Leadership Reflections

Many people recommend that seekers read the Gospel of John and I’ve never figured out why. It is the most mystical and complex gospel of the four. Although I greatly benefit from reading it, I always suggest Luke as an introduction to Jesus. It’s filled with human interest stories that anyone can relate to.

But which version should a seeker read? I recently received an evaluation copy of The Voice New Testament — newly revised and updated. The complete Bible will be released in April 2012. This version was created specifically to help people “step into the story of scripture.” I have read eight books in The Voice to sample the different biblical writers and genres. There is much to commend it, although I did find some things that cause me concern, enough that I can recommend it for specialized use only. I think as a first introduction to Jesus it will work well. It is engagingly written and people will likely read a gospel right through. It is also a good resource for believers who want a “we were there” reading experience.

The publishers

Probably the biggest surprise about The Voice is that it is the project of a single church. Ecclesia Bible Society is a ministry of Ecclesia Church in Houston. The idea for the book was born out of the ministry needs of the church, and the church partnered with Thomas Nelson to bring the project to fruition. I would feel more comfortable had the effort been a more broad-based project, but the book needs to be reviewed based on its own merits, not that of its origins.

The scholars and contributing writers

Twenty-seven scholars worked on the translation. There are another 53 contributing writers; a combination of artists, musicians, and writers.

I must say that with so many biblical scholars involved, I was surprised at the following statement in a note to Luke 1:

“Luke is especially skilled as a storyteller, so he isn’t presenting a theological treatise (as good and important as theological treatises may be); he’s telling the story of Jesus.”

Ever since I. Howard Marshall’s groundbreaking 1971 book  Luke: Historian & Theologian, Lukan scholars have recognized Luke’s theological agenda as the foundation on which the gospel was written. (Darrel Bock, one of the 27 scholars, apparently is among them since his new book coming out next month is entitled A Theology of Luke & Acts.) In fact, New Testament scholarship today accepts each gospel writer as a theologian. Why then was this gospel, and none of the others, singled out for such a note? Yes, Luke is a masterful storyteller, but he is also a first-rate theologian. It makes me wonder how much of a particular theological bent is being inserted into the edition.

The goal of the translation

A translation can be reviewed on two levels:

1. How well does it convey the accepted meaning of the original documents? and
2. How well does it achieve its own stated goals?

The stated goal for this translation is “to help believers experience the joy and wonder of God’s revelation,” but there is a secondary goal — to introduce people to Jesus. As the president of the Ecclesia Bible Society writes: “This is the story of God’s relentless pursuit of us…You will hear God as He whispers of His love to you.”

 Unique features

This New Testament has quite a few innovations in it that make it come alive in a fresh way:

