Creativity in Missionary Personnel Administration

              . 4')
f,
CREATIVITY IN MISSIONARY PERSONNEL. ADMINISTRATION*
I speak to this topic not so much as an observer :f~om
constituency, but : rather· as a part-time sta:f:f -person.
here raise are questions which : have been discussed in
the past several years.
the seminary or the
The questions I
a very low key ov~r
I welcome very. much the way the question was put in ·the memorandum in
which Wilbert . Shenk gave me this assignment: "There is no escaping the
use o:f structures, both :formal and in:formal, in doing our work as mission-aries.
However, it seems that it is ' precisely in the 'how we structure'
question that :fruit:ful lines o:f thought can be opened. For it is in the
'how' we structure that we ·may provit!le a· judgment or a witness to the .
world."
Deceptive, Purely Semantic Analyses
A recognition that the ·issue is not ·whether to have structures but how to
. operate them, seems perhaps simple ·and sel:f-evident. · However this is not
true. today. There is a wide-spread anti-institut.ional mood at large in.
our society. Such a mood is no surprise wh~n it is advocated by a young
rebel, but it concerns me much' more seriously, ·because I believe it does
more damage, when the same kind o:f reasoning is used by persons who ·
wReeled institutional power.
;.ne.. . U : ,;
It has o:ften happened that I suggested that a certain commitment could be
made, or procedure could be established, which would ccnstitute a reassur-ance
to :field personnel and a check point :for staff; ·'o:ften the staf:f
response was to say that we want · to maintain ·"personal relations~·ips
rather than structures", or that we want to solve ' the problem by being
"centered on persons rather than ·procedures", or ' that we want our mode of
working to be spiritual rather than organizational~ When such an attitude
is used by a person who is operating an organization, its effect is not to
make his operation any more spiritual but only . to make it less reliabl~,
less subject to question, and less worthy of confidence.
. -
There is noperson-centered approach which is not also an organizational
option. There are no theological concerns which are not at the same time
organizational ones. When· anyone hides .behind such ·a set o:f alternatives
to avoid direct scrutiny o:f t·he way he is acting, it ·is illogical and un-
:fair; especially when it is the person in power who .hides behind the
language of "relationships" or "person-centeredness''. .'
As an example of this I can refer to a non-Mennonite seminary president
who, because he considered his seminary to be one happy family, :felt it
would be improper to have any ·writiten policies concern_ing salary scales
or tenure or professorial rank. He sought · simply to' "work these matters
out in a brotherly way", personally, with every member of the :faculty.
What this meant was that in the 'absence of any · settled and impartial
guides, there was constant arguing and bickering and bargaining and th,e
throwing around of weight. There•could be no happy brotherly family ·
' '
*Prepared :for .the Overseas-Personnel Conimittees' Consu·ltation, Mennonite
Board of Missions, September 24, 1969.
-.
I'
-2-
~ . . . 1 · ' , . ' ,• . i'.: : .. '. ' :.· .
relationships because there~~~ :n~ · CQlllJllOn~nderstanding ot the rules of
the game. Thus aiaper organization is an expression of person-centeredness
rather than an alternative to it. . .
,.E.specially is this the c~~e; if~ a~.· we. ~iten . do in our.' promo.tional ·materi-al
·s, we contrast' our · denominatiQnai 1 mis~~OJl~Y· agencies , with the faith 1•
' missions or with free~wheeling evangelistic groups, · by · saying that we have
a greater concern for order and competence, or that our or1anization is
guided by a specit'ic denomini'.tiona;l identity, ·;O.r that · we are especially
concerned to behave in a . way: t~a.~ . i~ res~nsible·to the .supporting churches.
• , ' . , I • , ' ': • •. ' • : ,·, ' ' ' ~ . " . ; , • ,t ' • ~ : :
What is known as "quality control~~ - in - industry has .its' equivalent in the
f ~eld of personnel policies. What. ca.-i. be 1 done : to check whether the way we
wcirk corresp9nds to.how we say, we want to Work? We can only . do it by hav-ing
specific ·ways of asking the question and knowing what would constitute
a yes or no answer to it.
: i ' ; . . ..· · . . ·.
When we interpret the vision behind our prog~am, ·we often ·say • ! ourselves
that at: cer.~ain points there is a particula.r slant .or identity which we ·
want to hav~ o_ur missio.na.ries repres.ent . . wherever they go. · We talk willing-ly
of what it would add to Spain ·or to. Ghana or· .tQ Bolivia to have "us'1 ·
present with "our special emphasis" • .B ut ·what is that •.s pecial: emphasis?
How clearly can it be stated? Does ..f t actually function in <determining
who is a qualified representative cf the Mission Board? Is it· defined in
an objective way ' s·o that · candidate& can be told by what they .'are being ·
measured, and field workers can be told how their policies can be deter-mined?
Or is it just a matter of: "fe.el'.' which can only be understood by
growing up in one of ' our exemplary . .Men.nopite communities? ·· The Mission ..
Board which ·ac'tua;lly produces . a pr.odμct, is not, after all the .committee
structure or. ~he exe.c~tive secJ;etaries, . but the: appointed workers who are ·
in contact with individuals and churches overs.eas.. · The theological iden-tity
of the Boa.rd mu~t therefore be measured where they . are and function,
riot where the" committee's sta't'.e ·pi;>.licies ~. . · ·
Normalcy versus ·Reconciliation
' .. . ~ . . . . . .
