Lately we've been having problems getting a quorum for business in various presbytery committees. My presbytery is quite large geographically, so distance has always been a factor in making it difficult for folks to participate. With the price of gas what it is--there is no doubt more reluctance to use a half a tank or more just to commute to Houston for a presbytery meeting.
Of course there are no doubt other reasons as well. Everyone is very busy these days and its the busiest people who get the most done and they are the ones who agree to serve--but then their own schedules get in the way of that service. And let's face it, sometimes committee meetings are --ahem-- shall we say less than scintillating?
I'm sure we're not the only presbytery with the aforementioned problem. We're going to investigate other ways of arranging committee meetings to see if we can get better participation. Anyone out there in Presbyland tried teleconferencing or rotating meeting sites or anything else more creative than the traditional committee meeting at presbyHQ? How'd it work for you?
Or here's an idea--maybe we need fewer meetings than we think we do.
Of course there are no doubt other reasons as well. Everyone is very busy these days and its the busiest people who get the most done and they are the ones who agree to serve--but then their own schedules get in the way of that service. And let's face it, sometimes committee meetings are --ahem-- shall we say less than scintillating?
I'm sure we're not the only presbytery with the aforementioned problem. We're going to investigate other ways of arranging committee meetings to see if we can get better participation. Anyone out there in Presbyland tried teleconferencing or rotating meeting sites or anything else more creative than the traditional committee meeting at presbyHQ? How'd it work for you?
Or here's an idea--maybe we need fewer meetings than we think we do.
11 comments:
"...fewer meetings..."....
*gasp* Presbyterian hands are clutching Presbyterian hearts all over blogdom!
I live in a neighboring gigantic presbytery, so I know what you're talking about.
I've participated in teleconference meetings...they work best with people who already know each other face-to-face. And even then, the conversation is a bit stilted--two people can't talk at the same time and you can't (obviously) see any of the body language. You don't realize how much communicating goes on in a meeting by what people are doing non-verbally. And, I confess, it's easy to play on the internet, floss your teeth, whatever, while in the "meeting."
Anyhow, they aren't the complete solution. I'd be all in favor of fewer meetings.
my presbytery meets 6 times a year, but I suspect we could get by with less--the business portion of the meeting is only an hour long. The rest is "learning" and "networking" and "worship" (all of those belong in air-quotes as I'm not convinced we do any of them well enough to warrant multi-hour drives).
I also serve on the CPM, which meets 6 times a year, in a location much more central (supposedly) than our Presbytery office. It's only a 45 minute drive for me, but still! Once the committee went ahead and met with only two people in attendance (snowstorm). I'm pretty sure that's not right. I'd love to see videoconference meetings! Or, if you have to drive more than 50 miles to get there, we videoconference you in. I bet we could do it, but I doubt many people would want to. I live and serve in a mostly rural, mostly older, mostly white-male-conservative Presbytery and doing things in a new way is generally frowned upon. My church, with its powerpoint screens, is the black sheep. ha!
Cascades Presbytery uses video conferencing for several committees. We gather at one of three locations and then via camera and speaker phone do a fair bit of buisness.
It is a MAC based system so only those with the similar type stuff could actually get on from home. Ideally, we would have a system in which anyone with a camera and mic could log on and be a window on the computer screen and take part. I'm sure if you phoned someone at the Presbytery of the Cascades they could give you the specs on what they're doing.
Alan
Round-trip I drive 4.5 hours to attend a 1 to 1.5 hour committee meeting. Only once did I fill out a voucher for mileage (they pay something like 20 cents a mile).
I invest at least 6 hours to attend that meeting, and haven't missed it yet.
But this last time we were talking about the budget for next year. And I suggested they allow for use of the telephone - there's already a speakerphone in the room. Nope, the budget is too tight was the response.
Are you kidding me? Actual cost of gas is now running me $50 each meeting ($300 a year). I can get minutes for 5 cents each. On an 80 minute call that's a grand total of $4. That's less than a tenth of the cost each meeting. And it would save me at least 4.5 hours!!!!
But none of the others have that far to go - most are within 45 minutes of the Presbytery office. All I would need is for someone to scan in any documents and send them to me - the office secretary could easily do this.
I guess if I start turning in a mileage voucher each time they would finally get the wisdom of this (when 10% of the budget goes to my gasoline alone).
Has anyone given thought to the notion that it may be time to split the existing presbytery to shrink the geographical size ??
In my former Presbytery (East TN) we were strongly divided between two good-size cities, with quite a few people also in between the cities, and a few in outlying areas. The problem was that the Pres. office was in the northern good-size city, about 2 hours from those of us in the southern good-size city. Truly, I lived there for 7 years and never once went to the office. Most meetings were at churches. We tried to have meetings at the good-size town about halfway between the cities, but this was usually meant with complaints from people in both cities, rather than acknowledgement that this was probably the fairest thing to do. So much for effort. I don't know what the answer is.
I serve in Palo Duro Presbytery. Most of our meetings are in Lubbock, which can mean a four to five hour drive for some. I recently drove six hours, spending over $75 in gas (roundtrip), to attend a meeting for an hour and a half. It just seemed to be poor stewardship.
I've been on a committee which met via chat room. The key complaint was that you couldn't see anyone to communicate well, which is what another poster has said.
Some committees try to move the meetings to more central locations, but that is the exception, not the rule.
Personally, I think if there were a way to subdivide some of these committees into taking certain tasks by regions, it would be helpful. Then they could meet at shorter distances, with the full committee meeting less often.
Funny how I used to complain about driving an hour to a meeting when I served in Ohio. I'll never complain about that again!
I've been active in three presbyteries - 2 geographically huge, the other much more dense in population but spanning 2 states and the District of Columbia. My experience was that concepts of distance adjust to the time it takes to travel as well as the miles.
The really critical issue seems to be - does the meeting really need to happen? Has something occured during the meeting (has new insight been gained, has a critical issue been wrestled with, has more than either reporting or hand-wringing occured?) that justifies the time, energy and gasoline of the attendees?
As a presbytery staff member I spend a LOT of time in meetings - some are energizing and lifegiving, and some are numbing.
Add to this my role staffing the presbytery's nominating committee - how can we invite folks to serve if we have questions about the value of the meetings? How do we make sure that all parts of the presbytery are represented fully in the ministry and work units and still serve as appropriate stewards of energy (both emotional and carbon)?
Thanks for the input and the question, QG. I think it's a combination of a bunch of factors. OK ... take the 4.5 hour drive for a 1 or 1.5 hour meeting. That meeting could probably have been done by conference call, or chat or video conferencing. However, like another commenter said, the e-meetings work best when we have some face to face time ahead of time.
In the meetings I staff ... I think we could probably meet fewer times, with longer meetings. Say a retreat at the beginning of the year, and a half-day/full-day meeting 3 more times with a few conference calls in between. The longer times can be used for the work that never seems to get done in shorter meetings anyway ... visioning, training, strategizing, etc.
Now, that couldn't happen for every committee ... but, I think most.
fewer meetings yay - but surely it's time to start things like video or telephone conferencing. Our Youth board has cut their travel expenses enormously by doing meetings by teleconferencing and it saves so much travel time too. Glad they still meet together though - every second month now - instead of monthly.
and boy do they talk :O)
Post a Comment