Stagnation through Loss Aversion
In Tennessee the name Steve Spurrier spurs painful memorizes but in Florida the name is legendary. Steve Spurrier arrived on the Florida campus in 1990 to revolutionize a football team that was considered a “fixer-upper.” It was a team that never won a conference title; it was on probation because of allegations of rule violations, and the future seemed bleak. But through Steve Spurrier’s charisma, rapport with the team, and superb recruiting, he turned Florida into a nationally recognized team. But Steve Spurrier’s most important move was to refashion the strategy of offensive college football. Most Southern Conference teams practiced a strategy of attrition. It was the method of calling conservative plays to hold onto the ball for as long as possible. It was to keep the other team’s offense off the field. The point of the tactic was to win the game through a defensive battle. The offense was not intended to score a lot of points, but rather to wear down the opponent and eat up time on the clock. In other words, the coaches were playing the game not to lose. Steve Spurrier started to dominate the conference because instead of playing not to lose, he began playing to win. Instead of simply calling a list of conservative plays like the little screen passes, and the little passes behind the line, he began to mix in some big chance plays. Steve Spurrier’s team started to pass more, played more aggressive, and tried to score more touchdowns. As the other coaches across the league continued to avoid a potential loss, Steve Spurrier played for the win. He allowed his players to excel on the field by making big plays while the rest of the coaches continued to fell victim to the human dynamic of loss aversion. Because of the tremendous criticism on college coaches, it was easier to play a conservative game than to risk a mistake which would invite harsh critiques. Instead of following the safe approach, Steve Spurrier risked loss to secure the win.
The Power of Loss Aversion
The power of loss aversion can be as damaging to a congregation as to a college football team. Those who study human psychology inform us that the possibility of loss is emotionally more painful than the possibility of gain. Humans would rather refrain from a future loss than to strive for a future gain. It seems that people experience the pain associated with a loss much more vividly than people experience the joy of a gain. This tendency in humanity is played out in the congregational situation. Numerous congregations are operating on the principle of loss aversion. There is a lack of innovation, risk taking, and improvement because of the resistance of a few. The vocal minority in the pressure of change will hold captive the congregation with the threat of leaving. Even sound changes in a congregation will evoke this response because change, even scriptural ones will be resisted within a congregation. Humans typical will resist change, any change regardless of the nature. So when those who seek to maintain the status quo, even if the congregation is unhealthy or dying, level the “we are leaving” charge this causes a congregation to continue unhealthy practices. The pressure of the loss outweighs the future possibilities for growth. The power of loss aversion causes stagnation in congregations. Instead of remaining rational in regards to a loss in membership, there is overreaction to the potential loss. A congregation will continue to decline, stagnant, and die because of the psychological power of this dynamic. Congregations miss out on opportunities for growth because of the focus on holding the few members that it presently has attending. Instead of bold moves for growth, congregations shift to timid appeasing steps to maintain the present membership.
It seems that in John 6, Jesus transcends this human dynamic of loss aversion. In this chapter, Jesus presents some difficult teaching to digest. Jesus presents himself as blood and bread which must be eaten for one to have eternal salvation. John 6:53-58 presents this unpopular speech. “Jesus therefore said to them, ‘Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves. He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. For My flesh is true food, and My blood is true drink. He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him. As the living Father sent Me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats Me, he also shall live because of Me. This is the bread which came down out of heaven; not as the fathers ate, and died, he who eats this bread shall live forever.’” Jesus was aware that this doctrine would be difficult to swallow for the disciples (John 6:61). But instead of changing the message or giving into the power of loss aversion, Jesus seems to even suggest that his closest disciples leave as well. The text states, “As a result of this many of His disciples withdrew, and were not walking with Him anymore. Jesus said therefore to the twelve, ‘You do not want to go away also, do you?’” Instead of giving into the pressure to conform, Jesus remains strong in the face of multitudes leaving. This non-anxious Jesus is willing to sacrifice popularity or numbers to continue on the right path. Unlike congregations that will bend or cave to threats of leaving, Jesus remains committed to the direction of His work. The threat of loss did not circumvent Jesus’ designated correct path in life. A congregation that bends and caves to inappropriate political power plays will ultimately become stagnate because there will be no forward momentum or vision. The congregation will remain at the mercy of the most immature and shortsighted members. The congregation ransoms the divine plan for leadership to follow the immature feelings of loss aversion.
