First, let me say that I am uneasy about using any sytem that divides human beings up into two or three categories because I don't think you can realistically do this when you have a sample size of more than five or six people. I am much happier with continuums. Categories can be useful as long as you don't either see them as carved in stone or assume that all the people in one category are necessarily bad and all those in another necessarily good.
So... I think that there may be a misrepresentation of controllers in this discussion. Darren's original post said: 20% of each congregation/church is made up of people who are restless, who want to change. 60% of each congregation/church is made up of people who, overall are happy and content in the church. 20% of each congregation/church is made up of people who are controllers, controllers by large do not like change and wish to remain in control. As I read it (and I didn't hear Bandy), the primary characteristic of a controller is wanting to be in control, not resisting change. I am sure I have experienced controllers who are happy for change to happen as long as (they think that) the change was their idea and they are allowed to be in control of how it is implemented. And there are two responses to being restless and wanting change. One is to leave the organisation in frustration. The other is to get into the structure and work for change. So we probably have two continuua here - one with change at one end and staying the same at the other and one with being in control at one end and letting others do everything without any attempt at input at the other. The problematic people are those at extremes on both continuua. Extreme controllers who are extremely pro-change are as much of a problem as extreme controllers who are extremely anti-change because they will try to ram through change in ways that alienate people. As someone pointed out, if you have a mob of extremely laissez-faire people, nothing gets done, not even an adequate maintenance of the status quo. :-) I suspect that the UCA's consensus decision making process both drives controllers to distraction and makes it far more difficult for them to function in controlling manners except on insignificant issues where people are quite happy for them to take over and do things their way, so I don't think that the wider councils of the UCA are particularly highly populated with controllers. Judy -- "Change was necessary. Change was right. [Masklin] was all in favour of change. What he was dead against was things not staying the same" Terry Pratchett - "Diggers" Rev Judy Redman Uniting Church Chaplain University of New England Armidale 2351 ph: +61 2 6773 3739 fax: +61 2 6773 3749 web: http://www.une.edu.au/campus/chaplaincy/uniting/ email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Rob Bos > Sent: Monday, 2 August 2004 7:47 AM > To: Insights list > Subject: Fw: Tom Bandy Reflection Part 3 - Controllers > > > Hi Lindsay, > Could you say a bit more about the controllers, please? Do you see the > controllers at Assembly as some of the elected people who > participate in the > trinennial meeting and set the agenda for the national life of the church? > Are they people elected to the Assembly standing committee who meet three > times a year? Are they the appointed staff? Or are they the > officers of the > Assembly - President, ex President, President elect and General Secretary? > And then how does the controlling occur? > (As a member of the last Assembly and Assembly staff person, I > would want to > ensure that I am not using my position inappropriately.) Thanks. > Rob Bos > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Lindsay Cullen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Insights List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Saturday, July 31, 2004 4:34 PM > Subject: Re: Tom Bandy Reflection Part 3 - Controllers > > > > On 29/07/2004, at 21:32, Darren Wright wrote: > > > > > • The second question is about the membership of our Presbyteries > > > and Synods. If many controllers make it to the controlling parts of > > > our congregations and committees, how many make it to our Presbyteries > > > and Synods? From hearing Tom Bandy and others speak I’m now afraid > > > that the Synods and Presbyteries might be seen as havens for > > > controllers to gather… > > > > If controllers are defined as those people who resist change, then > > recent events would seem to indicate that there are lesser numbers of > > controllers in Presbyteries (possibly), Synods (probably) and Assembly > > (almost certainly) than there are in the general population of our > > congregations. And certainly that has been my own experience. I don't > > know if this is true, but my suspicion would be that those in specified > > ministry would tend to have a lesser proportion of controllers (defined > > as above), and so their larger representation in Presbytery, Synod and > > Assembly would change the proportions. > > > > ------------------------------------------------------ > > - You are subscribed to the mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > - To unsubscribe, email [EMAIL PROTECTED] and put in the message > body 'unsubscribe insights-l' (ell, not one (1)) > > See: http://nsw.uca.org.au/insights-l-information.htm > > ------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------ > - You are subscribed to the mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] > - To unsubscribe, email [EMAIL PROTECTED] and put in the > message body 'unsubscribe insights-l' (ell, not one (1)) > See: http://nsw.uca.org.au/insights-l-information.htm > ------------------------------------------------------ > ------------------------------------------------------ - You are subscribed to the mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, email [EMAIL PROTECTED] and put in the message body 'unsubscribe insights-l' (ell, not one (1)) See: http://nsw.uca.org.au/insights-l-information.htm ------------------------------------------------------
