Question:
I've always understood that the NCD Survey cycle was ideally a 1-year process. Why doesn't the workbook specifically emphasise this.
Answer:
There is no really good principle-oriented reason why an annual cycle is necessarily ideal for churches. For some churches, a 1-year cycle may fit well into an annual planning calendar. However, in many cases, waiting a year before repeating the survey will not be the best rhythm for growth.
Imagine that your church receives its results and, in accordance with the workbook, the key influencers begin cycling through simple action plans shortly after that time. Because of their influence and consistent application, the quality in your minimum factor areas is likely to improve quite quickly. Perhaps after 6 months there has been considerable progress in these areas. It is quite likely that by that time, other slightly different areas have become the minimum factors of your church. If those key people (and others they are influencing) continue to focus on their original lowest points, not only are they going to possibly miss the new emerging minimum areas, but with less and less fruit emerging from their original minimum factor work, they may lose momentum. The tragedy of this is that the minimum areas may have improved considerably through the cycle, but have fallen back to some extent by the time the survey is repeated - thereby masking how much progress was actually achieved on the original areas.
It is not at all uncommon for churches to repeat the survey after only 6 months and to see their average increase by 5 or 10 points with completely different minimum factors emerging. Some would argue that the 6-month progress is perhaps not consolidated and that the church might just drop back somewhat by the next survey. There doesn't seem to be any clear anecdotal or statistical evidence to support this suspicion and besides, working longer to supposedly consolidate original minimum factor areas when other areas have now become the minimum areas, defies the minimum factor principle itself. Consolidation of minimum factor areas is always done best by ensuring that key people in your church are influencing the rest of the church in accordance with your minimum factor areas at that given point in time.
So, when is the RIGHT time to survey? It's simple. When the key influencers perceive beyond reasonable doubt that there has been definite progress and subsequent fruit from their work in their minimum factor areas.
PS. If the cost issue is raised in these 'Survey Cycle Timing' discussions ask those concerned to divide the cost of the survey by the number of weeks in the proposed cycle period. Most times, it would be safe to conclude that fairly little church quality improvement (and likely improvement in giving) should more than compensate for the cost.