In the kind of thinking about organi~ation which is most current both
among professional Jl!'&na.gem~nt . c<.;n~ultants . an.d among amateurs :thinking
about structural ch~nge, t.he.,.centxal , concern ·.,is usual..ly how ·to deal with
"normal" problems of manag~~'iit in ~he mo-st._ expeditious :way·. . The kind of
paperwork or bookkeeping or : c~mmu~ic.ating that , needs to _ be: done is analyz-ed
and ·a way . is soμght t .o work through. thes~ ., operations . &Iii · efficie~ly as
possible. · Orie describes tl)e right kind .of administrative -. "case" or the
representative kind of case and how it can be dealt with most expeditious-ly.
. .. . i
. . . .: ; . i .... ~ . . ..
I artl s~g'<lesti~g that .,at least in a ·cr.zistian,-.;Lssionary agency, or in any
agenc{where .it matters very · niuc:;~ :._spititually"'nd theologically how ·we
proceed, this v.ision of nor1J1alcy is ., nQt .the way ·to lo"'k at what really
matteJ'.'S a.bout organizational problems.' .'Ibe most basic organizational ·de-cisions
are .i:eall)( matters . . iation;, that is, the have to do
with how you de iss nt .and estran· ement.
Speaking biblically, the most pointed instruction we have concerning
church process begins, . Matthew 18:-15, ''When your ;brother sins ••••• ~ • .:"
The New Testament does not give any instructions "abo-i>t how to ·proceeel·iri
v /
•
'
1.
-3- ··
a "normal" church. It rather instructs Christians about how to deal with
exceptional problems and cont~icts in the life of the church.
! : I ' : : , :'. l
Thus the normal way to ' find :the core of the problem ·church ' organization
is not to ask about · every possible issue ·or especially about the ·most ·
representative or ·typical kind of issue; it is rather to begin with the
most difficult . kind or problem and . ask· howit •can bes;t be dealt with.
I think what I have said on biblical grounds can also be afrirmed on
psycw).ogical .or sociological grounds as .well .• · There is real learning ·
where· 'there are real issues .. . People ;Wil:l remember: the recent General
Conference sessions in ;OregoQ not because · Conference .proceeded one notch
farther in . the process of an organizational ·realignment, · but because an
issue arose which ha,d not be.en planned, for and· ·which · made some people move
and learn.·. Both ·institutionalJ.y ·and personal.i.y· there• is l 'earning and
growth where ther~ is ·reconc;iliation; .. much 111ore .than ·where issues · are · '
avoided or passed . over. But ~hen the way to :. test .a structure or procedure
is not to ask how smoothly it will. normally work, , nor ·.how ef'f'iciently or
rapidly or with how littl~ attention: it will ..d eal iwith the 'regular bulk of
what comes over, .the desk. We must rathe;r ask how :it· will ·work ·in the
difficult ca.se, the excepti9nal or unforeseen case. " .1
l . · '
: :- j :i.
One Mission ~ard worker took · so . seriously · .some o:f i his own problems in
dealing with tight .issues and the placement of: persons : that he became per-sonally
depi::essed. He rinally: iSJ.Jggested . a change in his job description,
in such a way that he would deal =with administration and another person in
his department woμld de.al with. diff'icult: decisions. ···This colleague did
·not stay in adminis;tration .very long; f'or it ·is dif':ficult: decisions which
constitute administration .: . It is only. :at = that point ·that · we really need
defined procedures •. · " · ·
So when management consultapts with their type 1 of · thinking tend to ask .how
we deal with maximum smoothne~s with cases that :fit the 1expectations
which we were set up for, that is ·to .:run away :from the real ·problem, name-ly
how to deal with decisions which we could not be set up £or because
they were unforese~n. . .
: • : I t • : ": : f I ~ . I
I there£ore suggest that OJle. criterion £or church organization is the
~nciple 0£ early breakdown"; ', .a structure '.should . be set up so _t_b~_:Li:t .
c.a.xmot work if .you discove:t'. that you do not love ea_c h otq er or th~_Q.Y
a_!'e not commit:t;ed to the • same ,cause; where.as: a no;-mal business is set up
so that it will work as s1q<;>c;>thly as possible when you ido ; 'not love ·each
other. You want to set up a . ~neral MQ.tors ip such ' a way that how well
people get along together ,does notinterfer:e with : prpduction. A machine
can still keep turn.ing ~f there are all kinds ·0£ .problems, and if someone
is too :far out ~;f line and interferes .with the pr.oductive process you ...
. have no compunctions about .sj,inply expelling him.. But in church agencies
we should be e.stablished in suc.h a way rthat t · .wbgn it becomes visible that
we need to refocus our purposes , and re-establish consensus, · the process
~..!QQs .until iijs . ·done • . ·1 • .. • , ; . ·• • •
What I say here about normalcy versus ·reconciliation is ·not so · much one ·
particular procedural issue in its own right, as it is the mood with which
I proceed down the rest o:f my list . of· topics . . The ' road :is the recognition
that to :fail .to face .al'\d handle· issues of reconciliation, and thus to
paper over issues, is to fail to grow.
_. .
-4-·
The Mal-Assigned Worker "' • I '"
.' . . I ~ I . '
I use this term, "mal•assigned" advisedly rather than "maladjusted" or
"incompetent", because the problem must be ·identified as~one for the ad-ministrator.
I·f any . adm~nistrator -has ·been · involved :in the worker's gett-ing
to his place of work wt-ere he .does ~not ; ;fU:nction :well, then at least
pai:t of the prot>lem is that :of. · tll8 administrative .decision to send him
there.
. ; : .. ; ". .
