I just don’t get it

[Anonymous]

I’m scratching my head right now.

In the last year and a half I had a pretty good run honing my leadership ability with volunteers. I put in many long hours, and toward the end was able to retain volunteers for long projects, with a pretty high level of engagement.

The key? Proper alignment of skills with their native passions, skills and even self-interest. Proper understanding of the time they have available, matching work to that time available, and spending the time up front to really get to know their personal circumstances. Although there are always misfires, for the most part, it’s worked very well. Co-missioning (a term from Stephen R. Covey) was very important. Finding out what they see as their life’s purpose, or at least, what is most interesting to them at this point in their life, and then attach the work of the organization to it — that’s co-missioning and I think it’s hugely important…

In the church, and outside the church (even in my work recently), I see that many managers are totally oblivious about the power of harnessing the natural strengths of people. For example, the president of a non-profit (new in the position, but an experienced, retired manager) made a comment that floored me recently. She was bouncing ideas off me, and she wanted to tell the membership of the non-profit (all local business people) that serving in the non-profit is not about your bounce house rentals, your insurance policies, etecetera, its about service to the community — it’s about the mission of the non-profit. That’s why we call it a non-profit.

I was flabbergasted when she was contemplating that. Totally against everything I believe and know to be true in creating effective organizations. I WANT people to generate sales through the relationships they establish in the organization. I WANT to be able to throw business their way out of our budget, provided its granted on the basis of a fair, open and competitive process that makes the best use of our funds. This sustains commitment and adds value to the entire experience.

And in the church, as a leader, I would much rather call people to positions who WANT to be there because the calling speaks to their heart and their passions, and their desires for personal growth. I have learned that people who get placed in positions that don’t suit them waste a lot of leaders’ time. They can demotivate the people they are leading, and the people around them.

I would much prefer to leave positions vacant than have people in them that aren’t suitable. Now, reality needs to set in – there are times when you need people in certain positions — you can’t leave them vacant, and yes, that will take some flexibility and convincing of people if you don’t have a natural fit.

But the serve where I put you until I release you model in the Church is awful in my view.

Am I off-base here? In your experience, do leaders in the church seem to miss this this important need to overlap personality and interests with the work of the Church? Is it expecting too much of leaders to recognize that callings which speak to both organizational needs and individual needs leads to greater engagement, results, and fulfilment for everyone?

[Anonymous]

I think this is a huge problem in the church and a reason why many leave the church. It has played a minor role in my FC. For my whole life growing up, I believed that all callings were made by inspiration. Then DH served in a bishopric and told me how it actually works most of the time. Definitely not what we thought. He was also astonished at how many people say no to callings. That was something we never would have considered.

I’ve seen a situation recently where a sister had spent a year in a stake calling that has a huge learning curve. She was doing an amazing job and loved the calling. Then a leader in a ward auxiliary decided she needed to be serving with her instead, so the ward leaders talked the stake into releasing her. The ward calling could have been filled by just about anyone. This happened about 5 months ago, and she’s still upset about it and having a hard time in her new calling. The person they got to replace her in the stake position isn’t doing very well and isn’t well suited for it. In fact, she’s so stressed about it that it’s making existing health problems worse. The leaders justify their decision by saying it’s what the Lord wants and it will help people grow. I sure don’t see much growth happening. I think the sister in the ward presidency just likes the other sister and wanted to serve with her.

Like you SD, many of the people called to positions leave us scratching our heads.

[Anonymous]

That’s a good case in point. Although we discourage saying “no” to callings in the church, I now see Bpruc members extending mismatched callings as an opportunity.

It’s an opportunity to make the local leadership think about what they are doing and steer them toward more inspired decisions.

For example, as a career teacher, I get tapped to teach church classes all the time. To the point I’m tired of it. After 20 years in the classroom, I’d like to do something different. Next time they ask me to do that (or, be a ward clerical worker — clerk, finance), I think I’ll ask them searching questions about how they arrived at the conclusion this is the best way to serve the church and my own progress at the same time. If they pull the ‘inspiration’ card, I’d share what one of my ex-Bishops said. He said that its not always clear whether the idea to call a specific person to a specific calling is inspired. He said that he only believes its inspired if he extends the calling and the person accepts it.

