the issues better.

Key lesson: Don’t think you are doing people favors by remaining neutral. That’s boring, anyway. Have a point of view. That is far more interesting and will lead to much greater understanding on all sides. Don’t worry that this might “create controversy.” As long as you are polite and respectful, people appreciate (and benefit from) someone with a point of view.

You Should Have a Best Friend at Work

by

Conventional wisdom seems to suggest that the workplace is not a place for good friendships. One’s work life and personal life are best kept separate.

But as Tom Rath shows in his excellent book Vital Friends: The People You Can’t Afford to Live Without, research by the Gallup organization over the last several years has revealed that friendships at work are actually a critical component of employee engagement and a healthy work environment.

In other words, if you have a best friend at work, you are likely to be more effective in your work, and your organization is thus going to be better off as well. Workplace friendships are an important factor in overall organizational success.

This can actually be quantified. Rath points out that a mere 30% of employees report having a best friend at work. But “if you are fortunate enough to be in this group, you are seven times as likely to be engaged in your job” (p. 53).

Seven times more likely to be engaged in your job. That is huge!

In fact, Rath continues, “our results also suggest that people without a best friend at work all but eliminate their chances of being engaged during the work day.”

Note that the Gallup findings pertain to those with a best friend at work, and not just friends in general. This difference is critical. For their early research indicated that “having a ‘best friend’ at work — rather than just a ‘friend’ or even a ‘good friend’ — was a more powerful predictor of workplace outcomes. Apparently, the term ‘friend’ by itself had lost most of its exclusivity (p. 52)”

Here are some other findings from their research:

  • People without a best friend at work have only a 1 in 12 chance of being engaged in their job.
  • People with at least 3 close friends at work are 96% more likely to be extremely satisfied with their life.
  • Closer friendships at work can increase satisfaction with your company by nearly 50%.

What conclusions should we draw from this?

Organizations that discourage close relationships in the workplace “could be making a costly mistake.” Friendships are a critical part of a healthy workplace, and organizations should take steps to encourage their cultivation. This is first of all good for employees, and second of all it will be better for the organization. Organizations need to recognize that creating an environment that encourages the development of friendships at work is a key part of solving the problem of employee disengagement.

Rath concludes in this way:

While most companies spend their time thinking about how to increase an employee’s loyalty to their organization, our results suggest they might want to try a different approach: fostering the kind of loyalty that is built between one employee and another.

The Eight Kinds of Friends You Need to Have

by

I recently picked up Tom Rath’s book Vital Friends: The People You Can’t Afford to Live Without. It was an enjoyable, quick, and informative read. You don’t see many books on friendship, and I’ve never thought much about it before, so the topic really caught my interest.

My biggest take-away from the book was this: Different friends often play different roles in our lives, depending upon who they are and what their strengths are. Rath points out eight different “vital roles” that our friends play. Simply seeing these roles articulated was incredibly illuminating. They are:

1. Builder

“Builders are great motivators, always pushing you toward the finish line. They continually invest in your development and genuinely want you to succeed — even if it means they have to go out on a limb for you” (87).

2. Champion

“Champions stand up for you and what you believe in. They are the friends who sing your praises. Every day, this makes a difference in your life. Not only do they praise you in your presence, but a Champion also ‘has your back’ — and will stand up for you when you’re not around” (93).

3. Collaborator

“A collaborator is a friend with similar interests — the basis for many great friendships. … When you talk with a collaborator, you’re on familiar ground … you often find that you have similar ambitions in work and life” (99).

4. Companion

“A companion is always there for you, whatever the circumstance. You share a bond that is virtually unbreakable. When something big happens in your life, this is one of the first people you call” (105).

5. Connector

“A connector is a bridge builder. …. Connectors get to know you — and then introduce you to others” (111). Connectors are always inviting you to lunch and other gatherings where you can meet new people, and point you in the right direction when you need something.

6. Energizer

“Energizers are your ‘fun friends’ who always give you a boost. You have more positive moments when you are with these friends. Energizers are quick to pick you up when you’re down — and can make a good day great” (117).

7. Mind Opener

‘Mind Openers are the friends who expand your horizons and encourage you to embrace new ideas, opportunities, cultures, and people. They challenge you to think in innovative ways and help you create positive change. Mind Openers know how to ask good questions, and this makes you more receptive to ideas” (123).

