Disseminating information within the stake

[klapplegate]

As a member of the Communications Council in our stake, I have been asked to provide ideas for Best Practices when it comes to disseminating different types of information to members of our stake (i.e. information that goes strictly to the bishops--like upcoming bishops' training, information to the members on stake events, information on changes on stake events, etc.). With the issues that have been identified with Tools email blasts (a large amount of users not receiving these emails) I am wondering if anyone here has found a system that works well for their stakes to disseminate information before I go and try to "invent the wheel." Thoughts?

[russellhltn]

As a member of the Communications Council in our stake, I have been asked to provide ideas for Best Practices when it comes to disseminating different types of information to members of our stake (i.e. information that goes strictly to the bishops--like upcoming bishops' training, information to the members on stake events, information on changes on stake events, etc.).
...
Thoughts?

That is indeed a problem, but that's an interesting interpretation of the calling outlined in General Handbook 6.2.1.7 Communication (Public Affairs)

For things like Bishop's training, I'd think that would be an assignment for the Stake Executive Secretary, Stake clerk, Assistant Stake Clerk. They should be well enough informed when changes are made so they can update their mailing list.

For events, I'd have a look at the calendar system. You can create calendars that match the desired audience for them to subscribe to. It's also the way used to schedule the buildings. The calendar is available as a web page as well as on Member Tools. It can even be synced to one's personal calendar. The key is to manage the calendars in a way to optimize the signal to noise for the members by placing the events on the right calendars. If the members experience too much noise, they'll stop using it.

[johnshaw]

As a member of the Communications Council in our stake, I have been asked to provide ideas for Best Practices when it comes to disseminating different types of information to members of our stake (i.e. information that goes strictly to the bishops--like upcoming bishops' training, information to the members on stake events, information on changes on stake events, etc.). With the issues that have been identified with Tools email blasts (a large amount of users not receiving these emails) I am wondering if anyone here has found a system that works well for their stakes to disseminate information before I go and try to "invent the wheel." Thoughts?

I worked in a stake where we got this going pretty good. Here is the secret. REQUIRE stake leaders to send everything to the Stake Presidency, the Stake Presidency (execsec/clerk) creates a post with all the information needing to be transmitted and send it to the BISHOP/Branch President ONLY. Require Bishops to distribute as necessary, which hopefully kicks in their own internal mechanism for communication.

Here are some observations on why this is the only way to go:
1. We found the amount of conversation between stake organizations (young men, young women, etc...) was pretty staggering, and often bypassed both the Stake President and the Bishops - nobody with keys was reviewing this data before it's being sent as assignments/information gathering, etc.. much of it was unnecessary
2. When distribution is large, the 'false sense' that you've communicated is VERY REAL. If someone is left off the list those persons have no idea they aren't getting the information while everyone around them has it. Keeping that list updated is a full-time job and unmanageable anyway - Distribute to a single authority in the wards and branches and instruct them to get the information to the right people
2.5 - This false sense is already pretty rampant in our wards and branches because information is openly discussed and known in ward council, where it is assumed, falsely, that everyone has the information also - to avoid this a ward should also have a very specific communication plan.
3. We had the benefit of Stake Presidency review of the information and they could block and/or request information from the orgs, or we could intercept requests that a clerk could easily accomodate at the stake level without a ward org needing to go to their clerk to get the information.
4. Over time there is a COMPELLING reason every week to send the information to more than just the Bishop/Branch Preisdent - RESIST this URGE, as soon as it happens, you're communication has now broken down and everyone again assumes everyone has the information.

This only works if you specifically train the Bishops/Branch Presidents and stake org leaders that THIS is how you will communicate with/to them.

In our stake we sent this on Friday Morning, we called it the Leadership Post - and it had all the stake info they needed in it, Stake Orgs knew they needed to get stuff to the stake presidency (including the execsec and clerk by Wednesday to be considered for Friday.

If you want to do something different, fine, the key is training and agreeing to everything in your plan and then consistently following that plan.

[caillines]

As a Stake Exec Sec (albeit a smaller stake than many in other parts of the world would be):

Calendars
Train leaders and members to make use of the calendars. They are there for a reason.

We have the following:
Two to help with scheduling large events (Essentially we don't want to organise things on dates when we know people won't be around):

• Public Holidays & Major Events

• School Holidays

Then "group" based calendars:

• One for Stake Presidency only things (this is a private calendar with restricted viewing/access)

• One for "Stake Event Calendar" - this is where things like stake conference go, but also Stake/High Council Meetings etc

• A bunch that are used for specific areas/organisations - YM/YW/Combined Youth/RS/Primary/etc

Messaging

• Stake Leadership (Bishops, Bishoprics, Stake/High Councils, etc) - LCR "Send a message", direct email, or WhatsApp group depending on the situation

• Stake Conferences/Activities - LCR "Send a Message" + Stake Facebook group post

I will help put things in the appropriate calendar for stake organisational leaders, but announcing organisation activities is left up to them as their communication channels are better than mine.

