Meetings Take To Long

[mountain_trails]

Me: "I'm sorry, I have to leave now.  The time I've allotted for this meeting has expired"

Someone else: "You can't go.  We're not done yet."

Me: "Then we'll have to finish some other time.  I have other important things that need to be done."

 

I have deciced that IF I ever find myself in a situation like this again, this is what I'll do. 

[The Folk Prophet]

Concerning   -

 

I have a hard time seeing quitting and/or walking out as the way Christ would handle it. I can see it being appropriate in certain circumstances, I suppose. But my opinion is that those circumstances would need to be quite a bit more extreme than what has been spoken of here. I'm not saying there isn't a problem. I just don't think walking out or quitting is the proper solution. Doesn't seem in line with any principles of the gospel I've ever learned. Patience, humility, long-suffering, etc... 

 

Note, I don't reject the idea of clearly setting a time limit per MOE's suggestion. Just not in terms of rebellion, formal protest, or giving up.

[omegaseamaster75]

Concerning   -

 

I have a hard time seeing quitting and/or walking out as the way Christ would handle it. I can see it being appropriate in certain circumstances, I suppose. But my opinion is that those circumstances would need to be quite a bit more extreme than what has been spoken of here. I'm not saying there isn't a problem. I just don't think walking out or quitting is the proper solution. Doesn't seem in line with any principles of the gospel I've ever learned. Patience, humility, long-suffering, etc... 

 

Note, I don't reject the idea of clearly setting a time limit per MOE's suggestion. Just not in terms of rebellion, formal protest, or giving up.

 Your right if Christ were in the meeting no one would walk out 

[mdfxdb]

I'm not quite ready to quit yet, but we have some fundamental problems.  Ideally I don't care if the meeting lasts 3 hours, but we need to get things done, and set goals/objectives which need to be met and discussed.  After 3 hours of meeting I leave confused about what we discussed, what action has been taken, and what action is going to be taken.....

 

Our Bishop has an agenda, he refuses to stick to it.  He lets others go off on tangents, and he lets the auxiliaries make excuses when they haven't completed their assignments from the previous meeting. 

 

The missionaries are there, and they do go through every single investigator..........I have publicly questioned their presence.  The result has been that they are not present during the whole meeting, only for their portion.  Still, this hasn't fixed the time they waste while they're there.  (this is another area the handbook addresses that isn't being followed).

 

Friendship, getting to know people, socializing...Bottom line is I'm not there to braid hair, or swap recipes...I like the people I serve with, I would like to get to know them better, but we need to get the meetings under control because after 1.5 hours all I feel is resentment......I actually don't like going to church on the days we have ward council, which in my ward is TWICE A MONTH

[The Folk Prophet]

 Your right if Christ were in the meeting no one would walk out 

 

Haha. Not quite what I said, but yeah.

[Backroads]

I've yet to be part of a church meeting, but I hate overly long and ineffective meetings.  Hate them with a fiery passion.  I hate wasting my time so one person who cares about something only he cares about can blather on with the few people willing to attempt to solve the problem while everyone else plays surreptitiously on their phones.

 

My principal is a fun, goofy woman who likes to have fun, goofy meetings--that are also incredibly time efficient.  One of her top priorities is to get us out and doing what needs to be done rather than just talk about it.  It's wonderful. 

 

What I've noticed to be the biggest cause of long meetings are those people that have to talk and talk and talk.  I would say a tight agenda greatly fixes this problem.  Plus a leader who is able to say "Let's talk about this later, preferably with the people that actually need to be involved."

[Palerider]

Elder Ballard has a great book titled.....Counciling with your Councils. He authored the book sometime back and has since come out with a updated version. Excellent book....not a big book and a good read.

[MarginOfError]

 Your right if Christ were in the meeting no one would walk out 

I'm sorry, but even if Christ were leading the meeting and it was going on two hours while he talked about his favorite recipes on Pinterest, I'm leaving.

 

I don't mind if meetings run long so long as they are effective.  I'm not sticking around for chronically ineffective meetings.  I don't care who is there.

[The Folk Prophet]

I'm sorry, but even if Christ were leading the meeting and it was going on two hours while he talked about his favorite recipes on Pinterest, I'm leaving.

 

I don't mind if meetings run long so long as they are effective.  I'm not sticking around for chronically ineffective meetings.  I don't care who is there.

 

You do realize what you are saying here is that you would literally walk out on God if you didn't like what He was saying?

[Suzie]

I think Mormons just LOVE meetings, we LOVE them so much that we use a meeting to PLAN the next meeting. Yeah.

[Wingnut]

This was brought up.  The wording "at least monthly" allows for it to happen *more* often.  And maybe there was some intention that it would last in the 90 minute range, but the talkers would get talking, tangents were explored, and nothing (or little) ended up being accomplished other than three hours off the clock. 

