Ethical Companies

It is good to see companies being monitored for ethical behaviour.  However, as always there are question marks about what constitutes ethical behaviour.  Personally I see the treatment of employees as a major part of this and do not consider the "rank and yank" approach to appraisals as ethical.  I don't know whether they still use it but General Electric certainly used to and lo and behold they appear on the ethical companies list!

Shouldn't there be a threshold for this?  Good policies in one space shouldn't be able to outweigh bad ones in another.  After all they are the only company ranked in their sector.  Or is this a case of not being able to agree that "rank and yank" is bad?

What about Extra Curricular activities?

Is this person unfit to be a teacher because of this photo (with a caption saying "drunken pirate")?

I have blogged before about the perils of the net when it comes to employment.  But decided to have another go after seeing this article in the Guardian about someone arrested for a tweet, and someone else refused a teaching degree, they claim on the basis of a My Space entry.  I haven't fully read the judgement in this case, although comments on one of the sites covering it suggests that the issues were other than the photo.

What interests me about this are the range of views that exist in this area, for example the comments on this version of the story, from what you do off the job is no one elses business through to everything you do is part of the job (perhaps only for certain jobs).  It also touches on Red's question on differences of opinion.  Are there jobs where your behaviour off the job disqualifies you from carrying out the job?  I think the answer has to be yes - although with qualifications.  Nobody is perfect (I know this will come as a shock to some of you out there ;)) so the question becomes what imperfections do we focus on?  Red asked whether we would make a priest having an affair a Bishop - slightly tongue in cheek I would ask whether we would make a priest lending money a Bishop - after all the Bible says more about usury.  The same goes for other public roles, doctors, politicians and of course teachers.

I guess where I fall on this is that there are behaviours which would disqualify people from certain jobs, but having your photo taken as above isn't one of them.

What are exams for?

My daughter is about to start her exams (again!), but what are they for?  This might seem a silly question, but the answer determines an awful lot of other issues.

Broadly the choice is that exams are either to show the innate intelligence of children or to determine which children are most suited to further education or various jobs.

When I did exams I believe that they were to determine who was most suited to further education and jobs but somewhere they seem to have morphed into ways of showing innate intelligence.  Does this matter?  If you believe (as I do) that innate intelligence is not a good correlator for the ability to do a good job outside of academia then it does mean that exams are no help for this.

Universities and employers still appear to want to select the "best" (or perhaps most appropriate) candidates. However exams no longer provide this information.  I also recently got involved in a conversation about extra time for exams.  In the real world if someone needs additional time, or special surroundings that is potentially a drawback to carrying out their duties, but exams no longer tell this.

The problem is that universities are starting to set their own exams because they cannot determine what they wish to know from public exams, and I suspect that more employers will start to do the same.  When I was recruiting we used literacy and numeracy tests together with psychometric profiling - what is the literacy and numeracy other than an exam?

So why do we have the exams we do?  Answers on a postcard please!

Working from Home and Social Media

Not my office - far too little paper around for that!

I was sparked into thinking about working from home by this blog post.  Although I work from home, and have the issue of not having colleagues working alongside me at least in this church we say morning prayer together every day and have the opportunity to chat afterwards.

However, I am not going to blog on work - I have done that a reasonable amount already, but on my observations on social media.  Perhaps unsurprisingly I know a lot of vicars!  A subset blog and Twitter and Facebook and one of the things that I have noticed is that particularly blogging and Twittering (no I don't tweet) build communities and provide a a virtual neighbour for that displacement activity which is essential when that sermon just has to be written (like now!).  This is far from a scientific observation, but I am starting to wonder whether the growth in these media is in part down to the reduction in community in the workplace, providing a virtual community which will still be there when the current job isn't.

However, it can also be very addictive and at present I don't have time to tweet and don't feel the lack of community - although either of these might change!

The Value of Sport

Do you remember the old joke about having aches in places you didn't know you had places?  Well that is me today!  Yesterday I played my first game of cricket for about a year, and bowled for the first time in about 10.

It was a practice game before the serious stuff of the Church Times competition and for some reason unbeknownst to the rest of us the captain had picked last years runners up as our practice competition.  Suffice it to say we did not win and three big sixes got hit off me.  Still, I managed to fend off their quickest bowler at the death, although what I was doing facing him I still don't know.  He bowled a no ball and I called the other batsman for a bye - why?  I could have stayed at the non strikers end safe and sound.  That said I was pleased that I did as I discovered I could still see the ball and he didn't seem that fast (just hope we don't meet them again, or he doesn't read this!).

Still, I had an enjoyable day out and found out a bit more about my fellow players - relationships are important, and this is another way of building them.

Sabbath

Sabbath is the day on which all your work is done - even if it isn't.  So said Rob Bell at Greenbelt last year (free download here - about 45 mins into the talk).

