We can run out of the meetings and refuse to allow ourselves to be abused.  We can speak up and educate the abusers about the abuse they are doing.   We can refuse to allow ourselves to be victims.

I understand what you are saying, Serena, but then can you tell us how you think the work of the church can be done?

I don't know how to get the Church work done via another process.

....wait I have an idea.... THE MINISTER CAN DO IT ALL!!!!

**Serena runs out of the thread before RevMatt, RevJohn et all can catch her**

1. Follow Robert's Rules of Order

2. See # 1

3. See # 1.

Just a Self-writing poem,

Inannawhimsey

Meetings are an important way for the laity of a church to take leadership roles.

however I do think that there are meetings for the sake of meetings and that they very often go way too long.

When I lead a group I look at how often it meets.  Our Stewards used to meet monthly and when I became chair i changed it to quarterly and ad hoc if necessary. 

It is also important I think for church meetings to start with a short time of prayer or blessing or reflection.  It helps center everyone aroudn the common mission and reminds us that this isn't the PTA or city council .... but that we are working together to bring Christ to our community.

Minsters have scant time and i generally love having them at meetings for their spiritual support but i do feel that they should endeavour to make it only half the time for their own sanity

I also keep a strict agenda and time table.  The chairperson of the meeting has to be willing to say

"good point but it's not on our agenda today , I will raise it at the next meeting"

or

"We are going to put aside 20 minutes to hear form evryone today and if we need to we will revisit this item"

or

"you are raising a point that is not the duty of this committee.  WHiel it is valid I suggest you speak to M& P or Session or UCW or ...... to address that issue"

I have sat in meetings where the chair lets a discussion ramble into all sorts of unrelated areas.  Whiel that is nice for a coffee oarty, it doesn't facililtate the work to get done.

I also think it important that work get handed out at a meeting with a time table.  There is no room for asking volunteers to meet to discuss someting but that no work ever gets done and the discussion just goes around and around.

Wow what is the business of the church??? Is it only to pay the bills or is it to uphold the spirituality of the people. If is is only the business yes use Roberts rules of order. If there is a spiritual component which I certainly think is as important as the business of keeping the place running, you need to feed the council or board spiritually. If you have people in place to "run the church" then let them run it and let the council or board work on the spiritual side of things.

Since we discarded Robert's rules and deal with the spiritual our meetings have been way more cordial and we get more done because we do not rehash what our committees are doing. we let them do their job and they let us do ours.

Another thing that happens - someone is asked to sit or chair a particular committee and not being  up front the person isn't told that they also have to sit on the Stewardship ctte and the Council and that from the ctte they are on or chair  2 or 3 other cttes could branch out that they will be expected to attend. It is like an octupus.

Also "Time of the Day" for meetings. The meeting has a start time and an end time - what doesn't get done - doesn't get done - so priortize items on the agenda.

Just for the REcord, in the United Church we don't use Robert's Rules. We use Bourinot's which are Canadian.

The time suck is when we buy in to the concept that everybody has a right to be heard, even if they are all saying the same thing.  A good chair will cut off debate when it gets repetitive.

ANother Time issue.  PEople who have no concept how long what they have planned will take.  (or just feel their needs to say something are more important than the agenda committee's decision to give them x # of minutes).  This happens all too often, we either underestimate how long something will take or the person planning that section of the meeting (worship is a big offender) doesn't count minutes the same the planners do.

Maybe we neeed to plan fewer things with more time each -- and when it happens EVERY D-AM- MEETING we should learn to allot that piece more time.

The key thing is a good chair who will direct the meeting by bringing discussions back on topic and closing discussion on topics and moving on when it gets repetitive and non-productive.

Good point GordW re: time allotment.  Look at the previous meetings to see what did and did not work and adjust scheduling accordingly.  Just because meetings have been run a certain way for eons doesn't mean that it has to continue that way.  Of course, the fun part is getting the stick-in-the-mud people to recognize this.

