Category: Church Meetings

5 Questions for Efficient Meetings

meeting

Efficient meetings – a dream or reality?

I am sure all of us have attended way too many meetings where too much time is wasted. It can be frustrating to struggle through a discussion that takes forever to get anywhere. Then even worse the destination turns out to be a dead end.

No one wants to waste their time. But also we don’t want to rush and make people feel left out, or dominated by the powerful, or end up making a bad decision because we didn’t take everything into account.

Being efficient does not mean rushing. Being efficient means only talking about things that actually help us to make a good decision!

There are many tools that help us to make good decisions in a time-effective way. This post looks at five questions that can help us to be clear and focused on the task, and ensure that we know when we have talked enough to make the decision.

What are we here for?

This is not a question that needs to be asked every time but it is something that should be considered from time to time. There will also be situations when it is just the right question to get people back on track.

I have been to many meetings where an issue comes up and people want to tell you their experience of this issue. Or the conversation leads to commentary on the motives or credibility of the people bringing the idea. Have you ever been to a meeting where the group is asked to provide advice on a question and they want to spend their time saying what they think should be the final decision? All of these things cause a meeting to wander away from its purpose. They are classic time-wasters. When people talk about what is not their business it is very inefficient!

Any member of a committee can remind the group of their purpose. If no one else does it then it is up to the Chair. Simple comments like: I think the question before us is …; or We were not asked to make a decision on this subject but to identify the relevant issues for the Church Council; or We don’t have the authority to act in that way so there isn’t much point talking about it; or Can you help me to see how this conversation is helping us to get an answer to the question in front of us; etc.

There are many ways to pull people back on track. However, too few people are prepared to do it and so meetings wander off into all sorts of blind alleys. If the meeting is wandering one very useful tool is to remind people of the purpose of the meeting/discussion in which they are involved. Be polite – but just do it.

What is the issue?

A common way that meetings waste time is to not address the main issues. Instead, they talk about all sorts of things that are irrelevant to the topic. Often this is not done deliberately. People think they know what the issue is but they are wrong – so they talk about things that just don’t help to get the job done.

So the absolutely best way to make your meeting efficient is to make sure that everyone understands what is the issue that is before the meeting. Now, this is not as easy as it seems! Let’s look at an example.

Recently I was having a conversation with a regional church leader who said that a local congregation and his committee had to make a decision about whether a local church Minister would get an extension beyond their current term. On the surface, it looks pretty simple. The issue seems to be “Should  Rev X get to go beyond 10 years?”

But dig deeper and the issues expand. Ask the question again: “What are the issues at stake when we consider an extension for this Minister? Now we start to see that the deeper issues include

    • the effectiveness of the mission of the church
    • the health and well being of the Minister and congregation,
    • the Minister’s professional and vocational development
    • the personal needs of the Minister and congregation
    • the best use of her gifts across the church
    • is there a “church policy” that needs to be accepted or challenged

As you can see, by digging deeper to find the issues that lie beneath the presenting question we can better see what we need to talk about. If we don’t dig deeper then when the talking starts some people will speak to the first point, others the fourth and the talk will jump all over the place and make it hard to get to a point of decision.

This list of “what we need to decide” is very important. Write it up so everyone can see it. You are going to come back to this list. After creating this list, ask one more time: “Is there anything else on which we need to make a decision as we discern this matter?”

One outcome of this process is that it is possible to systematically work through each area rather than wandering all over the top of them and confusing the discussion. A second benefit is that you can prioritize the issues. Another is that you have now moved the conversation from one about strategy (in this case an extension) to goals (ie why would we give an extension).

What do we need to know?

What information do we require if we are going to understand these issues and be well informed? This step significantly reduces the potential for people to bring up red herrings, irrelevant minutia and overweighting their bias rather than dealing with the data. All of these are great time wasters.

So in the example above, the answer for issue one might include things like:

    •  we need to know the mission priorities for the congregation
    • the skills of the Minister and the members
    • decide if the Minister can make a significant contribution to that mission direction
    • etc

Do we have the information that we need?