Now when we discover that .someone· is :ma1:..as§.igned, the solution of .:least
resistance .is to try. to stand around :with ba·ndtJ.ds and send him back t~
the same job for a.pother. t-erm without ' asking wheth<l.T he· 1rea·lly·.belon9s
there. This s .eems · to -.be the :kind of :thing to do· beca\.fse .it :ctoes. not " ·
immediately hurt , him, :as .. he is at.raid ·he will "be hurt• t ·Th• administrator
is not aware that he i ·s : hurting ·the .worker· bec:ause he :doe's 'not cause· him
immediate pain; . the administr• tor ' does· not1 recognize that ' there !t; a much
deeper and more .permanent hurt involved in sending a ·person ·back to' vege
tate or . to be ground away ·in a place whe·re he does not 'fit •. ·It se~m.s . .
superficially that · ''relation·ships: are maintained" in that .. the worker is·
not frightened or. traumatized by ·rejection; ··but ·the problem remains un-:
solved and he remains ine.f.fecti·ve and probably inwardly unhappy·. · ·There ' is
no healing, there is no growth beyond his problem, when the fact th~t he
is not functioning well is not .faced. He may actually '.feel •worse and w0rse
. about. his ineffectiveness; : he may avoid ·facing ·it and vegetate. This kind
. ·· : '·
. Qf . n.ormal reassignment is .a .failure o.f. adminis·trati've responsibility. · '1.f
. we could have found something .el.se for him 'to· do 'this person would have
been more useful, the . work would :have been: less hobbled or confused by his
pJ;"esence, the job he was doing poorly could have. been done by someone else,
or we could have faced · the fact that · it Wa.s =n ot· being done. We run' away
from all of these improvements when we simply send him back. · · .. 1 · ·
There are proce9ures. ·and th~re are ·gaps· in. our : present procedure of ' fur-lough
processing which make ·it very difficult :tu raise· the :question· of the
worke.r's return in time to deal with it• · · .. ,. · ' ' ' •' ' ·· .;,. , : ' . . ,·, : '
One of the needs is therefore to~ early detection. ·Thete ·are af'ter a11 ·
some criteria of competence in the professional missionary field. There
are comp~tent ·people .observing the field•peTformance 0£ ·a'. ·worker; .in '.'most
cases there are both ·natiortal and missionary· colleagues "capable :of compe-tent
evaluation., Seldom however are these · sources of ins'ight ·called' 'upon.
O:t: if they . are, it is done . only ·when :.a · very serious and : dramatic mess has
arisen. Then the issue is often raised outside· of norma:i :channels by some-one
else on the field who apologizes .•fox: :writing because :i.t is not ·good
style to "tattle on your brother". My suggestion·:is ·that' :if·we had a way
of putting the .question, it would not be cons.idered as bad style but " ·
rath.er as an act of brot·herly loyalty to :the1 1home church,- to th·e 'young
chu_rch, and to the colleague. . It is in ' fact· ·striking that ' 'for· a .considera-ble
period of time this .was done routinely··in japan; ;a ' country in which · it
is leas.t· typical of . the .· local ; mores ·to ·commentl'publicly on c;riticisms one
has of a neighbor. Yet to this process in Japan did some serioU:s:·good by
bringing to our attention our problems of reassignment much earlter than
we heard about them from; .'Oltbe.r : t'teJ.ds 1. • ··: " · • · • · · ;
; I I · . :;·
Once it is determined·. that it i's i·nOt: in the best interest of'all involved
for a worker to .continue' in a given ·assignment, : then the welfare of that
' ! . ,
-5-
worker should become the predominant consideration in dealing with him.
The Board and not the individual worker carries major responsibility for
making all the necessary transitional steps, since it is the board and not
the worker which took the responsibility fir~t fo~ .tbe mistaken assignment,
and now for the decision to discharge him. . ,,
This means first of.allthat in the procedllres of decision-making there
must be a structure for the recognition of the need of due process. It is
very natural that a worker in this situation should consider himself being
treated unfairly. If the major concern were for the prestige or self-confidence
of administrators, it . would suffice to say that they know they
did their best. If, however, the concern is for the adjustment of the
worker, then perhaps gooc;Lintentions and superior wisdom on the part o.f
administrators are not. good epough. It . is .very understandable that a
worker would feel that .he has .been : .the .Yictim· of personal antipathy or
misinformation on the par~ .of 'a staff person ~r ,on :the part of folleagues
in the field. In order to deal with .that issue there should .be procedures
of recourse and appeal. The staff .should: ;either ~ot have the first word
or not have the last word in this process. (I have ,written fuller pro-posals
in this area .in June and November, 1968.)
In some contexts a staff administrator may feel that the creation of a
"civilian review board" constitutes a slur against his competence or
honesty. As a matter of fact, however, just the · opposite is .the case.
This provides for a point of reference and support which no honest admin-istrator
should want to do without. It would be a very strong reinforce-ment
of confidence in Mission Board administration on the part of both
constituency and workers, (and it would be used very seldom) if there ex-isted
provision in the overseas manual for some procedure .of appeal in .
case a worker felt his decision was not dealt with fairly.
Since the conclusion that a worker cannot continue is a recognition of
failure on the part of the administration .as well as the worker, the
Mission Board should share in whatever cost of adjustment there is. If
extra support and training . should be necessary to qualify the worker for
a different kind of service, this shquld be considered as a Board obliga-tion
even if it should mean more support, or more educational subsidy in
order to prepare for another . task, than a fu~iough missionary would
normally "have coming".
Growth and Chanqe in Commitment
It is tr~e of every human being in our day that with the passage of time
he develops new convictions or emphas,i.s, some of which affect his attitude
toward the Mission Board and its program and principles.
w~ should recognize that this is the case ~uch : more in our day than it""
was earlier, for some very understandable . reasons .. A. worker who was
assigned to service in Argentina or India in.the l920's was by the very
nature of the case, by virtue of the selection proc~~s which he had to .go
through to get there, a.very strong and committed individua~, very inde-pendent
and sure of himself. In contrast, it ·is possible now for . a recent
seminary graduate to find himself in ov.erseas serv,ice without ever having
had a serious test to what he thinks in an encounter with an unbelieving
world, a foreign culture, or a recalcitrant. congregation. Thus the aver-age
missionary assignee is less mature and less settled, and we can not
really demand that it . be other•ise.