8. Navigator

“Navigators are the friends who give you advice and keep you headed in the right direction. You go to them when you need guidance, and they talk through the pros and cons with you until you find an answer. In a difficult situation, you need a Navigator by your side. They help you see a positive future while keeping things grounded in reality” (129).

We need people in our lives that contribute all of these things. Many friends fulfill multiple roles, but to expect any one person to fulfill all of them is to commit the “rounding error” (which he talks about early in the book).

This even has implications for marriage, since friendship is a critical component of any marriage. In successful marriages, each spouse doesn’t expect the other to fulfill all of these roles perfectly. In unsuccessful marriages, you often have one spouse trying to “fix” the other to “do better” at everything and thus be more “rounded.” This doesn’t work. The key is to focus on what the other does bring to the relationship, not on what they don’t bring.

Vital Friends was filled with many other take-aways as well, including more detail on each of these roles and how to strengthen them. Tomorrow I’ll be posting on Rath’s findings regarding friendships in the workplace.

What Makes a Website Effective?

by

The redesign of any ministry website presents the organization with an incredible opportunity. It is an opportunity to serve the body of Christ by providing abundant and easy-to-access content and an opportunity to provide a foundation for more effectively accomplishing the goals of the organization. The way to make the most of this opportunity is to make sure that the outcome of this redesign is an effective website that is built on the basis of sound principles.

The Importance of an Effective Website for Christian Ministries

Why Is an Effective Website Important?

An effective website lies at the foundation of organizational effectiveness. In a real sense—at the human level—the success of any ministry today depends in a large measure upon the success of its website. Successful organizational strategy can no longer be carried out apart from an effective website and an intentional web strategy.

The reason is that, in this day and age, the web has become the main way people interact with and experience many organizations. This is even more true for teaching-centered ministries, as the internet has become the primary way people obtain, use, and share the content that these organizations provide. The more effective a website is, the better the experience website visitors have with the organization, and the more motivated they will be to spread its message and content to others.

What Makes for an Effective Website?

When most people think of a “good” website, they think first—and perhaps exclusively—about its graphic look. If a site looks nice, it is considered a success. But web experts such as Jakob Nielson, Steve Krug, and others have shown that the graphic look of a site is not the most important factor.

This comports with experience. We have all been to sites that look nice but are nonetheless frustrating to use. Specific information that we can reasonably expect to be available on the site is difficult to find, or the navigation tools are confusing and therefore inefficient. Despite an attractive look, such sites provide a negative experience, making us disinclined ever to visit the site again.

An attractive look is certainly very important, and any ministry’s new site must look great in order to serve visitors and reflect well on the gospel. But no one visits a ministry site primarily for the aesthetic experience. Your visitors are focused, goal-oriented, and likely quite busy. They want to identify as quickly and easily as possible—and at whatever level of detail may concern them—what can be found at the site and how to find it. In other words, they are interested in what has been shown to be the single most fundamental component of an effective website: usability.

Websites exist to be used. Sites that are easy to use enable visitors to accomplish their goals more effectively and with less frustration. Ease of use creates a more pleasant experience for visitors, makes them more likely to return, reinforces the credibility of your brand, and makes it more likely your visitors will share your site with others.

Graphic design does not create ease of use. It builds upon ease of use. Absent good information architecture and an adherence to sound principles of usability, attractive graphic design is insufficient and ineffective.

 

How Does One Build an Effective Website?

An effective website, therefore, is created when good graphic design is joined to high usability. Most of us recognize good graphic design when we see it. But usability is not nearly so well understood.

 

In essence, usability comes from (1) good information architecture, and (2) adherence to sound principles of usability and layout. Information architecture has to do with the way the site is structured—what the main sections of the site are, what the sub-sections are, what categories are used to group the content, and so forth. The primary importance of good information architecture cannot be overstated. In allowing a visitor to find his way around the site easily, good information architecture keeps him from getting lost (one of the worst of all sensations on the web), keeps him oriented, and enables him to move easily and confidently from one place to another.

 

Good information architecture reveals your content so that it can be maximally accessed; more than that, it interprets your content. Particularly at the levels of Topic (e.g., Atonement) and Resource Type (e.g., sermon, article, poem, etc.), solid information architecture provides the visitor a grid for how to think about your content, thus enabling him to find, understand, and remember it better. Sites this easy to use are returned to frequently and talked about widely.