• It describes its translation method as ‘contextual equivalence.’ The editorial team followed a standard translation process and then edited the work into a readable literary structure using contemporary language.
• The Voice retains the author’s meaning while using modern, rather than ancient, literary conventions. For instance, if Paul writes “Brothers…”, he did not mean only men needed to heed his instruction, so that phrase is translated gender-neutral. However, other passages clearly refer to only men or women, and gender-based language is retained. These contextualizations are well done and help modern readers get to the real points being made by the biblical authors.
• There are words such as baptism and Christ that are actually not English words, but transliterations of Greek words. The Voice translates these words just as all the other words are translated. Thus Jesus Christ becomes Jesus, the Anointed. While it takes getting used to, these translations are helpful. Even though I know what Christ means, The Voice forces me to not gloss over its meaning.
• All narratives are told in the present tense using a screenplay format. I think this is probably the best feature of the book. It makes it very exciting to read, and it puts the reader right into the action.
• Scenes are introduced by a phrase such as “Imagine this…” or ”Picture this…”
• Instead of saying “Jesus said…Peter replied…John said”, the text looks like a script
  Jesus:
  Peter:
  John:
  Not only is it clear at a glance who said what, but it takes fewer words to record the conversation and the reader can focus on the flow of the conversation. There is a greater immediacy and vividness with the screenplay format than there is with the usual narrative style
• Closely related to the screenplay layout for speaking parts are the lists. They allow people to read faster and highlight what is being said. An example is Luke 9:3-5:
• These were His instructions:
1. Travel light…
2. When you enter a house, stay there…
3. If a town rejects you…
• Material that would normally be found in footnotes is included right in the text, but clearly distinguished by position and colour from the actual biblical text. This makes for a very smooth reading experience (you don’t have to find the note and then find your place again). There are some things that a first-time Bible reader might find very confusing and this way they get the explanation at the same time they have the thought.
• In Mark 3:1-6 Jesus heals a man with a withered hand on a Sabbath in front of the Pharisees. The biblical text says Jesus asked them what the Law says about doing good or evil on the Sabbath and that he was grieved by their hard hearts. In a separate paragraph in a different colour, The Voice editorializes, “How can anyone care so much about the words of the Law and so little about the spirit of it?” The addition drives home the point of the story, which may not be obvious to a new reader.
• More extensive notes are also in a different colour, but are separated from the text by solid lines. Mark 3:31-35 is the story of how Jesus’ family comes to get him but can’t get into the crowded house. Jesus gives a short teaching that his true family is whoever does the will of God. Just before this passage, there is a note that explains why family and friends would become more concerned as Jesus’ ministry and fame grows. They are concerned for Jesus’ welfare and that Jesus will attract unwanted attention from the occupying Roman forces that can only end badly for him.
• Some words are added to the text in italic type to provide nuance to the text or to complete the idea of the original text. These additions put the modern reader on par with the ancient readers, who would have understood the nuances and thoughts.
• Luke 11:34 has an addition in italics that helps explain the meaning of the verse.
• The NASB reads: “The eye is the lamp of your body; when your eye is clear, your whole body also is full of light; but when it is bad, your body also is full of darkness.”
• The Voice’s translation is: “Listen, your eye, your outlook, the way you see is your lamp. If your way of seeing is functioning well, then your whole life will be enlightened. But if your way of seeing is darkened, then your life will be a dark, dark place.” Although The Voice translates soma as “outlook” and “whole life” when it actually means “body”, I think there is justification for this translation. The plural of soma means “corporate life” and even though this is not a meaning for the singular in Danker’s Greek-English Lexicon, it is a reasonable use based on the context and the meaning of the plural.
• Acts 2:45 has a more debatable insertion. The NIV is almost a word-for-word translation of the Greek and it reads: “They sold property and possessions to give to anyone who had need.” The only improvement on this is a Greek word in the sentence that means “to the extent.” So it could read ”They sold property and possessions to give to the extent that anyone had a need.” However, The Voice translates the verse as: “They sold any possessions and goods that did not benefit the community and used the money to help everyone in need.” This seems an unwarranted limitation on the sacrificial generosity of the believers. The Greek does not say anything about whether or not the assets sold benefitted the community in their present form. The Voice’s version may be a reasonable assumption, but it should be a note rather than italics in the text.
• By involving artists, poets and writers in the project, the publishers have tried to recapture “the passion, grit, humor and beauty” of the original language and culture.
• A great example of recapturing the passion and the sarcastic humour of the original text is 1 Corinthians 15:55. The familiar reading is “Where, O death, is your victory? Where, O death, is your sting?”. The Voice says “Hey, Death! What happened to your big win? Hey, Death! What happened to your sting?” I loved this ‘in-your-face’ triumphal cry of the redeemed.
• One example where there is a surprisingly bland translation that misses the thought of the original text is Romans 8:37. The NASB translates it as “But in all these things we overwhelmingly conquer through Him who loved us,” accurately conveying the superlative nature of the conquest. The Voice has a rather anemic choice of words that gives no hint of the extent of the conquest: “But no matter what comes, we will always taste victory through Him who loved us.” Now, let me say there is victory, and then there is VICTORY! The Greek verb is hypernikao, which is a heightened form of the verb nikao. Nikao means to prevail, conquer, overcome or be victorious. Hypernikao means to prevail completely. It was used by secular authors writing in biblical times to mean “we are winning a most glorious victory” and “victory and more than victory.” To translate this word as mildly as “to taste victory” is to miss the overwhelming, comprehensive nature of our victory in Christ. It lacks the emotional intensity of the Greek.