-6-
In addition, today's missionary comes · from a . church whose identity is
much less clear. Any Mennonite who got J to: the··field in the ' l92Q's knew
perfectly well what Metmonitha.,·was. :He · knew what he could do and·what
he could not do and why. This was decided for him 'in the ·society in which
he had grown up and whose principleS··he had accepted;"· ·most of ' these ··
principles were not conceivably to be challenged. Today the theological
identity of Mennonitism is much less self-evident'and the sociological'
identity which used to undergird ·tile theological identity '·rio longer does
so.
; '
What is thus true in general of every missionary; ·and therefore should be
dealt with ·for all of them, ·is even much :more"'the :case for the · missionary
who a:fter one or two terms is assigned .to graduate study. · The·purpose ·of
this study process is that he should learn s~mething, i.e., that he.should
change. It is very likely.'1that 'the ' d~·>Jcipline in which he studies (com-parative
religion, anthropology, · theology) will constitute an intrinsic
challenge to .some 0£ his past convictions. 'It is · more 'likely than ·not
that he does his studying within a · university community whose main value
identity is different from that o:f ·the Mennonite Church and Mission· Board.
It is very likely, because of the workload of the · student ··and the geograph-ical
location o:f the university that he will find himself out 0£ close
touch with. the sociological constituency ·of ·the 'Mission Board. The actual
cu 1 tur al context in which he studies is different, 'bot:h .from ·that of his
home church and :from the church overseas in · whicJ:i he · has been serving. ··
In all o:f these respects then it is perfectly normal that ' there should ·be
very -strong forces tending 'to ·aiienate the·graduate student from his field
o:f past and (we hope) future servic·e. 'Our Boaxd has lost a goodly number
of its most 'creative workers this·way.: .. "1 " • , ,
·' . . : '
The most rigid traditional view of this development would consider it as
uniquely -and completely tragic. ·Someone who · had·'promised to ·serve · his ·
Lord and his church in overseas mission ·foF all of his li:fe ·has made a
shipwreck of his calling if he windS up· doing something else. ·"The · ex-tremely
permissive view in the other direction would be to 'say .that we
should not regret it at all if aftei a term ·or : two of service and graduate
study · at Mission · Board expense a·veteran·o~ Mission Board service· finds
that he would rather earn.ibis living and· raise 'his children in another
pro:fession.
Between these two extremes, it would seem tha:t .we . shou.ld .as a.minimum
need to say that it is not a very rational way of structuring things for
getting people into other pto:!essions·,· that their· graduate ; studies should
be subsidized by the Miss·ion Board. · ' 1 • · : • ,
Not only is such attrition regrett~ble from the viewpoint of time and
funds invested and then lost, or · from the viewpoint of ·the early orienta-tion
years which are never rewarded by the 'contribution of a mature work-er.
It also does . something to the ;morale of those ' who remain in fuiltime
missionary professional .service ' and to the image of the missionary calling
back home if all the · "really creative!·people with academic capacities" ·
find themselves moving into·other·occupations which they are somehow ·find-ing
more rewarding and more respectable. lt• also does something to the
confidence of sister churches.overseas ~ when brethren whom they learned to
know and trust do'not ·return.
-7.-
It would therefore see:ci. to be· ipportant to study the possibilities of dim ·
inishing the amount or the severity or the permanence of· the graduate study
alienation syndrome if this can be done by more sen'siti"ve personnel
liaison techniques. Our sister board at Salunga~·surfers less attrition of
this kind. The persons assigned to graduate.study mostly live in Pennsyl-vania
and commute to New York or -Philadelphia and thus are sociologically
closer to the home base. There are even :fewer :extended leaves,- and more
often need to take several periods of leave ·to terminate a doctoral prog ·
ram. The topic of study and the actual · "course of study tend to be linked
rather closely to .the actual assignment in the field.
It is not procedurally possible for the General Board to imitate the East-ern
Board in these respects. But perhaps the very :fact · 'that such differ-ences
do have.an effect on attrition can •be lo~ked at as a sign of promise
indicating ·that if concern were invested in :finding better ways to keep in
touch with .graduate students it could have "an e:ffect upon the number whose
skills continue to be available for Board service overseas.
' I , . '
Our experience seems to have demonstrated that simply keeping in touch
with graduate students when there happens to be a decision needing to be
made or when the· student or the staff per.son is traveling ror other·,
reasons is not a sufficient way to implement concern :for t _he continuing
integration of the growing worker in the brotherhood. It ·is proper to in-vest
in this concern more staff time 'if proper ways can be found. Should
more be done to involve him in a congregation in the university situation?
Could each student be asked to relate ·:to some senior churchman or member
of the Pers0nnel Committee who would, without :any academic resp6nsbility
or pretensions, still have a function something like that of the Academic
Advisor? Should there be a regular seminar process of some 1ength once a
year to which every person being supported on :furlough studies would be
obligated to come? Should there .be some greater discipline involved in
the choice of a place and topic or study? Should the st.udy experience be
interrupted by a period of return 'to the · field? 1 : .
It should not be assumed that the over',.;arching purpose or such a process
would be always to keep a missionary from · leaving Board service. ·: ' In fact,
in some cases such close connections might hastenthe separation pf .certain
kinds or workers. If it :is truly the· case· that a given person has de- ·
veloped deviant convictions, or a specific vocational commitment, by vir•
tue of which he is no longer most fruitful and -:fulfilled in a specific ·
area, then the sooner we ascertain· that £act and build·it into our
structures, the better it is ·for all concerned. · So in :some cases the'
process of keeping closer to this matter might actually clarify and pre-cipitate
the reassignment of someone who otherwise would not have had the
incentive to: change even though feeling vaguely tha~ he should.
