Many (perhaps most?) churches struggle to reach budget.
As budgets strain and the end of the year draws to a close, congregations are urged to “be generous”. What kind of response does this generate? Perhaps the budget is reached, but is this from more people giving, or the same people giving more?
As I’ve been reading ‘Switch: How to Change Things When Change is Hard‘, I’ve been struck by the value of giving clear instructions:
“If you want people to change, you must provide crystal-clear direction…What looks like resistance is often a lack of clarity…Clarity dissolves resistance.”
“If you want people to change, you don’t ask them to “act healthier.” You say, “Next time you’re in the dairy aisle of the grocery store, reach for a jug of 1% milk instead of whole milk.”
Could the same apply when it comes to asking people to “be generous”?

I’ve seen this in action when I go to fundraising events for Crusaders. They ask for a clear amount – “if everyone here gives $300, we can reach our goal and do X”. As long as I’ve got the money, I don’t have to think about it. They’ve made the ‘path’ (in the language of Switch) very clear. And this makes it easy for people to respond.
We hate to put a number on what it looks like to be generous, because this looks different for different people. We feel uncomfortable with calls to ‘tithe 10%’, finding it difficult to match this instruction with NT teaching.
What would it look like to direct generosity?
Could this be “we’d like you to consider giving $10 more per week – on top of whatever you are currently giving”?
Could this be “if each adult at our church gave an $300 by Christmas, we’d reach our budget and be able to do X, Y and Z”?
“To spark movement in a new direction, you need to provide crystal-clear guidance. That’s why scripting is important—you’ve got to think about the specific behavior that you’d want to see in a tough moment”
What are your thoughts on moving beyond “be generous” to a more directed approach to encouraging generosity?