Hi crazyheart,

This is the fault of the Chair of the meeting who allows it to happen.  If the meeting has a purpose or an agenda stick with it.  Don't be afraid to say, "this is not the time for that or this is not the place for that."

Always a possibility.  Or, it might just be that several meetings are needed to discuss the same issue.  Depending upon the congregation Session can meet 10x per year and if they are doing their job that will be sufficient for the work they do and not overly draining.  The Official Board might be able to get by on 10x per year.  Smaller congregations can get by with much less than that.

That can happen too.  The Chair should be keeping an eye out for the spirit-killing comments and minimizing them whenever possible.  A reasonable degree of skepticism can be the perfect thing to keep optimism from becoming too wide-eyed.  Skepticism run amok is probably the deadliest thing that a congregation can deal with.

Again, this is the Chair not keeping the meeting on track.  If the meeting is wanted for a gripe session let those wanting to gripe do the work required to call the meeting.  10 signatures plus two weeks notice in the church bulletin.  The Chair does not have to call a meeting every times somebody wants one and, even if the Chair does call a meeting the meeting cannot be held officially if the clergy is not able to be present.  I'm not giving up an evening with my family just for someone to gripe about something.

If there is legitimate work to be done have the meeting.  If there is nothing pressing don't.

Not co-operate with the traditions of meetings that permit them to become abusive.  Keep things moving.  Keep things orderly.  Only give groups agenda time if they have something to report.  

Grace and peace to you.

John

[quote=crazyheart]

Church meetings - go around and around

Church meetings - too many

Church meetings - that suck the spirit from us

Church Meetings - that acomplish nothing quickly

Perhaps we need a few guidelines and a Chair who can enforce them, while recognizing that this is a church and the people are volunteers - a Chair who recognizes the importance of both the business to be accomplished and the people who are trying to accomplish it. 

I would suggest - first that the meeting start on time.  If people are used to arriving for a 7:00 pm meeting any time between 7:00 and 7:15 they might be surprised when they walk in at 7:05 and find the meeting in progress - but that is what the Chair has to aim for.  Have water on the table and tea and coffee available 10 minutes before the meeting.  Start the meeting on time even if there are only a few people present.  And give each late arrival a brief nod of welcome - not 5 minutes to explain about the cake in the oven, the kid at little league, and the traffic on Main street. 

Start the meeting with a time of worship and centering - especially if there are contentious issues to be discussed.  Invite the Spirit to be present.

Allow a short time for checking in with each other.  Perhaps go around the circle - but cut anybody off who starts on a long drawn out story.  Everybody gets to speak in the 10 minutes alloted  (of course this doesn't apply to the widow whos old dog died this morning - she gets to talk and the others don't - except to offer condolences).

Then get on with the business on the agenda - adding any new items to be discussed if time permits or put on the agenda of a later meeting.   Cut off any long involved stories (the "I remember when I taught a class in the kitchen, we were so short on space, and that little Johnny . . .")    I think business moves along smoothly when a motion is made and seconded - then discussed - then a vote called; but I have also been at meetings where there was discussion first, then the group pretty much agreed on what the motion would be, someone moved, someone seconded, and the vote was taken immediately.  Decide which method works best for your group.  I find having a motion on the floor directs the discussion and keeps it on topic.

Delegate, delegate, delegate - and then trust people to do the job.  Once you've asked somebody to look after the Thanksgiving display - or the Christmas eve candlelight service - trust them to do it.  Don't spend the next 15 minutes discussing how they should do it.  (If they have questions, suggest that they give you a call tomorrow or meet with you after church.)

Respect the closing time.  At a quarter to 9:00 remind the group that they have 10 minutes to complete the agenda - and decide what items will have to be carried over for next meeting.  At 5 to 9:00 decide on a date and time for the next meeting, have a closing prayer, call for adjournment. 

If anyone seemed to be upset, either by something that happened (or didn't happen) at the meeting or for a personal reason, try to meet with them for a few minutes after the meeting or suggest that you have coffee the next morning.  Then gather your things and go home.