Conclusions

Let me answer the two questions posed above.

How well does The Voice convey the accepted meaning of the original documents?

After reading eight books, I thought it was a fresh and very meaningful translation that I would use for reflective and meditative reading rather than for study. Christians who already know the Bible well will find it ideal for this purpose.

The reason I would not use it as a study Bible or for regular Bible reading is due to the number of times I read a verse and thought “Does it really say that?” An example is Luke 11:3, which the NIV and NASB translated exactly the same, “Give us each day our daily bread.” The NKJV says, “Give us day by day our daily bread.” Ten other versions all say either daily, day-by-day, or each day. These are all correct translations of the Greek word kata which means, in this context, x period by x period (eg., year by year, month by month, day by day). Yet The Voice translates it as “Give us the food we need for tomorrow.” The Greek word for tomorrow is aurion, which is not in this verse. It appears the translators are using kata in one of its other meanings, which is as a marker for a definite time (at, on, or during a specific time) while everyone else translates it in its distributive meaning (over time). The translation team included experts in biblical Greek, so I’m sure they had their reasons, but they are not explained in a footnote. I’m no Greek scholar (although I took two years of Greek at seminary so I know the basics), but it seems the editors have taken a ground-breaking position on translating this verse that subtly changes the focus from our needs today to our needs tomorrow. When it comes to caring for ourselves, scripture tends to say “Pray for what you need right now, not what you will need tomorrow” (eg., Mat 6:34). Is this a significant issue? I’m not sure. Praying for our food to be provided day-by-day is also praying for the future, so maybe it’s nothing to get worked up over. It’s just that there were a few places where I had the same question about why they had an unusual interpretation. That is why I suggest this version not be used as a study Bible.

How well does it achieve its own stated goals?

The Voice has to be rated an ‘A’ for achieving the publishers’ goals. Will believers “experience the joy and wonder of God’s revelation?” Absolutely! It’s like his revelation is unfolding in your presence.  Will seekers find a good introduction to Jesus? Absolutely! He comes alive in this version.

Reading the gospels was a delight. I can’t overstate the significance of putting the narrative in the present tense. This is a powerful technique that bridges two thousand years to draw us closer to Jesus. Combine that technique with the in-line explanatory notes, and the reader will see Jesus in a fresh way that will invigorate the spiritual life of both experienced believers and neophyte seekers. The love of God permeates this version – the notes constantly remind the reader that God’s love is behind every verse.

I recommend The Voice to believers as a Bible that will make scripture fresh and draw them right into the action. It will be good for lectio divina and meditation.  But they still need a study Bible such as the NASB and perhaps a Bible for daily reading such as the NIV (although I’m fine with the NASB for that purpose too).

I also recommend The Voice to seekers as an introduction to Jesus and the Christian faith. They will find it an easy and enjoyable read that piques their desire to seek God. Just be sure to let them know that words in italics are explanatory and not in the original text. I doubt they will read the Preface where that is explained.

“Book has been provided courtesy of Graf-Martin Communications, Inc. Available now at your favourite bookseller.”

"I'm a confused person" by Carly at http://www.flickr.com/photos/cstnc/4319195477/

Ever wished you could get inside the head of a donor and find out what is really going on in this person’s life? How about a parishioner? Or people you help? Here’s a way to better understand the relationships your ministry has that will help you design more effective strategic plans.

As part of our current strategic review we want to get a better understanding of the people who work at our member ministries. After all, although the organization is the CCCC member, it is the people who work there who we interact with. We’d sure like to understand them better so we can design programs and services that exactly meet their needs.