I would tell them that in this case, I’m not convinced its the best thing, and quote the ex-Bishop’s phraseology above. Also, give them an implicit “lesson” (without being preachy or condescending) about co-missioning. And then, let them know where my passions and talents lie, and where I see myself growing in the church, and invite them to come up with something that speaks to my talents, passions and interests — that way I can give my best.

Thanks for the story above — great example.

[Anonymous]

I have mixed feelings about this issue, SD. On the one hand, I wholeheartedly agree with you that much time and resources is wasted when you don’t consider the skills and abilities that a member brings to a calling (you should see the revolving door in our ward’s primary). Yet…

Several years back, I was called to be the Sunday School teacher of the 12 and 13 year olds in our ward (about eight kids total). Many people love working with the youth…I never have (I never cared much for youth when I was young) and so I was not enthusiastic about the calling. And with good reason, I found out later that the class had a “reputation” and it was well-deserved. My lessons never seemed to go well. The young people acted either bored or silly most of the time (particularly the boys!) I can vividly remember after one bad lesson, going home rather than to priesthood meeting and swearing never to return. But I was a good Mormon boy, and kept it up. No, I don’t recall fasting or praying about it. Nobody stepped in with words of wisdom for me. The class behavior remained essentially the same but…something changed. I wish I could articulate what it was. I started seeing the kids in the class in a different way…two of the boys came from broken homes and had a lot of instability in their lives, another boy had parents who weren’t very active and he often came to Church alone, ditto for one of the girls. Maybe something helped me see through the bravado and foolishness and disruption to the somewhat desperate emotions at the core of these kids…or maybe I just got used to the barely restrained chaos that was our classroom. In any event, I stopped dreading it and started even enjoying it. My best moment was after the turn of the year when a couple of former students (both girls) came back to my class one Sunday because their new teacher “didn’t teach them anything.” There was value for me personally in doing something that I would NEVER have chosen to do nor really had the skills to do. There was suffering (most definitely) but there was also value.

So I’m on the fence on this one.

[Anonymous]

I can see pros and cons in this (surprised, anyone?), but I do believe, quite deeply, in church callings being an awkward avenue for individual growth more than a well-oiled machine. I feel LESS that way when it comes to teaching our teenagers, but I feel strongly about it in just about every other case.

[Anonymous]

There’s no easy answer is there? Even the personal story you related underscores one of the core problems with issuing callings. Try to match people with their strengths and you end up with a career teacher being assigned to teach classes in church for two decades. You also end up with about a dozen people wanting to be ward clerk and no one wanting to be the deacons quorum adviser.

Sorry, but this comment really stood out to me:

Quote:

I have learned that people who get placed in positions that don’t suit them waste a lot of leaders’ time. They can demotivate the people they are leading, and the people around them.

Waste a lot of the leader’s time? Demotivate the people around them? What about the person stuck in a calling that’s not a good fit for them? I’ve been in that position and let me tell you, I was cognizant of the fact that I was letting the leaders down, I was cognizant of the fact that I was letting the people around me down. As a result the only fruit of holding a calling that was a bad fit for me was a downward spiral that destroyed my sense of self worth. I know that most of that was my own personal brand of psychosis but I think other people may feel similarly at times.

I understand that there’s an organization to hold together and that effort requires work but what is the purpose of the church? Help the organization/leaders or help the individual?

Sorry, this is one of those issues that I’m apparently very opinionated about. IMO the problem of a bad fit calling isn’t:

[Anonymous]

Quote:

There’s a person out there that’s suffering because of their calling.

I agree, nibbler. That is the real issue.

The system of running the organization within the LDS Church is both its height and depth in many cases. It has amazing potential – toward both extremes. The vast majority of members live in the middle of those extremes, moving back and forth across the midpoint throughout their lives and occasionally experiencing one or both extremes.

I wish I knew how to avoid the negative extreme without eliminating the entire positive side of the spectrum, but I do agree that knowing strengths and trying to match them to callings in many situations is a good start.

[Anonymous]

I agree that that’s the real issue as well Nibbler. I have been in leadership positions and while it is frustrating to have someone not performing the duties of their calling because they can’t or won’t, I have tried to look at it from their perspective before. I have also looked at who else, they are “harming” though and sometimes that is also very important.