 

Good information architecture, however, is not achieved by organizing a site according to what “seems best to us.” Rather, there are established principles of classification and organization that assure effective architecture. Likewise, there are also general principles of usability and design that reveal and govern how to build the mechanics of a site correctly. These principles of usability and design are the second component to making a site usable. As a few examples: site navigation should always highlight the section the visitor is in so that he can tell at a glance where he is; every page on the site needs a title; only links should be underlined; and “click here” should never be used. Defining these principles (along with some 100 others like them) and following them in the creation of the site pages, is essential in creating an effective, usable website.

The Root of Making Good Decisions

by

There are lots of different formal and informal approaches to making decisions. But at the end of the day making a good decision comes down to one thing: Knowing the fundamental governing principles of the area. Usually there is just one.

For example, as I posted earlier today, with the economic policy of a nation, the governing principle is to maximize people’s freedom to the greatest extent while preserving the rule of law. In deciding where to work, the guiding principle is: where can I have the greatest impact with the gifts I’ve been given? In managing an organization, the guiding principle is to make employees’ strengths productive for the performance of the organization while minimizing weaknesses.

Once you understand the governing principles of an area, most decisions fall into line. More on this in the days and months to come.

Objections to Making it Free

by

There has been a good discussion on my article “Make It Free” over at Joshua Blankenship’s blog. It inspired me to address some of the main objections I often hear against my perspective that media ministries should post everything online, for free, without requiring registration, in a maximally usable interface.

Objection 1: People value what they pay for. Therefore, if you make all of your online sermon audio and other online content free, people won’t value it.

Response: This is the least powerful objection for a media ministry, in my opinion, simply because the gospel is free. Does that lead us to not value the gospel? Of course, some people will want to say, “Yes! Look around!” But surely God does not think so, because he is the one who made the gospel free. (As an aside, I would argue that when we don’t value the gospel properly, it’s because we’ve failed to recognize the depth of is freeness and have actually fallen into the mentality that we need to earn it “just a little bit.” When we truly begin to recognize that justification is completely apart from our works, that’s when we really begin to see the surpassing value of the gospel.)

Theological arguments aside, observation shows the premise to be false that “if it’s free, people won’t value it.” My favorite TV shows are 24 and Lost. They are all “free” to me—I watch them without paying a cent, and even skip the commercials. Yet I do not value them any less than if I had to pay for them. In fact, I have paid for episodes before on iTunes, and I didn’t value those any more than the ones that were free. Many other things in life are free and yet very valued.

The value that you place on something is often a reflection of the intrinsic worth of something or the cost someone else paid for it, rather than its cost to you. Further, in regard to resources like a sermon especially, the response we have to it may be costly to us in our actions. We may realize we need to start living this way or that, or do this or not to do that; or we may just be encouraged to stay a difficult course. Sermons bring this incredible after-the-fact cost; let’s not hinder that from happening by imposing a before-the-fact cost.

Objection 2: It dishonors the staff and volunteer hours and other work that went into producing the media, and the pastor’s time in preparing and preaching the sermon.

Response: You have the wrong people on your media team, and the wrong pastor in your pulpit.

Bottom line: When it comes to resources for edifying the church, the aim is not to preserve honor for the work in this way. The aim of the sermon is to edify and serve the church and the world. Christ calls us to sacrifice good things—in this case, the honor that comes from financial recompense for the work—for the sake of greater things. I wouldn’t deny that financial return for a resource bestows an honor on the work of all involved. But that’s not why they are doing the work; this is a good thing to sacrifice for the much greater goal of the work itself, which is to serve and spread. I would argue that, ironically, sermons and the creative efforts surrounding them are most honored when they are set free to spread and serve, without hindrance. This honors them most because it is most aligned with the purpose and nature of the sermons in the first place, which is to spread truth.

Objection 3: Do you think that making a profit is antithetical to serving others?

Absolutely not. Milton Friedman, the great Nobel Prize winning economist who brought capitalism back to life among academics in the latter part of the 20th century, is one of my heroes. I am fully on board with free market capitalism, for example, which has as one of its main implications that serving others in your work and making a profit are not at odds, but are ultimately the same pursuit. Further, I recognize that ministries that do charge are not doing so to make a profit per se, but to earn more money in order to produce more resources.

