i believe strongly about this, but i'm too lame to put my beliefs into words...
This is from a book called "An Unstoppable Force" by Erwin McManus
"I believe that the resume-style selection of leadership has detrimentally affected the development of an apostolic ethos in the church. The church overwhelmingly hires from the outside. Even mega-churches tend to hire from the outside. Every church seems to have a leadership crisis, whether there are two hundred people or twenty thousand. It seems abysmal that in a church of ten thousand, you wouldn't be overwhelmed with emerging leadership, and yet these churches tend to hire proven leadership from other congregations. We seem to be better at growing congregations than at developing leaders. If you identify leaders from within, everyone realizes that he or she could be the next leader indentified. It gives everyone a sense of inspiration and hope that he or she might be selected and invested in. If you're always hiring from the outside, it becomes a mystery how one ever grows to that level of leadership. The obvious conclusion for someone intersted in leadership would be that he or she has to leave the church to find a place where that level of leadership could be obtained. Leadership is not about how much education a person has attained but how much they have actually accomplished in a ministry context. In many congregations the only role that members can aspire to be is a good follower. In the first-century church, there were no other churches to take leaders from. Everybody had to be homegrown."
I would also like to add that this does not have to be only hired faculty, the same principle is true for volunteer leaders or aids. It just doesn't make sense to pull leaders for YOUR church from ANOTHER church. The purpose of the church is to GROW disciples not TAKE disciples. What is this communicating to future leaders? What is this communicating about the current leadership?