Finding Talent: The Pool and a Plea

So who's going to be in the 'Talent Pool' then?

The report tells us that the programme is to offered to 'a small number of outstanding individuals'. These will be people who have consistently delivered high quality stuff over a 'sustained' period of time. Time in the pool is limited (five years being cited as average duration) and staying in the pool will be determined by making the grades and fulfilling the potential that got them in.

This is not as bad as many are viewing it because there's no point in trying to polish a brick but there is plenty of point in polishing something that is gold. There is also the fact that whilst there are many clergy out there who are trying (and some are very trying) there are few who are consistently hitting the spot and producing the goods and where this is seen (hopefully regardless of school and university background) it will be acted upon with an offer of time in the pool!

This is going to be something of a high inertial load with regard to the loading of the programme and the report envisages that once running there will be around thirty people a year effectively graduating and these will form an 'alumni' who will mentor, coach and act as role models. Once in the pool the training will be tailored and include a degree of inductive learning (which these courses always have). I am intrigued to see how those selected will be able to spend time in the pool and continue their day job.

What this report is really saying is that we have a number of people in senior and influential roles within the Church of England who are effectively not fit for purpose and this 'finding talent' exercise is about replacing them with people who understand structures, organisations and management; and can bring them to bear in the organisation. This has to be good, especially when things like 'conduct meaningful MDRs' appears on the menu because effective, helpful and meaningful they are not (if those I talk with are being honest - and I suspect they are)! 

The continuing their day job elements leads me to think that many of those who are loaded onto the course will not be parish clergy. My thinking for this is that those who are hidden within the cathedrals and diocesan and national church roles are those who can step back without major impact; something that is not the case for a minister in a parish setting, especially when they are effectively already overworked or highly engaged such that they will be noticed! Here begins my concerns that 'elitist' and 'jobs for the boys' will begin to bite.

The problems I can see (as a bear of extremely limited brain) are:

i. The Church is only as effective as the people on the ground and this means equipping and releasing laity and those engaged with the people around them (i.e. parochial clergy) but what I am seeing is a 'top down' and hierarchical structure that would be the pride of any corporate entity I have worked in or with. What this reports appears to be seeking is a Lee Iacocca or Steve Jobs at the top who is surrounded by an inner guard of alumni. A visionary and bold explorer who will be the subject of conversations and songs of praise from the workforce as they sit around the fire. BUT we already have this in the person of Jesus, the Christ.

ii. Agents of change are found not in the corporate headquarters but on the ground where the money and workers are few and the need is at its greatest - but this is also where the weaknesses of the CofE are best seen - for the pointy hats and the diocesan hordes often don't have a scooby about the real needs. My fear is that this report, albeit well intended, will do nothing to change things and will merely breed a bunch of experts who know how to turn of the lights and pull the plug on the ventilator maintaining the life of many churches!

iii. Working in an Urban Priority setting of Church, although we are broke and struggle to win souls, we have seen many come to faith and progress towards lay and ordained ministry over the past few years. People who will probably never enter the 'training pool' or be elevated to senior office but many of them will be soul winners and life changers nonetheless; and it is the pastorally engaged and able rather than the managerially enhanced who will save the CofE from extinction! What makes it worse is that some of those who are able and would serve the Church well will never be in to comfortable position of being able to swim in the pool and minister to those around them - and so elitism and preferment and the reward of being a 'have' becomes a reality.

iv. Having been engaged in Industrial Engineering, change management and real life delivery of customer-facing teams (management and building) I am aware that knowledge of processes and procedures is helpful but, at the point of delivery, quite useless if the conditions on the ground are not fully understood. Take for instance a soldier who has operational tours and the Army under his belt and progresses through to what we used to call a 'late entry' commission. These people combine ability, experience and subsequent training to make them superb senior officers (as many who are now in 'one str' roles so ably demonstrate). This is what we need - not giving the privileged and able more whilst those ho have little are given less.