Empathy Maps

An empathy map is an organized way of learning about another person that you create in a brainstorming session. When completed, you should have a pretty good idea of what it is like to be a person. You know what they think about, what they do, what they see and hear around them, what gives them grief and what gives them joy. You have entered into the life of someone so that you can see your own ministry through their eyes and judge it according to the pressures in their life and their needs and wants. Are you an interruption to them or the source of great relief and joy? An empathy map will help you find out.

Personas

You normally create several empathy maps at a time. Think about the people you want to know better. You can likely sort them into several categories, or personas. In the for-profit world, the personas would represent customer segments. You might want to develop personas for your donors – the major donor, the monthly donor, the occasional donor. In a church you might do a single mom, a retired man, a person who has special needs and so on. For our strategic review at CCCC, we have developed eight personas:

1. A treasurer of a small church
2. An administrator of a reasonably large church
3. An executive director of a small foreign mission agency
4. A president of a large international relief agency
5. A secretary-treasurer of a denomination’s district office
6. A church board chair
7. An agency board chair and
8. An agency’s fundraiser

We chose these eight because:

• Two-thirds of our members are churches, and 60% of those are fairly small (less than $300,000 total revenue). The person we most often serve in a small church is a volunteer treasurer, so we will study that person.
• Large churches (more than $1 million in revenue) are few in number (231 in membership) but tend to be involved in a lot of activities that require more detailed knowledge (foreign activity, liability etc.).  In a large church the paid administrator is usually our primary contact, so that becomes a persona.
• One-third of our members are agencies and two representative sectors are foreign missions and relief & development. We serve some very large agencies, but half of our agency members are below $700,000 in total revenue. Since their needs are quite different, we made one agency small and the other large.
• Governance and fundraising are major topics for us.
• We especially want to be denominationally-friendly and support the work of denominational offices.

It really helps to give the persona a name and a face, and perhaps even to create a ‘back story’ to help you get into the exercise. We did empathy maps at the two strategic planning workshops I’ve previously described for up and coming leaders in BC and Ontario. We found pictures of people representing different demographics and laid them out for the groups to look at. They picked a picture of a person to represent each persona and then came up with a name. This was a lot of fun as people debated which picture and name most suited the position.

What you want to know about the persona

To get inside a persona’s world, think about them in the context in which your ministry will engage them and ask the following questions:

• What does this person see in this context?
• What does the person hear?
• What do they think about and feel emotionally?
• What do they say and do?
• What causes them pain?
• What would they like to gain?

We put paper up on a wall with a head in the middle and the categories placed around the head. Everyone had Post-it^(R) notes with them as they walked around looking at the personas, and when they had an idea for something, they wrote it down and posted it. If you would like to contribute to our strategic review, please go to the Strategic Review website and select the personas you would like to comment on.

Using the output

It is important to understand that the empathy maps may or may not be accurate. First, people in the same type of job may be in very different circumstances. Second, unless the people doing the empathy map are in that persona’s role, they are either guessing or answering based on what they have observed. In both cases, they may not have the complete picture and may be speculating about stereotypes. So you will have to exercise judgment.

Here are some ideas for what to do once you have completed an empathy map:

• Use the map to develop questions for a survey of the persona’s group. Test to see if the observations are accurate. The map informs you as to what the likely issues and opportunities are. Check it out.
• Use the map’s output as a lens through which to evaluate your ministry and its services. Is it meeting real core needs or is it missing the mark? Are there gaps in your services that they want filled?
• Think like the persona and how, playing the role of that person, you would like to be engaged (or not engaged) with your ministry. What strategies and services are likely to reach the persona and get action?

This strategic planning/marketing tool has been around for a while (it was the basis for Lee Strobel’s book, Inside the Mind of Unchurched Harry and Mary), but it is still a new tool for many people. It will be helpful in at least three areas of your ministry:

1. Strategic plan
2. Program design
3. Fundraising

Let me know how it works for you.