But it would be important to put to a real test the inclination~ of any ·
worker to leave Board service. It might well be that·~· his leavi:ng would
be not a move toward a more clear calling but rather an attempted escape
from some particular problem he has not resolved. 11There · have, :for instance
been some cases in our experience in which it :seemed (at least in the mind
of some observers) that the reason for leaving 'missionary work,· although ·
stated in the form of changing theological conviction, was really a screen
for an inability or unwillingness to face the · emotional cost of dealing ·
with a problem of personal re la tionsips. In such·'. a ease it ·is a 'disservice
to the missionary to accept his first effort .: to explain his problem in
terms of changing convictions.
The Board's concern for the commitment ·and maturation of the missionary·
should include not only his contact wi tb·.the support in<_; constituency · and
the Mission Board sta.£f but also with ·what is going on in North America.
One major American board ~~e~ a.p~l.nt-. of .assigning furlough missionaries
from overseas to significant . s.hort-term. service ·at home rather than simply
resting aqd studying. $<>me .~re :.a1; .$.elma, .some were ·at the Democratic ·
convention, some .-erved brief.ly .in pastoral assignments. Thus the mission-ary
not only keeps in .touch with the s~pporting church but he also shares
iri the learning experiences _by which church leader.s :and the current ·gener-
. ation of seminary studen1;s . ar~ . bringing ' up-to-date th£~1r understanding of
witness and service. In the abcence of such a W<".y of catching up, there
is a real poss~bili1:Y that the missionary may continue ,to,· think about the
homeland on the. bas.is of memories .which .are several .years . old, and bef.ore
long become more "conservative or 9ld":":fa.shioned than the Clristians at ·home.
I therefore suggest that ·e.ven apart .trom the· concern for the- special im-pact
of graduate studies,, there. could well be other ways : in which the · .fur-lough
experience could be so structured.as to improve the missionary's
orientation and qualification for .truit:ful service in which the home
church can believe. · · 1 , ,
Let Us Clarify.the Diversity of Administrative Roles ,
From a biblical perspective we are; clear. .t hat within the Christian comm-unity
there must be a variety o:f different ways in whi·ch one is a resource
to one's brethrep. There is not. one particular. :function of "clergy" or
"leadership"; but .there. are many ~μch :functions . .e ach with its own shape,·
its ~wn presuppositi«?ns and resource~.
' ' ·".
From a sociological point of view there is real usefulness in the concept
of "role"; the expectatiqns with whic~ . hWl)an beings relate to each othe.r
have a strong effect upon what can ·possibly happen. The person to whom
one expects .to relate as to ·a .tatper can be a resource in a way completely
impossible for someone who is perceived in the role of ~'enemy". If the
same person is trying to live up to· the expectations both of :father and of
enemy, neither function wil~ .be .~aken ,ca~e of. ·. There is a certain ·particu-larly
naive· amateur way of . speaking o~· the concept of. role as · :i:f it ·were
possible to .".take off one•'s mas~~· and .simply.be.:· oneselt.· The-re ls a seri-ous
misinterpretation ,of real.ity; :the. claim• to 111ave no mask on is also a
particular social role, and in :f~t often a .v.eey .hypocritical one. · We
therefore will ·~e iaore e:ffectivE: iri..,dealing ·wit.h '. tihe problems :i.ri"·this area
if we recognize the.reality of. the diverse de:f'ird, tions of: role expectation,
rather than th~nking that we cpuld somehow jus.t a-Sk · eve~yoriel to ·''be him_.
self'~? · , ... : ·. ~ ... ::.; , ·:
. . .
What we'usually;J!iean by "ad111inistration" ·iS: the ~ exercise r;i:f that particu-lar
role which communicates between decision-making boards and :field staff
with tq'e kind of· information which is needed to make solid decisions about
budget ; and per's'onnel placement. This particular· role • is best exercised ·
when it is kept very precise .and gets just the .kind of . data which is need~
ed for : its p!-lrpose. But there . are ·other ,,kinds of roles which are just as
neces~ary as resources to :field personnel, which deal with another kind o:f
data, /and cannot necessarily be gathered most effectively by the same per-son.
- This statement is not a statement about. the ·shortcomin·gs of any par-tic~
l~r person in. administrative o:ffice; :for to say.that would simply . .
suggest that we should look :for admj.nistrators who have more variety of
gifta. It is rather a statement about .the limitations of any particular
I
-· /
-9-
pe:gon in administrative office; for to say that would simply suggest that
. we should look for administrators who have more variety ot gifts. It is
rather a statement about the limitations of any particular office. It
should lead us to the recognition that certain kinds .of gifts would not be
. most fruitfully used in that kind of office.
~~ have in ~he past, without being self-conscious about it, made .other
kinds ot resource persons available to field personnel • . When John Mose-man
made extensive overseas trips his role was somewhat different from
that of J • . D. Graber; when either ,of these men took his wire along, the
kind of resources they could bring and the kind of data they could receive
were again different. The special commissioner trips of Milo Kauffman and
John R. Mumaw (and his wit~), or my own visits to Latin America· in 1966
and Japan in 1968 were (with .much less time) also something like this.
Goshen College has made a point of sending several different kinds of
visitors to evaluate the Study Service Term on location.
My suggestion i ·s that, .now that,.the Overseas Office is somewhat more
adequately staffed, having at least two full-time.persons, we should not
assume that .this decreases the fruitfulness of . having signi·ficant field
visitation done by other persons who would be perceived by the field worker
in another role. Sometimes such a special resource could be identified by
a special emphasis of the visitor (Ross Bender on theological education,
Paul Miller on leadership patterns, Norman Kraus on new techniques in
mission); other times he would be identified by the_ specific qualities of
need, (Dorsa Mishler as counsellor, a wife with reference to home inter-ests).
