Faith-based outfits now juggle global donations, regulators and cybercriminals. Their quiet turn to modular tech may change how religion is run, without changing what believers believe
Faith-based organisations (FBOs) are among the oldest institutional forms in human history, yet paradoxically remain one of the least systematised sectors of the modern economy. Scholarly work on available technologies for structuring and governing FBOs is still sparse. This absence is not due to lack of scale or money, but to history.
Existing literature often describes FBOs as institutionally hybrid; simultaneously religious bodies, charities, nonprofits, and community organisations. This produces ambiguous and fragmented administrative practices. When accounts are handled by someone “you know” or “we know the donors” systems rarely outlive people.
However, things are changing as the research on digital religion and post-pandemic worship documents widespread adoption of livestreaming platforms, digital scriptures, language translation tools, and online devotional communities. Even though just for content propagation, these tools transformed religious experience and beliefs about tech.
The state of infrastructural technology in FBOs
Studies on church information systems, nonprofit financial management, and COVID-era crisis governance show that modern FBOs manage complex financial flows, restricted and unrestricted donations, land and asset portfolios, volunteer workforces, and cross-border contributions.
Additionally, regulatory scrutiny, particularly around foreign funding and compliance, has intensified. Informal systems now represent not humility, but risk, especially in loosely structured or non-socialised organisations where transparency norms are weak.
The response has not been a straightforward adoption of enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems. Empirical research highlights persistent challenges in ERP implementation within nonprofit and religious settings, including cultural resistance, low user participation, and concerns about bureaucratisation.
Consequently, FBOs are gravitating toward modular institutional technologies: donor-management platforms, accounting and reporting software, governance dashboards, compliance tools, and cybersecurity frameworks. These systems address specific accountability gaps without imposing rigid corporate structures.
What can we expect from faith-tech?
Post-COVID, this shift shows signs of sectoral maturity. In November 2025, Gloo, a US-based faith-technology platform, went public, raising USD 72.8 million in its IPO. Notably, Gloo operates at the infrastructure layer, offering tools for donor management, operational coordination, governance support, and data-driven engagement, rather than content or worship mediation.
Complementing this, FaithTech gatherings in North America, ChurchTech Expo and the Exponential Conference in the United States, and nonprofit-technology summits across Europe increasingly prioritise enterprise systems, cybersecurity, data governance, compliance automation, and AI-enabled operations alongside worship technologies.
The professionalisation of faith is more of an infrastructural one and not a theological transformation. Technology does not necessarily dilute belief, but rather it is highly needed to survive scale, scrutiny, growing crime and time. AI and blockchain may safeguard faith’s future, or bureaucratise its soul. The difference lies not in faith, but in governance design.