Your strategic planning process must ensure there are plenty of opportunities for you, the leader, to be surprised. If you forge ahead based on what you already know, or what your research plan discovers, the strat plan will simply reflect what you thought you should research and think about. Simply put, you don’t know what you don’t know, and you need to check regularly for blind spots.

To get really fresh, daring, out-of-the-box ideas, to get completely new approaches to pursuing your mission, you need to enter terra incognita, the unknown land. You need a planning process that deliberately introduces the unpredictable, the unforeseeable; the jarring, non sequitur idea that makes you say, “Oh yeah! Of course! Why didn’t I think of that?”

No Self-Help can help

You can’t do this on your own.  Your staff and board can’t do it either, because they are too close to the way you think and you probably have a common understanding of ”the way things are.” Unless you have some very new staff or directors, you all share the same organizational lore, mindset and assumptions.

No, the only people who can take you into uncharted territory are people who are on the periphery or even completely right off your map. This is ”edge-centric” strategy development. People on the edges are not tainted by your organizational history or its aspirations. They will say whatever they think, without prejudging whether or not you want to hear it. They will call it as they see it, and they will do that from a variety of perspectives and assumptions that are vastly different from your own. Their ideas are worth their weight in gold!

Outsource your planning

One of the ways to introduce unpredictability into the planning process is to outsource part of it by engaging people on the periphery.  Here are some ideas for how you can do that:

• Non-users
• Find people who don’t support your ministry or use its services and ask them about their needs and wants.  Whatever service you are providing, ask what they are doing instead. For example, we used our database to find members who have not attended a conference in the past five years, and we surveyed them to find out why they don’t come. We discovered they like to get their information from books and the Internet, don’t like to travel and don’t value the networking that occurs at a conference. They still want the information provided by the conference, but in a different format.
• Using CRA’s database, we can identify Christian charities that are not members of CCCC.  In the strategic review we will be surveying them to find out how they get by without us. We just don’t understand that!! Seriously, we want to know how they satisfy the needs that we think we fulfill. Is there anything we can help them with? If they know about us, why have they chosen not to take out a membership?
• Who is a non-user for you? One would be a Christian who does not financially support your ministry. You can be pretty sure they are giving to at least a few ministries. Why not yours? Some ministries have causes that are hard to raise support for. Why not dig into how people perceive your cause and see if there is a better angle you could use to raise support? If people are not using your devotional material, find out what they do use. Do they have any formal way of doing their daily devotions? Maybe they will give you an idea for a new product. Ask friends, staff and supporters to recommend people to you to participate in a focus group or a survey. I think for most ministries that will be the easiest way to identify non-users.
• Non-traditional voices
• Whose voice is not usually heard in your ministry? Go seek it out. For the strategic review, we wanted to hear from up and coming ministry leaders, so we brainstormed how to get a number of them to give us a few days of their precious time to work on our strategic plan for us. We developed a win-win-win. We offered a free (yes free!) three-day strategic planning course.  We asked members and non-members to suggest the names of young, creative leaders interested in Christian ministry and invited them to come. They got some professional development that will help them with their careers, they shared a meal with our board, and they had the experience of making a board presentation. Their employers got some training done at no cost. And since we used CCCC as the case study, they applied their new strategic planning/thinking skills to our ministry. What a deal! We ran it in Langley, BC and Etobicoke, ON. Thanks to Focus on the Family and Opportunity International who let us use their boardrooms.  Many of the students had virtually no knowledge of CCCC except that they knew something called CCCC existed, so they also qualified as non-users. They were full of ideas that we will be considering during the strategic review, and I’m sure many of their ideas will be used.
• How could you do this? Why not gather potential donors or users of your services and give them a day or so of training in your core ministry. Help them evangelise better. Give them a greater understanding of the root causes of poverty. And ask them to help you design a better way of conducting your ministry.
• Unexpected users
• Have you ever discovered a user you didn’t expect? I have. Two years ago I was in a French class and my seatmate said he was a CCCC member. I asked what his ministry was, and he said it wasn’t a ministry. It was a completely secular agency. ”Why would you want to belong to a Christian organization?” I asked. (We do allow secular members — they can’t be Certified, but they can receive our materials.) Apparently we do very good work that applies to all charities and they can put up with the prayer requests we send out and the occasional theologically-based article. “We can skip the articles if we want, and I guess prayer never hurts,” he said. It was an interesting perspective and it says that much of our material has application beyond Christian charities.
• Maybe you’ve had an unexpected large donation from a new donor. Why? How did the donor find you? Why you and not someone else? What did they see and value about your ministry?
• Perhaps a program has suddenly had great success with a group you never thought would be interested. Again, why? What’s going on? You just might have a new initiative!
• Unexpected uses
• For-profit companies often send staff out to watch customers use their products and services. Some even have people live in a home for a day or two to observe. They are looking to see how the product is used. They are especially interested in seeing someone use it in a way they never expected. When they find that, they often have a new use to include in their advertising.
• Maybe someone isn’t using your material as expected for personal devotions, but is using it as a neighbourhood outreach. Maybe a leader’s guide would be helpful.
• Perhaps someone is downloading your sermons, but you discover they are being translated and sent to another country. Maybe you have a ministry somewhere you don’t even know about. If it is bearing fruit, then maybe you should make it a program and ramp it up.
• Non-competitors
• Most for-profits watch their competition closely, and copy anything that looks successful.  In the ministry world, we do the same thing. Maybe you should stop copying someone else and look outside of your sector, outside of the nonprofit sector entirely, and see how things are being done elsewhere. Ask how that might apply in your context. That’s how leadership in innovation is achieved. It’s not by copying others but by creating new strategies, often by taking something from one market and applying it in another.
• Foreign Lands
• Most of our members operate in Canada and maybe a few other countries. Get out beyond that and see how things are done in different cultures around the world. This was the real benefit of my sabbatical trip – seeing how things are done in other countries and realizing that the way we do it in Canada is not the only way it can be done. There are similarities, but there are many differences, and it may be that in the differences you will find something new to bring back to Canada with you.