In any case, the assignment wo~ld be to a person who is not in the
chain of command, to whom the field worker could say the kinds ot things
which might be difficult to -handle in adm.i,l)istrative correspondence or
might get in the way of smooth dealing with current ·procedures.
The very careful reader might have noticed at this point an apparent ccn-tradict
ion with the earlier concern ·for the "principle or early break-down".
By ask_ing for a second kind of administrative .role, am I ·not con-ceding
that the ordinary -administrr:•tive chain of command is not operating
on the principles ot early breakdown, but on the principle of smooth oper-ating
of routine decision·-making? The justification for this discrepancy
is that the physical distance .and the difficulty of written communication
makes the link between the administrative secretary and the overseas work-er
the most difficult place to insert the principle of early breakdown.
It should be worked at first in the places. where people see ·one another
morefrequently; within the structure of the North American organizational
chart, between Board and Executive Secretary, between staff colleagues,
between furlough workers and their reappointment, bet1'9,en field colleagues.
The last place it would be possible to incorporate .this conc.ern is the
link between the secretary tor Overseas Missions and his field contact'S.
Especially when the worker is dependent upon the administrator for his job
... ., ~·iri ty and for budget allocations to do h.is work, to insert the wedge of
"early breakdown" here would simply make even worse ·tbe dependency upon
the power of the central office which is . the barrier to communication in
the first place. It can be said in response to this discrepancy that the
function of the counsellor type of person not in the chain of command is
reall,y another way to detect the same kind of problem that the "early
breakdown" concept was concerned with.
I
-10-
Thus £ar, what I am suggesting in ask:ing ·for. such visits is a more thorough
renewal of : practices already present in the · past •. .· It ·might be suggested
that this concern should be moved on·e s·tep further by the creation of •an
office or an· agency not in the line· 0£. ·COIDm"and· which could serve as a
sounding board, a point 0£ reference, crftique·, and creative ' imagination.
I was.pleading· fe>.: 'something 'like .this ·function 'on the field when after my
visit to Latin America I pointed to certain - valuable functions for a field
secretary who would' not be a field executive . . In the June 1969 meeting of
administrative staff .with c.- Norman Kraus ·it wa& "suggested that an of:6ice
or agency should be ·created in: :analogy ·to 'wnat a business does in "research
and development'! · or "quality control". . Both of· these phrases · point to ·
instances of a valuable function separate f~om . the line ·of command; here
I am suggesting that such a c:;oncern Diight ·be ·located in the specific .field
of the welfare and · motivation of: personnel. · · · · ' 1
. • ': i : · : '' ' '"
Perhaps something o.f this concern could be realized by a redefinition of
the role of the Personnel Secretary. ·l• ·this ·office ·most efficiently .
de-Lined when i-.t is conceived of as providing s ereening and t ·rouble-shooting
services to the overseas administration? ~uld it be ' more properly con-ceived
of as providing .a sounding -bG.•·rd and an advocate to concerns ·of ·
- workers, with special at.tention ·to .the times when these concerns ·do not
coincide with the immediate interest of program management? ·
Personnel Servi.ces the Other way Around
The origin of the o:ffice of Personnel Secretary · in church institutions has
obviously been a n!eed o-£ the ins'titutions; a need ·to 'screen and to recruit
qualified personnel for existing and already projected program. I do not
mean to sugges.t tha't that cons·ideJ:'a:tion is illegitimate but only to call
into question whether it is sufficient.
' • f I •
If, biblically speaking,. we· affirm 'that every Christiai't bas a christian
calling and · a.. particul:ar gift· whicli he alone ·can :exercise,·i then it would
seem that the basic concern of personnel pl·at:ement ·should be with the per-sons
who need to . be: ·helped to find ..avenues .0£ sei;-vice, rather : -than with
the" slots· wliich need to be filled .. '". In the light ·Of 'this -oonsi:deration·,
it would .be a successful ip~ocess:of personnel·p1ace~ent to· hav~ found that
the most. fruitful . and appropriate point of service - £or a given person is
in some other. agency · than .. ou-r. o-wn, even at 'the· ·same time •that ·some ::fob- in
our own structure goes undone. · · ·. . .
; . ·.. , , ; • :" ' . i i.
Now we have admitted in· principle that this is a ··possibility;-: the · ·
"mission associates" program is a way of giving r-ecognition to 'service
under the ·administration of other agencies. · We: have recognized that such
service is legitimate when we exercise no administrative·control over it
at all or even when the service is under another missionary· agency; b~t
such cases have been very . exceptional. Generally ·we do :not ·seek to .pro·-
vide staff time to meet that kind of·.need. To meet it most· effectively
would take a different· kind of process and probably· a different institu-tional
base. Although willing to try to .:find ·places .£or everyone who
demonstrates interest, we have in the past not thought that we were a
failure when we simply let a candidacy lie with no formal response. ·In-stances
have been reported of the negative · effect on constituency :confi-dence
where persons are told we are grateful for their interest but then
we have nothing more to say.
: -11 ...