It is part of a question and answer session that I didn't hear at the time, but which having listened to it in the car has made a big impression on me.  He was asked what he did, but rather than answer the question he challenged us all to think what it was that we "had" to do - that was what we should stop doing on our Sabbath.  As an example he switches his mobile off and doesn't answer email on his Sabbath - now there's a thought!  He said that his wife has her life run by lists - so for her the Sabbath includes no lists.

So what is it for me?  I think the computer definitely stays switched off, and the mobile would if it were an issue, but it is so often a blessing for meeting up with people.  One of the implications of this is that there will be a blogless day (Saturday), perhaps more as a symbol than anything else, but I believe a good one nonetheless.

Am I adequate?

One of the problems with being a priest is that I (and I suspect many others) keep thinking that others are being a priest so much better than I am.  There are said to be many workaholic priests (why can I never find the references when I want them?) - and in any gathering the chances are that they are there - after all, if they weren't workaholic they would be taking time off wouldn't they?

The Vernacular Curate wrote about this in another way and soon after I read his blog the following quote appeared in my in box:

We tend to manage life more than just live it. We are all over-stimulated and drowning in options. We are trained to be managers, to organize life, to make things happen. This is what is built into our culture, and probably into human nature. It is not all bad, but if you transfer that to the spiritual life, it is always heresy. It doesn’t work. It is not gospel. We might be productive and popular, but we will not be spiritually fertile or free.  Richard Rohr

My spiritual director quoted Monica Furlong to me:

I am clear about what I want from the clergy. I want them to be people who dare because they are secure enough in the value of what they are doing, to have time to read, to sit and think, and who face the emptiness and possible depression which often attack people when they do not keep the surface of their mind occupied ... I want them to be people who can sit still without feeling guilty, and from whom I can learn some kind of tranquility in a society which has almost lost the art.  Quoted by Gloucester Diocese

 This resonates with me - but it is so hard to achieve - even more so when colleagues are rushing around "achieving" so much.

And yet one of the things that I have valued about my curacy has been precisely the time to read and to sit and think and to face up to who and what I really am.

Work - Again!

From http://www.wolfescape.com/Humour/WorkStress.htm, with some other workplace jokes.  It was a real trip down memory lane!

Nothing is really work unless you would rather be doing something else.  James M. Barrie

It is a while since I blogged on this here, in fact much longer than I thought!  And then the above quote came into my inbox on the day that I saw my spiritual director and he challenged my definition - where is time for me - what hobbies do I have?

Life used to be busy.  I had a full time job and was studying part time and doing things in the local church.  Work was the job and study and ministry was my "hobby".  Then I was made redundant and was able to become full time in the church.  Suddenly my "hobby" had become my job.  That was 2 years ago, and I haven't found a hobby yet.  Perhaps blogging counts, although it falls into the same category of a lot of other things that I do - it could be considered part of the job.  Similarly with reading - I enjoy reading without a purpose!  We were told that when we started studying that it would ruin reading for us and for a while it did, but I seem to have made it back again.  Perhaps because I struggled to study.  We were told that study was answering a question and to use the index - I prefer to read and be surprised by what I find and by the connections that appear between the strangest things.  But most of my reading is theology of some kind.  I also like chatting with friends - but most of the chat could in some way or other could be called work.  Hence the reason that I came up with the definition that I did.

The best that I could come up with was that I am hoping to play some cricket this summer - if selected.  Except that it is for a team of vicars!

Less is More

Recently I read an article quoting a priest saying that the less he did the better things were (of course I paraphrase) and frustratingly I can't find it to pass on.  I remembered it when I was talking about how if we take on something new we have to drop something to make space for it and was then reminded of my experience at work.

Obviously if your job is to make things or physically do something then less is not more!  Although perhaps the better athletes can achieve more with less - they always said that Teddy Sheringham beat people in his head.  However, I was latterly a manager and my job was to achieve things through other people.  When I discovered my vocation and starting training for the priesthood (whilst working full time) I found that I cut back the hours that I did (still exceeding my contracted hours), and yet I also felt that I was more effective than when I had been busier myself.  Similarly whilst I was working my notice, having been made redundant, I found that by doing less myself, as I handed over my responsibilities to others, and empowering those who worked for me, I got complimented for the work that I was doing.

As a priest it can be tempting to do too much - after all I am the one who doesn't have another job to do.  But, as at work, where I realised that doing the right thing was so much easier than forcing through the wrong thing, so in the church - if it is worth doing then others will chip in, and if they don't then perhaps it is the wrong thing to be doing!

Recruitment

I am off on a course to learn how to write CVs and be interviewed in preparation for my next job.  This seemed a little odd to me as coming from industry I am more than used to doing these kind of things, and even had some outplacement help as part of my redundancy.  Of course not all clergy have this background - I was talking to one who used to be a singer - auditions yes, interviews no.  That and this article set me thinking about recruitment techniques.