These are all sources that are likely to supply you with ideas you could never have come up with on your own. They all take planning to set-up, but once you’ve engaged with these people you will not be able to predict what great ideas will be offered to you.

Happy planning! And if you have another way of opening yourself up to the unpredictable, please post a comment! I’m keen to hear about them.

As I read the news today, I was reminded of a powerful illustration of how legacies are attached to names, and what significance that has for leaders. Sixty years ago today, Queen Elizabeth ascended to the Throne and became Queen of Canada upon the death of her father, King George VI.

King George VI

In July 1972, I stood in a small side chapel within St. George’s Chapel at Windsor Castle. After seeing elaborate graves all over London with wonderfully carved statues, long inscriptions about the person’s importance and so forth, here was a simple marble slab in the floor bearing just a name: George VI.

Queen Elizabeth is another remarkable inspirational leader whose name, I’m sure, will bring a legacy to mind for a long time.  She is to be congratulated for a remarkable reign of sixty years and counting.

Queen Elizabeth is an amazing woman who provides leadership as Head of State not only to the U.K., but also as Head of State to fifteen other nations (including Canada). Furthermore, another 38 member nations of the Commonwealth also follow her leadership. Her dedication to her role, her ability to stay steady through turmoil, her simple style and her graciousness have inspired me. I believe her greatest legacy is simply the way she’s lived her life in service to others.

Today, one columnist wrote about Queen Elizabeth saying,

“In this present time of glaring, intrusive, nasty media, it is hard to imagine the proportions of the Queen’s achievement in serving 60 years, every one of them as one of the most prominent and publicized people in the world, without one gaffe, one embarrassing photograph, one injudicious utterance or slip on a banana peel, literal or metaphoric. Queen Elizabeth II has personified the British middle-class virtues: moderation, unflamboyant consistency and unflappable reliability.”

