OD Application Project – Section 3

HRDO 604
Eric M. Larson
December 3, 2004

Introduction
Based on preliminary recommendations to improve the Video Ministry at Berean

Baptist Church in Burnsville, Minnesota, the following plan will be implemented and

evaluated primarily during the first half of 2005. (Two minor interventions will be

implemented immediately. Further implementation will be postponed until after the

Christmas holiday season, which is an extremely busy time for Berean.)

Recommendations for intervention fell into three broad categories: improving

training, clarifying vision, and building community. To these was added a goal of

transorganizational development (described below) with other churches near Berean.

Not every good thing can be done at once; the recommended interventions needed

to be prioritized so that the Video Ministry can begin with the “biggest bang for the

buck.” Rust (2004) describes a rubric and matrix for evaluating information technologies

“in the public sector,” which maps very well to the technically-oriented Video Ministry

within Berean’s church organization:

Page 1 of 13 Section 3-[ERIC LARSON]

 Risk/Effort
0 = Solid solution;
addresses recognized needs
1 = Little maintenance
during downtime;
intervention is transparent
to members
2 = Limited service;
inconsistent availability
3 = Requires constant
maintenance.
0 = Few speed/efficiency/
cost issues per task
1 = Some tasks cannot be
completed
2 = Generalized difficulty
in meeting demands; not
dependable
3 = Budget or time makes
tasks possible only at the
expense of others
0 = “Transparent”
1 = Video Ministry image
suffers
2 = Berean’s image suffers
3 = Personally “faith-
shaking”
Value Category
Constituent Service Level
(Of what help is proposed
intervention to the
volunteers in the Video
Ministry?)
Operational Efficiency
(How will the proposed
intervention improve the
overall function of the
Video Ministry?)
Political Return
(What will the “public
opinion” be if the proposed
intervention is
implemented?)
Reward
3 = High value placed on
access and availability
2 = Near-universal use
1 = Limited demand for the
intervention
0 = Available, but not
essential
3 = High rate of completion
2 = Lower problem
incidence, greater volunteer
retention
1 = Facilitates some staff
efficiencies
0 = Status quo; no
additional value to
organization.
3 = Improved Christian
growth
2 = Better engagement in
Berean’s congregation
1 = Increased confidence in
Video Ministry
0 = No apparent
recognition.

High scores in “risk/effort” mean that a proposed

Hot Opportunity
Zone Zone
RISK / EFFORT

intervention is difficult or potentially harmful to

the organization. Low scores in “reward”

indicate that a proposed intervention is of little Maintenance Low-Hanging

Zone Fruit Zone
value. (Adapted from Rust, 2004)
REWARD
Page 2 of 13 Section 3-[ERIC LARSON]
 The earlier recommendations, along with the addition of a transorganizational element,

resulted in a list of ten intervention opportunities:

• Train volunteers on the basics of system operation.

• Establish a Saturday morning “play time” (a “skills development lab”).
• Develop an iterative manual.
• Differentiate tasks and roles among volunteers.
• Clarify the tension between the desire for quality and the impossibility of
perfection.
• Cultivate an understanding that not everyone will fit into the Video
Ministry.
• Involve pastors in affirming volunteers.
• Involve lay leaders in affirming volunteers.
• Publicize the Video Ministry and the work of its volunteers.
• Collaborate with other area churches via a transorganizational
infrastructure.

Each of the recommended interventions was graded according to Rust’s rubric and placed

on the opportunity matrix. The “lowest-hanging fruit” became:

1. Establish a Saturday morning “play time” (a “skills development lab”).

2. Involve lay leaders in affirming volunteers.
3. Train volunteers on the basics of system operation.
4. Collaborate with other area churches via a transorganizational infrastructure.

Skills development lab

Effective immediately, volunteers are encouraged to attend Saturday morning

rehearsals (particularly for the Saturdays immediately prior to the Sundays that they are

Page 3 of 13 Section 3-[ERIC LARSON]

scheduled to work). Here, volunteers may practice camera work with live people on the

actual stage where production events occur. Evaluation will be through observation and

interaction with the participants and through actively asking how the Video Ministry can

help them to “become even better.” Responses to questioning will give a good (albeit

subjective) indication of how engaged particular volunteers are in the Video Ministry.