v. Noting use of the term 'absolute standards' I would have hoped that rather than refer to academic veracity the standards would be those required of us as Christians, for I fear that I have read little to make me think we will be building a spiritual house for the bishops to reside in at this rate. What we are looking at is the pursuit of excellence; a place where performance and knowledge is all but what we need is flatter structures where we perhaps have business managers to do the nuts and bolts and bishops and others engaged in pastoring the pastors, preaching the word and being people of God. For, and I quote from the same ordinal the report quotes:

'Bishops are ordained to be shepherds of Christ’s flock and guardians of the faith of the apostles, proclaiming the Gospel of God’s kingdom and leading his people in mission...With the Shepherd’s love, they are to be merciful, but with firmness; to minister discipline, but with compassion.' Bishops are called to exercise authority 'to heal, not to hurt; to build up, not to destroy.'

Bishops are not called to be regional managers but pastors proclaiming the Gospel and, by visibly living it, to proclaim it and set others on fire for, through and for it so that the Gospel might be seen to be authoritative, attractive and compelling. They are to maintain order and discipline with humility, understanding and compassion - to 'heal and not hurt' to 'build up and not destroy' and to 'draw on experience, not books alone, to advise and model'

Now what's so blesséd difficult about that? Why are we looking at entering the corporate when what we need it to proclaim the spiritual for goodness sakes?

Now I know that I am a cleric with a limited grasp of things and consider myself fortunate to be considered worthy to wear a dog collar and to shepherd people analog the road to the cross. I have no ambitions to enter the pool because I know I'd drown as soon as enter it for and I have no axe to grind because I'm a shepherd, not a woodcutter.

But as much as I applaud the 'Finding Talent' report for trying to address the woeful managerial, pastoral, organisational and (sadly) spiritual elements of those in senior ministry - I think we are in danger of exchanging our priestly birthright for a mess of management and business modelled pottage.

I submit this as my thinking with due respect for my senior clergy colleagues - for I am not trying to hit out at them - and in Christian love for the church of which I am privileged to serve.

It's rough and scribbled on the hoof - done between carol services, communions, Christingles and counselling - it's probably full of typos and grammatical collisions as edits conspire to add to the confusion that is me. But it is honest and hopeful;.

May God bless us all :-)

C of E to groom talent for top jobs: Contributing to the Common Good

My first thought was the 'contributing to the Common Good' was about people and engagement not politics and that this shows how much those who produce such stuff have missed the mark. What I think we are seeing in Project: Finding Talent seems to be more about becoming a secular and political organisation rather than an engaged and authoritative spiritual body. Regarding the report as a whole, it's nice to see a few Bible references thrown in and it's great to use a bit of Christianspeak but in the final analysis I am finding my support (which still exists) just a little cooler as I see nothing different in what is on offer here to the two year course I had to undertake to become an Industrial Engineer and Management Consultant type person.*

I have to ask myself whether this is really an area we need to be sending our senior people (and those in the pool for preferment) to 'high quality academic institutions' to learn. After all, and I know I'm being naive, this is something that those who are 'Church' should already know something about.
Contributing to the common good is who we are, isn't it? If it is merely about politics then I have to offer the thought that if they haven't learnt about politics by now it's all probably just a little too late to start doing in with them now (did I mention £2m?) isn't it?

There are a number of ways in which we should be doing this:

Serving the community directly through engagement with them in the shape of Foodbanks, care on the streets, mental health, addiction, unemployment, homelessness and so many other provisions of support, advice and care.

Being engaged in political parties where we bring the Christian voice to bear and by our presence (a true 'presence' ministry) bring about cohesion and change - which is where I wish we hadn't decided merely to remove ourselves from some political groups rather than engage and encounter them from within. After all, who listens to those outside. Isn't that what Jesus taught us to do - get involved and into relationship?

Getting in to politics at local, national and European levels - wouldn't it be nice to find more ground level Christians in politics where they could be an influence. After all, great to teach the uberchristians all this stuff but what the hey, a bishop speaks on something and the majority outside of the church merely shrug and generally ignore (sorry Justin, my non-christian friends think you're a good guy but generally ignore you because you are 'pontificating' and because you're being a 'do gooder' - actually doing good speaks lasting and louder words).