Queen Elizabeth, as her father did, represents the best of the figurehead leader. Figureheads in practice have very little real power.  What power they have is pretty much ceremonial and their ability to get anything done depends more on leading by example than by authority. But in spite of that, some figureheads have so much personal power they can accomplish a lot.  The Queen fulfills the figurehead role admirably and embodies the aspirations of people everywhere to live lives of civility, graciousness and a whole lot more.

What’s Your Legacy?

As a senior leader, you fulfill a figurehead role for sure, but you also have the authority to direct an organization and get results. How will you be remembered twenty or thirty years after you retire? What attributes will people talk about? What will be your lasting imprint on your ministry? It would be really nice if in 2060 or so someone mentioned my name with regards to CCCC and a listener said, “Ah yes, John Pellowe.  He…” and then some nice thing or other is said. What would you want said?

Is life about individual accomplishment? About doing? Is it really “all about me”? Or is it about us and how we lived together and what we did for each other?

I hope to accomplish a lot, through my own work and that of the CCCC team, during my time in leadership here. However, given that Christianity is fundamentally about relationships, between us and God and us and other people, I think our legacies that endure will be about how we cared for each other, inspired one another, and helped our neighbours.  Here are some things I think would be worthy to be on a leader’s wish list for a legacy:

• Your leadership produced an outstanding crop of gifted people who filled mid and senior leadership roles from within for a generation
• During your term the organization learned how to live out its values and this culture of authenticity endures “to this day”
• People still tell stories of how you gave them their big break that opened doors for them to flourish in their ministry careers
• The fun and pride people had working together as a team during your tenure is still the stuff of organizational lore decades later

Take a moment and write down your list of words or phrases you’d like to have associated with your name.

Then ask the question: Is the way I am currently leading going to leave a legacy anything like what I have just thought about? If not, now is the time to do something about it.  Now is the time to create the history you want to be told to new generations later on.

• I believe a rich enduring legacy will not simply be a list of accomplishments, although there will certainly be accomplishments in a leader’s legacy.
• It will not actually be about you or me as if the goal in life is to say “Look at me!” It will be about us as conduits, about how we obediently followed God, received the gifts and roles he gave us and acted as one of his means to bless others and help them to be the great person God intends them to be.
• It will be how we made other people feel about themselves, how they believed more about their abilities and future, and about how we helped them to have more significance, more meaning in their lives.
• In the end, what matters for leaders is the influence our leadership had on others and what they were able to accomplish because of our influence.

I realize that my accomplishments today are the result of many people who believed in me and who got me to where I am today and those who work with me day-by-day. While I need to accomplish things to fulfill my job responsibilities, my true leadership will be measured by how well I helped other people to do the same.

A good name is more desirable than great riches; to be esteemed is better than silver or gold.
Proverbs 22:1

Well, the program review is now complete and it is time to figure out what to do with the results.  The process started with selecting which program to evaluate and went on from there with development of the theory of change and logic model, the literature review, and then the research.

On Monday the final report was presented to the board.  Although programs are a staff responsibility at CCCC, the board is always responsible for due diligence under any governance model and program evaluations are a good way to show they are doing their due diligence.  They help assure the board that our programs are effective and efficient and that our mission is actually being fulfilled through our programs.  If an evaluation cannot show a program is effective and efficient and moving the mission forward, then it should be re-designed or scrapped.

The leadership team has also reviewed the final report and is beginning the process of revamping the conference.  I don’t expect significant changes for the upcoming September conference, but I do expect several significant changes for the next conference.

You can download the final report, Conference Evaluation Report – Public, if you wish to see the extent of the work.  I think it reflects a fairly comprehensive program review.  Certain parts we have labelled ‘confidential’ either because they refer to information from outside sources that we are not at liberty to make public, or they refer to new initiatives that it is simply premature to make public.

This brings the program evaluation series of posts to an end.  My hope is that you will select a program, any program, and try it out.  Let me know how you do!