This “skills development lab” is vitally important for the growth of the Video

Ministry’s skill base. Such practice sessions, occurring in a relevant environment and

paired with a targeted training program of limited scope (discussed below), will serve

Berean’s needs far better than hours of classroom training. (Volunteers would likely find

such training to be disconnected from the actual work that they need to perform.) In

discussing training programs, Eitington (1996) explains that “it is far wiser to concentrate

on limited material, practice, and application than on a lot of ‘standard’ concepts and

theory” (Eitington, 1996, p. 419).

Berean can expect to see increased self-confidence in its video volunteers, and

should encourage this in the hope that confident volunteers will draw others in to join the

ministry. A regular “open house” time will be established to provide an opportunity for

interested “potential volunteers” to ask questions, see the equipment, and build personal

connections to current members of the Video Ministry. Initially, this time could also

include the opportunity for existing volunteers to step in and ask questions. Such contact

time integrates with the expressed need for community building, described below. The

best hours for such “open houses” have yet to be determined; a sample of the target

audience will be surveyed so the most convenient time can be established. Obvious

Page 4 of 13 Section 3-[ERIC LARSON]

candidates are Wednesday evenings (before existing programs begin or after they end) or

Sunday afternoons between services.

Success of the “open houses” will be evaluated by attendance, and by the number

of attendees who join the Video Ministry as regular volunteers. While an overwhelming

response would be very encouraging, the Video Ministry must guard against becoming

truly overwhelmed and thus ineffective at converting “visitors” to “participants.”

Therefore, the frequency of these “open houses” will be no greater than quarterly (once

every three months). In approximately one year (or sooner if unforeseen needs arise) the

Video Ministry infrastructure will be re-evaluated to determine if it can support an

increased response by more frequent “membership drives.”

Lay-leader affirmation
Entering the Christmas 2004 holiday season, the Video Technician Coordinator

will send out personal Christmas cards of appreciation to all current Video Ministry

volunteers. (Such cards are appropriate to the season, yet will “transcend” the ordinary

Christmas card boilerplate and be a sincere and personal expression of thanks for the

contribution made by that particular volunteer.) Edgar (1997) emphasizes that many

different kinds of expressions (certificates, cards, parties, etc.) are valuable, and that

taking the time to express appreciation will increase respect and broaden volunteers’

perspectives. Evaluating the “success” of such an action is difficult – asking, “How did

my card make you feel?” tends to dampen its perceived sincerity. However, during the

diagnosis stage of this intervention, volunteers clearly expressed a desire for greater

affirmation; as long as the expression of that affirmation does not end with a mere annual

Page 5 of 13 Section 3-[ERIC LARSON]

Christmas card, any action here will contribute to the positive environment of the

ministry.

In addition, a “Cabin Fever” gathering in January or February (dates to-be-

determined) will bring the volunteers together for some initial community-building

fellowship. (In some contexts, this would be known as a “party.”) The timeframe within

the first quarter of the year nestles in the “down time” between Christmas and Easter but

occurs before summer (when people withdraw on weekends and go on vacation). The

Video Technician Coordinator will need to be very sensitive to the timing and schedule

of the event, so as not to create “one more thing” that volunteers feel obligated to attend.

Training Intervention
Volunteers who participate in Berean’s Video Ministry need training to increase

their knowledge of, and comfort with, the audio-visual equipment they use. The ministry

needs more volunteers who are better skilled – in fact, it needs some who are so skilled

that they could “back-up” part-time staff. By improving the training infrastructure, the

Video Ministry hopes to improve its “product” and become more attractive to potential

volunteers (removing the anxieties and concerns that act as “barriers to entry” for

participation).

With this training intervention, Berean Baptist Church can expect a better

“product” from its video ministry. Minimally, Berean needs high-quality productions so

the congregation is not distracted from an important message. Beyond that, a better Video

Ministry will reinforce that message as it supports various learning styles within the

congregation.

Page 6 of 13 Section 3-[ERIC LARSON]

 By implementing training that increases volunteer skills and participation, the

Berean Video Ministry can not only help Berean to enhance learning and worship among

members of the congregation who view the ministry’s “product,” but also help Berean to

postpone the hiring of additional part-time audio/visual staff. Volunteers are the life-

blood of the Video Ministry. Without volunteers, Berean would, at minimum, need to

hire two additional part-time staff. At $12.50 per hour and 6 hours per week per staffer

(current rates), two additional staff would cost Berean (2 x ($12.50 x 6)) $150 per week,

or $7,800 annually. As Berean’s Video Ministry grows, additional staff expenditures are

nearly inevitable, but reinforcing a volunteer base now can delay those expenditures.