What I’m saying is that ministry work is in a different realm. While it is acceptable to charge for ministry resources, this also brings with it significant trade-offs that do not exist in the for-profit world. For example, it can create the appearance of peddling the word of God. It demonstrates God’s grace and generosity less fully, in exactly the realm where demonstrating generosity should be the fundamental guiding principle. And, as I argue in the original article, charging for online resources short-circuits the effectiveness of the work by creating a barrier to spreading.

The production of Christian resources is unique in that it is not mainly an artistic endeavor or profit-making service; it is a service per se, done for the good of others, at cost to oneself. The core of our message is that Christ gave of himself that through his sacrifice we might become rich; in ministry we imitate that best when we are willing to pursue the good of others at cost to ourselves—in this case, without receiving rightful remuneration.

But most vividly, this thinking cuts off creative thinking. The desire for security—often cloaked unintentionally in the mindset that “we have to charge so that we can keep making more resources”—covers up the flame of great thinking with the doldrums of boring, easy business models. As ministries, we are non-profit, and I think we mean that for real—it is not just a tax status to us. So let’s take advantage of that. Let’s do radical, risk-taking, great endeavors that simply could not be possible if we had to focus first on survival and the bottom line. If we go broke, fine. What a way to go out. Survival is not enough, anyway.

Objection 4: Do you disagree that ministries should be financially healthy?

Again, no. Usually. There are cases where we must sacrifice to our harm when there is a compelling reason of service that cannot be accomplished any other way. But as a usual course, it is best for ministries to be financially healthy. One of the things I’m saying is that charging online for resources is not very effective at doing this, and that if you make them free you spread your message further and will likely see more funding.

Also, keep in mind that I am speaking very specifically about the resource side of things, and in particular online resources. There are missions organizations, for example, that consist of running full-fledged businesses that sell commercial goods. Those ministries should not sacrifice financial strength in those areas. I am talking about the very specific matter of Christian resources, which are a unique case because of their unique nature and aim.

Objection 5: Most ministries don’t have the financial backing to offer things for free.

Offering things for free is a great place to start when seeking financial backing. It gives donors a compelling vision to give to. In other words, I think this objection has the order wrong. Second, this objection seems to assume that a ministry would make decent money from selling content online. I have my doubts that this will ever happen, although I grant that I could be wrong. The biggest obstacle, then, is finding the money to post the content. For that, see the first sentence of this paragraph.

Objection 6: Are you saying that charging is sinful?

No, I’m saying that it’s not a good idea for online media ministry resources. It undercuts effectiveness. This is not about right or wrong—do what you want. It’s about what will be most effective, what serves, and what is great.

Objection 7: But isn’t it good for the profits from one sermon to fund the cost of creating another resource?

I’m not against the concept of seeing content generate revenue so you can produce more content. I’m saying that there is a much better model for this than charging. Offering it free, no strings attached, will result in more funds if people that want to go deeper with the ministry are given the option to get involved. And it avoids the appearance of peddling the gospel and is an acted parable of the grace of God that is proclaimed in the sermons.

In the end, what I want to say is: “Who cares if we’re making money from sermons when such an intention seems by its very nature to reduce creativity and effectiveness?”

Make it Free: Improving Online Effectiveness by Removing All Barriers to Accessing and Sharing Content

by

You can also read my follow-up article to this one where I answer objections.

If you are a Christian media ministry, I commend the following vision for maximizing your effectiveness online: Post all of your content online, for free, without requiring registration, in a maximally usable interface.

This basis for doing this follows from the purpose of ministry and the purpose of a ministry website. The purpose of any ministry is, at root, to spread the message of the good news of God’s grace. And the purpose of a ministry website is thus to serve as an avenue for spreading that message.

From this it follows that your site will be most effective if you maximize ease of access to your content. It’s simple: If your content is hard to access, or not accessible at all, then it can’t spread. People won’t find it on your site, and they won’t tell others. But if you remove all barriers to access, people will use it and tell others (assuming that it is good). Thus your message will spread and be of far more benefit to everyone in the world.

In other words, anything that hinders the ease with which your users can access and share your content imposes a “cost” on them. You maximize ease of access to your content (and thus the effectiveness of your site) by making it “free” in the fullest sense of the word–by offering it without financial charge and removing all barriers to accessing the content.