I am often amazed at how often meetings are prepared to make a decision when they do not have the information that they need! To make a good decision you need the right information. By agreeing ahead of time what you need to know then you can decide if you have the answers that you need. This helps efficiency in at least two ways. First, it means that you only have a discussion when you are in a position to make a decision. Second, it reduces the chance that someone will turn up at the next meeting and say “We didn’t take this into account” and start the discussion all over again. Yikes!

If you do not have the information at this meeting then ask: how do we get it, who will collect it and by when? If this question is right up front then it is less likely that you talk for ages and someone decides that they have to postpone the discussion until another meeting because there is something they need to find out.

Have we talked this through?

Talk through the issues one at a time then move to the next one. Summarize the comments. If there is agreement then note it. If there is a difference of opinion then acknowledge it.

After going through the list of issues that you wrote up at the beginning of the discussion summarize what has been said and see if there is a consensus on the presenting question. It may be that the conversation leads to discernment about the appropriate path forward on the presenting question.

It is also possible that people want to give more weight to one of the underlying issues than to another. For example, some people may want to give the most weight to the family’s needs, others a policy or bias against long terms, or others the mission of the local church. Not all considerations are created equal! But getting these out in the open reduces the risk of it becoming a shouting match or a time for accusations that some people just don’t care about the Minister’s family.

If it becomes clear that there are strongly held different views on what should be the most important factors then make that topic the discussion for a time. One thing that may be helpful is to give people two or three coloured dots and ask them to put a dot next to the two or three things that are most important to them as they make this decision. People can share why their top one is important. This kind of process encourages transparency and makes it possible to address the feelings and values of the committee members as well as their ideas. This step plays into achieving positive relationships among the members and ensures that everyone is respected and has the chance to share their point of view. This may seem to some to sacrifice efficiency for a feel-good vibe in the meeting. However, that sets up a false choice. At the end of the day good, respectful and open relationships enhance the ability of a group to work effectively together over time.

Conclusion

It is very easy for members of meetings to wander all over the place and take way too long to get to a conclusion. The best solution is to have a structure for exploring any issue that is before the group. This post could only offer one example. However, I encourage you to think of an important agenda item from a recent meeting that you attended. Were there more issues under the surface than seemed obvious from the way the business was presented? Did the group try to make a decision without realizing all the information that is needed? Did the meeting go around in circles or have people talk back and forth at each other because they had different priorities and they were trying to wear the other person down? All of these problems can be overcome if you ask the five questions for efficient meetings!

 

6 things not to like about Committees (and what to do about them)

committees

Whether it be work, church, or community groups we have all sat through meetings that make us sad, mad, and bad. Sad about the wasted time and expertise. Mad about the outcomes. Bad inside is often how we feel and it can make us want to behave badly too! So what to do about the things that we hate about Committees?

6 things to hate about committee meetings!

      • Meetings that go for hours longer than necessary
      • Valuable people time is used for no good result
      • Processes that often leave the people affected by the decisions confused, disempowered, hurt and angry
      • A few people within committees seem to hold the power and the greatest influence on decisions
      • Quieter members do not speak up or challenge proposals that some see as unfair or unjust or uncaring
      • Inexperienced and untrained people who deal with complicated and sensitive issues

Wasting Time

I am sure that we have all sat in meetings and thought “surely we can do this business faster than it is taking!” The signs of time-wasting include repeat expressions of the same point of view, going around in circles, never finishing a discussion, people bringing up things that are irrelevant to the matter at hand, etc. I am sure that you can add to the list.

One of the complaints sometimes made about using a consensus-building approach is that it takes too much time. This is a fallacy. It is actually very efficient because it focuses on the things that matter in making a decision rather than let a rambling succession of speeches pile up in the hope of wearing people down to your point of view.

The key to efficiency is not to shut down the conversation and “run a tight ship”. Rather it is to make sure that you open up the discussion early so that you focus on the core issues.

For example, most motions/proposals/recommendations that come before a meeting are that a certain thing is done. It is an action step. The Chair will then often ask “what do you think of this idea?” This has the potential to (and it often does) lead to a spray of reactions, comments, and alternatives. One reason for this is because an action step is a “strategy” – a means of achieving something else. That something else is a goal. There are lots of ways to achieve a goal and we waste time when we don’t first consider what we are trying to achieve.

