I have great concern about the facts released in a recent article by Relevant Magazine, Inside Worship’s New Power Structure: How the Industry Has Quietly Shifted in 2025. The article is based on a report from Worship Leader Research.  by First, let’s explore the claims of the article, then some concerns.

The modern worship landscape in 2025 looks vastly different than it did just a decade ago. While many of us might think of worship music as an ever-expanding tapestry of expressions, recent reports reveal a significant and concerning shift: the industry has quietly become more concentrated, with a surprisingly small group of interconnected writers shaping what churches sing worldwide.

As we strive to foster authentic and diverse worship, understanding this new power structure is crucial.

The End of an Era, The Rise of a Tighter Network

Remember the 2010s, when “The Big 4” (Hillsong, Bethel, Elevation, and Passion) operated as distinct powerhouses, each with its own songwriting engine? That era, characterized by hits almost exclusively from within those movements, is waning.

However, the dismantling of these big walls hasn’t led to an expansion of influence; if anything, it has narrowed significantly. A study from 2020 to 2025 found that out of 51 new songs breaking into the CCLI Top 100 chart, an astonishing 47 were written by a small group of songwriters tied to just a few megachurches and collectives. The boundaries between movements may have blurred, but the circle of influence has not widened. 

The Dominance of a Handful of Individuals

This new reality means familiar names like Chris Brown, Steven Furtick, Pat Barrett, Phil Wickham, and Chandler Moore are collaborating actively across various brands and platforms. As Relevant Magazine points out: “This isn’t just a branding shift. It means worship music is increasingly shaped by a handful of creative relationships rather than the theological or stylistic priorities of a single church.”

One name, in particular, stands out: Brandon Lake. He has become a central “connective thread” in this new ecosystem. Lake is credited as a writer on 13 of the 51 new songs to hit the Top 100 since 2020, representing an astonishing 25 percent of the new hits. His collaborations with Elevation, Bethel, Maverick City Music, and others mean that when someone like Lake moves between these movements, they are effectively “shaping the canon of songs sung in churches worldwide.”

The Dangers of Centralized Influence

While collaboration can be a beautiful thing, this level of concentration poses several potential dangers for the broader church:

  1. Homogenization of Theology and Expression: When a small group dictates the majority of widely sung songs, there’s a risk of theological and stylistic homogenization. The rich diversity of Christian thought and musical expression, nurtured in various traditions and local contexts, could be overshadowed by the preferences and perspectives of a few.
  2. Lack of Diverse Voices: This concentrated power structure also reflects a concerning lack of diversity. While women are reportedly participating in more writing sessions, the Top 100 charts do not reflect this progress. According to Relevant Magazine: “Fewer than 25 credited writers on the current CCLI Top 100 are women—just 19 percent of all songwriters represented,” with Brooke Ligertwood being the sole female writer with a recurring presence at this level. This clearly illustrates that “inclusion in the room is not the same as influence on the songs churches actually sing”. There is also a lack of influence from many church traditions. When the majority of the church’s soundtrack is penned by one demographic, it inevitably limits the breadth of experience and perspective woven into our worship.
  3. Potential for “Cause Fatigue” and Neglect of Local Contexts: While not directly stated as a danger of songwriting concentration, the broader cultural context may suffer from “Cause Fatigue,” where individuals find it hard to care about every issue. When a few writers, however well-intentioned, shape the global worship canon, there’s a risk that songs might not adequately address the unique struggles, joys, and theological needs of diverse local communities, potentially leading to a disconnect between corporate worship and congregational life. The “mission field” itself is noted to look different now, implying the need for adaptable and context-specific expressions of faith.
  4. Prioritizing “Hits” Over Depth: With a focus on a “songwriting family” creating widely adopted songs, there’s a potential for the industry to prioritize what’s popular and easily digestible over songs that emerge from deeper theological reflection or unique congregational needs, i.e. worship becomes more market-driven than spiritually inspired, perhaps prioritizing commercial success over genuine worship expression.
  5. Getting Caught Up in Worship Music Success Formulas: Songs may be becoming more formulaic to entice greater sales, radio play and adoption.
  6. Forsaking Intergenerational Worship: While many of the songs coming from these writers are sound theologically and very suitable for multigenerational congregations, a vast number of the new songs seem targeted at a younger demographic and are unsuitable for multigenerational worship due to complex rhythms and vocal ranges that exceed those of the average voice.

What Does This Mean for Our Churches?

For worship leaders and congregants worldwide, this shift calls for intentionality and discernment. 

We must ask ourselves:

  • Are we passively adopting the soundtrack defined by a few, or are we actively seeking out diverse voices and expressions?
  • Are we letting the CCLI top songs determine our song lists?
  • Are we seeking diversity in our church’s repertoire, incorporating the best songs from classic hymns, modern hymns, classic worship songs and modern worship songs?
  • Are we nurturing local songwriters and unique worship traditions within our own communities and church denominations?
  • Are the songs we sing truly reflecting the full breadth of Christian theology and experience?

Here are some steps to take:

  • Diversify Your Song Selection: Actively seek out and incorporate worship songs from a broader range of writers, not just those from the “songwriting family” that frequently appear on the CCLI Top 100 charts. Explore songs from different traditions, smaller ministries, or international contexts to enrich your congregation’s worship experience. Seek to incorporate the best songs from classic hymns, modern hymns, classic worship songs and modern worship songs.
  • Nurture Local Talent and Songwriters: Encourage and develop songwriters within your own denomination, church, and local community. By providing platforms and mentorship, you can help cultivate unique worship expressions that authentically reflect your denomination’s/congregation’s theological convictions, cultural context, and lived experiences. If your church is part of a denomination (e.g. Southern Baptist), consider initiating national and state movements to support songwriting and recording among musicians/theologians in your churches.
  • Prioritize Theological Depth and Contextual Relevance: While popular songs can be powerful, ensure that your worship music choices align with your church’s specific theological and stylistic priorities. Don’t just choose songs because they are popular; choose them because they speak truth, resonate with your community, and foster genuine spiritual connection.
  • Intentionally Include Female Voices: Given the significant gender disparity in charting worship songs, make a conscious effort to include songs written or co-written by women in your worship sets. This helps ensure a more balanced representation of perspectives and experiences in the songs we sing to God.
  • Cultivate Discernment in Song Choice: Encourage your worship teams and congregation to engage critically with song choices. Understand the themes, lyrical content, and overall impact of the songs you sing. This intentional approach helps ensure that your corporate worship truly serves the spiritual formation of your community.

In closing

This article is much less about whether or not these new songs are theologically accurate or if we should be using them, and more focused on what happens when only a few voices shape the musical canon of the modern church. Note that the danger of a handful of writers dominating the worship music world extends beyond mere musical uniformity. When a few writers dominate worship music, there’s a risk of:

  • Reducing theological depth
  • Limiting spiritual expression
  • Creating a consumer-driven approach to worship

Churches must recognize that worship music is not just entertainment or a commercial product, but a profound spiritual practice that should reflect the diverse voices and experiences of their entire faith community. Worship music is one of the greatest tools of the church to disciple the congregants. We, as worship leaders and planners, must be discerning as we select the songs that we will put on the lips and the hearts of our congregations.

By actively working to decentralize worship music creation, churches can restore a more authentic, diverse, and spiritually meaningful approach to musical worship that truly represents the breadth of their congregational experience.

Let us be mindful that true renewal in worship comes from a place of depth, diversity, and genuine heart, not just from the latest hit from a concentrated network. Let’s champion a worship landscape that truly reflects the vast and beautiful body of Christ.