I’ve been sitting with a Microsoft report this week that I think deserves more than a quick read.
THE SHIFTS THAT DON’T SHOW UP IN PRODUCT ANNOUNCEMENTS
The Bottleneck Isn’t the Technology. It’s the Organization.
Their Work Trend Index found that organizations aren’t struggling with AI because the tools are failing. They’re struggling because the structures around those tools aren’t ready. No one has decided how AI should be used, who’s responsible for those decisions, or where the lines are. The technology is running ahead of the people leading it.
My honest first reaction was to think that’s a corporate problem. But the more I sat with it, the more I had to acknowledge: the same thing is happening in churches. Staff using tools leadership never discussed. No clarity around who owns AI decisions. No shared understanding of what’s in and what’s out. It’s not a technology gap. It’s a leadership question that hasn’t been asked yet.
Why this matters for Christian organizations
If your church hasn’t had that conversation, I’d gently say the bottleneck Microsoft is describing is already there. It just hasn’t made itself visible yet.
Leadership consideration: If your organization hasn’t named who is responsible for AI decisions, that gap already exists in your context. It just hasn’t surfaced yet.
Data as Stewardship
I want to take a moment on something I think gets moved past too quickly in ministry settings.
AI is increasingly being used by people trying to breach organizational systems, and the sophistication of those attacks is accelerating. I know that can sound abstract and far away. But churches hold more sensitive information than most leaders stop to realize: giving histories, pastoral care records, counseling notes, children’s ministry data. And most churches are operating with consumer-grade security and very little IT oversight.
I’ve come to think about this as a stewardship question. We talk about stewardship of finances and time. We rarely talk about stewardship of the information people entrust to us. If that information were compromised tomorrow, the impact wouldn’t be on a system. It would be on people who trusted their church with some of the most personal details of their lives.
Why this matters for Christian organizations
I’d encourage you to hold that for a moment rather than rushing past it.
Leadership consideration: What data does your church hold, who has access to it, and what would it mean for the people in your care if it were compromised?
WHERE AI IS ALREADY TOUCHING MINISTRY WORK
Planning Center Adds Structure to Facilities Management
New guidance was released this week on using Planning Center Calendar for facilities coordination. It won’t change everything, but it does reduce some of the administrative weight that tends to fall on your most stretched staff. Worth a look if facilities scheduling is still running through email chains and informal conversations.
Implication: Churches already using Planning Center have more operational capacity available than most are currently using.
The Gap That Matters Most
Something I keep coming back to as I watch this space: the access gap is closing. Platforms your teams already use are getting smarter, often without any announcement. That’s genuinely good news for smaller organizations.
But the governance gap, the absence of clear organizational decisions about how AI should and shouldn’t be used, isn’t closing at the same pace. I don’t think training closes it, either. Training tells people how to use a tool. It doesn’t tell an organization what it believes about that tool. Only a real decision does that.
Implication: The access gap is closing. The governance gap is not.
ONE CONVERSATION TO HAVE THIS WEEK
“If our systems were breached tomorrow, what information would be exposed, and who would we call first?”
I’d encourage you to hold that question with your team rather than rushing through it.
Listen for:
- Uncertainty about what data your church actually holds
- The assumption that being small means being safe
- The moment when no one quite knows the answer to the second part
This may reveal:
- Gaps in data stewardship that haven’t been named yet
- An opportunity to lead proactively before something forces the conversation
That’s not a problem to be embarrassed about. It’s important information. And it’s far better to surface it now than to wish you had when something forces it.
WORTH THE CONVERSATION
- Giving data is discipleship data — how you interpret generosity trends shapes how you pastor — Read more →
- Baptism numbers are rising — the preparation your church offers matters more than the celebration — Read more →
- Pew Research on why people leave and stay in church — Read more →
- The lies and truths keeping some Black people out of church — a necessary conversation for leaders serious about belonging — Read more →
CLOSING PERSPECTIVE
I can’t ignore the fact that the Microsoft report is pointing at something deeper than a process problem. It’s pointing at a leadership gap: the absence of clear decisions about how AI should and shouldn’t be used inside an organization.
That gap doesn’t fill itself. And it doesn’t stay neutral while it stays open.
The organizations that close it on purpose will have something the others won’t: a coherent position when the questions get harder. And I genuinely believe they will.
The tools aren’t the issue. The absence of a decision about them is.
Curated by Mike Burnard
Strategy first. Technology second.