Tip one for saving time: focus on the real issues. Clarify the issue – what are we being asked to make a decision on? For example, if it is a discussion about using new music in worship the first answer might be “to be more contemporary”. But dig deeper and the issues expand and become clearer- the importance of cultural relevance to mission, supporting the diverse spirituality and faith experience of different members, including more people in leading the worship, etc. Now you know what you are talking about. This helps you to be more systematic in the conversation by working through the goals one at a time rather than the discussion spraying all over the place.

Poor stewardship of people resources

Sit in any meeting – local, regional or wider and multiply the number of people by the meeting hours by the number of meetings a year. A local Church council of 12 people meeting for 3 hours a month 11 times a year is 396 hours a year of valuable people time. Saving an hour puts 132 hours back into a mission activity. Regional meetings can burn thousands of hours a year in ministry time – what a waste of God’s resources! Yes, we need meetings but there is always a question about how many people need to be involved, how often they should meet and how long they should run.

The solution to squandering people’s time resources is to have efficient meetings, good delegations, and very clear role descriptions. I worked once with a local Church Council that went from 45 members to 14! One part of the strategy to releasing over 1,000  hours a year to support local mission was to give people the ability to swap that meeting for another respected and important leadership role – plus get the meetings to work better!

Processes that often leave people confused, disempowered, hurt and angry

I could write a book about this! That’s right I did: The Church Guide for Making Decisions Together. There isn’t space here to cover everything that helps to avoid these problems, but here are some key elements that you want in your process.

      • everyone gets to express their feelings, hopes, fears, and ideas
      • all the issues are understood
      • all the implications of a decision have been thought through
      • the group has all the information that it needs to make a good decision

If these things are going to happen you have to create a culture of co-operation, a place where people feel safe to speak their mind, ask the right questions of the group, always begin with questions for clarification – so people know what they are talking about, use the blue and orange cards, don’t put haste ahead of care for people. Easy!

A few people hold the power and  greatest influence

Could it be that there is some cultural influence at play? There are some cultural groups where it is not appropriate for persons of a particular age or gender to contribute on some subjects. Another kind of culture is where committee members defer to ordained people or those who have high power professional jobs. Still another culture is one where certain people are the gatekeepers and power brokers in a congregation and they expect to be followed.

Different cultural sensitivities need to be respected even if that tends towards the exclusion of certain voices or fosters a hierarchy with Ministers at the top. Respect doesn’t mean that it goes unchallenged but this issue needs to be named and sensitively explored from a theological and cultural perspective. Western individualism also needs to be critiqued from the same angles.

The key to addressing power is to name it out loud and to find a way to talk about it. If the use of power includes intimidation, disrespect of others and arrogance then it is a spiritual issue and a matter of discipleship. Allowing bad behaviour to continue unchecked is a failure of leadership.

Alongside naming power, understanding where it is based, exploring it, and teaching about it we need to operate in a way that shows appropriate respect for all – not just the powerful. This can be done in ways a simple as who we ask to contribute first in a discussion through to how we praise and honour the contribution of everyone.

Quieter members do not speak up

One of the reasons that this happens is because people are dealing with the use of power and culture that we just talked about. However it can also be that some people have low self-esteem, or they process things slower than debater types, some people need to talk their ideas out loud before they come to a view and can’t jump into a debate, some people are just shy, still others avoid conflict or have a personality that wants to accommodate other people and not be self-assertive, etc. You need to know your group and devise a process that meets their needs.

Tools that are mentioned in our book include using small groups to explore more complex issues, ask people to think about their response to a lead question for a minute or so (maybe writing a note to themselves) before asking anyone to speak, invite people to talk to one or two persons around them so that they can surface their thinking before the group discussion, and use a behavioural covenant to create a safe place for dealing with differences. There are plenty of other things that you can do – what are your suggestions?

People don’t have the experience or training they need

This can happen a lot in church meetings. It is not necessary to be an expert to be on a church committee but people should have the ability to grow and build on the skills that they bring from other parts of their life.

