It's not "Is there or is there not risk?"

It's more about how much you'll take on and what you'll do with it.

Taking on a relationship, there's risk. Absolutely 100% of the time. Because risk is everywhere and associated with everything.

• Odds of dying by choking on food is 1 in 2,745 

• Odds of dying by heart disease is 1 in 6

• The odds of dying while walking down the street and getting hit by a car is 1 in 556

• Odds of an asteroid hitting the planet are 1 in 1 million.

• And the odds of dying by a shark attack are 1 in 3.7 million.

BUT how you engage with the risk contributes to the amount and pain of it. 

You can put some hamburger in your pocket and jump in the ocean to increase your shark risk. Or you can shove your face without chewing while on a jog and increase your choking risk. Or you can never go outside and lower your risk of being hit by a car.

The same is true for identifying, recruiting, and developing people. Even your spouse. Even your kids to an extent. You can raise or lower the risks. And ignoring the risks is the same as elevating the risks.

I am happy to take on riskier candidates for my teams. I've done this since I started building teams in 1999 and it's worked out for me literally 100% of the time. I'm not saying all people turned out amazing but I am suggesting all of those relationships increased in value and those people elevated their potential and opportunities. 

I was eager to work with Dustin (from my previous email on this risk topic - go back and read that). I accepted responsibility for his exposure and new experiences. I accepted the risk of him making mistakes but also knew there were no lives in danger. BTW, think about how much we worry about stuff that literally won't matter in 5 minutes. (Especially in the church world where I primarily work.)  

During my 10 years at Elevation I took on the riskiest people we ever had there. Very much unproven leaders, some with DUIs and other baggage, some with jail time. Plenty with literally zero experience leading teams. Plenty with no understanding of the "rules" of church. All of whom (literally all) were overlooked as "not qualified" or "not ready" or "won't fit" or "not yet." The first woman campus pastor, the single campus pastors, the "bad accents", the country bumpkin, the "can't be on time" guy. And more.

But the other variable no one considered was "Who is their leader?" That is a very relevant and active part of the risk equation. 

Let's go to another industry: Financial investing.

There's risk when you buy a stock. But the "good stock" or "bad stock" is made better or worse by the investor. If this person has a low tolerance for risk then they freak out when it dips, they sell, and they lose money when there's a good chance patience would have seen the stock rise again. Or the high risk investor puts $10,000 into a meme stock "on a hunch" and loses it all overnight. Both have high risk and low risk based on the investors response. Aka their contribution to the risk equation.

For me, I just don't follow trends or opinions when I invest - in both people and stocks. I look at 10-20 variables that contribute to trends. *** More on these variables and questions I ask in an email coming soon. ***

Dips WILL happen. Your "best hire" will still be stupid 4 times a month. Your "worst hire" can change the game if you don't "sell low" like a dip in the stock market. (Are you following my back-and-forth between stock and leader metaphors?) 

Bottom line is this: Know the risk and accept your part in the equation. If you're a low risk person, you'll need to pick someone more certain. The high side won't be as high but the low side won't be as low. You'll have a great khaki pant-wearing, safe-driving, toe-the-line leader who will deliver consistently for years. And if that's the level of risk you prefer, that's a win. 

If you're like me, you're happy with a barely-saved, "it's not what you say but how you say it", shoot-first-aim-second, too-bold leader because the upside is massive. The downside is huge too but (like me) you believe you can be part of their development and eagerly take on the responsibility for their misses as if they're your own. 

>>> Go read about Jesus and the disciples he picked and see where he lands on this spectrum. <<<

The level of responsibility you accept should be equal to or greater than the level of risk you except.
I'll take more risk because I take more responsibility. 

BUT YOU DO YOU. Don't gamble with the organization's future, a person's calling, and your sanity. 

P.S. More on risk coming soon. Watch your inbox. Because understanding and assessing risk is infinitely more valuable than hoping to hit the mythical leader lottery.

P.P.S. Regarding the Avengers in that picture above, I'm not suggesting I made them awesome. I just unleashed and exposed their innate awesomeness. Taking on more risk doesn't mean you make people, it means you expose the goodness about how God made people. Knowing that and leaning on that would upgrade every leader and church in the world. 

P.P.P.S. Surely there's at least one line in here you can post about to help others. Tag me if you like but if not, at least get the helpful stuff out there. Thanks!