Sounds easy on paper, doesn't it.

How not to conduct a meeting:  I once asked if we could invite a speaker to the next presbytery meeting and was told that she could have 20 minutes as an Order of the Day.  She agreed to cut her usual 2 hour presentation to the allotted time, she arrived on time, bought along an assistant, hand outs and props - that she had set up and ready in good time. 

Early business ran late - then we had a 15 minute break that ran into 20 minutes before people reassembled and the guest was able to begin her presentation  (on how the church responds to abused women).  Before 10 minutes were up, the Chair was pointing to her watch and gesturing to me to cut off the guest - that we were running over time.  A few minutes later she signalled to me to cut off the guest.  After 15 minutes I did stand up and suggest that we pass out the literature and wind-up.  A terrible example of how to run a meeting and welcome a guest speaker.  I was embarassed for my Presbytery.

Seeler, that's how our board works generally, and it is rather smooth.  We have more empathy for the widow who has lost her dog and understand more when she may be grumpy at a later part of the meeting.  It also establishes a stronger sense of community, and having God's presence invited as part of that community is huge.  Sort of straddles the best of Bourinot with a religious intent.  Another thing that has helped hugely is the "One Big Motion".  Each committee submits a report.  That report is accepted in the "OBM".  If there is anything to discuss from the report, the committee has to ask for time on the agenda.  Otherwise, it is assumed that the committees are doing God's work well and a feeling of trust ensues.  It also means no reading aloud of reports!  We usually have one topic of conversation to discuss, and if it looks like something else is contentious, we can make it the main agenda item the following month which allows a cooling off period as well as time for research if necessary.  So now instead of board meetings going on until 11:30, I've actually seen most ending at 10, and one that ended at 9:30!  Not perfect, but it's an improvement.  A strong chair is crucial, too.

A comment re: sticking to the agenda. While this is a critical part of making the best use of everyone's time, it also comes with its own dangers. It could cause critical issues that come up in the course of the meeting (or since the agenda was set) to be ignored, for example. It could mean spending meeting time sidetracked with debating whether the issue should be included on the agenda. Or the item could be relegated to the end of the agenda (new business), and then be squeezed out because the rest of the agenda went overtime.  A great way of killing time-sensitive issues.

Often, church agendas are set with only the historical business of the church in mind - very difficult to "think outside the box" in new ways when that option is the last one on the list!   So much depends on the skill of the Chair, but not everyone has that skill. Yet we still need to find a way of remaining open to the Spirit, even if the Spirit isn't on the agenda.  (and I like RevJohn's test: Is this a Spirit-killing comment?). So in an organization that has been created to atune ourselves to the spiritual, I find musicsoothes' comments (about taking the time to deal with spiritual issues) to ring true.  The challenge is finding a way to manage both spiritual and temporal "business".

I think that occasionally an item will arise during a meeting that needs to be discussed but the chair then needs to decide if it will be held over or if someother item will be held over.

You can't get waylaid by items that pop up.  the person who raised it knew about it ahead of time and they needed to inform the chair they wanted to raise it.

i had a boss once who said if a meeting takes more than 90 mintues we better be solving world peace.  i believe that.  I strictly hold all meetings to a max of 90 minutes and what is left gets held over.

if you commit to that what happens when you are the chari is you learn to say

"thanks for that point, we'll discuss it more fully next month when we have time'  next item."

The use of conference calls and e-mail is also a good way to minimize the time element.

We had our ACM on the weekend (at my UU church). It was very successful and here's why (in case it helps any of you):

- the Board was well prepared and major motions were circulated ahead of time so we knew what was coming and the rationale for it

- the chair was knowledgeable, firm, and kept a steady hand on the tiller

- we have a congregational covenant that defines what constitutes acceptable behaviour and read it in unison at the beginning

- one potentially time-consuming issue was put off for a separate meeting due to the time needed to deal with it properly.