Finally, our bishoprics are also pretty switched on to what is happening as far as upcoming events and so are pretty good at announcing them in sacrament.

Keep in mind all of this is a for a SMALL stake.
----
John's final point is good

the key is training and agreeing to everything in your plan and then consistently following that plan.

[BrianEdwards]

I'd also point out a recent Official Letter from Aug 2022 titled "Responsibilities of Executive Secretaries for Communication". Although this letter and the Handbook sections it references, are specific to handling communication from Church employees and volunteers, the underlying principle remains that Stake Presidents and Bishops should be allowed to focus on their core responsibilities that only they can fulfill. Much of the "key holder" aspect of their calling can be delegated for matters that do not fall into the "only-the-Bishop-can-do-this" type of category. I know some Bishops still are unable to dedicate their time and energy to the children, youth, and young single adults, in the way they have been asked to do, because they are still burdened with many aspects of their calling they have not been able to delegate successfully.

Of course for those Bishops who have successfully delegated many items, the challenge then becomes how to still remain a responsible steward, and ensure things are functioning. Everyone's situation will be unique, I'd just caution the understandable desire to include Bishops (or even Bishoprics) in all communication loops by default, when perhaps the Ward Executive Secretary is a better choice. But that's for sure a determination best made by each set of local leaders.

[johnshaw]

Of course for those Bishops who have successfully delegated many items, the challenge then becomes how to still remain a responsible steward, and ensure things are functioning. Everyone's situation will be unique, I'd just caution the understandable desire to include Bishops (or even Bishoprics) in all communication loops by default, when perhaps the Ward Executive Secretary is a better choice. But that's for sure a determination best made by each set of local leaders.

A single email of announcements 1 time a week isn't a burden that will kill the Bishop especially as he'll just tell the ExecSec to send it out. The reason to keep it to Bishops only, and I'm serious about it is because you can't chase down every change to the process that happens. One Bishop will say, well, my execsec is busy, so can you send it to the clerk also, and then the ask will be, well, my execsec travels and so the clerk does some of his stuff can you include clerks too, and someone else will ask that the Bishopric counselor be on the list, and now you're back to managing lists that will ensure either things get missed OR that there is the false sense that it's been communicated. the communication becomes more and more meaningless the more people it touches.

I watched it happen, I watched it become meaningless, I watched as the list was expanded and sooo many people weren't getting the message that stake orgs started sending directly to ward orgs again, we had to fix it in the middle of what we were doing, had to reset it, because of ONE stake presidency member who would DIRECLTY contact an assistant stake execsec and have him add groups of people to the distribution and the rest of the stake presidency wasn't aware. He wasn't a believer in the system, he wanted to add all his little favorites and all the people within his 'perview' and all he did was reduce the effectiveness of the communication.

Keep it simple send it to the Bishop/Branch President who can engage whatever ward communication plan there is (likely an assignment to the execsec). The Bishop can take 10 minutes to read a note from the stake and take another 30 seconds to forward the email. I wish there was a better way, but I don't think there is.

Also, because LCR doesn't work for everyone that is currently a poor way to send messaging, including the fact that nearly anyone under 40 doesn't' use it anymore.

[russellhltn]

The reason to keep it to Bishops only, and I'm serious about it is because you can't chase down every change to the process that happens. One Bishop will say, well, my execsec is busy, so can you send it to the clerk also, and then the ask will be, well, my execsec travels and so the clerk does some of his stuff can you include clerks too, and someone else will ask that the Bishopric counselor be on the list, and now you're back to managing lists that will ensure either things get missed OR that there is the false sense that it's been communicated. the communication becomes more and more meaningless the more people it touches.

The other thing is that you want ONE person to be responsible for grabbing the ball and running with it. When you have a group, there's a diffusion of responsibility - the tendency to think someone else in the group will run with it, leaving no one to run.

The nice thing about email is it's easy to add assignments when forwarding the email. Forwarding prevents "the telephone game" where the message gets distorted each time it's retold.

[lajackson]

I am enjoying this discussion. I believe communication is vital to the success of any organization.

I also wonder what I would have done when two of my bishops did not have email or even own computers.

And I still recall with fondness all of the unprintable things people said about me because I would not check my email more than once a day.