In my early
years of doing Committee on Ministry work in John Calvin Presbytery, I often accompanied
Jim Marlette, Associate Executive. Jim was usually in lead as we met with
sessions concerning issues, conflicts and opportunities they were facing. My
role, in the meeting, was to observe Jim and those with whom we were meeting. After
the meeting, on our way home, we frequently stopped some place for coffee to “debrief”
our meeting. Jim would usually ask, “What did you see happening during the meeting?”
I would share my observations and Jim would ask, “What could have improved the
outcome?” He really was not asking me to critique his participation. He was
asking me to take in my total observation and to draw lessons for my own
development. I give thanks for Jim’s being a significant influence in my OJT
(on the job training.)
This
afternoon I was reading an article on LinkedIn. The article was titled “Why
Leadership-Development Programs Fail.” (McKinsey Quarterly,
January, 2014, Pierre Gurdjian, Thomas Halbeisen, and Kevin Lane) In the church, as in business, we have often used off-site academic style educational
opportunities for leadership development. We have sent gifted people off someplace to acquire knowledge on
various topics such as conflict management, administration, preaching, pastoral
care, and a plethora of functional tasks. When they return to their
context, we wonder why performance is not improved all that much. Gurdjian, et al, state,
When
it comes to planning the program’s curriculum, companies face a delicate
balancing act. On the one hand, there is value in off-site programs (many in
university-like settings) that offer participants time to step back and escape
the pressing demands of a day job. On the other hand, even after very basic
training sessions, adults typically retain just 10 percent of what they hear in
classroom lectures, versus nearly two-thirds when they learn by doing.
Furthermore, burgeoning leaders, no matter how talented, often struggle to
transfer even their most powerful off-site experiences into changed behavior on
the front line.
The
answer sounds straightforward: tie leadership development to real on-the-job
projects that have a business impact and improve learning. But it’s not easy to
create opportunities that simultaneously address high-priority needs—say,
accelerating a new-product launch, turning around a sales region, negotiating
an external partnership, or developing a new digital-marketing strategy—and
provide personal-development opportunities for the participants.
Yes,
during the whole course of my ministry, I went off to take various specialized
courses for my study leave, often underwritten by the congregation,
presbytery, and synod. I have to acknowledge the truth of the assertion, in the
article, I learned a lot more by doing and the reflective practice Jim led
me through in real life situations.
I
have discovered that Jim was functioning as a coach. He was asking me to
employ my knowledge, my gut intuition, and observations to mold my theology,
philosophy and practice in a contextual situation. Long before I knew it Jim
was schooling me to be a coach. Since then, I have supplemented what Jim taught
me by studying the theory and practice of coaching through the Auburn Coaching Institute,
actively practicing coaching, continued study, and participating in reflective practice
with other coaches.
I
am convinced, dollar for dollar, the best “leadership development” for pastors,
other leaders in congregations, and in more inclusive councils (governing
bodies/judicatories) of the church is OJT with a coach. Where the coach and
leader are in a co-creative process dealing with real time situations in the
specific context in which the leader finds her/his self. The role of the coach is not to give direction, but to help the leader draw upon their own resources, reflectively, to discover a way forward.
No comments:
Post a Comment