The room was hot, and I stared on the pristine white table in front of me, being careful to not lift my eyes, my muscles tense. To my left were members of the International Board of Directors of Ravi Zacharias International Ministries (RZIM), seated on the table and joining on video. To my right were lawyers. One of them was preparing to read to us the 12-page report of a months-long investigation into sexual assault allegations regarding the ministry’s founder, Ravi Zacharias.
The tension was palpable. The boardroom seemed too dim, although that suited the mood; a few of us weren’t ready for shiny lights.
My experience as an RZIM board member would completely change the way in which I view ministry today. I feel many ministry boards are broken—or at the least deeply unprepared for the challenges they could face—and my aim is to begin a conversation on how that will be remedied.
When I speak of “boards,” I’m using the term broadly. You and folks you understand may not serve on the board of an internationally known nonprofit, like RZIM at its peak. But you could serve in your congregation’s elder board, as a deacon, or as a member of the vestry or the pastoral search committee. You may advise your kids’s Christian school or informally help steer an area food bank or the Sunday School planning committee at church.
The hard lessons I learned might be applicable to almost any type of group leadership arrangement, especially in ministry contexts but in addition more broadly. That said, specific needs and circumstances will vary, so I’m sharing my lessons as questions that Christians in board leadership should seriously ask themselves and their colleagues.
1. Should board members be required to interact in continuing education?
Not only was I ill-equipped to be a board member, I used to be unprepared for the onslaught of crises that will engulf the ministry throughout my short tenure. From what I observed, even the longtime board members were unprepared for what appeared like “unprecedented times”—the catch phrase during those years.
Looking back, one problem was that those weren’t, in truth, unprecedented times. Ministry leaders fail. Red flags aren’t noticed—or worse, they’re willfully ignored. Understanding theories of institutional betrayal and how abusers often confuse and verbally attack their victims while deflecting responsibility has been helpful in my quest to make sense of RZIM’s trajectory. But it might have been far more helpful to have known all of this before the crises occurred.
If you’re serving on a board, consider what knowledge gaps you might have that might limit your ability to serve well. What high-level questions keep coming up for you in meetings? What other perspectives might it is advisable understand? Are you not only willing but desperate to learn and grow? How are you able to acquire the knowledge and skills you wish for faithful service and push your colleagues to do the identical?
2. Whom do you select as board members?
The RZIM board was overwhelmingly comprised of Ravi Zacharias’s family and friends. They were all highly invested within the ministry and the person; they donated their time, their expertise, their money, and their contacts due to that private relationship. From my outsider perspective, all of them appeared to have very similar skill sets. Loyalty was highly prized.
I used to be an unexpected addition to this group and the primary woman to ever sit on the governance committee. I had no relationship with Ravi, and I didn’t lead a successful company or have a powerful contact list. This put me at an incredible drawback when voicing concerns. The skills that other board members saw as helpful after I was in agreement with them—my willingness to learn recent things, my eagerness to listen, and my ability to be vocal about things I believed in—became liabilities after I disagreed.
On your board, how are members chosen? I don’t only mean the procedures, that are definitely essential but are sometimes established by by-laws or denominational rules outside your control. I also mean what qualities and skills are preferred at a cultural level. Do you’re taking spiritual gifting and spiritual maturity into consideration? How do you round out the roster beyond the officer roles? Are you on the lookout for unexpected those that may offer a singular perspective?
3. How do you concentrate on giving?
For many nonprofits, it’s a given that the majority board members are chosen for his or her ability to donate and lift funds. After my time with RZIM, I see this as a dangerous pairing of power and money. Wealth shouldn’t be the measure of a pacesetter’s commitment, faith, or contribution to a corporation. This metric can encourage a way of entitlement in board members and supply a false sense of security to the leadership team. When board seats are only stuffed with those that provide the ministry with monetary stability, there’s an influence imbalance within the structure that may and infrequently does result in unhealthy relationships.
Is your board overlooking potential members due to their inability to provide significant monetary gifts? Have you unconsciously come to assume larger all the time equals higher? How are you able to make sure that to recollect the widow’s mite and that wisdom and wealth don’t reliably coincide?
4. How does your board communicate?
Truth and transparency have all the time been essential to me, but never greater than they’re post-RZIM.
The organization had an executive committee that met individually and privately, away from the total board. That committee made all of the essential decisions, and to my recollection, during my 12 months of service, the total board never once received or reviewed their minutes. The committee would send recommendations to the remainder of the board, and our votes were strongly encouraged to be unanimous. I observed—and was told—that abstention was higher than a “no” vote. As the abuse crisis continued to unfold, this silo of secrecy throughout the board caused major problems, as did similar “normal” RZIM procedures.
Does your board have an analogous secret oligarchy? Is secrecy the default or the exceptional measure at your organization? Is it mandatory to invoke legal danger to force board members to do the best thing? Does fiscal protection of the institution all the time take precedence? Are board members adapting the world’s “spin” for ministry use? Are you willing to inform the total truth to yourselves and others, even when it’s potentially disruptive?
5. What does accountability appear like?
Board members are alleged to provide institutional accountability for the ministries they govern. But who provides accountability for the board?
As the RZIM saga unfolded, we heard multiple calls for the board to resign from each donors and key individuals outside the inner circle. The board didn’t wish to resign. I heard excuses corresponding to, “We needs to be those to repair this” or, “If we resign, who would lead?” This board did not take a sexual predator out of ministry but continued to reject calls for transparency, even demanding anonymity for themselves—refusing the barest accountability of being publicly named.
Before a crisis comes your way, it’s vital to ascertain answers to the next questions: Is there some extent at which a board has shown itself incapable of self-correction? What would want to occur to disqualify board members from serving? Does a grave public failure require public repentance? How will your board self-assess or subject itself to external assessment? Concretely, what does accountability appear like for you?
6. Who do you’re thinking that you might be?
Being on the board of a worldwide multimillion-dollar ministry is a standing symbol. Once people came upon I sat on the RZIM board, they were impressed, curious, and fascinated by the facility they perceived me to carry.
Internally, the overall ethos of the board was that Jesus neededus to do that work. Twitter banners proudly displayed photos of board members on RZIM stages or with celebrities connected to RZIM. There were Facebook posts concerning the great work the board was doing for the dominion. We had special dinners, fancy hotels, beautiful facilities, and a general feeling of superiority. Social media was a method to brag about accomplishments until it became clear it is also a conduit of demands for accountability.
Does your board comprehend the type of servant leadership that must include a lot responsibility? How much of their identity do members find of their board role? How will we make sure that power is all the time paired with responsibility, not only in our formal rules and procedures but in our hearts?
RZIM’s unofficial motto said no doubt was off limits. But as a board member, it became clear to me that this was not true. I encountered institutional failure firsthand. I failed—at first, to even imagine the victims, after which, in my attempts to reform a broken system.
But failure doesn’t should be defining; somewhat, it needs to be refining. For me, it has fueled a passion to assist members of other boards forestall the type of dysfunction and abuse we didn’t prevent at RZIM. Instead of hiding and deflecting responsibility, Christians in leadership roles must freely admit and proper institutional and private failure alike. We needs to be the primary to acknowledge that each considered one of our failures will be redeemed by a God who has offered us full and complete forgiveness.
The stakes are high, but ministry boards can and needs to be a spot where one of the best examples of servant leadership are found. So ask yourself: Would Jesus overturn your board table?
Stacy Kassulke is enthusiastic about encouraging individuals to make use of their unique giftings to make things right for the sake of Christ and his kingdom. She served on the board of Ravi Zacharias International Ministries from February 2020 to March 2021.