As a guy in his 50s with over 30 years in the church in a variety of callings I have become quite aware of those callings to which I am more suited and those I am not. I simply won’t accept those to which I am not (clerk, for instance). I do agree with SD’s point about trying to match abilities with callings. Part of his point, I think, is that even though he is obviously a good teacher (it’s his profession), he has other talents as well. Our ward used to have this sister who was good at playing the organ, and had a BYU degree in organ performance. She was, of course, the ward organist the entire time they lived here (over 10 years). There were other people who could (and did) play the organ, and I’m sure she had other talents – but we’ll never know because she was never given the chance to do anything else.

One other point I wanted to make. As a counselor in bishoprics and as a high councilor I know most callings are more of the desperation variety. I don’t think I’m bursting any bubbles here by saying so – I think most of us here understand that most callings are not really “inspired” and no direct revelation is received. BUT, some are inspired – it is rare, but it does happen. And some of those inspired callings are really a surprise to everyone. (I happen to be very close to a guy who was called to the high council after being inactive for 10 years, and it’s probably the only reason he’s active now – and I might add I think he does a great job.)

[Anonymous]

Quote:

(I happen to be very close to a guy who was called to the high council after being inactive for 10 years, and it’s probably the only reason he’s active now – and I might add I think he does a great job.)

😆 :thumbup:

[Anonymous]

nibbler wrote:

Waste a lot of the leader’s time? Demotivate the people around them? What about the person stuck in a calling that’s not a good fit for them? I’ve been in that position and let me tell you, I was cognizant of the fact that I was letting the leaders down, I was cognizant of the fact that I was letting the people around me down. As a result the only fruit of holding a calling that was a bad fit for me was a downward spiral that destroyed my sense of self worth. I know that most of that was my own personal brand of psychosis but I think other people may feel similarly at times.

I understand that there’s an organization to hold together and that effort requires work but what is the purpose of the church? Help the organization/leaders or help the individual?

I’m chuckling as I read this. Ray or anyone whose been on StayLDS for a while knows that one of my biggest gripes is that the church cares more about itself than it does the individual members. The one year waiting period, serve where placed until released model, pay tithing first in spite of your need for food and shelter, and the list goes on and on and on. If anyone could have written that snippet above Nibbler, it could have been me!!! I agree wholeheartedly with you. I’ve posted a ton a posts here about the individual versus the tribe. And in my view in the church, the tribe wins far more than the individual.

One case in point is that I spent a decade believing the church supported education because it enobled the spirit and blessed the educated person’s ability to earn a living. Then GBH mentioned in conference that he’s big on education because “it increases the members’ ability to serve in the Church”. I call it church ego-centrism. I’ve learned that it exists in all churches and organizations (based on my community service recently) but it’s a huge issue in the LDS church nonetheless. I am with you on this.

Quote:

The date you get called to a position goes into MLS. Every calling has an expiration date. The person holding the calling is made aware of the expiration date. At the beginning of the month the BP gets a notification of callings that are set to expire the next month. People that love their calling can opt for extensions.

This addresses one of the issues I had with the calling that was a bad fit. There’s a light at the end of the tunnel. I can hold on until December vs. when is this misery going to ever end? When considering my perspective keep in mind that I feel like people asking to be released is the exception to the rule. People “stuck” in a calling are silent sufferers. If a calling has a known time limit it becomes easier to stick out.

I agree with this. In the non-profit I’m involved with, you serve for a term. When your term is up, you can go for another term if you want, and the Board/membership wants you. If you quit midterm, someone takes over for the rest of the term.

I also think the Bishopric should have the option of extending a calling mid-term if the person wants (and releasing them from their existing calling), but if the member doesn’t want that new calling, they can stay with the old one until their term is up. I also think releases should happen within a specific period of time as well. I find the leaders will call you to positions and sustain you in lightening speed, but when you ask for a release, they drag their feet, sometimes for months and months and months. When a person is suffering, they leave the person there until they take their time finding someone to replace you. Meanwhile, you suffer. It would be better if they just released you and kept the position open until they found someone.

The other thing — the idea that if you release a president you have to release the counselors is also flawed, in my view. Why not release the president (when they ask for it) and let the counselors take over like we do in industry? The church is corporate enough, what’s wrong with adopting this approach, which balances the needs of individuals while also allowing the church program to continue on with at least some staffing until a replacement president is found?

[Anonymous]

I see multiple sides to this issue. Unfortunately I don’t See any way to avoid giving people unwanted callings a vast majority of the time. There are too many Primary teacher callings and not enough desirable callings.

This is an oversimplification but I thi nk that means leaders have to be careful to rotate.

