Top leadership has strong buy-in to vision, mission, and values
Pros
- Top leadership has strong buy-in to vision, mission, and values. They're generous, humble enough to seek council, admit when they're wrong, etc. amazing character all-around! - The CCB peeps are amazing to work alongside; they, too, are passionate and a LOT of fun - The clients (churches) are amazing :) - Christmas bonuses can be really generous, (and creative), good benefits package (401k, etc) - While some of the cons seem harsh wrt bureaucracy, they *do* try to eliminate what they can
Cons
Any company transitioning from start-up to grown-up has some challenges, (many of these, they've already overcome!) so take these with a grain of salt :) - salaries weren't as (historically) competitive as they might have been, though they've made great strides here! - technical expertise wasn't (historically) as highly-valued (or understood) as it should have been - culture and policies had a hard time identifying and parting ways with under-performing employees (referring back to the general lack of technical-expertise) - lack of technical/business expertise rarely, but sometimes, trickled into decisions informing team size and structure (growing staff instead of growing revenue) - org-structure changes were frequent (though humble and well-intentioned): sometimes informed by large-faceless-organizational-growth-coaches instead of organic need-based growth - in some rare examples, leadership seats were filled quickly out of necessity and not from competence/skill/expertise; however unlike a short-lived (and appropriate) battle-field promotions, these lasted perhaps overlong - lack of technical or business acumen sometimes led to misdirection or misestimation (eg. solving the wrong problems, solving them wrongly, or, when questioned, requiring fundamental explanations for why their solutions shouldn't be implemented) - remote-work wasn't implemented (well) - sometimes in an effort to be 'equal' to all employees, Church Community Builder failed to extend exceptions in exceptional circumstances (ie. what once was a start-up culture of exceptional individuals with exceptional roles/responsibilities/rights became slowly mired in the bureaucratic muddle of unified performance matrices, half-applying quarterly metrics, etc) - impatience with how long it takes a lumbering org to accomplish something could cause well-intentioned leadership to make quick-turnaround dramatic changes - the aftermath of which would (sometimes tragically) result in more bureaucracy to prevent from happening again - in rare cases, a hierarchy of competence (expertise in business management or technology) was supplanted by a hierarchy of globally-synergistic-solutions-managers who could speak the right language TLDR; some growing pains :) to butcher (the infamous) author GK Chesterton: when CCB missed on technical leadership, they did not get liberty; they did not even get anarchy. They got bureaucratic leadership.