Equipment/operation lessons
The proposed training will be structured in “modules,” beginning with the most

immediate need of basic camera operation. In addition, this training intervention will

include material about multiple-camera operation, to serve as the initial lesson in a

module for “full-system operation.”

The lessons will be developed in interactive computer-based video format,

because explaining proper video techniques in only written form is rarely effective. The

videos will be self-paced, so volunteers can engage with them in their own homes, at

their own rate. (The technology required to run the training video should not be a barrier

for the target audience; those who have interest in the Video Ministry should have access

to a computer.)

The training video will be reinforced with cheat-sheet “takeaways” that highlight

key points of the instruction. Supplementary instructional materials will be provided so

Page 7 of 13 Section 3-[ERIC LARSON]

an instructor may use the interactive video for illustration during a traditional classroom

training session.

Training Evaluation
Evaluation of the training is contained within the training itself: the modules will

contain self-assessed quizzes so that the volunteer can assess his or her own

understanding of the material. Further assessment of the volunteers’ learning will occur

by putting them through standardized exercises and measuring their performance.

Successful completion of that assessment will grant volunteers “Berean Certified Camera

Operator” status (complete with a certificate “suitable for framing”!), and other

certifications will follow. This is a relaxed yet sincere way to:

• formalize participation in the ministry

• recognize dedicated volunteers (recalling Edgar’s recommendations, above),
and
• communicate to others (both inside and outside the Video Ministry) which
volunteers have specific, demonstrable technical skills that could be applied to
particular needs.
Beyond assessments and certificates, however, is a broader, more holistic

approach to evaluating performance and participation within the Video Ministry.

Cashman (2000) expands on the traditional 360º evaluation (where “leaders are given

feedback multiple sources on their behavior, skills and leadership approaches”) and

introduces the concept of a “720º evaluation”:

Unfortunately, 360º feedback does not reveal the full horizon. From a
development perspective, it only reveals a portion of the person, rather than a total
picture… (T)hey learn how to act instead of how to be… But 720º feedback is
different. It begins with an Inner 360º – a deep, broad, well-integrated
understanding of ourselves, as well as our current and desired stages of

Page 8 of 13 Section 3-[ERIC LARSON]

 development. This first stage ensures that we begin to master a more authentic
understanding of ourselves. Then, an Outer 360º is completed to give broad
feedback on how people above, across and below us perceive our strengths and
areas of development. (Cashman, 2000, p. 112-113)

Such work might sound excessive for someone who is “just a camera operator,”

but that reaction emphasizes the importance of broadening the foundational concept of

assessing Video Ministry volunteers. These individuals’ actions are very visible and set a

tone for worship and learning at Berean. The Video Ministry hopes that its volunteers

will grow to draw in and mentor other participants. Therefore, Cashman’s comments on

leadership can easily apply to their role. Engaging volunteers more fully in the ministry,

and improving their performance, must begin with what Cashman terms an “Inner 360º”

that compels volunteers to evaluate their personal goals and how they relate to the Video

Ministry. Without that foundation of self-awareness, mere critiques like “move the

camera more smoothly” will have little value; they might alter a particular behavior for a

time, but volunteers will realize that their role is that of a robot and will disengage from

the ministry.

Transorganizational development
Cummings and Worley (2001) describe transorganizational development as “a

form of planned change aimed at helping organizations develop collective and

collaborative strategies with other organizations” (p. 479). In the transorganizational

context, Berean Baptist Church is not a be-all, end-all competitive organization. Instead,

the “competitive organization” is Christ’s church, and Berean is an organization under it

that needs to work with other organizations (i.e. fellow churches). Those churches are not

Berean’s competition; instead, the Christian church as a whole is “competing” with other

Page 9 of 13 Section 3-[ERIC LARSON]

religions and secular organizations in an effort to get its message out (or, put terms of the

for-profit market, to “sell its product”). Therefore, in a way, efforts to improve

collaboration among churches are simply improvements among “divisions” of one huge

organization. Yet, because Berean’s peer churches function as independent entities, the

work to enhance communication and cooperation truly is a form of transorganizational

development.

At the moment, Berean’s Video Ministry is in the latter portion of what

Cummings and Worley describe as the “Identification Stage.” This stage identifies

potential churches with which Berean could form a “transorganizational system” (“TS”).

In early 2005, Berean will move to the “Convention Stage,” where representatives from

the identified churches are brought together in a meeting that “enables potential members

to explore mutually their motivations for joining and their perceptions of the joint task”

(p. 483).