If we were committed to. staffing with . the primary purpose of finding slots
for people rather than finding people .· for slots, · I do not assume (al though
some do) that this would mean th~t ·most of ·the jobs ·then existing in
institutions would then 90 unmet. II what we axe doing in our institutions
makes sense and is meeting a . real need, .·then we should be · able to trust
tha~ with adequate in1'ormation ·these services wou.1.d turn out • to be slots
being .sought by certain peraons. · . But we · are perhaps at'raid to' face that
test of whethexi our .programming ·is ·really relevant :and convincing, in the
very sharp · form of testing thqt would ·arise· i '.:f: we ·were committed to serve
.first the applicant· and only second· the adniinistrator •
. ; .. . ;' . . · ;
If we were commit·ted to this · approach tc.; counselling' it would have the
e.ffect of involving bo.th the sp:ecialized personnel st a.ff and the local
congregation much more: early in the· decision-making process. ·'Instead of
waiting until so.meone is. ·t-hrough< !college: .and graduate school and then hav-ing
dift'icul ty. .t n ·finding· ·a • &er.vice fitting ' his s·ervice specialization,
why could the , .ehurche·s' needs . ( : ~d the .needs of the world) not be more
.formally represented sooner., ,when ·the· :choice of· major' ·topics of study and
pf graduate sch.ool entrancewas to :be ·made?· ' ' ·•' :
\ , . . .. ' .. : C1 i •
Share of Personnel in Policy c·: , .: :. ',',' •
I • ' : i i , • . '
Under the heading, "A share of policy," I want to draw attention to two
.complementary observations • . Both of them ar·e .: aspects of the fact that in
. an agency like the .Mission Board (or church college), in distinction to
other types of c;>rganization like manu.facturers or merchandisers·, the
theological .identity and perspective o.f the personnel are an essential
par-,: of the job needing to be ·done. .. . . .
. (a) This means on one hand .that "subordinate" person~, i.e., per-sonnel
whose place on . the administrative"cnart; is· near the bottom ·where
the w<..rk, is done, must not be nsubordinate"· in . ce which the~i.!:.r_ ........ ._....
vi ct ions have in makin . . This is a ·'t ;heme spoken to a y
memo wr1 en in 1967 .for the church reor9anization commission:
'. ' ' . ., . . ·.,. . :; ·. . :~: ... . · :, • .
this. is a spe~ial pro.blem in '.those church . agencies · which employ
.,personnel ·o.f .sl!ch ...q :uality and ·training: that ·they ·appropriate ly share
concerns. for ·t~e principles on :which ;the'' instiiution ·operates .· In
raising .turkeys,,or: building house ·trail·er·s it .. is 1 not a pr~requisi te
. .f or employment that one should" have: deep conviction·s about the ·
theology o.f turkeys or ·tr·a·ilers ·.~ .: -But ·'to wo:tk "for· •a mission b()ard .or
f9r a .ohurch co.llege, : such a • quality· ·of concern and suc1' ' a capacity
is a pr-erequisite. But then: · if· personnel in order 'to be hired need
to be the kind of persons who want. to 'i share· in l·the policy thinking
in the institution for· which they work, ; does this not call fo r a kind
of admi,nistrative structure which ·wil·l ; enable : them :to communicate
with the · level . where · the _decisions are'made;· especially in . the cat>es
where what they have to communicate might have·' some · immediate
cri tical or ·negative 1impaet? In :other words, · how does the board,
where policy .decisions are ·made. ·get ·negative feedback from personnel?
If the . . normal channe l ·o:f •commwiication :is through an exe cutive, he
will have :both the means :and the motivation to .filter out at least
some of the concerns which · his ·subordinates express to him. · In · s~me
cases he might .filter it · all out, .. a:nd·:not · necessarily only in the :
case where he is personally defensive or tyrannical. It might also
be because he is honestly and unselfishly convinced that it is not in
I
-12-
the best interests of his employee to be able to unburden himself ·
in this way, or that it is not the concern of . the board to deal fn
this much detail with particular problems.
This means that a person who was recruited because he is the kind of
person who has policy concerns, and who then "tcomes to have convictions
which.., at least \,lntil he gets ·a hearing, have ·an·apparent ·critical
bearing o.n existing policies, has 'before him .only three choices. He
may take an extraor~nary initiative, asking for a hearing in some
irregular way. :Since .this rocks the boat: it :will be held against him
in the future. Even if he does get a hearing, there are no normal
procedures for making . sure that .. the · hearing will •be · fair. Secondly
he can propagandize .and drum up.support ·until •matters come to the
point where the issue, j.eopardizes ,the employment. of the administra-tor,
since hiring and :fi·ring ·the administrator . is ; the :only ultimate
control which the board exercises ·over him .• : ' . Or thirdly he may choose
to leave silently his ·place of employment, and perhaps the denomina-tion,
and perhaps " the Christian faith, .rather than: make an issue of
things. In this extreme case the .church loses everything that might
have been learned from giving him a hearing, and loses him as well.
In the other two cases a problem is seriously magni:fied by the .ab-sence
of normal and peaceable ways of soliciting negativ~ t'eedb~ck.
'. I ' '.
In the business world there are regular and unmist&Jcable measurements
of the shortcomings of . a management operation, which come in the fc~m
of financial reports. · But when : the product is a quality of personal
relationships, which is what you hire .. a missionary or a college
faculty member for, there is no automatic quantitative reporting
process, and in fact practically no objective evaluation process at
all. What I am suggesting is ·that :this case calls for a· particular
.structure . to enable the .subordinate, · without pain .of' penalty, to ;.
exercise . his Christian responsibility of fr.aternal address, in a con-text
where normal business structures do not provide it either.
·. ~ ' : ' ' . • ! .
{b) This same awareness operates in the other direction as well when
we observe th~t very often it is by.its naming of staff that the Mission
Board takes theological positions. The background · and education · and per-sonality
of a missipnary whom we wish :to send to a given area . will have
the tendency to impose a ~rticular theological slant . on the overseas
church. It does not help t9 say that we do not mean to do this; ·for all
our insistence t}lat we want ·,the indigenous brotherhood to have its own
identity, the.faqt still remains ·that in a ·given case we:·send a worker
with this kind of view . and not· another · worker with that ·kind of view. Nor
is there any way not to do this •. The concern must therefore not be to
avoid tending to impose a th~ological direction on the ;overseas church,
but rather to find a responsible way for knowing what ; that direction is.