When I was on the Ward Council, we had 60-90 minute meetings, twice a month.  They were great.  In fact, I think they were really good.  I was on the WC before the 2010 Handbooks and training came out, and we used to only have WC once a month, and it was mostly calendar/activity discussions, and missionaries.  After the training and new Handbooks (which all focused a LOT on WC and other councils), we switched the twice monthly meetings, and changed up our format.  We still struggled with missionaries droning on and on, but eventually that improved.  We also tabled discussion about every.single.calendar.item, and began discussing ward members instead.  We still talked about activities, but less in terms of planning specifics, and more in terms of: "how can we include primary children in this activity, other than as tagalongs?"  "How can we improve activity attendance of the older widowed population in our ward?"  "Is there a way that we can make this activity a motivator for less-active families to come?"  We discussed needs of families, regardless of auxiliary.  We made assignments and followed up.  We had good working relationships with each other because we spend real time together.  We became a council, instead of an event planning firm.

 

Twice monthly can be a good thing.  But when each meeting is over two hours long, it has probably ceased to be very productive, even if for no other reason than that no one wants to be there anymore, and everyone has mentally moved on to other things.  Perhaps in your ward's case, you need to be aiming for a 60 minute meeting, and hope that it doesn't go longer than 90, rather than planning for 90 when you know you're going to go over.

 

Concerning   -

 

I have a hard time seeing quitting and/or walking out as the way Christ would handle it. I can see it being appropriate in certain circumstances, I suppose. But my opinion is that those circumstances would need to be quite a bit more extreme than what has been spoken of here. I'm not saying there isn't a problem. I just don't think walking out or quitting is the proper solution. Doesn't seem in line with any principles of the gospel I've ever learned. Patience, humility, long-suffering, etc... 

 

Note, I don't reject the idea of clearly setting a time limit per MOE's suggestion. Just not in terms of rebellion, formal protest, or giving up.

Personally, I see it as Christ would rather go and do something than sit around and talk about doing it.

 

You do realize what you are saying here is that you would literally walk out on God if you didn't like what He was saying?

I think what MOE is saying is that he would walk out if he didn't like how long God was saying it.  Not much better, but still...

[The Folk Prophet]

Personally, I see it as Christ would rather go and do something than sit around and talk about doing it.

 

While perhaps true, that is not really relevant to whether He would stage a protest of some sort, walk out on his bishop, or quit His calling, if things weren't to His liking.  The point is not whether the meeting length is appropriate or not. Everyone agrees it's too long. The point is more, how do we handle it when things are less than perfect, others behave less than perfectly, and situations are difficult and uncomfortable? Trying to handle these difficult things in a Christ-like manner means, to me, showing patience, long-suffering, and humility, but also incorporates teaching, exhorting, and standing for right with kindness.

[The Folk Prophet]

I think what MOE is saying is that he would walk out if he didn't like how long God was saying it.  Not much better, but still...

 

It amounts to the same thing. If Jesus wants to speak on any subject for any amount of time, I think we ought to listen. We are not wiser than the Master. Seems mistaken to pick and choose which time and subject of God's we deem ineffective.

 

Considering our entire existence is to one end -- to return to the presence of the Savior -- it's a strange idea to condition that based on the His subject matter and our view of how efficient He is being.

 

It's a thread jack subject though...so......

[mordorbund]

Ok, so TFP (and anyone else who wants to chime in - but he's been the most vocal against the proposed solutions) - let's suppose you're a really inefficient and (just for kicks and grins) ineffective bishop when it comes to running a ward council. I take my obligations to sustain you seriously, but your meetings are too long and too unnecessary. What can I do to sustain you?

 

I think letting you continue to waste everyone's time is not really sustaining you. Should I let yo know ahead of time that I have a hard stop 90 minutes after the meeting and walk out? Should I offer to give you training on setting and keeping agendas? Should I just tough it out and find whatever benefit I can? Should I play minesweeper in my head during the official meeting, and coordinate an informal meeting via email that's actually effective?

 

How do you want me to sustain you?

 

 

And, as a bonus, here's then Brother Monson sustaining others in the ward council (starts at 15:41):

 

[The Folk Prophet]

Ok, so TFP (and anyone else who wants to chime in - but he's been the most vocal against the proposed solutions) - let's suppose you're a really inefficient and (just for kicks and grins) ineffective bishop when it comes to running a ward council. I take my obligations to sustain you seriously, but your meetings are too long and too unnecessary. What can I do to sustain you?

 

I think letting you continue to waste everyone's time is not really sustaining you. Should I let yo know ahead of time that I have a hard stop 90 minutes after the meeting and walk out? Should I offer to give you training on setting and keeping agendas? Should I just tough it out and find whatever benefit I can? Should I play minesweeper in my head during the official meeting, and coordinate an informal meeting via email that's actually effective?

