BIRD FEEDER BULLIES

It is a simple pleasure. It is relatively inexpensive. I can do it in the warm comfort of our house while sitting in the chair at my desk. Usually, I see the normal suspects but once in a while, a stranger shows up to keep things interesting. I have been watching the birds coming and going from the feeder I have hanging in the maple tree. Periodically, I have to put on my coat and refill the feeder. Without pushing the metaphor too far, I am a provident agent in this economy of nature. I think I have seen some commonalities between us and our feathered friends. 

I see what I will categorize as four different types of birds. The first category I will call the poor. In this group, I will include the doves which are unable to land on the feeder. Instead, they glean the seeds which have been dropped into the stones beneath the feeder. Usually, there will be two to five doves walking humbly with their heads down hoping to find a morsel here or there. They spook easily and fly away quickly at any perception of threat. 

The second group I will call the working poor. They are the sparrow, finch, titmouse, and others who fly to the feeder and then to a limb to eat the small seed they were able to quickly grab. In less than a minute they fly back to the feeder get another of the small seeds and return to a limb to crack open the seed so they can consume the miniscule nourishment. If they make one trip to the feeder they make 15 or 20 forays. They too are skittish and flash away at any sign of threat. 

The third category I will call the middle class. The primary birds in this group are the cardinals. They are bigger than the working poor and their plumage is generally finer. The cardinals feast on the large black sunflower seeds. They still have to work to hold on to the feeder. They don't fly as far away from the feeder as the working poor. They move to a nearby limb, easily crack open the casing which contained a substantially larger meat for their meal. 

The fourth classification is the bullies. They are the Blue Jays. Usually, a flock of five or six arrive in close proximity. All the other birds are easily intimidated by the larger more aggressive Jays. The gathered Jays chase off everybody else and take turns coming to the feeder. One leaves and another arrives. They are like fighter planes strafing the feeder. Their beaks are larger than all the others and they are not afraid of using it to drive away all the others. They never seem to get their fill. They are gluttonous and belligerent. They have no concern for the poor, the working poor, or the middle class. The only thing is that once in a while they will spill some seeds from the tray for the poor doves to seek out in the crevices between the stones. 

There is a fifth category but they are rarely seen. That would be the occasional hawk looking for a quick capture from among all the others. When the hawk shows up, even the Jays take flight. They are massive compared to all the others. Their crooked beak is perfect for ripping their prey to shreds. The seeds in the feeder are not their concern. They are the super-powers in our back year. All they have to do is screech from a nearby top of a tree, or more aggressively perch on the fence 10 yards from the feeder and all other flee in fear. 

Am I projecting what is see in our local and national politics upon the birds? It is possible. Like many others watching what is going on in our state and national capitols, it is hard not to see a similarity. Since the hawks rarely show up, I see a lot of the bullies, the Jays, in nature and in our political environment. The Jays are only out for themselves. If they could construct an economic structure I am sure it would involve a "trickle down" aspect and would claim the whole feeder as their own. 

LEVEL UP

(eLearningMind.com)

A familiar saying is, "You cannot see the forest for the trees." That is one way of saying one is too close to a problem to be able to see a possible solution, or a different means of operating. Organizational theorists encourage top level leaders to maintain a 30,000-foot perspective rather than being lost in the weeds. Maintaining a 30,000-foot perspective is difficult for pastors and other church leaders. In fact, it is difficult for leaders of any organization. I believe one of the reasons Jesus periodically withdrew from others was to regain a higher perspective on his ministry.

The immediate past president of the board of the International Coach Federation (Leda Turai Petrauskiene, MCC) points out the difference between being a local leader and a leader of an international organization. 

For many years, I served on a chapter board. Based on my personal experience and my conversations with chapter boards and ICF Members, I observed that from the local point of view, the perspective is always more homogeneous. From the boardroom, the picture tends to look more complex, because we have to take into account many factors, such as the different size and the various length of existence of chapters; different legal, economic and political factors; language issues; etc. Juggling with these numerous factors, things can never be perfect, and it is not easy to find solutions, which feel equally fair for everyone, which satisfy equally everyone’s needs and which are at the same time objective, defendable and of rigorous professional standards. Therefore, the importance of listening to each other and taking multiple perspectives in order to see the picture in its fullest cannot be overemphasized. 

(http://coachfederation.org/blog/index.php/9425/?inf_contact_key=94017387f45ca83a244b1095911ff28088fb17d01e49d6ea8d3bedeb36e5fa2e)

If we spend our whole life in one community or congregation our perspective on "normal" becomes limited to that particular order of things. Regardless of where I have lived, I have known people who had never gone to the closest big city, nor worshipped in another congregation. Life looks so very simple from inside the cocoon of the local community or congregation. If required to step away from that which is most familiar the world can feel chaotic, complex and disorienting. It is difficult to function in the new environment.

I had such an experience in my younger years. From first grade through high school I went to the same school, and for a while, the whole school was housed in one multilevel building. My graduation class had 82 members. My first experience of higher education was a freshman year at Ohio State University with 15,000 members of that freshman class. I had been a fairly large fish in the small pond of my high school but was as small as a newly born guppy in the Ohio State University environment. I was totally overwhelmed and at the end of the year was invited not to return for my sophomore year.

Such is the experience of many people from smaller membership congregations who are chosen to serve in the more inclusive councils of the church. There are more people, more complex issues, even issues which were never dealt with or mentioned in their home congregation. Frequently they become disoriented and overwhelmed. A colleague wonders if we are asking folks to function at a higher level of Maslow's hierarchy than they are equipped to function. Another colleague speaks in game theory language of assisting people to "level up."

There is a way to help people make the transition, to level up, to gain a larger perspective. It is not forcing them to climb and dive off the 10-meter diving  board. The view can be overwhelming from that height if one has never been there before. Neither is it to insist they stand at the poolside and attempt to describe what can only be seen from the 10-meter board. The ideal would be to increase the height and asking them to describe how they feel and what they see at each successive level.

According to the Urban Dictionary "leveling up" is defined as, When a player of a video game has earned enough experience points to acquire a new level in a skill or skills. Often is accompanied by the ability to wield new weaponry, access new places, or begin new assignments.

Early in my ministry, I served on the Council committee which dealt with pastor/ congregation conflicts and strategic planning. The staff member for that committee frequently took me with him. At first, I merely observed. On the way home, we would debrief the meeting. He was helping me articulate my observations and what lessons I was gaining from the observation. After a while, he began giving me part of the meeting to lead. Again, on the way home, we would debrief the meeting. After some time of leveling up, the staff member put me in lead for the whole meeting with him as the observer. The debriefing of the meeting happened on the way home. Finally, he would send me out with another member of the committee. The methodology was that he worked with me to "level up," and I then worked with others to "level up" them. 

Pastors and other church leaders, who are new to their position or when facing new issues, can "level up" with effective coaching. Those newly chosen to participate in the more inclusive councils would find their service less overwhelming with coaching in their first months or year of service.