Ongoing professional and personal development should be part of what happens in all committees. If that is going to happen then you have to spend time understanding what your task is and what skills are needed. Many leadership groups in the secular world have retreats and planning meetings as part of their schedule. There is nothing to stop a church committee from setting aside some or all of one of their meetings a year to ask the following questions:

      • What is our reason for having a meeting?
      • What skills, attitudes, and spiritual gifts do we need to do our job?
      • Are there gaps in what we need?
      • If so, how do we fill them, eg training, spiritual growth, new people?
      • Looking back on the past year – have we done a good job?
      • How can we better fulfill our calling in the next 12 months

Self-evaluation and training based on recognized needs is a great first step to having skilled and effective members for your committee.

Conclusion

Meetings do matter so we have to do them as well and as faithfully as we can. I encourage you not to put up with less than the best. You don’t have to hate committee meetings and be frustrated by their results. There are simple steps that you can follow to overcome the problems. It truly is worth the effort.

 

A Case Study on Church Conflict

First: Review the 7 Levels of Conflict

Church conflict happens in lots of places. Understanding the dynamics and what can be done needs practice. The following case study is a chance for you to put theory into practice.

Review the Case Story

Background

Blessed Peace Church is located in Keiffer, a small town. This congregation has been in existence for over 135 years. There is a sense of wellbeing in the greater community and the population has been growing steadily in recent years due to the high quality of life offered. Keiffer has a college, a new telecommunication center for a large insurance company and an established manufacturing factory nearby that employs a lot of people. Because of these factors, new people are moving into the area alarming older residents with the need for new schools and other services. Change is happening despite growing opposition.

Current Reality

This growth has also brought about challenges in the congregation over the last 5 years.  Once a small church, Blessed Peace has now grown in size (Average Weekly Attendance 115) and style offering a full program for children, youth and adults.  Its ministry has developed, stretching the budget and space needs. There is now a growing college student program that is led by a new member, Charles Tony. Mr. Tony has been a member of the congregation for less than 2 years and has established an effective ministry with students that totals 45 each Sunday. He tends to work best alone and values growth.

Pastor Martha Rowlings has been at the church for 6 years and is now receiving a steady stream of complaints about the Student Ministry from older members. They share that this new group is not sharing space well, they consume a part of the budget that could be used on other ministries and seem not to appreciate established leaders or approved ways for doing things.

What Happened

At a recent Church Council Meeting, Mr. Tony made a request on behalf of the students requesting that a second worship service begin next month. They would meet on Sunday evenings in the Fellowship Hall and offer a contemporary style of praise and song. He would take the responsibility to find musicians and promote this new venture on behalf of the congregation. When Pastor Rowlings, who did not know about this request in advance, asked that the congregation form a task group of 7 members of the church (older members and students) to further study this matter to gain support and to properly organize this activity, Mr. Tony objected. He stated that if the church did not approve his request, he would quit and the students would leave.

A heated debate occurred that raised all the underlying issues that the congregation was struggling with over this ministry: lack of communication, the difference of perspectives, allotment of resources, confusion and a desire to do things the way they have been done in the past.  While no one opposed the request, some expressed doubts that the request was brought before the Council properly and with the support of the Pastor, as it should be. Assumptions and insults followed over whether the proper process was followed. What was the impact on the budget expected to be? The congregation wanted to support student ministry but not be held hostage.

In frustration, the Council Chair finally deferred the matter until the next meeting. He suggested that the Pastor and Mr. Tony meet together during the week to work out a proposal that would be beneficial to both the students and the church. Mr. Tony did not show up for that meeting.

Afterwards…

People began to talk and take sides. Some believed that the student ministry was taking over the church and needed to be more respectful. Mr. Tony had overstepped his boundaries. Other leaders wanted to do all they could to support the newer members and suggested that a second worship service would help alleviate tensions between the 2 groups. My Tony did bring new energy to the church and the young adults responded well.

Sadly, nobody knew what to do to resolve the matter or the conflict that led to the place that they now find themselves. So they call you…

Discussion Questions

  1. What level of conflict do you think the church is encountering and why?
  2. What would you suggest be done to resolve the tensions and bring about a restored trust and wellbeing to the congregation?
  3. Is there a way to meet the needs of both the older members and students? Can you see a way forward?

Community based decision-making process – 4th step: implementation

Implementation is step 4 in a series of steps required for effective community based decision-making. This is the most important step because without implementation you don’t have a decision that is worth anything. The first step 1 is preparation. Step 2 is invitation. Step 3 is deliberation and decision. The final step 4 is to implementation of the decision.