Informal evaluation of the Video Ministry’s transorganizational efforts is fairly

straightforward: if participating churches find it valuable, they will continue to

participate. Connections and conversations among members will grow as participants

simply ask, “What do we want to talk about?” or “How are you doing things at your

church?”

Cummings and Worley warn that a TS change agent must maintain impartiality,

noting that, “They need to be seen by members as working on behalf of the total system,

rather than as being aligned with particular members or views” (p. 484). Initially,

“neutrality” will be difficult as the initiative is being led by Berean Baptist Church.

Page 10 of 13 Section 3-[ERIC LARSON]

However, once again, Berean and its fellow churches are not “competing” against one-

another. In addition, churches that choose to participate in this collaboration will in no

way lose their autonomy or independence. Therefore, there should be few pressures

within the group that would result in a push for a leader who is completely free of biases

or any appearance of partiality.

Overall Evaluation
Although it is discussed throughout this document, evaluation of any intervention

is so vitally important that it merits some additional exploration here. Evaluation of the

intervention as a whole will be performed by re-surveying the entire volunteer population

in approximately 6 months with the initial appreciative inquiry questionnaire that was

used in this particular intervention. This fairly limited evaluation is by no means intended

to shirk the responsibility of thoroughly assessing this intervention. Many excellent

organizational assessments do exist, with reliability and validity data that indicate

potentially valuable applications in a church context. Cooke (2000), for example,

discusses the quantitative Organizational Culture Inventory (OCI). The OCI is a well-

known instrument that measures the continuum of “concern for people” vs. “concern for

task” against a continuum of “higher-order satisfaction needs” vs. “lower-order security

needs” (Cooke, 2000, p. 148). The instrument then plots 12 attributes of the organization

on a “circumplex” that is statistically normed against other organizations that have

completed the inventory. However, Berean’s Video Ministry and Berean as a whole are

too small to warrant investment in formalized assessments like the OCI at this time. In

fact, such assessments (with row after row of bubble-sheet questions and answers, color-

Page 11 of 13 Section 3-[ERIC LARSON]

coded graphs and wheels, etc.) could detract from the organic, engaging, collaborative

environment that the Video Ministry needs to reinforce. Lee (1999) explains this

perspective, noting that people come before process:

A supervisor has the challenging responsibility of forming and maintaining

relationships with all the workers s/he supervises. While the context of the
relationship may include tasks like training, coaching or providing feedback, its
essence is a one-to-one connection between two human beings – and all the
complexities and nuances that implies. Good relationships in a work setting are
characterized by mutual trust, mutual respect, and mutual recognition of each
person’s competency and professionalism. (Lee, 1999, p. 2)

Protecting volunteers against an onslaught of assessments does not mean closing

off avenues of communication and evaluation. Beyond the usual communication within

the Video Ministry, regular qualitative “organizational climate” surveys will be given to

volunteers to glean new ideas from them (and also to determine “morale”), which will

help to inform decisions made by Berean’s leadership. But overall, achieving

involvement and increasing communication among volunteers and leadership is more

important than executing a perfectly designed assessment. In its most basic form, ongoing

evaluation will be a continuation of the process begun in this intervention – ask,

investigate, respond, and repeat.

Page 12 of 13 Section 3-[ERIC LARSON]

 References

Cashman, K. (2000). Leadership from the inside out. Provo, Utah:

Executive Excellence Publishing.

Cooke, R. A., and Szumal, J. L. (2000). Using the Organizational

Culture Inventory to understand the operating cultures of

organizations. In N. M. Ashkanasy, Wilderom, C. P., and Peterson,

M. F. (Eds.), Handbook of organizational culture and climate (pp.

147-162). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Cummings, T. G., & Worley, C. G. (2001). Organization development and

change (7th ed.). Cincinnati, Ohio: South-Western College

Publishing.

Edgar, S. (1997). Hooray for volunteers [Electronic Version].

Instructor, 107(2), 80-84.

Eitington, J. (1996). The winning trainer. 3rd ed. Houston, TX: Gulf

Publishing.

Lee, J. F. (1999). What we learned (the hard way) about supervising

volunteers. Philadelphia: Energize, Inc.

Rust, B. (2004, May 11). Risk and reward: The opportunity matrix. Paper

presented at the May 18 Gartner, Inc. online conference.

Retrieved Nov 15, 2004, from

http://www4.gartner.com/teleconferences/asset_70287_75.jsp.

Page 13 of 13 Section 3-[ERIC LARSON]