Organization DescriptionThe organization selected for this project is Wilshire Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), a historic church in the Wilshire District, also known as Koreatown, of Los Angeles, California. The facility is located in one of the most diverse areas of Los Angeles, with over one hundred and thirty languages spoken at home within a three mile radius. The make up of the congregation includes: Filipino, North African, Subsaharran Africa, European-American, African-American, Indonesian, Latin American, South American, Eastern European, Korean, Japanese, Thai, and Iranian individuals.
The organization is a congregationally ran church that has adopted the mission of the denomination which is: “To spread the Gospel from our doorsteps to the corners of the earth” (Disciples of Christ – Pacific Southwest Region, 2009). This is an ill defined mission for the specific nature of the congregation since the “corners of the earth” have come to the church’s doorstep. The philosophy is embodied in the motto: “in essentials unity, in matters of opinion liberty, and in all things brotherly love” (Disciples of Christ – Pacific Southwest Region, 2009). For this congregation, the philosophy has been expanded to include diversity regardless of race, color, creed, status, lifestyle, sexual orientation or nation origin as is repeated in the welcome every week as well as in the Sunday Bulletin.
The core values of the organization have not been redefined for the changed demographics of the geographic area as well as the current membership of the organization. While the core values include respect, diversity, harmony and sharing, these values have not been defined and educated to the congregation. These values have merely been assumed. The current business strategies have been proven inadequate with the changes that have taken place during the past ten years.
The areas of diversity that will be addressed in this proposal include: redefining core values that are relevant to the current membership, that can be put into practice, and that reflect the heart of a multi-ethnic, multi-racial, and multi-cultural congregation. A more practical, more specific mission statement that is directed toward the time, space and location that this group occupies will be developed. And finally, business strategies that incorporate the core values, and redefined mission with the inclusion of the diversity of the congregation and diversity of the area will be developed.
The one key question that will need to be answered is: How can a multi-cultural, multi-ethnic, multi-racial group be empowered to develop a new culture that embodies a harmonious synergy of the individual cultures?
Need for ChangeWilshire Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) is a multi-cultural, multi-ethnic, multi-racial church with no one group outnumbering any other by a significant margin. The organization has traditionally relied upon the discrimination-and-fairness paradigm as described by Thomas & Ely (1996), where the point was to ensure no discrimination of members and treating all members equally. The Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) was formed when the American frontier was in Pennsylvania and the founders Alexander Campbell and Barton Stone, Presbyterian ministers, saw the diversity of the people attending (primarily European groups) and opened the doors of the church to all regardless of previous denominational affiliation. Wilshire Christian Church carries this ideal in its welcome every week: “We seek to extend the Gospel to all people regardless of race, color, creed, status, lifestyle, sexual orientation or national origin through worship, service and education” (Wilshire Christian Church, 2009, p. 8).
While the organization can be proud of attracting such a diverse population, Cox (2001) states: “The challenge of diversity is not simply to have it but to create conditions in which its potential to be a performance barrier is minimized and its potential to enhance performance is maximized” (p. 16). This has been the challenge for this organization: How does one maximize the potential of the multicultural make-up of the congregation? The organization has the mistake mentioned by Thomas & Ely (1996) of the access-and-legitimacy paradigm: “….access-and-legitimacy leaders are too quick to push staff [members] with niche capabilities into differentiated pigeonholes without trying to understand what those capabilities really are and how they could be integrated into the company’s [church’s] mainstream work” (p. 83). The result has been that some members feel exploited as indicated by Thomas & Ely (1996) on page 84.
The result has been a loosely committed membership and a high turnover of members. The historical facility is very expensive to run, especially in the heart of Los Angeles, California. There has been an unstable Executive Board. While it has been made up of a diverse group of people, it has been primarily run by the older white individuals working under the 1950’s corporate rules who have not necessarily recognized the limitation these rules place on an expanding ethnic and culture diversity. With the downturn of the market, the organization has also suffered a severe reduction in the monies it relied on for operations for the past 10 years, a large endowment fund that reduced roughly in half over the past year. Tithing has only made up ten percent or less of the income. There is a definite need to use the diversity of the membership to grow and develop into a unique congregation.