“The Church Guide For Making Decisions Together” expands on this material in pages 96 and 187. You can get your copy at Amazon.

What now? Implementation!

Decisions deserves action or follow through. This final step is so important for a community-based process of making decisions. You have taken the time to prepare people, invite them to participate, discern God’s will through deliberation, and…?  Don’t forget the final step: Implementation! This is why decisions matter – things get done.

Implementation of the decision made by your faith group involves easy but often overlooked things. All are important. All are essential. Confusion and lack of synergy shows up in groups that do this step poorly. Groups that do this step well have discovered that their membership own the decision, and just as importantly, own the process. It becomes natural to them. They discover a strength in accomplishing God’s best hopes.

So, what’s involved in this step? Here is a  list of actions for you to consider once a decision has been made.

Meet with people who are affected by a decision

Not every decision needs a special meeting to relay the results. However there are times when something is significant and needs extra effort.

If a decision is complex, contentious or affects a lot of people then it is pastoral to meet people face to face. Listen to the concerns they have. Answer their questions. Explain again the process that was undertaken, the decision and the implications. Care for one another.

Send a letter

People were invited into the process in the first step. They have been partners with you in the process of discernment. So inform members that a decision has been made on the specific matter about which they have been in prayer. If appropriate convene a meeting rather than try to cover everything in a letter.

Of course websites, newsletters, Facebook groups and other communication tools can also be used to share information. However don’t hide behind a computer screen or a piece of paper.

Other people will tell the story if you don’t. Therefore ensure that people get the right information. Do not let people rely on gossip to know what is happening. If your decision impacts a specific ministry or previous arrangement with groups, be sure to let them know in writing as well.

Request continued prayer and support

Making a decision is only half (maybe less) of the story. Implementation of the decision can take weeks, months or years. Request prayer and other appropriate support for those with responsibility for the implementation of the decision.

Make these requests for support very specific. Share the projected timeline, key people involved, and name those who will be positively or negatively affected by the decision.

Think about what specific things can people do to support the decision throughout the timeline. Then offer concrete tasks for action.

Thank people

Discernment is a team effort. Remember, encourage and thank people for participating in the process. Think of specific people who have carried a heavy load in the decision-making process or will have to in the implementation phase. What special blessing can you offer them?

Have clear lines of accountability

The meeting decided who would do what tasks and by what date. The minutes provide a clear record of the decision. The implementation of the decision must be monitored.

Whether it is a small or large decision the decision-making body should get progress reports. There is a saying that people don’t do what is expected, they do what is inspected.

Do not be naïve. A person will delay and divert attention from a project if s/he doesn’t want something to happen. The community has discerned Christ’s will for them and therefore it is the responsibility of everyone to accept that decision. People are held accountable through regular progress reports.

More positively accountability ensures that the implementation of the decision is happening. When people sense that they are being faithful to what God has called them to do, this can be an energising and encouraging time.

Assess the process

Leaders should be clear about what went well in the process and what can be improved next time. Remember, it takes several attempts at a new way of doing things before people feel comfortable. Stay the course.

Strategies for review include setting time aside at a regular meeting to reflect on the process, or hold a special purpose meeting or design a survey.

Remember when you do your review to include all four steps and the people who were involved. For example

  • Were there any steps in the preparations that were missed or could have been done better?
  • Did the members of the congregation feel invited to participate and know how that was possible?
  • How well did we do in the four phases of the discernment process – community building, information sharing, deliberations and determination? What can we do better next time?
  • How was our communication? Did the implementation go to plan?

Celebrate

In an appropriate way acknowledge that you have done well.

Conclusion

As you can see there are many aspects to implementing a decision. More than just the decision matters in a community based process. The community matters. People affected by a decision matter. When your decision-making process has an eye beyond just the decision it is easier to recognise the many steps involved in implementation.

Decisions that are made actually get put into action when you do this step well. Things change. Your faith community becomes stronger.

Let us know your experience in making decisions. We would welcome your feedback to this series. Post a response. We’d love to hear from you!

Community based decision-making process – 3rd step: deliberation and decision

In any decision-making process deliberation and decision is where most people want to rush. This is the part of the process that most people think about when they talk about making decisions. It is the very heart of a decision-making process.

