Regarding High Expectations

[Anonymous]

Silentdawning wrote:

I think it’s been the belief of some people, notably, Ray, and perhaps others, that one of my problems with activity have been unrealistic expectations of the leaders and perhaps others in the church. I agree that I do have high expectations. And through this whole disaffection and coping process, I have learned that somewhere along the line, I developed very high expectations of how leaders and certain members should “behave” in our Church. I have realized these high expectations have their genesis in three facts:

1) That the church makes claims that are far above other institutions — its divine commission, Christ at its head, the only true church, and leaders who will never lead us astray, calls and decisions made by inspiration, and tendencies toward a top-down leadership style.

With those facts in hand, I guess it has seemed reasonable to me that the behavior of such an organization should be far above what I see in non-LDS organizations. There should be kindness, love, humility that is not only part of leaders’ personalities, but embedded in policy and practice. In that respect, I have been let down. Sure it exists in certain pockets, but there are startling policies and practices which violate this expectation in spectacular ways. This has been hard to accept.

2) The church demands a lot from us. With high expectations of me personally, I have developed the attitude that the church itself should meet high expectations from myself. I guess I started believing that a church that expects me to give just about everything I have in terms of discretionary income,free time, and self-actualization goals, should give back in ways consistent with its espoused principles. And my life experience, which I know is unique, has revealed this to be a big letdown at Church.

3) I demand a lot from myself, so I guess I expect a lot from others.

Silentdawning wrote:

So, on to the non-profit and the reconciliation of high expectations and my personal commitment to an organization.

Here are the results. I vetted three people for a demanding event recently, on a large scale. All three worked out to my satisfaction. Someone else vetted two people, and they quit — acting like many volunteers that have NOT met expectations. The ones I vetted met expectations enough that I feel very good about them. Further, we raised 14 volunteers for the day of the event. 13 confirmed three days before, 1 quitting due to a mistake I made in contacting her by text at a late hour. I learned on that one — there is etiquette with texting given audible notifications for texts on phones by people’s bedsides.

Here is the formula I am refining

1. Hurdles for volunteers who want to be involved. They have to invest time in watching YouTube presentations about the organization, expectations for their time, and a structured interview and online survey. They also make certain commitments. Plus they have to have formal education in the area they are serving. Many volunteers never make it through that process — which, by the way, requires little investment from myself during the video-watching and survey-taking phases.

2. We co-mission. I WANT volunteers to have reasons that border on naked self-interest for serving. This can include — a title, a mentor, a letter of reference, and a positive (or negative) report to career services. Most of these people are students or alumni of universities — career changers wanting a title and experience for their resume as they reinvent themselves so we recruit from honor societies at local universities. Some have 20 years of industry experience and want to break into teaching. I bring them into my classroom and mentor and train them in how to be a teacher. Plus they get an “in” with the university. In short, we overlap organizational needs with individual needs. Unlike what I have seen in our church.

3. Service is short-term — and for a term. Usually about 2 to 4 months. At the end, they can quit or renew for another term. All of the three people I vetted for the last event renewed for another term. The two that quit, we actually kind of fired, really…in our church, leaders conscript us for as long as they think they need us. My approach puts control back into the volunteer’s hands after they finish their short term.

4. Casual volunteers (such as day-of volunteers) must register at a website if they want to serve. They do a surveymonkey survey that captures their age, contact information, and where they might like to serve. We invited a ton of people and as I said, got a a 100% show rate, and excellent performance from all volunteers, it was a raging success. I was completely satisfied with their performance.

Silentdawning wrote:

So, the combination of selection procedures that filter out uncommitted people, recruiting well-educated people with expertise in their field, short term assignments, co-missioning, and overlapping organizational and volunteer interests has shown promise for an organization where I can work with volunteers, yet have high expectations at the same time.

It took me three years to get here, but I am in a happy place, Ray..(and anyone else who wants to comment)

[Anonymous]

I think I have some pretty low expectations at this point. I really do not expect much from church members and I am happy with them not expecting too much from me.