The next section of this article will deal with the misunderstandings of 1 Corinthians 8.
Related posts:
About The Author
[...] Stagnation through Loss Aversion Jesus presents himself as blood and bread which must be eaten for one to have eternal salvation. John 6:53-58 presents this unpopular speech. “Jesus therefore said to them, ‘Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the … [...]
Great post here Matthew. Great analogy about loss aversion in college football and the church. I love the books Purpose Driven Church and 7 Practices of Effective Ministry where the authors talked about their respective churches who were faced with prospects of members leaving. They let them go, and those churches grew because of that. We don’t see that too often. Too many churches keep the status que (how do you spell that?) to keep a few members “happy”.
BTW, thank you for your very kind comments on my blog today! I appreciate you! God bless. Grace and Peace.
In the book, “Who Stole My Church” the author makes a powerful statement, sometimes you have to grow through subtraction.
You lost me at Spurrier.
Matthew their are three cardinal rules to being a Volunteer fan: 1. You must know all the words to Rocky Top and be prepared to sing it 43 times each game. 2. You must own 17 shirts of various types with the UT logo. and 3. you MUST despise Steve Spurrier!
All kidding aside, great article I could’t be more in agreement with you.
As a Vols fan, this is not an endorsement of Spurrier, he is still Darth Spurrier to me.
The biggest challenge I see here for us today, is when do you take that step to let them leave? Jesus had us beat in that department by being all knowing.
He also instructed us to find and retain lost sheep.
A balance of the two requires much prayer and the best use of our present wisdom.
As for football I hope the Vols new offensive coordinator can loosen Phil up a little. Go Vols!
Thanks for visiting my site today, Matthew! I am looking forward to returning and reading through more of your posts. During the summer, I am not blogging as much, but you can expect me back regularly in September.
Boy I am glad you gave Bama Tide a rest. Steve Spurrier is a great football mind and he is so easy to not like.
Go Bama Rollllllll Tide Rolllllllll
Do not worry Sonny, I might be easy on the Tide now, but the Vols will not in October. Alan, this is the hard part too, you do not want to chase people out of the building and you want to be patience with people too. I think it just comes to the point where people want the church to remain or be unhealthy, we cannot cave into this. Good seeing you read tonight, you are a 21st century elder with the PDA. Besides I thought you were texting the Lord, and thought I wish I was that networked. Just joking.
One thing I’ve found out over the years is that there is a difference between being “lost sheep” and choosing (threatening) to go elsewhere. The first may just be spiritually weak and not know better but the latter is purposefully rebellious and just want their own way.
I recently read an article in the Harvard business review entitled when grows plateaus. It was similar in principle. The main point was once growth had plateau only a fraction of businesses and organizations ever grew again. Mostly because they did not understand how they grew in the first place, most of their paradigms on growth and business were based on things that no longer exist. While Jesus was certainly the stereotypical counterculture warrior, it is important to understand what it was that he stood for and how he did it. He stood against social injustice; he spent much time with the people that the religious leaders of the day had written off. He had the strongest words and harshest criticism for the religious leaders who thought they had all the answers and were very sincere but lacked the very Spirit of God. He fed, healed, clothed, comforted, rebuked (the Pharisees), taught, and gave himself up for others. Jesus never once commended the Pharisees or any religious leaders for binding up religious laws on other people. He never once encouraged people to stand against instrumental music, or praise teams, or any of the issues that our churches continue to fight and squabble over today. In one of his addressed to the Pharisees about who get into Heaven. Jesus said I was hungry and you did not feed me, I was naked and you did not clothe me, I was outside and you did not invite me in. Then he says go along with the other evil doers, or those who practice lawlessness. It is interesting that Jesus compares religious narcissism (ignoring or not seeing social injustice) to evil doing. Here is the thing he says these folks don’t get into Heaven no matter how well they had kept all the religious laws. So let’s stand up like Jesus stood up and for what he stood. If our churches spent most of their time doing what Jesus actually did we would have very little trouble convincing others of the love of God because they would see it by what we do and that what we do comes from a genuine love and concern for other people. But we don’t we spend most of time doing what the Pharisees did, making up and binding up religious laws on others.