There are four things that create obstacles for accessing and sharing content:

  1. Not having very much content online
  2. Charging for content that is online
  3. Requiring registration to access content that you don’t charge for
  4. Having a hard-to-use website

Therefore, there are four things you need to do in order to maximize access to your content online and truly “make it free”:

  1. Post all of your content online
  2. Don’t charge for your online content
  3. Don’t make people register to access any of your content
  4. Make your site very easy to use

In other words: post everything online, for free, without requiring registration, in a maximally usable interface. In what follows, I will attempt to show that if your ministry does this, you will demonstrate God’s grace in a wonderful way, serve people more effectively, and build a larger audience. Further, if it feels dangerous to post everything online for free, I will discuss how this is actually not too different from what you already do if you have a traditional radio broadcast. I will then close by observing what a great testimony to God’s grace and service to the church and world that it would be if every ministry did this.

Post All of Your Content Online

By “everything” here, I really mean everything. For example, if you have been on the radio for 30 years, then I would say to post every single broadcast from the last thirty years. Every article that has been written, every seminar that has been given, every conference message that has been delivered–any media or written content that your ministry has produced during its entire existence should be posted online. And it should be posted in all formats in which you have it or can get it–audio, written, and video.

Why? First, as a ministry you probably have a large amount of helpful content in your archives, and if people can’t access it, they can’t benefit from it. The mere fact that some of it may be 25 or even 50 years old is irrelevant–when it comes to biblical truth, if it was helpful then, it’s helpful now. Even when some content is heavily tied to its time period, there is almost always something timeless in it that will benefit people. If you post everything, then you let your users be the judge of what is most useful to them–which is as it should be, because a fundamental principle of effective online strategy is that you need to allow the users to be in charge.

Second, when it comes to the Internet, more is better. Our disposition should always be towards offering more, not less. It is so easy to search and browse (if you make your site usable–see point four) that abundant content provides a rich arena for your users to explore, and a reason to come back frequently.

Third, you should post all of your content because doing so is remarkable. To do something remarkable means to do something that is “worth remarking on.” Being remarkable is foundational to how your message spreads, because it spreads most effectively through everyday people remarking on it to others. Your website users are thus the most effective (and least expensive) promotional avenue for your site. Further, the Internet provides them with a megaphone that amplifies their word of mouth so that instead of telling just a few people, they can tell hundreds.

But in order to tap into this, you need to give your users a reason to talk about your site. Telling them to talk about it won’t work. You need to do something that is distinctive and incredible enough that it naturally motivates them to remark on it. Posting a massive amount of content is one of the best ways to do this. Put yourself in the shoes of a user for a minute. Now, imagine coming to your website and finding a years worth of radio program archives. That’s nice, but nothing incredible. Now imagine that there are thirty years of programs and other content. That’s remarkable–that’s something to keep coming back to and to tell others about. By making your site “remarkable,” you tap into the most effective–and least costly–method of promotion for your ministry and its message: your site users.

Don’t Charge for Your Content

If you are going to have people talking about and emailing your content, you need to make sure that you remove all obstacles to this process. This means you shouldn’t charge for your online content–not for any of it. Charge for things you pack and ship to people, such as DVDs and physical books. But don’t charge for anything that is accessed online. The reason is that charging creates a barrier to access, and therefore directly opposes the purpose of your site–which is to spread your content. Spreading your content requires that you maximize access rather than restrict access. The bottom line is this: If you charge for your online sermons or radio programs or other content, people will use it far less and tell others about it far less. This is a non-negotiable fact.

The secular media has recognized this for years. For example, sites like ESPN and CNN and Fox News have had their content free for years (perhaps even from the start; I can’t remember). Even the New York Times, which has been charging for its content, is now removing that barrier because they recognize how detrimental it is to their web traffic. A recent article in the Times discusses some of their rationale: “…many more readers started coming to the site from search engines and links on other sites instead of coming directly to NYTimes.com. These indirect readers, unable to get access to articles behind the pay wall and less likely to pay subscription fees than the more loyal direct users, were seen as opportunities for more page views and increased advertising revenue.”1

It could be pointed out that a site like the New York Times benefits from advertising revenue, but a ministry site does not have a revenue source like that. Hence, some ministries might be concerned that if they don’t charge for their content, it will threaten their ability to fund the ministry. We have not found this to be the case at Desiring God. Instead, what we find is incredible gratitude from our users that they can access 27 years of sermon audio and other content for free. Some are so enthusiastic about this vision that it leads them to give. And isn’t this exactly the kind of thing that people want to give to? By posting all of your content online, you provide your donors a compelling initiative to support and be a part of. Further, you bring much more traffic to your site, and thus more people who may chose to become donors. While we haven’t done a formal analysis, it appears to me that posting everything online resulted in more gift revenue than sales revenue we have lost.