What I would have preferred to see here is those who are in senior posts encouraging those below them to plan and communicate and publicise and inform and create a warm feeling with those who engage with vitriol and bile against the Church.

I would like less indulgence and more full-on engagement from the people at the top (yes, know you're busy, you're supposed to be!) and less of the naff photo opportunities and toepointingly awful engagements and pronouncements that so often grace the media (local and national).

The 'common good' for me is to be found in the Acts church where we lived in our homes, met in the temple and all that stuff - it is seen in Malachi where we bring ALL of our tithe into the storehouse so that none might go without, and it is seen in the pouring of something precious over the feet of Jesus, the Christ (//) - and that precious oil is discipleship, obedience, worship, sacrifice, service, and prayer.

Not rocket science, is it?

* I will post the outlines of the three taught modules in the next blog so we can see :-)

C of E to groom talent for top jobs: Leading Growth

Now this part of the report: 'Talent Management for Future Leaders and Leadership Development for Bishops and Deans: A new approach'  had, to be perfectly honest, me spitting feathers! The training in 'Leading the Church for growth'  with what will be case studies, models and examining what is to be considered  'best practice' is great. My problem with this is that we don't need to send our bishops, Deans, Archdemons and others off to academic institutions, no spree, what we need is for them to have ALL taken part in Mission Shaped Ministry training!

The lack of support and encouragement for this amazingly vital and valid course from those who should be promoting it and shouting about what it gave them (which of course because they haven't done it they can't - and if it doesn't come from the upper echelons then the laity (of which we are all part) won't engage with it either).

What is sown spiritually by the leadership comes to pass in the people they lead!

(Vic's rule)

This is why so many in the pews are so taken up with numbers, and especially

How much money we have to pay for what we have! 

How many people we have so that we can be seen to be valid!

The report lends an air of spiritual validity to itself because it speaks of 'spiritual and numerical growth' but to get numbers we need to be appealing and attractive - and generally we are not (for a number of reasons which we will note and pass by for now). That said Justin Welby is doing stuff to gain some profile and make waves (more about that in the next blog entry) and Church is being seen to be engaged and active

BUT

What we need is to be a more prayerful bunch and this needs to come from the top. If people see their leaders praying then they will pray with them and continue when they are on their own.

We need to be reading our Bibles and acting as if what we have before us is holy writ and not some 'pick and mix' offering where that which allows us to 'be happy' and allows us to justify our actions, attitudes and lifestyles is taken up and the other stuff consigned to the 'no longer valid - that was for when the people weren't as smart as us!' bin.

We will be seeing growth when the people who call themselves Christian are committed and engaged and educated and equipped and released - those who have made it to the top floor are generally Oxbridge and educated and generally well-informed - what we need is good communication skills and good news (I'm sure I've read about the 'Good News' somewhere) and positive experiences.

We need those who are struggling to be come alongside and helped and those who are doing stuff that works to share it in their deaneries and Churches Together groups and to be willing to say that things aren't great and accept help and bless fresh expressions and plants from others (as long as they don't steal my sheep that is ;-) ).

I'm still applauding the reports aims but feel the 'growth' area could end up being about money and numbers - because that's what academic business models do (I know, I been there and remember visiting a company held up as an exemplar of great management and shrewd business modelling - a year later it had folded owing millions!).

We need to use organisations theory (that's Handy ;-) ) and to understand what works rather than reinvent the wheel when we don't have the momentum to try and fail for ourselves. The report is right in so many ways and yet in this area (leading growth) there is a danger that we might leave the spiritual main line and head off along the down the business branch line to corporate city.

I have to say that were the Church of England to invest £2m in making its grassroots ministers and ministry more effective there might be more to celebrate but instead we're going to invest in those in whom we have already invested much already (I assume we did send them to college and probably, because we want 'young' ordinands this means more academic laurels were also on the menu) - and the  'meritocracy' that we are to develop means that it will be the 'haves' who find themselves having even more. Perhaps spending it on those who have already been flagged up and 'needy' in MDRs* would yield something more with regard to spiritual (and numeric) growth and be a motivator that pays dividends for the Church across the board (and denominations).