 

How do you want me to sustain you?

 

 

And, as a bonus, here's then Brother Monson sustaining others in the ward council (starts at 15:41):

 

 

I suppose I should clarify my  a bit as a general disdain for the storming out/quitting attitude rather than a concrete expression of proposed action.

 

Here's my proposal: Get on your knees. Pray for guidance. Humbly submit to the will of God in all things. Follow the Spirit.

 

It is entirely possible the Spirit might guide one to storm out or quit I suppose. That does not make these things the answer. The answer is to honestly and genuinely follow the Spirit.

 

I had a situation once when I was the Elder's Quorum secretary where I felt quite abused and treated unfairly by the President. He told me that I had to have the HT reporting in by the first Sunday of the month. It did not matter if the first Sunday fell on the first day of the month, that was his rule for me. Things became quite intense when I told him that was not fair. The ward standard was the 10th and the Stake report was by the 15th. He did not care. I can confess this -- I was MAD. So mad that I seriously considered something along the lines of telling him that I'd have it in by the 10th and if he didn't like it he could release me. I struggled a few days with it, with a fair amount of prayer and consideration. In the end, what I determined I was meant to do was support and sustain him, in spite of the fact that he was wrong, and have my report in by the first Sunday. That does not mean I was given the answer that he was right. He wasn't. I still maintain he was wrong. But I was given the answer to sacrifice my will and sustain my leader's mistaken attitude in that case.  I believe the Spirit could have potentially told me to stand my ground and (kindly) tell him that I could not accommodate his request. But if that had been the proper action, it would not have come by way of my frustration and anger. I could only be guided by the Spirit once I settled down and humbled myself and gave to the Lord the idea that I was willing to do His will, whatever that may be.

 

There is a time and a place to quit a calling. As a general rule, it is inappropriate. But the Lord justifies when He guides us by the Spirit, so we follow the Spirit. If we do so, we are justified. This is not to defend our own sense of justice or to satisfy our weaknesses or imperfections, or even to satisfy what we may perceive as just, right, efficient, wise, etc. It is a submission to God's will.

 

That is my point of view. Now, if I unfairly misread the walk-out/quitting sentiments then I can accept that. But I did not read them as submissive and humble, and so...

[estradling75]

I guess I am confused by this whole issue.  The Ward Council is the place were issues affecting the ward can and should be brought up and discussed.  Including overly long and ineffective Ward Council meetings.  Therefore if this is a concern of a member of the Ward Council that Council member has the responsibly to bring it up.  And keep bringing it up and following up with it over multiple meetings.  Chances are other members agree with you.

 

Doing so is well with your stewardship and sustaining of the bishop.  Over time you will either help things change or get released.  Until then at least you are spending some time talking about something you feel passionately about

[MarginOfError]

You do realize what you are saying here is that you would literally walk out on God if you didn't like what He was saying?

 

 

I think what MOE is saying is that he would walk out if he didn't like how long God was saying it.  Not much better, but still...

 

Actually, what I'm saying is that I don't care who it is, God or mortal...if they droning on about something unimportant and taking away time that I could use to do something meaningful and important, I'm leaving.  I've walked out of meetings with priesthood leaders, supervisors, and higher ups at my place of employment.  The consequences: I've always been commended on managing my priorities.  If God is really that upset that I walked out of his recipe spiel, he can take it up with me at our next PPI.

[The Folk Prophet]

Actually, what I'm saying is that I don't care who it is, God or mortal...if they droning on about something unimportant and taking away time that I could use to do something meaningful and important, I'm leaving.  I've walked out of meetings with priesthood leaders, supervisors, and higher ups at my place of employment.  The consequences: I've always been commended on managing my priorities.  If God is really that upset that I walked out of his recipe spiel, he can take it up with me at our next PPI.

 

Which translates to, "I know better than God what constitutes meaningful and important".

 

I know it's academic and theoretical -- but really? I'm not walking out on God for anything. People have been known to be turned into pillars of salt and the like for such things. :)

[Suzie]

I confess I developed a dislike for Church meetings in general. When I just got married, my husband was the First Counselor in the Stake Presidency and the Stake President who I love dearly, had meetings once a week from 6:00pm all the way to 10:00 or even 11:00pm sometimes.

 

It was very frustrating for his counselors and their families. At that time, I was teaching Institute so I would wait for my husband sometimes but then when I realized it was a habit, I stopped and I went straight home. His counselors spoke to him many times about it but it didn't change a thing.

 

No matter how much I love this man, I find it was disrespectful.

[Suzie]

Which translates to, "I know better than God what constitutes meaningful and important".