There were some experiences with a particular bishop that I feel helped to lower my sense of expectation.

I also am aware that sometimes the ward community can be wonderful – like a family for some that are “all-in.” I do not feel that I can be all-in. I therefore content myself with managing expectations.

I am also involved in several volunteer organizations and can see the wisdom of SD’s approach.

[Anonymous]

Roy wrote:

I think I have some pretty low expectations at this point. I really do not expect much from church members and I am happy with them not expecting too much from me.

That was where I settled originally, but experience has taught me there is a better way.

At their core, people are who they are. Just as Ray once said “If you want me [Ray] to serve in this position, you get ME [Ray]”.

Some people are just not into missionary work. Others are just not into children/Primary. They might learn something, or grow a bit from the experience, but it’s better for them, and better for the organization as a whole if they serve in areas they are ON FIRE. And the church has no real program for keeping that fire alive after 30 years of Sacrament meeting formats, 30 years of callings for women in the same few callings, and for men in a limited, but broader range of callings.

I taught a lesson this a while ago. I had everyone complete an anonymous survey in which they indicated how they most like to serve in a missionary capacity:

a) Designing the overall strategy for missionary work (strategic thinking)

b) Inviting people to take the discussions (influencing others)

c) Implementing the overall strategy, but not making missionary invitations (such as holding activities that attract non-members, marketing the activities internally, putting together schedules of who to visit — operational stuff).

d) Building relationships with non-members, but not asking them to take discussions.

In our particular Ward, there was overwhelming support for d). Only 2 people wanted to do b). A couple retired managers were very interested in a), and there were a handful of people willing to do c).

This to me, was the missionary program of the HP group. The managers would design the program, collaboratively with the quorum and the executers. This would involve a heavy relationship-building aspect to it that most members could participate in actively. Activities would occur by the doers.executers in the Ward. Anyone who seemed ready to take discussions would get an invitation from the Inviters.

They were actually very interested in the concept of program — even though not even conceived. That fact that it showed respect for their native talents and passions, was the starting point.

We can do MUCH better at that in our church — when you can’t even tell your Bishop where you’d like to serve, then we really do have a problem. Particularly in the new context of leadership and management where people EXPECT more than a dictatorial, top-down style of leadership.

[Anonymous]

Just to be clear, I don’t think YOU have a unique problem with unrealistic expectations as I think that it is woven too much into our culture, which rubs off naturally on many, many members.

I gave up those expectations at a very young age, when I realized I thought most people I loved and respected greatly misunderstood things that seemed obvious to me. That started at the age of seven, when I read the Book of Mormon on my own for the first time, and it hasn’t stopped in more than 40 years since then. I honor and sustain people in callings of responsibility, and I love what I understand of Mormon theology (not everything that is taught, generally), but I have no expectations of anyone when it comes to agreeing with them on anything. I believe in the BofM concept of being “agents unto ourselves”, while being a member of my own religious group / tribe and choosing to believe / have faith in its goodness and “rightness” for me and my family.

[Anonymous]

Old-Timer wrote:

Just to be clear, I don’t think YOU have a unique problem with unrealistic expectations as I think that it is woven too much into our culture, which rubs off naturally on many, many members

First, I’m glad you dealt with high expectations a long time ago (like roy). It sounds like your high expectations were in the area of agreeing on/or taking away the same understanding of scripture and theology. The fact that you’ve dealt with that is great.

I actually accepted that I have high expectations, and that these expectations are part of my problem with activity in the LDS church — based on feedback at this site a while ago. Higher than the average person. So, it’s nice you don’t think I have a problem with it. Problem or not, I do have them in the church. And to a much lesser extent in community-based, non-LDS Church situations.

Here is my logic — the church expects the world from me — most of my disposable income, and most of my free time. They expect me to devote time to serving organizational interests that are not in line with my passions. Further, they claim to have a divine commission, a corner on salvation for me and my family, and promise happiness by following their textbook. Yet, the church experience has been a Major letdown in so many ways, including the church’s inability to live up to its own principles at It has even been a trigger for depression many times. As one of my ethics professors told me, when you say you are ethical in business, you become a target for everyone who assesses whether you are living up to your principles. A church that expects so much from me, AND does not appear to live up to its own principles and promises, is such a “target” (although I don’t see myself as actively LOOKING for inconsistencies — they just hit me in the face earlier in life).