Just a thought - sorry this has been a soapbox splurge, I just get too passionate :-)

* MDR - Ministry Development Review

C of E to groom talent for top jobs: Reshaping and reinventing ministry

Some random jottings on the 'Future leaders' Report - this is destined to but the first of a few of these I'm sure as I've only managed to get one area covered. Please feel free to comment (and criticise):

The first part of the report deals with training up the senior staff and my first response is that this would not be a bad thing. That said. I do think there is a potential problem in the 'churchification' of management terms, theories and practice. After all, as much as many people will rant and rage and then despair at the use of the secular, the rebranding into Christianspeak will surely cause even more sadness. Let's call a spade a spade and get on with using it to create solutions, establish good practice, and clear away the dross that has hampered the process - but let us not forget that first and foremost we are a people of prayer and live by faith in Jesus, the Christ.

Under the heading of  'Reshaping ministry'' - where development of gifts and abilities of God's people is the intended outcome (lay and ordained); the ministry of equipping, training and releasing that has been the hallmark of Church since Church began. Here we need training needs analysis (TNA) and motivation skills, coaching and mentoring to collide with an understanding of ministry as seen in Jesus (must never lose sight of the fact that doing what He does is pivotal) and others in the Bible (champ and chump). We need motivators and people so full of passion that they are a contagion  against which the world has no cure. We need people so on fire for Christ that others want to listen, follow and emulate them - and this is Jesus! Not job design, renumeration and work quantification (I know, I've done them in a previous life).

Elton Mayo and Freddy Herzberg are heroes of mine and yet whilst they motivated and understood how to get people to be productive, neither of them died on a cross for me! I can seek to express myself because all other needs are satisfied or understand that in being creative I am mirroring the Father - and all of the hierarchy of needs is met such that I am set free to be me.

What we need to do is communicate what 'baptismal calling' is all about and assist people to recognise and fulfil that calling in their own lives.

Doing management courses and gaining bits of paper taught me much. Some of it was even useful - all of it was interesting. The real thing that taught me was doing the job and falling over but still getting what needed to be done, done. The theory was great but I wasn't in Hawthorn and I wasn't in that same culture or time scale - but I was with people and the positive strokes regarding engagement and releasing and enhancing ministry were delivered by a scourge to the Christ's back!

I've been an Industrial Engineer and have reorganised and quantified and revised and devised much and yet at the end of the day it came down to relationship and engagement - not the models or case studies of others. The lectures and syndicates and reading added to my arsenal, but at the end of the day it ws about engagement - how very Christlike is that?
 Don't misunderstand me, I am not against the training of senior staff engaging in ways of Reshaping Ministry,  I merely want them to be informed, made aware and enabled rather than educated! I want them to be disciples and to make disciples who want to make disciples. This is how we 'reshape ministry' - not through one dimensional ministry reviews and the images captured in broken looking glasses.

We do need to encourage thinking that calls senior staff to leave their ivory pulpits and safe, yet diminishing, diocesan fortresses and understand what is needed and what might bring about positive change. Recognising the need to move away from the well meaning amateur, that bumbling and slightly inept cleric we know so well, is a positive move but must not develop academic rigour as a replacement for the inspiration of God's Holy Spirit and prayer. It would be easy to create God in a management image and exchange calling and inspiration of the Holy Spirit for a mess of management potage.

We need to create in our senior staff enigmas akin to investment accountants who are willing to move away from the traditional safety of conservative thinking to fund new businesses and new models of thinking. Spiritual venture capitalists who push back the boundaries and regain the ground we have lost through slow responses and incompetence; people who release the laity because that's what we should be doing rather than need to be doing because we are broke; people who engage in investing in clergy and projects that are doing the stuff rather than frustrate them with meaningless applications of management such as the dreadful MDR process (is is any wonder that some people will mistrust the 'management and business skills promise of this report after their MDR experience?)?

A plea: 
To those outside the report - Don't throw this report in the bin or reject it as secular but accentuate the positives and call for the church to build on them. 

