Longevity in Youth Ministry
We need "operating systems" that support it
Previously, I’ve mentioned that women don’t tend to have much longevity in youth ministry. Today, I want to explore a related topic that I believe contributes to this issue: what we’re prioritizing in our youth leaders.
In the past several years, I’ve increasingly heard others discussing the importance of how we staff our youth ministries - specifically, the age, maturity, and experience of the people we put into youth ministry roles. The idea is that placing our youngest, least mature leaders in front of some of our most impressionable population is not the best recipe for making mature disciples. I largely agree with this sentiment, which is why I’m an advocate for making sure that the leaders (staff and volunteers) in a youth ministry aren’t only made up of people in their 20’s (maybe even 20’s and 30’s).1
And yet, I want to recognize the trade-offs involved in this approach.
Having younger leaders has advantages. They are often boundless in energy and enthusiasm and therefore able to keep up with a higher-energy, faster-paced ministry operation. They often have less personal demands on their time, making them more available for relational ministry. They are also closer in age to teens, which means they often find it easier to relate to them. When it comes to putting them in staff roles, they are also, frankly, easier on the church’s budget.
Having older leaders also has advantages. They offer a maturity and wisdom that comes with age. They possess “adult instincts” that many younger leaders won’t have when it comes to things like safety or handling emergency situations. So they’re more likely to not do careless things, to keep an eye out so they don’t lose kids during an event, and to know how to address physical and medical issues that arise in the course of ministry. They’ve also had more time to develop their own skills and strengths, which can be a great benefit to the ministry.
Many youth ministries operate in a way that necessitates mostly (or entirely) young leaders. As I aged in youth ministry, I found scenarios that were more accommodating of the effects of my age and stage (i.e. decreased energy and availability), but this is not the case for many youth workers. I’ve heard many stories of those who have left youth ministry because they were entering a phase of life where the demands of their youth ministry schedule were too much. They were working 50-60+ hour work weeks and expected to be out most nights for youth events, relational ministry, and cheering on youth in their extracurriculars, on top of multiple overnights throughout the year.
Many youth ministries have relied on a model that requires their leaders to operate in this way. Their “operating systems” require the younger leaders, with their boundless energy and flexibility. So if they want to have older, more mature leaders, they will also need to change their larger “operating system” to support longevity. But such a shift can have significant implications, including potential loss of families and students who preferred the old model. It’s not an easy trade-off.
When a youth ministry’s “operating system” requires younger leaders, it will often result in lower leader longevity, as leaders find the expectations unsustainable. So, while this model does some things well, it also comes with weaknesses. The higher turnover means leaders have less relational capital, knowledge of the students and families, and understanding of the church’s context and culture.
This is a conversation worth having for youth ministries and youth leaders across the board. If we want to increase leader longevity, we need to think through what we prioritize in our leaders. What do we want to put more weight on — maturity and longevity, or youthfulness? They both have their advantages, of course, but I think youth ministries often prioritize the latter without realizing what they are losing out on from the former.
There’s also a particular reason I’ve been thinking about it in relation to women in youth ministry. When expectations become unsustainable, some leaders are able to shift into different youth ministry roles that offer more control over one’s schedule (something like a youth director or pastor role that involves more supervision and management of others who do the hectic activities of ministry). However, often the women aren’t able to make these shifts. Sometimes those roles aren’t offered to them. Furthermore, work-life balance tends to be more difficult for women than for men, especially for those raising a family, so the pressures of ministry tend to hit these women harder. So, it’s possible that “operating systems” that support youthfulness over longevity may disproportionately impact the women leaders, and therefore, the female students as well.
I’d be interested to hear others’ thoughts on this. Is this a fair assessment?
Are there other trade-offs you’ve noticed that I haven’t included here?
If maturity and longevity in leaders is worth the trade-offs, then how can we move toward a model supports these values?
To be clear, I don’t think that we should not have young leaders at all. Everyone in ministry has to start somewhere, so churches need to invest in young leaders in order to produce mature leaders. I’ve seen great benefit to younger leaders being brought on and mentored by older leaders. I myself benefited from having started in a 2-year internship program designed to help me learn the ropes of ministry, and that youth ministry was able to benefit from capitalizing on interns’ capacity for relational ministry. Furthermore, if you start ministry while you are young, it does make sense that you would start by working with younger populations.