So, I invite anyone to uncover the flaw in my thinking. I won’t make it a line by line debate, but I would be interested in hearing why I should not have high expectations of the leaders, the policies and the culture, and should not expect a certain amount of reciprocity after I make huge sacrifices for the organization and the religion.

I will say this — I know the scripture in King Benjamin’s discourse that says we are always indebted to God. No matter how much we give, or what we do, we are always indebted to him. There is nothing we can do about that….fine…but where it breaks down for me is the idea that the church and its leaders are a mirror image of God. I don’t feel the same kind of indebtedness to the church as I might feel to God.

Comments welcome. This issue, although relevant to me, is not a hot button for me, (unlike other issues like the one year waiting period) as I have found a way of serving in ways that mitigate the negative effects of high expectations of others in the community. But I find the subject interesting and something that may help when I return to church when our new building is ready.

SD

[Anonymous]

Yep, the central issue is that the Church (any church or religion) and its leaders is not a mirror of God – or even close to it. We all see through a glass, darkly.

My early epiphany about differences of opinion was not just theological or doctrinal. It helped me understand that there is nothing inherent in a church position or title that magically makes anyone’s view, interpretation or opinion more correct or divine than anyone else’s understanding. It helped me be comfortable applying the same understanding to global leaders, even prophets and apostles. That expansion didn’t happen consciously at such a young age, but it was a direct result of what I learned so young – especially as I read differing opinions and doctrinal statements from apostles and Church Presidents.

I have high expectations of church leaders in some ways, but they are more in the nature of believing that they are honorable people doing the best they can and sincerely trying to do the right thing – even when I think they are wrong in some things they say and do. I have essentially no expectations that they will be uniquely insightful into anything outside of the narrow confines of their testimonies relative to their callings, and I am totally fine with that limitation as part of being an apostle or local church leader.

[Anonymous]

A few years back, I received a sweet note for my RSP. She talked about some of my strengths and how much she appreciated working with me. I was really touched. The next time I saw her, I mentioned how much the note meant to me. She looked at me with a blank look, paused, laughed, and then told me, “Oh you know how it is, I was just trying to get notes out to everyone who hadn’t been VT last month.” I suddenly realized that she hadn’t meant anything she had written. She had been focused on 100% VT results. I had been a name on a list of sisters who needed to be contacted that month. The note was meaningless. She had just been going through the motions.

Those are the leaders that used to break my heart. They do the job, but for the wrong reasons.

She did a great job. She checked the lists and did what needed to be done, but there wasn’t a lot of love,care, or concern involved.

I used to hold LDS leaders to a higher standard of living and caring for others. That RSP experience made me re-think my standards. The RSP wasn’t a bad person; she was a task-oriented person. Not everyone is wired to care.

Leadership Roulette

[Anonymous]

Ouch. You are right she wasn’t a bad person, but she very well could have had many good traits and strengths – just overwhelmed with the calling. My wife has been RSP a few times and I have to say I can tell when when she is and isn’t RSP. She is WAY stressed when she is RSP. I came close to going and asking her to be released one time as it was really damaging our marriage. Looking back now I should as I think it would have sent her (yet another) message about the state of our marriage.

I am a guy and I am very guarded when someone uses flattering words. “Words are cheap” rings true to me. By default I am very defensive and almost instinctual assume manipulation/flattery with only a few exceptions – maybe about 4 people if I think about it for a second. As a manager I have had to learn to give more praise without overdoing it as other types of people like to hear kind things as it motivates them.