But increased donations is not our motive for not charging. There are four much larger reasons for posting everything for free, and I commend them to your ministry as well.

First, it emphatically demonstrates God’s grace. Salvation is free and without charge. Paul and the other apostles proclaimed the gospel for free and without charge. To make all of your content available for free says something great about God–it is an acted parable illustrating his incredible generosity and grace.

Second, posting everything for free serves others most effectively. If you are a ministry, I would assume that after glorifying God, your next most fundamental purpose for existence is to serve others–to be a blessing to the church and the world, no strings attached. Making all of your content free so that people can access it without restriction fulfills this aim and demonstrates to the world that you are not in ministry for yourselves. This is a message the world needs to see today more than ever. It is not wrong to charge. But my exhortation is to do what is great, to do what most manifestly serves others, and to think about financial return second–or third.

Third, as already discussed, far more of your content will spread, and it will spread to far more people. Requiring people to pay inserts friction into the process of spreading your message. Friction slows things down and brings them to a halt. If you want your message to spread as far and as wide as possible, you should go to all lengths to remove all possible friction from the process. And note that the obstacle with charging is not simply the amount you charge, but also the mere fact that users have to go through a payment process to obtain the content. So you should not reason “Well, what’s $1.99 for a sermon?” Even if you only charge $0.10, the mere fact that people have to go through a series of steps to access the content will substantially reduce the number of people who access it.

Don’t Require Registration to Access Your Content

There are many who recognize the importance of making the content free but then, in my opinion, take back everything by requiring people to register in order to access it. Although no money is involved, registration is a cost to the user because it is a hassle. If you want to maximize access to your content, you need to “make it free” in all senses of the word–you need to eliminate all costs to the user, even the non-monetary ones, of which required registration is the most significant.

There are several reasons to offer all of your content not only without cost, but also without requiring registration. First, as with charging money, requiring registration inserts friction into the process, thereby reducing the amount of content people access and spread. To see this clearly, think of your own behavior. Have you ever had a friend send you something interesting online–a link to a newspaper article or perhaps one of those personality tests that can figure you out in 5 minutes–but when you click through to get it, you find that they require your email address? If you’re anything like me you do one of two things when this happens. Either you hit the back button and forget about it, or, if you really want it, you give them your Hotmail address from 6 years ago that you never check. And these sites weren’t even trying to charge any money. Maybe you don’t think people should be this way, but we need to accept this is in fact how people are and structure our websites based on how people actually behave, rather than how we think they should behave. If you want your content to spread greatly, then do not require registration.

Second, if you require registration, most of the people that do register are not interested in hearing from you–they simply want to see the piece of content they are interested in, and then move on. So when they receive emails or bulk mailings from you, those communications will be thought of as spam–either going to an old Hotmail account they never check, or annoying them in their regular inbox. Either way, they will not be effective. As Seth Godin has said, “if someone signs up for a list they don’t want, in order to get something they do want, your emails to them are impersonal and irrelevant, and treated just like spam–and are just as irritating.” Far better to offer the option to subscribe to various email newsletters (and RSS feeds and podcasts), but not require it. Then, you will have a much higher quality email list. The people that sign up will be those who really want to be hearing from you–and thus your communications will be far more effective.

Third, if you require registration to access your content, then (in my opinion) it fails to clearly send the message that you are here first to serve, no strings attached. Instead, it sends the message of reciprocity–I’ll do something for you (let you access the content) if you do something for me (give me your contact information). This is not intrinsically bad, of course; but we are ministries. We have another aim. We are here to serve, period. Existence is not our first priority. Serving others for the glory of God is. Therefore, the message we need to make very clear is: “We are here to serve, no strings attached. Not serve you so that we can see a financial return, but just serve you because our joy and calling is to do good for your sake. If you do want to be more involved with the ministry, we would love it and would greatly benefit from your help, but regardless, our first aim is to be a blessing for you.” Let us as ministries send a message of service written in bold letters–we are not here for what we can get from people, but for how we can help and what we can give.

