This post goes a bit deeper than the basic reminder that, as leaders, we need to communicate our expectations and communicate them clearly.  You probably have that part down.  I find, though, that it is easy to stop there -- and that's not enough.  Not only must we communicate what we do want; we must communicate what we don't want.  
With the diverse backgrounds of our followers along with different educational attainment, hearing ability, predisposition toward cooperation or not, and so much more, twenty people can hear the exact same presentation and draw at least twenty different conclusions.  In fairness, we cannot anticipate every ditch people may stumble into, but investing a few moments to consider this can save you time and headaches down the road.  
Consider an example.  Our church recently added a staff member.  We wanted to give that staff member purchasing power, so we asked the bank to generate a credit card for him with "the same information" as the card that I carry as pastor - same billing address, same credit limit, same fact pattern.  Months later, we learned that the bank had generated a credit card sharing the credit limit with the card I carry (which is typical procedure we now know).  We thought we had clearly communicated that we wanted an additional amount, raising the overall organizational credit limit to accommodate, but the term "same" led all of us into a ditch.  
Trust me - I could share dozens of other examples, but for a variety of professional reasons, it would be unethical for me to do so.  Bottom line: Think through a couple of possible corruptions of your message, and kindly communicate that those corruptions are not what you are after.

In one of those chats where you sit and talk with your wife about your day, my wife and I were discussing a common phenomenon in every church - namely, that people vote with their checkbook, their money.  You and I would readily agree that legalism hurts and kills a church.  But something that had never before occurred to me was this particular connection between legalism and the church's cash flow and what that connection means for leading a church.