In my previous career we used Competency Based Interviewing, and we used it at all levels - we believed that the detailed technical stuff was more easily taught that the competencies that we were after.  For me a competency based interview is based around the person spec, and I was horrified to hear of a company who purported to carry out a competency based interview on behalf of another company without seeing the person spec!  However, having interviewed with the church I am aware that they do not necessarily use this approach - discovered when I was told to stop asking about the past and ask what they would do in the future - a big no no in competency based interviewing.

So how does this work for auditions?  What it says to me is that there are times when the performance is everything, and others when teamwork, or organisational skills or what ever are key.  If it is about performance of a specific task then use an audition, but if you want the person to get on with others consider other approaches.  It isn't always obvious which is which though!  Something like football might be expected to be about skill, but Sir Alex Ferguson has sold players because of their attitude and the impact that it might have on others.

For me the interesting thing about the article was that the recruiter wasn't only interested in technical skill, but also in networking skills and personal interest in the form of personal projects.  Fair enough, but he then found a way to measure these attributes objectively using information in the public domain.  However, as the article points out - now that people know can this be faked?

Shorter Working Week

This article suggests that the working week should be shortened to 21 hours.  I have blogged before (here and here) about work and working hours as a vicar, and wonder about the practicality of this.  It is all very well suggesting that people cut their hours and earn less, but there are some people who cannot live on less - are we going to double the minimum wage?  Might not be a bad idea - but then of course there will be battles to maintain differentials.

And when it comes to a lot of professional work, do we really believe that people work long hours for the extra money?  I believe that most of our professionals and senior managers work the hours they do because of their will to win - their ability to do whatever it takes to get the outcome they desire.  I have blogged before about control, and of course it might be good if that could be taken away, but while people believe that they control their own destiny then it will be hard to get them to act in a way that contradicts this.

And vicars?  I know people think that we only work on Sundays, but depending on your answer to what is work for a vicar then 21 hours might not give any time to do anything other than pray and lead services - or might that be a good thing? J


Christian Aid update:

‘We had 13 children, but four of them died.’  What Leandro wants more than anything is to keep his children healthy. 80% of his family’s diet is potato. Chronic malnutrition and infant mortality are huge problems in Bolivia. Christian Aid is helping to fund seeds, tools and training so families there can build greenhouses and grow vegetables to eat and sell. Could you hold a Super Soup Lunch on 26 March? Visit www.christianaid.org.uk/super-souplunch.

Mmm - I am on a residential on 26th and will be travelling at lunchtime, so no I can't.  But is this a convenient excuse?

MBA Oath - Faith for the 21st Century?

Have you heard about the MBA Oath?  Among other things it includes:

I will seek a course that enhances the value my enterprise can create for society over the long term

There has been some debate about this in BusinessWeek with an INSEAD Professor arguing that it would violate directors fiduciary duties in some situations.

The question is what is for the good of a business?  Is profit today always better than profit tomorrow?  Increasingly business is being driven by quarterly results, but I know of a business where, not that long ago, the MD and FD didn't let the other directors know what the financial results were.

Is the drive for measurability for good or bad?

Certainly directors can argue that the government sets the context within which they work, and if the government wants businesses to have a social conscience then they will have to legislate for it.  And yet some businesses are working in this way.  I heard of a large solicitors where the staff do voluntary work, reading with children in school and offering free legal advice in legal centres, and where promotion depends upon having spent some time doing this!  Why?  Call me cynical, but I believe that they must see some benefit to themselves from this activity, there is no compulsion to do it, and it may cost them money.

Is it perhaps about what these activities do for the person doing them?  Does it make them a different kind of person - and does it make them the kind of person that businesses would rather employ?

Compare this to faith.  As well as having the doctrines to be believed, faith has encouraged people to care for the weaker in society, and I think that it is that caring which transforms people more than any belief that they have.

So, have we discovered faith for the 21st Century?  And what have those of us who hang onto an older one done wrong?  Is it perhaps the clinging so tightly to doctrine that has stopped people discovering the change of life that comes from loving others?

More thoughts on Work!

I once read that an artist is an artist because they decide they are, and I decide that this could apply to being Christian - I am a Christian because I choose to be.

This was said in Sundays sermon, and apart from being a great quote it also set me thinking that work is what I decide it is!  I have been so used to work being what someone else decides is it that I forgot that I am now the arbiter!  It is certainly far harder now to determine what is work than it used to be when I travelled to an office and worked when I was there and didn't when I wasn't (I was quite strict with myself, taking work home about twice in 30 years, though I might have stayed late in the office).

