LoginNB. This is archived material from Assembly 2004
Home » What's Presbyterian? » Church governance structure » General Assembly 06 » Reports from Assembly 2004 » Policy Groups » F4: Appendix 4 - The Presbyterian Church & Leadership Development
Appendix 4: The Presbyterian Church & Leadership Development
<typohead type="3">1. Introduction</typohead>
1.1 The Presbyterian Church of Aotearoa New Zealand is working to develop “healthy congregations” throughout New Zealand . To further the achievement of this aim there is a need to develop its leaders, both ordained and lay, for their pivotal role in laying the foundations on which healthy congregations will grow. This should be done within an environment in which ongoing learning and growth is encouraged and provided for in terms of time, energy and resources.
1.2 One of the keys to individual/ministerial – and hence organisational/congregational – development is the provision of regular and timely feedback on performance, both in relation to what has been or is being achieved and how those achievements are being brought about. For many organisations this feedback is used both as a vehicle for judgement in relation to achievements (e.g. for use in deciding remuneration or other rewards for performance) and for personal development purposes. For the Presbyterian Church, an appropriate use would be two-fold:
1. Formative reviews – that focus on personal development and performance improvement, and generally include a process of self-appraisal. Feedback from key contacts and peers may be included as part of the process. Formative reviews would usually follow an annual cycle.
2. Summative reviews – that focus on performance assessment, generally follow a process of external measurement (including comprehensive feedback from contacts/peers), and have employment implications (they are conclusive and help determine a person’s competence in their role). Self-appraisal may be included as part of the process. Summative reviews may be undertaken at critical stages in the life of the leader’s ministry, e.g. Prior to renewal of a set term of office/employment/call; annual review of staff/employees; annual review of ministers doing supply past retirement age; etc.
1.3 Formative and Summative reviews are both competency based. They rely on clear personal goals and/or position descriptions that are consistent with and flow on from the parish/organisation’s own mission goals and vision. In this sense, leadership development reviews will be consistent with, and parallel to the process of parish mission audit/reviews.
1.4 An additional and important aspect of any leadership review & development programme is that of forward planning. So the review meeting provides a formal opportunity to both reflect on the past and prepare for the future (revision of personal goals and position requirements).
<typohead type="3">2. Current situation</typohead>
2.1 Presently the church’s primary vehicle for the appraisal of congregational life and work is the visitation that is required to be undertaken by the presbytery “at least once in five years”. This minimum requirement has, over the years, become accepted as the norm.
2.2 The “visitation” is carried out by a group generally comprising both ordained and lay church members. It addresses issues of congregational health, property and financial management, public worship, Christian education, the mission of the congregation, the management of the Parish or session, the ministry and the leadership of the parish itself and any other matters that may arise or are relevant.
2.3 The “Guidelines for procedures in a parish visitation” make little reference to planning for the following period, although the aim does specify that one purpose of the visitation is to “stimulate discussion and planning……..”. The only mention of this important aspect of a developmentally focussed review is question 7 in section 3 of the “Questionnaire” which asks the minister for his/her “hopes and plans for the future”
2.4 The reports arising from these visits can best be described as variable in depth and quality. This is not surprising, given that the visitation teams would seem to have had little, if any, training in carrying out what is in effect a review of performance of the minister over a five year period. This is not a criticism of the visitation teams, whose members are carrying out a very difficult and delicate exercise. This is simply to be expected given the circumstances. However, if the church is to develop its leaders, as it has identified it needs to, this exercise needs to be lifted to a more professional level. An effective performance/developmental review is an exercise in motivation for everyone involved; a poorly executed review can have the reverse effect.
2.5 One particular problem with a five year visitation is that some ministries can start and finish within that timeframe, meaning these pass without any review being undertaken at all. Further, five years is too long a period to pass without appropriate feedback to assist with providing a motivational influence, to redirect energies, or to plan future work programmes.
<typohead type="3">3. Leadership Development Reviews</typohead>
3.1 A review consists of three sections:
1. the review of achievements and competencies displayed over the past period (ideally no longer than twelve months);
2. the goals, objectives or achievements to be focussed upon for the forthcoming period (which can be longer than a twelve month period) together with the competencies to be displayed; and
3. the personal development programme to be undertaken in supporting the leader in reaching their goals.
3.2 There are three elements to sections 1 and 2:
1. specifying what the leaders are expected to achieve;
2. specifying how the achievements have been met or addressed; and
3. specifying the nature of the evidence , be it quantitative or qualitative (the performance indicators).
3.3 In addition, there should be provision for the minister to reflect and record, as preparation for the review discussions, their own view of how they have managed the period under review.
3.4 The personal development programme will specify the support that the minister/leader can expect from his or her supervisor and parish in completing the coming year’s activities.
3.5 The first review for a new ministry or leadership appointment should take place within six months of the start of that ministry or appointment. The use of the word ‘review’ in this context is a bit misleading – the “review” should consist of sections 2 and 3, i.e. the planning for the forthcoming review period. Thereafter reviews should occur annually, with frequent less formal review meetings during that time.