There was once a time whep it- was the Personnel Committee which :took
responsibility for the . theological identity of the 'worker and whether he
would represent on the field what the Bcard .. wanted ·him ·to. ··It may··well be
that the criteria applied in .the .old days by such a committee were the
wrong criteria, or that. by the way they were· applied they ·implied a wrong
sense or style .c:>f authority. : But .·:does it need to tolla.r ~roill :this obser-vation
that no one should exercise this responsibility? ··Or that · a
program administr~tor should be :burdened with it all by ·himsel:f'?
J !
-13-
The Structure of a Special Discipline ,
As the variety of missionary occuplations and structures .• increases there
will be 'an increasing number of persons .:who do not '. find within their direct
field management structure the totality of resources needed for the ·
special thing they are doing, but who wc.,uld have persons with similar
interests and needs in other . parts of the ·world. · Persc:-~·. especially con-cerned
for leadership training, for instance; would have more in cvmmon
with other missionaries in leadership training · in other parts of the world
than they might have with other members of ·.the missionary staff in their
own country. In some cases this commonality of task might be sufficient
to justify bringing people together for retrea;ts or , circulating specialized
newsletter&. : . , ;
• ; : , ; ~ , • . ·: , · 1 • . I . · • '
If the particular ~hing the missionary :is trying to do is not ·only a
spec~alization but in fact runs against :the current of some other mission-ary
work, perhaps he needs even .more ·moral support than an ·occasional re-treat
or newsletter can .give. ·If, for instance, his entire style of life
is different from that of the other missionaries, perhaps .he .needs the.
kind of moral support which in the past has been provided by the concept
of the "order"; knowing about a specific body of people committed to the
discipline and tied together by personal acquaintance and frequent commun-ication
about the exercise of that discipline.
Two such concepts have been proposed in the past which might involve
enough persons to be worth formalizing. One was suggested especially by
Weyburn Groff and passed on in a memorandum to the Overseas Office in
April, 1968. This is the concept that a special discipline might be in-volved
in the preparation and service of couples who could commit them-selves
to remain childless for the sake of maximum mobility and avail-ability
in service in areas of special need or tension where the presence
of family obligations is a serious handicap. Celibacy in the Roman
Catholic sense, ~s a higher level of moral performance or spiritual disci-pline,
is not theologically valid. But celibacy as a pattern of commit-ment
to a particular ministry or a particular quality of availability and
willingness to take risks is a very valid and meaningful calling. Commit-ment
to childlessness on the part of a couple would be somewhat of a
functional equivalent of this kind of functional celibacy, yet would com-pensate
for some of its limitations and avoid .some of its dangers. But
this is not something that a single coqie could very well do alone. It
would be far more fruitful and likely to succeed if such a discipline were
taken on by a group of people; if they prepared for it during their years
of training and if they were sustained by the knowledge of a group of
persons in comparable discipline in other parts of the world.
The ;other sample of a special category which might well deserve being,,.
structured as an "order" is the ~lf-s~porting missionary couple who seek
a re~atively great economic integration into the host culture. This is
not i,he same thing as "As You Go" migration, but it is a close approxima-tion
. to it, a frontier in evangelism which our Board is in principle open
to ~nvestigating. It is a method with some very definite limits and
sp~:cial kinds of cost; but some of this cost could be considerably helped
if . there were some formal recognition and sc.,me channel of information so
that a Marvin Miller or a Wesley Rlchard could sense that they are not
alone.
I
,. .,
I
-14-
O:ften the very presence of workers ~:f ·this typ~ is a point . of. some ... t~nsion
within the missionary team. The self-supporting, economically integrated
worker does not necessarily mean to b~ saying that there is no · place for
the foreign supported professional missionary.: : Nevertheless, the ·mission-aries
working in more traditiona1 ·ways tend to cvnsider .his presence as a
reproach and a challenge. As-a result ;he sometimes feels rejected. Bven
if he is not in .. any way rejected; the difference in li1'e-styles, work
schedule patterns,1 :travel and :time budgets ·makes himf·less able to ·partici-
·page in much o~ the •social .:fellowship upon ·whichthe rest of the expatriate
missionary team , is quite dependent. '· . ·· : · ;. . r: : · ·
, I . • j o: ,: ,· .. •' l ; , _, · , · , I · • ·
It would therefore seem quite in·order'that'worl:ers 01' this particular •
type be given formal recognition in a special category. They might have
an occasional newsletter of their own which would deal with special kinds
of problems ·they need to :face (schooling ot children; participation in
national social ·movements, relation to "home churches").· .. Perhaps it would
.be possible to schedule :furlough exper·iences so · ·that· several couples · of
this type could · have a few weeks together 'Lor ·sharing ·experiences and
mutual support. . " · 1 · · , .r: '
·. '
: : .; .r:
. ,·
• : . i
. • 1
. . . . .
...
. ..
; · .
t ' j
'J
: I I • .i. ' : j; •
i I . ' ;· ... < =.. \ . . ..
. t i, : f , I
' . • • l . , •
.... . . .. i .. .
• I
' ; • i f• I \ ,; I • ' I ' ' . ..: . . ; ~ ! ._ .
I '
• j 1 •
•,:. ~ : : ; : . ':
, 1 ~ , , . . I , ,
I • J '~ ' , j •: : ' f 1 i I . ' , ; ,; . ,
..
. : :
·l: •....
. ... ' ,!
. ! • I ~ ' ··· , / I J
, : :.; ..
l ;
.t'
... .
.. . .·.'. . ....