Make Your Site Very Easy to Use

Last of all, in order to see maximum spreading of your content, make your website easy to use. This again goes to the fact that user costs are not simply monetary; anything that creates an obstacle to accessing your content is a cost. A hard to use site is a cost to the user in that it hinders their ability to access (and share) the content and which thus must be removed.

There are a few key principles that can make a huge difference. First, and most important, make sure everyone who works with the web in your ministry reads Steve Krug’s book Don’t Make Me Think: A Common Sense Approach to Web Usability. This is by far the best book on the subject, and tells you almost everything you need to know about making your site easy to use. And the book is a quick read–just over a hundred pages, with many helpful illustrations and examples.

Second–and this is very basic yet will have the greatest impact–make sure that your site gives your users persistent secondary navigation throughout your site. Here is what I mean: Virtually every site has a global navigation bar which shows people the main sections of the site. This gives people the high-level layout of the site. But when you click into one of the sections, a lot of sites fail to give good sub-navigation that shows you where you are in that section and always stays with you so that you always know where you are. Without this, your users get lost. So an effective site needs to provide sub-navigation that is persistent–that is, that always stays with the user–and well organized. Krug’s book shows how to do this well. The result is good orientation for site users–the foundation to a usable site–so that they always know where they are and can easily get from one place to another.

Excurses: Comparing This Model to Radio

As an aside, it is worth noting here that the model I am proposing has certain key similarities to how traditional radio has been done. So if you have been doing traditional radio, the model that I am presenting doesn’t need to feel like such a risk. With traditional radio, ministries don’t charge people to listen to the program or require them to register. Access to the program is completely free. Those who listen and are interested in going further with the organization are then invited to contact the ministry, just like how with the Internet those who want to go further can sign up for a newsletter, sign up for a donor program, or purchase a product.

Requiring payment or registration to access or download ministry content is thus the opposite of what ministries have been doing with radio for decades. Offering content for free online, with the option to sign up for something if you want to go deeper, is actually more in line with the traditional radio model. And, it is far cheaper. For the cost of less than one station for a year, you can probably post all of your content online and cover several years of operating expenses for the site.

Alternatively, something that should not be preserved from the traditional radio model is being brought over–namely, the temporary duration of the archives. With radio, the program airs and it is gone. That is part of the nature of the medium. But with the Internet, there are no internal constraints, other than storage and bandwidth (which are very cheap, especially compared to radio), determining how long you can make a message available. The Internet allows you to keep the archives up permanently. Yet, many only keep their program archives up for a month or a year. I argue above, the best thing to do is to put all content online forever. This is a strength of the medium that needs to be utilized, and it will drive traffic.

What we see here, then, is the irony that, in general, we as ministries are often bringing over from radio strategies that we shouldn’t (namely, temporary access to the programs) while failing to bring over strategies that we should (namely, free access to the programs without requiring signing up with the ministry first).

In Conclusion: Everyone Should Do This

Here is what we have seen: Ministry websites exist to be a major avenue for spreading your message. Your website will do this most effectively if you “make it free”–that is, if you maximize ease of access to all of your content and remove all barriers that get in the way of using and sharing your content.

The way you do this is by posting everything online, for free, without requiring registration, and in a very easy-to-use interface. In turn, this emphasizes the grace of God and serves people most effectively. And the result will likely be that rather than seeing a threat to your financial survival, you will see a more enthusiastic donor base and a larger amount of web traffic that results in more interest, more spreading, and the financial provision you need.2

I would love to see every ministry website implement these four principles and make their content freely available in the fullest sense of the word. What an incredible testimony that would be to the grace of God and what an incredible service it would be to the church and the world.

1 “NY Times to Stop Charging for Parts of Its Website,” September 18, 2007. By the way, this is a good start, but they need to go further–apparently there will still be charging for access to some sections.
2 At Desiring God, after we redesigned our website on the basis of these principles, we saw these results within four months: Visits increased 99%, audio listens increased 352%, and page views increased 359%. One year later, traffic continues to increase at a significant rate.