3.6 For such a leadership development programme to be successful there is a need for all parties to receive training, not just in the process itself, which should be relatively straightforward, but in the conducting of and responding to the interview.
3.7 The reviews should be conducted in a blame free, constructive and consistent manner throughout the church, with the overall aim being the continued development of the church leadership and thus the church itself. Recent trials of this process have proved helpful and successful owing to some key factors:
1. A simple format, adaptable to the theological and cultural context;
2. Good communication of the purpose and process to all parties;
3. A balanced and well-trained review team (with a gift mix that included knowledge of church polity/presbytery representation, knowledge of the reviewee, their role and context; knowledge of the review process; human relations and communication skills; a Christ-centred gospel and mission orientation; and usually consisting of 3 people).
<typohead type="3">4. Suggested Review Process</typohead>
4.1 A draft review form is attached. This can be used for ministers or lay members in a leadership role. The participants in the review are the minister or leader and the facilitator/reviewer. The minister/leader could also have a support person, such as their supervisor, attend the review if they wished.
4.2 Before the review meeting – preferably one to two weeks – the minister/leader is to receive a copy of the review form to enable them to “self review” the period in question and consult with the session/parish council on achievements and proposed plans for the coming review period.
Section 1.1 : self explanatory.
Section 1.2 : The minister/leader will specify what has been achieved and comment on how they have been achieved, with comment from the facilitator/reviewer. The achievements made through the personal development programme are to be included here. The supervisor could prompt with questions such as:
● What has been achieved?
● What helped with achievement?
● What hindered you in the process?
● What did you learn / what would you do differently?
● What has given you energy in the past 12 months / what has drained energy?
Comments are to be agreed. Where this is not possible, both parties’ comments are to be recorded.
Section 1.3 : Provide specific examples of the competency in action and how it contributed to the achievements recorded. Areas needing further development are to be specified.
Section 1.4 : Comment here on any factors that particularly supported or hindered achievement, e.g. funding difficulties, an unexpected departure / increase in congregation members, accommodation difficulties and so forth.
Section 1.5 : Provide specific examples and their contribution to the ministry/achievements during the review period.
Section 2.1 : The minister/leader is to discuss proposed plans for the coming review period with the session/parish council/supervisor prior to the review itself and then confirm them (with amendments as agreed) with the supervisor. Note the timelines for some aspects of these plans may be longer than the forthcoming review period of twelve months.
Section 2.2 : This could also be the subject of prior discussion.
Section 2.3 : This is the outline of the agreed key activities to be taken to reach the agreed achievements/expectations.
Section 3.1 : This follows on from sections 1.3 and 2.2.
Sections 3.2 and 3.3 : This is the basis for the personal development plan and takes the form of an agreed set of actions or activities by both parties over the next review period and possibly beyond.
4.3 The agreed review is signed by both parties.
Please Note:
● This process and form are a draft and any comments towards their improvement and further development is welcomed.
● A recent article offered some hints regarding appraisals that may be helpful for the review team:
Feedback in performance appraisal/reviews is effective if it is... (vs ineffective if ...) |
● Descriptive (vs evaluates) ● Specific and leads to interaction (vs general and judgemental) ● Focussed on behaviour and on behaviour that can be changed(vs focussed on personality and on short comings beyond control) ● considers the need of the receiver (vs cuts the receiver down to size) ● solicited (vs imposed) ● information shared (vs advice is given) ● well timed, in particular, very soon after appraisals (vs delayed, or if receiver is not ready to hear or listen) ● comes in small amounts (vs receiver is overloaded) ● concerns what is said or done and how (vs concerns why) I am not too sure on this one! ● checked to ensure clear communication (vs unclear, further encouraging resentment, frustration, suspicion and hence distortion or misrepresentation) ● reflects full collection of information and preparation (vs preparation is hurried or incomplete) ● encourages self evaluation and respects the dignity of the receiver (vs purely negative and dismissive) |
<typohead type="3">Leadership Development Review </typohead>
<typohead type="4">Section 1 : Evaluation</typohead>
● Agreed goals/achievements/expectations from last review.
● Achievements since last review.
● Competencies (skill knowledge, attributes) displayed.
● Conditions under which achievements were made.
● Particular strengths demonstrated over the review period.
<typohead type="4">Section 2 : Planning</typohead>
● Agreed goal/achievements/expectations for the next review period.
● Competencies (skills, knowledge, attributes) required to meet the challenges for the next review period.
● Actions to be taken by the Minister/Leader to meet the agreed goals/achievements/ expectations.
<typohead type="4">Section 3 : Personal Development Programme</typohead>
● Competencies (skills, knowledge, attributes) to be acquired or requiring further development.
● Action to be taken by the Minister/Leader.
● Action to be taken by the Supervisor.