This is the 3rd post in a series of four posts that walk through the steps required for effective community based decision-making. Step 3 is deliberation and decision. Step 1 is preparation, step 2 is invitation and step 4 is implement the decision.

The material below is expanded upon in the book: “The Church Guide For Making Decisions Together” in pages 93 – 95 and 186. You can get your copy at Amazon.

Before the deliberations begin

We are absolutely convinced that when you complete the first 2 steps properly (Preparation and Invitation), then this step is a real delight.

First a reminder. Because this process is community-based, gathering the community for this work is crucial. Therefore people should know the issue(s) in advance and receive all relevant materials before the meeting. They should come to the meeting with a sense of prayer and wonder at what God is about to do through them. Supported this step with deep prayer and reflection. Sadly, some people come to meetings loaded for bear. That is, they take sides in advance and are convinced that they need to argue their point. Winning is their motivation. However, nothing is further from the truth of what community based discernment is about!

Here is a basic outline of an agenda for the deliberation and decision-making part of a discernment process.

Gather the Community

Participants are reminded, affirmed and built up as a community in this part of the meeting. When done well people will:

  • be welcomed
  • share a time of worship or devotion
  • build community
  • set boundaries or guidelines to complete the work ahead
  • review and agree to the agenda with appropriate break times
  • receive an overview of the consensus process.

Information Phase

Most leaders tend to ignore or limit this part of the meeting. Many questions and confusion easily arise when this happens. The issue or topic to be discussed is presented and relevant supporting material distributed.

Often this material takes the form of a petition or proposal to considered. Time must be given to answering questions on the topic so everyone is clear what they are being asked to do, understand the matter before them and the implications of their decision.

An often overlooked important piece of information is what is important to the decision makers as they consider the issue. People decide things on what they think is important. If other people don’t know what matters to others then they will not know where each other are coming from. Worse still, important needs and concerns will not surface. This means that all the issues will not be addressed and the full range of possible outcomes will be cut off.

Deliberation Phase

It is very important that you provide enough time for this phase. This is where creative options surface and the shape of the decision starts to come into focus.

In Robert’s Rules of Order, this is often a time of making amendments and substitution which can be confusing. In a community-based consensus process, it is a time for respectful conversation and consultation with one another to share experiences, hopes, values, feelings, and theology on the proposal. By doing this you begin to see what is acceptable in the proposal and whether there are other ways to achieve goals.

There are many ways to help these sorts of discussions and to capture the developing consensus. One valuable technique to foster these conversations is to form smaller groups of 6-8 people to seek direction.

Determination / Decision Phase

This is the place in the meeting where the decision is made. Perhaps the decision is that it is not time to finalise the issue. So the matter will be referred to a group for further work. That group will then bring back the next phase of the discernment in a new proposal.

Often, a group decides they have had enough conversation and are ready to share alternate ideas gleaned from conversation and prayer in the Deliberation Phase.  If you have completed the previous phases with integrity, there may be a clear cut sense of direction. This is the point where leaders ask the group if they are ready to make a decision. A revised petition or proposal may be presented to the entire group from feedback in small group sessions, or through other strategies.  Remember the point is to draw from the wisdom of the community.

Ultimately it is time to make the decision. This can be done with a show of hands, ballots, or other means. Once the decision is made it should be documented so anyone not present at the meeting understands what has happened and what the next steps will be.

Conclusion

Close the meeting by thanking people for their participation and hard work. Where appropriate end the meeting with an acknowledgement of what the group has worked on and been through. This may be a time for a prayer or song.

I am deeply troubled when a group says that this work takes too much time. They prefer a simple yes or no vote. The answer is simple: take just enough time to discern the will of God on a matter with your brothers and sisters. Then people have ownership of the decision. You will know that you have spent time wisely when you hear people say that they fully understand the decision and are prepared to support it.

If you do not take adequate time for this step then you will waste time later revisiting the matter, or suffering from people’s confusion or lack of support. Groups have split over less!

What a wonderful feeling it is when a faith community knows that they have discerned the will of God on the matter and are prepared to embrace it together!

Post your response to this article so that we may hear your experience and insights about making decisions well.