[Anonymous]

We might not be able to keep everybody in a job they love, but we can change the structure of the whole system — the way Nibbler suggested. Terms are a great idea, I think.

Failing that, people just have to take matters into their own hands — they fake moves, they stop functioning, and they refuse callings.

[Anonymous]

SilentDawning wrote:

…And in the church, as a leader, I would much rather call people to positions who WANT to be there because the calling speaks to their heart and their passions, and their desires for personal growth. I have learned that people who get placed in positions that don’t suit them waste a lot of leaders’ time. They can demotivate the people they are leading, and the people around them…I would much prefer to leave positions vacant than have people in them that aren’t suitable. Now, reality needs to set in – there are times when you need people in certain positions — you can’t leave them vacant, and yes, that will take some flexibility and convincing of people if you don’t have a natural fit…But the serve where I put you until I release you model in the Church is awful in my view…Am I off-base here? In your experience, do leaders in the church seem to miss this this important need to overlap personality and interests with the work of the Church? Is it expecting too much of leaders to recognize that callings which speak to both organizational needs and individual needs leads to greater engagement, results, and fulfilment for everyone?

I don’t think Church callings have ever been primarily about trying to accomplish meaningful goals and letting people do what they really want to, are best at, etc. in an efficient way. To me it looks like they are just one more thing the Church does mostly because they can and because they have always done it that way (in recent memory). If more members were willing to say no to callings they weren’t comfortable with up front then the Church would probably be forced to reduce the number of callings, separate meetings, etc. but instead many members will just outwardly go along with them mostly because they feel like they are always supposed to do what they are asked to by Church leaders.

Personally I think callings mostly serve the purpose (intentionally or not) of increasing people’s level of investment in the Church and getting them to attend meetings when they don’t always feel like it by exploiting their sense of duty because they know other people are counting on them and expect them to be there to do their job. If the Church left callings vacant except for those that really want to do them, are especially good at them, etc. then they would probably need to find some other way to get people to show up or live with significantly decreased attendance because the meetings themselves are not necessarily very enjoyable to many members that will still attend mostly because they feel like they are obligated to do so for various reasons including their callings.

[Anonymous]

nibbler wrote:

The ultra orthodox member is going to believe that all callings they are asked to do are coming directly from the lord. If that member experiences problems they don’t immediately assume that the calling is simply a bad fit they beat themselves up because they view themselves as the problem. The calling was divine, it’s what the lord wants me to do; that side of the equation is unassailable. If things don’t work out… what did I do wrong? I know the lord wants me to do this but this is killing me. What can I do better? It can be a vicious cycle for some people.

I also see a different side to this in how other ward members react to the person who is struggling in a calling. People treat the person struggling as if there was something wrong with them, as if they are not righteous enough or working hard enough at what they are supposed to be doing. I have been in a calling where I was totally in over my head. I thought that I must need to learn how to do it, that is why the Lord put me in the calling (and later the BP said he heard me say I did not really like little kids so I should be the PP to learn to like them). Most of the people I went to for help did not want to offer any. Help usually was along the lines of just go pray about it, it is your calling so figure it out. I remember thinking once I am praying about it that is why I am asking you for advice on what to do. Eventually I went to the BP and said I just don’t think I can do this I need some help and I can’t find any. I got called to repentance for not having enough faith that God wanted me in this calling so I should be able to figure it out. It has really destroyed my self confidence, and I really no longer believe that BPs are inspired as often as we think they are.

I guess though I have a much different way of looking at other people that don’t seem to be excelling at their callings. I am frustrated with one of my kids primary teachers because it is making it so hard on my kid. But I do recognize that she is doing the best that she can, and me complaining to her or telling her she is doing a bad job is really not going to help anything. And as much as I don’t want to admit it my previous calling did teach me a lot about little kids, though I still don’t really like them (my kids being an exception). Maybe we need less pulpit pounding about serving and magnifying your calling and more real training on how to do them, or a mentor that can help us instead of guilt us.

[Anonymous]

Quote:

Maybe we need less pulpit pounding about serving and magnifying your calling and more real training on how to do them, or a mentor that can help us instead of guilt us.

I totally agree. The problem is that the people who might be able to help are struggling to to keep their heads above water in their own callings. There should be a calling to be on a committee to help people in their callings (with the proper training first, of course.

[Author]

Posts