Finding Talent: The Modules

The report tells us that the means by which training is to be delivered is a 'modular development programme' undertaken over a period of 12-18 months consisting of three modules which are (and I quote directly here):


Module One - Building Healthy Organisations.
In preparation for this module, learners will be asked to work through a suite of on-line tools that will measure the effectiveness of the team they lead. They will also be asked to participate in a 360 degree feedback exercise. The module will start by exploring the current context of the Church and the challenges and opportunities that face the organisation now and in the future. The spiritual focus of the programme will be underlined. Ecclesiology and perspectives from different traditions in the Church will be included. The ‘healthy organisation’ will be defined as the foundation for the success of the Church in the future. Learners will work on their team and individual 360 feedback reports and construct action plans around their development needs.

Time will be spent on approaches to change management and how to lead complex decentralised organisations through change. Conflict and coaching support for difficult conversations will be included. External perspectives will be supplied from organisations like the National Trust, BBC, NHS Health Trusts and the Armed Services. The module will conclude with examining the importance of measurement and controls, including an overview of financial and other measurement tools and techniques. Refresher and updated material will be offered to cover safeguarding and legal issues. Each cohort will be divided into action learning sets and these sets will agree development tasks focused on the healthy organisation for completion before the second module. The action learning sets will also form the basis for prayer and spiritual reflection between each module.

Module Two - Leading Growth.
This module will look at the challenges and opportunities presented by the intent to grow the Church. As course preparation, learners will be asked to review any planning material for their diocese and come prepared to discuss and share plans. The module will open with an exploration of growth, why evangelism is so important for the future of the Church and will examine the importance of planning for growth. The module will aim to offer peer reviews of existing diocesan plans and assistance to design and implement a plan where none exists. Work on team effectiveness from the first module will be revisited to examine in more detail the importance of building the right partnership between lay and ordained ministries. A field trip will be organised so the cohort can experience personally a part of the Church that is experiencing growth and this will lead to sessions sharing best practice and looking at successful initiatives, including ecumenical perspectives. The module will conclude with action learning sets agreeing development tasks focused on evangelism and growth, for completion before the third module. Once again the action learning set will be the basis for prayer and spiritual reflection.

Module Three - Re-inventing the Ministry.
The final module will focus on the capabilities required from senior leaders to improve talent management in the Church. As preparation, each learner will be asked to review the current status of MDRs in their diocese and review their senior staff meetings from the perspective of how it could be better used to identify talented individuals. This module will help participants to both conduct and receive a MDR and will work on best practice. The module will include further work on developing coaching and mentoring skills. The new approach to identifying talent within the Church will be highlighted, together with the key role of senior clergy within the process. The module will conclude with sharing best practice in ministerial development, using case studies both from lay and ordained ministries.

This is nothing more than the basic management courses that would elsewhere lead to a DMS* type qualification which with the addition of communications, marketing and financial papers would form at its highest level an MBA. What is sad (from where I recline) is that these skills should have inductively been added to the portfolio of anyone who has been around in the real world of management and are no great shakes at all. So what;s the fuss about with those who had texted and mailed to tell me it's 'elitist' - for what's on offer here is merely bread and butter skills (for £2m - have I mentioned this - not sure we're getting value for money or even looking at the right people to deliver the training to either!).

The 'healthy organisation' is something that should be featuring large in today's organisation and yet, if those I engage with are being honest, they don't appear to feature even barely in some places! Growth as a learned and transferable reality is also great fun for, wearing my missioner hat, I don't find that replication comes through ageing what is seen any more than it comes by buying into to 'the only effective ± ten years of the minister's age' theory!

Re-inventing the ministry is a little bit insulting. Insulting because it's not the ministry that need 're-inventing' it is the way that senior church people use the talent that already exists - and this is about more than 'releasing the laity' (also known as 'skint so can't afford to pay') and MDR (Major Drain on Resources?) as an exercise that keeps blue riband clergy frustrated and leaves the hopeless and hapless clergy hopeless too.

But here are the words, read them for yourself and see that there's nothing special here - that's going to be the people they pick perhaps?




*Diploma in Management Studies

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!