[Anonymous]

I agree with most of what SD said in the original post. However, I would maintain that the Church has have high standards for itself, if we mean by “the Church” the leaders of that organization—General Authorities and other leaders. I would imagine that they are all driven, ambitious individuals with high standards for themselves as well as a high level of ability (most being successful in their careers before being called….ever hear of an GA who was unemployed before his call?) For these people, work and success are inextricably entwined and such a natural part of who they are that they can’t imagine anything different. This kind of drive obviously trickles down in many different ways.

I’ll give you a small trivial example. A few years ago, I had the occasion in one week to visit the BYU-Idaho campus and the Utah State University campus (both fine institutions with somewhat different missions). I was certainly impressed with the BYUI campus: the campus was clean, the buildings were shiny, the grounds well-kept and managed. It was a lovely place with “not a symbolic hair” out of place. The USU campus was a little different. It was a very nice campus with some lovely grounds and buildings but not quite as maintained. There were a few places where weeds hadn’t been pulled, students had placed posters on doors and windows advertising activities and some of these were tattered, some of the buildings looked their age. It was by no means rundown but it was just ever so slightly ragged around the edges.

I kind of preferred the USU campus. I felt like there ” important academic things were happening.” At BYU-Idaho, it felt like the work was focused on “let’s look our best ” It was like the difference between two Sunday School teachers: one, who works at getting the lesson done but perhaps forgets to shave in his hurry to get the lesson prepared and, the other, one who grooms himself carefully at the expense of preparing the lesson. Kind of style without substance. Now I don’t mean to imply that BYUI is not a great institution nor that USU is perfect in every way. Just trying to illustrate a feeling you get when certain kinds of expectations dominate the organizational structure.

[Anonymous]

Quote:

Gerald wrote: “I kind of preferred the USU campus. I felt like there ” important academic things were happening.” At BYU-Idaho, it felt like the work was focused on “let’s look our best ” It was like the difference between two Sunday School teachers: one, who works at getting the lesson done but perhaps forgets to shave in his hurry to get the lesson prepared and, the other, one who grooms himself carefully at the expense of preparing the lesson. Kind of style without substance. Now I don’t mean to imply that BYUI is not a great institution nor that USU is perfect in every way. Just trying to illustrate a feeling you get when certain kinds of expectations dominate the organizational structure.”

Gerald, you nailed it.

The importance of looking photo-worthy while serving has become — too often — more important than the serving. Image has become too important.

[Anonymous]

I can just see Billy Crystal saying, “remember dah-ling, it is always better to look good than to be good”. If you are not old enough or never watched SNL then you won’t get that reference

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Anonymous]

Quote:

. I can just see Billy Crystal saying, “remember dah-ling, it is always better to look good than to be good”. If you are not old enough or never watched SNL then you won’t get that reference

Oh oh. I got the reference!

[Anonymous]

I guess everyone else is in a different domain than I am on this. The discussion seems to focus on high expectations for outward appearances while there are sometimes a lack of inner passion or sincerity. I see the unmet expectations as in the form of not living up to its own principles. I realize that temporal organizations have that problem. But they don’t make massive truth claims like the LDS church. So, they get a pass as mere strivers. But our church claims to have a divine commission and demands a lot from its members. It’s claims are very strong as a moral and ethical organization. So where much is given much is required.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

[Anonymous]

SilentDawning wrote:

I guess everyone else is in a different domain than I am on this. The discussion seems to focus on high expectations for outward appearances while there are sometimes a lack of inner passion or sincerity. I see the unmet expectations as in the form of not living up to its own principles. I realize that temporal organizations have that problem. But they don’t make massive truth claims like the LDS church. So, they get a pass as mere strivers. But our church claims to have a divine commission and demands a lot from its members. It’s claims are very strong as a moral and ethical organization. So where much is given much is required.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

Are you saying high expectations for your interactions with the members or high expectations for the church in general? If members, then it is a mixed bag obviously with a trend that skews towards some people being fake or doing the right thing out of a sense of duty rather than sincere concern. If church itself then I might take this into a discussion of how the church seems to be silent on many real issues that affect humanity (choosing instead to largely preach to the choir).

[Anonymous]

At this point I expect about as much from the church as the effort I put in. Which is next to nothing

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Author]

Posts