 

I know it's academic and theoretical -- but really? I'm not walking out on God for anything. People have been known to be turned into pillars of salt and the like for such things. :)

 You seem fixated in trying to add your personal interpretation of things, which I guess it's fine as long as you are aware it is just your opinion.

[mordorbund]

Which translates to, "I know better than God what constitutes meaningful and important".

 

I know it's academic and theoretical -- but really? I'm not walking out on God for anything. People have been known to be turned into pillars of salt and the like for such things. :)

 

The way I read it is if God stops acting like God I shouldn't be expected to indulge him. It is a bit of nonsense really (the whole premise).

 

I can't imagine Jesus or the Father getting upset or considering it sin if Michael or other council members ask to be excused from the creation council meeting when it gets derailed to matters relevant only to the Godhead. If anything, I'd imagine they'd be commended for being good stewards.

[The Folk Prophet]

 You seem fixated in trying to add your personal interpretation of things, which I guess it's fine as long as you are aware it is just your opinion.

 

Ok.

 

I confess I developed a dislike for Church meetings in general. When I just got married, my husband was the First Counselor in the Stake Presidency and the Stake President who I love dearly, had meetings once a week from 6:00pm all the way to 10:00 or even 11:00pm sometimes.

 

It was very frustrating for his counselors and their families. At that time, I was teaching Institute so I would wait for my husband sometimes but then when I realized it was a habit, I stopped and I went straight home. His counselors spoke to him many times about it but it didn't change a thing.

 

No matter how much I love this man, I find it was disrespectful.

 

You likewise seem fixated in trying to add your personal interpretation of things, which I guess it's fine as long as you are also aware it is just your opinion.

 

Useful response, right?

 

Of course it's personal interpretation/my opinion, as is everything everyone ever says. How is pointing that out useful? What if I preamble every sentence I ever write with "In my opinion..." Would that appease the presumption that I'm a holier-than-thou know-it-all who is entirely oblivious to it being my opinion?

 

What, exactly, is the point here? Everyone else who maintains a position doesn't get the talking-down-to, in spite of the fact that they're all just as "fixated" on their ideas and just as opinionated. Why are you singling me out?

 

If you disagree with me on a point, say so.

[The Folk Prophet]

The way I read it is if God stops acting like God I shouldn't be expected to indulge him. It is a bit of nonsense really (the whole premise).

 

I can't imagine Jesus or the Father getting upset or considering it sin if Michael or other council members ask to be excused from the creation council meeting when it gets derailed to matters relevant only to the Godhead.

 

Right. I was reading it as, if I think God stops acting like God I shouldn't be expected to indulge him. Point being, who are we to determine when God is acting like God? There's some serious danger in that sort of approach. Historically, God has done a whole bunch of things that are not very God-like to our modern sensibilities (death, destruction, slavery, animal sacrifice, circumcision, polygamy, etc.) When we start approaching it from a, "I'll follow God until He does THIS" point of view there's danger in that.

 

To clarify -- this is my personal opinion. 

[mordorbund]

Right. I was reading it as, if I think God stops acting like God I shouldn't be expected to indulge him. Point being, who are we to determine when God is acting like God? There's some serious danger in that sort of approach. Historically, God has done a whole bunch of things that are not very God-like to our modern sensibilities (death, destruction, slavery, animal sacrifice, circumcision, polygamy, etc.) When we start approaching it from a, "I'll follow God until He does THIS" point of view there's danger in that.

 

To clarify -- this is my personal opinion. 

 

Revisit your Lectures on Faith. There are some basic principles (some of which are contradictory) which if God does not practice we cannot have faith in Him. If you find out everyone goes to the celestial kingdom regardless of what they believe or do, do you still worship that God? Of course not - he's either not just or lacks judgment. You owe him nothing.

 

And revisit the garden of Eden as well. If God has given you a timely task or stewardship and is chewing your ear on an unrelated matter, it's not out of sorts to point out the conflicts and seek a resolution - even if that means excusing yourself from the meeting.

[The Folk Prophet]

Revisit your Lectures on Faith. There are some basic principles (some of which are contradictory) which if God does not practice we cannot have faith in Him. If you find out everyone goes to the celestial kingdom regardless of what they believe or do, do you still worship that God? Of course not - he's either not just or lacks judgment. You owe him nothing.

 

What you're talking about is different though. The ideology that God must follow certain principles to be God is one thing. The ideology that we should put our absolute, resolute faith in Him whether we understand or not is a different thing altogether. Yes, in principle if God behaved a certain way He would cease to be God. That does not put us in a position to judge His behavior.

 

And revisit the garden of Eden as well. If God has given you a timely task or stewardship and is chewing your ear on an unrelated matter, it's not out of sorts to point out the conflicts and seek a resolution - even if that means excusing yourself from the meeting.

 

You'll have to specify what you're referring to here. I'm not following.