  In a previous post I was challenged on why I had blogged on this topic, and after some thought decided that my answer was worth another blog!!!  So I had better at least answer the original question.  The question posed was:

I guess my first question is why are you asking?

I don't really believe there are 'one size fits all' answers.. hence if someone is asking the question it suggests that they are not happy with the level of work because they are stressed or because they feel guilty because they are not stressed?

I think I was posing the question about how much I work, and what counts as work at least in part because a friend had challenged me on that.  That came about because I had just had a post Christmas break and had recognised (again) that I had been overdoing it beforehand - something that I have recognised just about every holiday for the past 30 years.  When I said that this time it would be different I was then challenged with the Einstein quote:

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

So am I going to do anything different?  I don't know!  Part of the problem is that things crop up that I want to do, and I can see how I can fit them in - but what suffers is "vegging" time - perhaps not very yuppy (link for the younger readers), but something that I believe is necessary.

I have wondered about following some advice given to me, in story form, by a wise old priest:

When a monk is hoeing the cauliflowers, and the bell for chapel goes with one cauliflower left, does he put down the hoe and go to chapel, or does he hoe the final cauliflower and run to chapel?

Of course the right answer is to put down the hoe.  And yet for years I have worked by doing things when I was in the mood for that task - I felt and still feel that it is better to do a particular task when I have the energy for it.  In my previous career I went home as a sort of putting down the hoe - but it was usually when the last cauliflower was hoed.  Now of course my work is always there, and there is a greater overlap between work and leisure - after all, I was doing this work voluntarily on top of my other job before becoming full time.

I think where I have reached is that I am paid not to work - so what I do is largely my own choice.  Given that, then I need some way of monitoring myself.  This post gave me some ideas, as although I don't find the issues raised there a particular issue I realised that there are times when I become brain dead, and there are times when I am tempted to cut back on family and friends - so the answer is to take time out when brain dead and to cut back when family and friends aren't getting enough time.

What is work? And how much should a Vicar do?

Talk to many clergy and you will hear comments like "what private life", or in the worst cases boasting of how many hours a week they work (the best example I heard of this was counting time in the gym, even though they didn't talk to anyone, because they might have done).  Our Diocesan Bishop, John Pritchard, wrote, in "The Life and Work of a Priest", that he thought that priests should work 50 hours a week - equating it to a "normal" job plus the time that a layperson would give voluntarily.

Having given a significant amount of time voluntarily as I trained whilst working full time, my reaction was that the time that I gave was different from work - the old saying "a change is as good as a rest" comes to mind.  To be fair he also suggests that we should look for a "6th day ministry" - doing something that energises us outside the parish, so perhaps the balance is restored.  However, another book ("If you meet George Herbert on the Road...") refers to the Bishop's book as "The Life and nervous break down of a priest".

During training we were offered two models for working - one was to divide the day into 3 and work 2 of them - the other to divide it into 5 and work 4 - we weren't told how long these should be, but I have figured that 2x4hours or 4x2hours are both 6x8 hour days = 48 hours - conveniently the European Working Time Directive restricts working to a 48 hour week which was also pointed out to us - although of course as Office Holders we are not subject to it.

So - having worked out how many hours - what is work!  That might seem a simple question, but many clergy I have spoken with have difficulty working this one out.  One curate of my acquaintance has even been heard to say "that's not work, I enjoy it".  And of course there is the whole question of being versus doing - we are priests all the time - whether in a full time or part time role, whether paid or unpaid.  So what do you think?  Are any or all of the following work?

• Private prayer
• Time vegging after a funeral
• Reading news, books, blogs
• Talking to friends about things which would be work if they were parishioners
• Networking with fellow clergy
• Watching films - I once got a sermon illustration from Home Alone 2, and Avatar had spiritual themes
• Writing books - not that I have pretensions, but plenty of clergy (particularly Bishops) are also authors

Perhaps the key is to remember Bishop Stephen reminding us that we are paid not to work!

Pressure of Work

Lord God, before I am exhausted from earning every last penny, filling every last second, pushing every last boundary, show me a better way.

This quote comes from the Christian Aid daily Bible reading web site and I think it contrasts with todays message from the variable site I have quoted before - and I like it!

When I was employed in industry I used to fight against the always active approach - and so often I saw people busy doing things, which if they had stopped and thought and found another way would have been so much easier.  But perhaps that was my downfall.  Now in theory I have the ability to take that time - Bishop Stephen reminded us at Diocesan Synod that a stipend is money so that we do not have to work - I still find that when I reach a holiday I am exhausted and need to just stop.  Why is it I have this ability to think that I can "just fit that one more thing" in?  I have a friend who says that if you open a new door then you have to close another - and they are no better at it than I am!

Anyone out there got the answer?  And I'm not looking for a time management system - that defeats the objective!