To those with the power - Don't engage in churchification but use management tools where they are helpful and productive alongside models of Church and opportunities for prayer without trying to con us they are 'spiritual' - the being spiritual comes by being prudent and using all before us to support and extend our ministry.

We need to applaud this attempt to make us more effective and seek change and modification rather than it's demise as gleaning reveals it to be, like the Curate's egg, not all bad!

Surprised? I am :-)

C of E to groom talent for top jobs (2)

I began the first post in this series noting that when this item appeared in the Church Times the response from some (now many) of those with whom I engage was, 'No change there then!' The reason for this was that it seems one of the qualifications for the 'top jobs' was having attendance a good school and Oxbridge.

The second part of the (as yet unpublished) report: 'Talent Management for Future Leaders and Leadership Development for Bishops and Deans: A new approach' is perhaps a little more unsettling as it not only extends the people who receive training under its recommendations but engages with them up to five years before appointment.

What, Who and When?
The report recommends that training so that the people are 'fit for role' (my term) is offered to those who are to be be considered potential  bishops, deans, archdeacons, incumbents of large churches and heads of mission societies - takes place before appointment. Up to five years before appointment.

It is recommended that a 'talent pool' (their term) of up to one hundred and fifty 'high-potential individuals' is established. The pool members will then undergo two years of 'intensive, modular training' after which they will join senior staff teams to learn 'how to run a diocese' and undertake projects of relevance to the national church. During the training, pool members will be assessed and grouped into four categories:

Early promise

Exceptional potential

Ready to be promoted

Potential not reached: Asked to leave the pool!

Those who are ready to roll will have their names passed to appointing committees and then, ignoring all the applause, the job will be regarded as having been a good'un.

Better still, pool members will form an 'alumni network' who apart from supporting each other (no there aren't any handshakes Bob!) will also act as mentors and coaches for future leaders.

The goals of the report in a nutshell:

Contributing to the Common Good, in essence involvement in local and national politics;

Reshaping ministry, i.e. developing the gifts of lay and ordained people;

Leading the Church for growth, implementing best practice for spiritual and numerical growth.

All great goals - no complaints with them at all.

It's Urgent!
Here's a quote from the report which says it all:

'So often in the face of real opportunity, many organisations, including the Church, do too little too late. We 'get there late,' as it were. Our commitment is to 'get there early,' while there is still time for imaginative response, agility, and a range of possibilities."

Hopefully I have presented a true and balanced account of the report (which I understand will be out in early January) - the third post in this series will be my (and hopefully some of your your) reflections.

Pax

C of E to groom talent for top jobs (1)

When this 'news' item appeared in the Church Times the response from those I engage with was, 'No change there then!' For despite the apparently egalitarian nature of ministry, the reality is that amongst the qualifications for the 'top jobs', attendance of a good school and Oxbridge feature large.

Paul Handley's article on the as yet unpublished report: Talent Management for Future Leaders and Leadership Development for Bishops and Deans: A new approach, tells me that it promises a 'culture change for the leadership of the Church' as it seeks to train up and develop the senior staff by means of a mandatory university level management training programme with modules like:

Building healthy organisations,

Leading growth, and

Reinventing the ministry.

Being church the training will be supported by theological reflection, prayer, and 'a spiritual retreat' (yeeha!).

Having done courses such a these in formal settings during the course of my previous work life, and having experienced senior church staff in action*, I have to say that this might not be a bad thing. Exposure to Herzburg, Maslow and Mayo might just transform some of the exceedingly nice (yet just a little inept) people in the top echelons of Church (and I'm sure they know who they are).

Thinking back to the hours spent in seminars reading case studies and in syndicates refining skills that shaped my thinking and honed skills that were never fully engaged with by the organisation - as good as it all sounds (and would be) - there is a need for more than change within the senior management's skill set; but it is a start and a such should be applauded.

Then comes something which might be regarded by some as something a little less positive - but I won't let that tarnish this piece so will save it for another post in the 'talent' series of which this is but 'part the first'

* and inaction!