Report of Committee on Ministry
Report of the Committee on MinistryCONGREGATIONAL ASSESSMENT PROCESS
One of the roles of the Committee on Ministry is to assess the ministry of the church as a whole – not just the minister. With the Board of Trustee’s guidance, we decided to use the Appreciative Inquiry process focusing on three areas – spirituality, membership, and stewardship. Sue and Howard Lamb developed five questions to be asked during small group sessions – each group led by a facilitator, and responses recorded by a notetaker.
The questions were:
1) What are the ways in which MVUC contributes to your spiritual development?
2) What keeps you actively involved in the church?
3) What are you particularly proud of as a member of the church?
4) What do you consider to be your responsibilities as a member?
5) How do you make decisions about financial stewardship for MVUC?
The sessions were opened with a paired discussion to help focus attention – allow for story telling between two people. The question asked: “Think of a time when you felt that your spirituality was being particularly well nurtured by something happening at MVUC…What was happening? ….What made it such a wonderful moment?” Then, each individual in the group was asked to give a response to the above five questions in a round robin format. After the sessions, the COM met with the Lambs to pull responses together into themes.
We had approximately 40 congregants – adults and youth – who participated in our “Congregational Conversations.” We offered two opportunities for people to participate – both on Sundays after the second service. It should be noted that those attending were self-selected. Keep these limitations in mind when looking at the responses. The sessions were successful in that people continued to discuss MVUC after the meeting was concluded.
The next congregational assessment by the COM is slated for 2013. A goal would be to increase participation from those attending MVUC.
Jane Nelson, Chair
APPRECIATIVE INQUIRY - COM OVERVIEW
The appreciative inquiry held on two early April Sundays focused on the areas of membership, stewardship and spirituality. Our adult participants, drawn in with the help of cold cut sandwiches, settled into the process and embraced the round-robin format. The inquiry seemed enjoyable and most participants stayed beyond the conclusion of the round-robin to continue sharing in conversation.
Within a week, the COM sorted the results with the expert assistance of Sue and Howard Lamb subsequently came to the following conclusions from the inquiry notes:
Question 5 (Financial stewardship)
This question elicited the one clear consensus of the sessions which was that the “Fair Share Guide” is useful and depended upon when making pledge decisions. This is not to say it was universally utilized but neither was it disparaged by any participant.
Question 1 (Spiritual development)
There was no strong consensus of opinion for this question. There were some positive views for adult and youth religious education, especially the “Build your own theology class”. Still, many folks did not consider themselves spiritual in the least (and were perfectly content not to develop spiritually). Others found that community, social outreach, the grounds, the music, the services, our values etc spoke to their spiritual development. We believe this is a positive hallmark of our congregation and quite affirming of the vibrancy of our community.
Question 2, 3 and 4 (Membership)
The responses to these questions were again, across the spectrum of the MVUC experience. “Connectedness” was a central theme whether in social justice, from common values, during services, or when volunteering but no one activity was valued over another. Folks were proud of the spectrum of what it means to be an MVUC member or friend.
It was a pleasure to participate.
With warm regards, Renee Desrosiers
COM APPRECIATIVE INQUIRY, MAY 2011
Minister’s perspective:
I’ve studied various assessment tools for several years and have found the Appreciative Inquiry method to be the least onerous and most pleasurable for participants. It’s noted for its low level of work for participants which helps produce the positive feelings and outcome. This being a strength, there are of course weaknesses, one of which it doesn’t intentionally seek out dissent. Dissent often gets a bad rap, usually because it’s delivered rather poorly. But, the opposing views do serve as a valuable source of information when delivered and heard in healthy ways.
The results of the COM’s recent AI process produced lots of affirmation for what many people have been articulating: spiritual growth, community connection, and music are priorities. We also heard people are getting these, which means programming is working. Leaderships instincts that people are more engaged with MVUC when they volunteer and are recognized for their time and effort are accurate. We can also see that efforts at appreciation and gratitude are working.
People are proud of MVUC because we live our principles, and were able to specifically name how this happens. Of particular importance to the Board is that people named stewardship and time as priorities for responsibility of membership, and used specific language that the BOT introduced last fall: time, treasure and talent. In addition, the fair share guide was listed as the number one way people decide on what to pledge.
I note the lack of reflection on liberal theology, which is often noted for why visitors walk in our doors for the first time, yet is not why they end up staying and joining. I didn’t see any surprises in the answers, but was pleased to see that the participants represented a good selection of people who are not ordinarily in key leadership positions.
-- Rev. Kate R. Walker