Crucible, , Residency, , MCCI Prepared by MANTER CONSULTING - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Perception Study Results Crucible, , Residency, , MCCI

Prepared by MANTER CONSULTING September 22, 2016

Study Obje jectives

• To determine the impact and effectiveness of these programs.
• To evaluate which aspects of the programs have had a lasting impact
• n participants and their ministry.
• To determine how these programs can operate better in the future.

MANTER CONSULTING

Study Scope and Methodologies

• Collect, analyze and report findings, “Not our role to advise”
• No evaluation, comparisons to other programs nor financial analysis
• Fifteen exploratory interviews conducted prior to full study design
• Crucible

66 quantitative telephone interviews

• Residency

27 scheduled qualitative executive interviews

• MCCI

300 quantitative telephone interviews

MANTER CONSULTING

Crucible Perception Study Results

Crucible Respondent Profile

• Most (40) respondents were age 45+, with

15 being 35-44 years old and 11 being 25- 34 years old.

• A total of five classes or cohorts that

ranged in size from 5 to 20 were represented in this study.

MANTER CONSULTING

45+ 61% 35-44 23% 25-34 17%

Age

Key Obje jective of Crucible

MANTER CONSULTING

• Develop and enhance pastor leaders

23%

• New pastor education

20%

• To teach provisional members what they

did not learn in seminary 20%

• To learn day-to-day skills

18%

Overall Perception of Crucible

MANTER CONSULTING

Positive 83% Negative 11% Neutral 5% Don't know 1%

Crucible Im Impact Statements

• It is important to continue to allocate resources so Crucible can continue.

(89%)

• Crucible is a valuable way to develop spiritual clergy leaders who can lead
• ministries. (88%)
• I believe that Crucible produces a lasting impact on participants and their
• ministries. (83%)
• Crucible provides tools that are relevant and useful to pastors within their

ministerial context. (85%)

• Crucible has been effective in pastoral identity formation. (68%)

MANTER CONSULTING

Overall Satisfaction wit ith Crucible

86% 8% 6%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied

MANTER CONSULTING

Wil illingness to Recommend Crucible to Others

MANTER CONSULTING

Yes 86% No 8% Don't know 6%

Future Considerations for Crucible

• Increased communication of objectives and expectations up front

were suggested by some participants.

• Some participants suggested improvements in relevancy and assured

up-to-date information for program content.

• Program format suggestions included rest and time during the two

years so participants have time to process and reflect upon what they have learned.

MANTER CONSULTING

Future Considerations for Crucible contin

inued

• Some participants expressed a desire for follow-up after completing

Crucible.

• The issue of the effectiveness in pastoral identity formation and the

cultural context three-day event are areas that some feel need to be evaluated.

• Optimizing the selection and management of cohort groups during

the program, addressing the process of selection, geographical ramifications and deacons, was suggested.

MANTER CONSULTING

Residency Program Perception Study Results

Residency Program Respondent Profile

• 27 scheduled qualitative executive interviews, 30-55 minutes in

length

• 10 Residents
• 7 Mentoring Pastors (+1)
• 6 Extended Cabinet/District Superintendents
• 4 SPRC Chairs from Host Churches

MANTER CONSULTING

Experiences of Residents

Top reasons for participating in the Residency Program:

• Opportunity to learn from a seasoned pastor
• Leadership skill development
• Career trajectory/financial security

Hesitations/concerns about participating:

• Mentoring Pastor/Host Church placement

“I was wondering how I’d fit into the new setting. Will it be a good fit? Will it be a healthy environment? How will I do with the mentor?”

MANTER CONSULTING

Experiences of Residents

Most challenging/stressful aspects of the program:

• Submitting to the leadership of the Mentoring Pastor
• Overall relationship with the Mentoring Pastor
• The pressure to succeed/fear of failure
• The “elite” nature of the Residency Program

“There is an implied sense that all eyes are on you. There is a legitimate fear

• f failure. You are told, you are the cream of the crop. There is no one else

getting this experience.” “I felt under a microscope. Not only did I have the stress, but I had to worry about how I was handling the stress and how that would be viewed.”

MANTER CONSULTING

Experiences of Mentoring Pastors and Host Churches

Top reasons for participating in the Residency Program:

• Opportunity to invest in the growth of a high potential leader
• Provided the church with additional leadership support

Hesitations/concerns about participating:

• Compatibility of skills/personalities/theologies
• Limited amount of time they would have with the Resident
• Finding ways to provide the required experiences
• Disruption to staff/congregation

MANTER CONSULTING

Experiences of Mentoring Pastors and Host Churches

Most challenging/stressful aspects of the program:

• Finding ways to provide the required experiences
• The limited amount of time they would have with the Resident
• Finding the time to invest in the Resident
• Issues related to the “entitlement” mindset of the Resident

“The time frame is short. You immerse them, you connect them, but they are looking forward all the time.” “They are made to believe they are superstars and that inhibits learning. They are promised a church and a certain salary and that sets their expectations.”

MANTER CONSULTING

Residency Program Im Impact Statements

Level of Agreement: Mean Ratings

• I am/will be a more effective leader because of my experiences in the

Residency Program. (4.7)

• My Residency is/was helping me more fully develop my pastoral
• identity. (4.5)
• My Residency is/was everything I hoped it would be. (3.7)
• I was adequately equipped to handle the stress that comes with the

Residency Program. (3.3)

MANTER CONSULTING

Residency Program Im Impact Statements

Level of Agreement: Mean Ratings

• I witnessed/am witnessing growth in our Resident as a result of the
• program. (4.6)
• Our church benefited from hosting a Resident. (4.5)

MANTER CONSULTING

Residency Program Im Impact Statements

Level of Agreement: Mean Ratings

• The Residency Program is an effective way to grow young leaders. (4.1)
• It is important to continue to allocate resources so that the Residency

Program can continue. (4.4)

MANTER CONSULTING

Residency Program Im Improvement Areas

MANTER CONSULTING

6 10 10 10 11 13 15 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

Support of Resident After Placement Mentoring Pastor Selection Process Host Church Selection Process Support of Resident During Residency Education of Mentoring Pastor More Formalized Process Candidate Selection Process

What the Residency Program Needs to Do Better (n=23)

Residency Program Im Improvement Areas

Candidate Selection Process

• Evaluate the process to determine if there is a way to better predict the

future success of a candidate Top 3 Success Characteristics

• According to Residents
• According to Mentoring Pastors and SPRC Chairs

MANTER CONSULTING

Residency Program Im Improvement Areas

More Formalized Process

• Clearly established goals and timelines
• Commitment to regular meetings outlined in the program
• Better communication with the Conference
• Intentional management of expectations
• Wrap-up meetings and assessments

MANTER CONSULTING

Residency Program Im Improvement Areas

Education of Mentoring Pastors

• Expectations of the program
• What the mentoring role “is” and “isn’t”

Support of the Resident During the Program

• Commitment to regular meetings
• Mental health component

MANTER CONSULTING

Residency Program Im Improvement Areas

Host Church and Mentoring Pastor Selection Process

• Assess pastor’s understanding of the mentoring role
• Assess pastor’s readiness to embrace the program’s responsibilities
• Expand the definition of an “appropriate” Host Church
• Implement a system for cultivating new sites

Support of the Resident After the Program

• Develop a formal follow-up program (for at least one year)

MANTER CONSULTING

Wil illingness to Recommend the Residency Program to Others

• Nearly all participants said that they would recommend the Residency

Program to others, but approximately one-third of those said they would do so with qualifications. “When done well, and operating at its highest moments, it is an

• utstanding concept. The idea of pairing seasoned pastors with high

potential young leaders just makes sense…but some things need to change.”

MANTER CONSULTING

Future Considerations for the Residency Program

• Most participants agreed that the time has come to develop the new

generation of the Residency Program, incorporating the learnings from past successes and failures. Future considerations might include the following.

• Re-evaluating the overall goals and objectives of the Residency Program

and clarifying its purpose.

• Rebranding/reimaging of the Residency Program, including how the

program and the Residents are described, both verbally and in print. This also includes what the Residents are told about why they’ve been invited to participate in the program.

MANTER CONSULTING

Future Considerations for the Residency Program

• Re-evaluating the length of the Residency Program. A number of

participants (including Residents) expressed concerns that two years was not enough time to optimize learning.

• Embracing greater diversity in Residents, Mentoring Pastors, and Host

Churches.

• Offering more tailoring of the program to the passions and gifting of

Residents.

MANTER CONSULTING

Future Considerations for the Residency Program

• Providing more systematic and purposeful support to Residents during

their Residency Programs.

• Developing a way to include more young leaders.
• More purposeful promotion of the program, including: yearly statement

from the Bishop, Resident testimonials; Mentoring Pastor testimonials; emphasis on the mutuality of the program.

MANTER CONSULTING

MCCI Perception Study Results

MCCI Respondent Profile

MANTER CONSULTING

1% 3% 8% 14% 23% 28% 33% 48%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Roles of Respondents in MCCI

Paid Church Leadership Church Member Volunteer/Lay Leadership Team Leader Pastor Other Conference Staff Prescription Coaches

Key Obje jective of MCCI

• Enable churches to reach their full potential/new lifecycle

34%

• Help churches that are not thriving

26%

• Improve churches

25%

• Improve community outreach

16%

• Growth in membership

16%

• Growth in discipleship

14%

• Revitalize churches

10%

MANTER CONSULTING

Overall Perception of MCCI

Positive 67% Neutral 23% Negative 9% Don't know 1%

MANTER CONSULTING

MCCI Im Impact Statements

• Churches must continue to reinvent themselves to survive. (96%)
• It is important to continue to allocate resources so the MCCI can
• continue. (80%)
• The MCCI is a valuable way to enrich and grow churches. (78%)
• I believe that the MCCI produces a lasting impact on participants and

their ministries. (65%)

• The MCCI has been effective in positioning churches for revitalization.

(62%)

MANTER CONSULTING

MCCI Fruitfulness Resulting from MCCI

• Improved community outreach/presence

71%

• Increased congregational commitment to prayer

71%

MANTER CONSULTING

Overall Satisfaction wit ith MCCI

72% 12% 15%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied

MANTER CONSULTING

Wil illingness to Recommend MCCI to Others

Yes 78% No 14% Don't know/not sure 7%

MANTER CONSULTING

Future Considerations for MCCI

• Many felt that the consultation report and prescriptions be continued

with the requirement that all prescriptions be accepted.

• Some suggested that MCCI provide for effective communication of

results including evidence of success.

• It was strongly suggested that follow-up and support during

prescription implementation be improved to more adequately equip the pastor and congregation.

MANTER CONSULTING

Future Considerations for MCCI continued

• Changes mentioned for time following Consultation Weekend

included: communication and guidance, support/training for lay people, sufficient and better equipped, high quality coaches and relevancy.

MANTER CONSULTING