The Executive Board has recently been revised and the members are: two retired European-American women, one working European-American woman, one Filipino woman and one retired African-American man. While this is not truly reflective of the make up of the congregation, it is a much more open group to differing ideas and methodologies than have been entertained in the past. The recent decision was made to share the facility with a fellow Disciples congregation from a uni-culture group and form a partnership between the two congregations to work together for both group’s benefit.
The organization has realized that it can no longer do business as usual and is beginning efforts to recognize the talent and power in celebrating the cultural differences within the group. However, again, as indicated by Cox (1996), diversity must be managed. It is not good enough just to say that people are welcome, they must be integrated and engaged to build a new “culture” within the organization.
It has often been said that the greatest strength is the greatest weakness. This is definitely applicable in the case of my church. Most churches are relatively homogeneous giving many of the members something in common. This enables the group to form meaningful lasting relationships with each other more easily. Where smatterings from all walks of life and all continents converge, it has been to this point, an elusive goal with this organization to become that house on the block where all the kids go after school.
Diversity Definition and VisionThe word diversity has many different definitions for various companies and organizations. One definition considered is the University of Oregon’s definition:
“The concept of diversity encompasses acceptance and respect. It means understanding that each individual is unique, and recognizing our individual differences. These can be along the dimensions of race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, socio-economic status, age, physical abilities, religious beliefs, political beliefs, or other ideologies. It is the exploration of these differences in a safe, positive, and nurturing environment. It is about understanding each other and moving beyond simple tolerance to embracing and celebrating the rich dimensions of diversity contained within each individual (University of Oregon, 2009).
This definition is very comprehensive and encompasses a multitude of individual factors of diversity; however, it is a cumbersome definition that requires contemplation and dissecting to get to the understanding of the definition. Another, looser, definition is relayed by Cox (2001): “I believe it [diversity] is neither so broad as to mean any difference between people nor so narrow as to be limited to differences of gender and race” (p. 3). Cox (2001) goes on to state that: “Diversity is the variation of social and cultural identities among people existing together in a defined employment or market setting” (p. 3). This indicates that an organization that determines its definition of diversity needs that definition to be in context with the core values of the organization, the mission of the organization and the objectives and goals of the organization. In other words, the definition needs to be specific to the organization defining diversity.
Trompenaars & Hampden-Turner (1998) propose that “a useful way of thinking about where culture comes from is … culture is the way in which a group of people solves problems and reconciles dilemmas” (p. 6). With this concept in mind, the definition of diversity at Wilshire Christian Church is: We recognize that we all come from differing ethnic, national and cultural backgrounds with differing life experiences.
All of these factors of our development are valid and have created the unique individuals, individual perspectives, and individual gifts and abilities that are not just tolerated and accepted, but appreciated and used for the edification of each other and service for God. This definition of diversity is appropriate to the organization because of the varied lifestyles, cultures, races and ethnic groups that make up the congregation. The emphasis of this definition reflects the inclusiveness of the organization, the importance of the individual and the leveraging of the differences for the growth of the organization as well as the primary mission of the organization.
Wilshire Christian Church has done an incredible job is the acceptance of the various cultures and races that is evidenced by a membership boasting from 13 distinctly different regions of the world. What Wilshire has not been able to accomplish is the engagement of these individuals into a cohesive, integrated congregation that fulfills the objectives of service and education. The vision for the diversity effort for Wilshire reflects the words of Christ: “Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship to Father in spirit and truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and truth” (John 4:23-24, New International Version).
This includes the precept that we all experience the power of the Holy Spirit and saving grace through our differing cultures and life experiences, that each individual and each group is limited in our concept of God, and that we have individually learned aspects that should be actively shared with others to build an engaged, loving congregation that is able to truly spread the “Good News” to the community through word and deed.
Change Model and AssessmentTwo models presented for consideration are: Cox, T. (2001). Creating the multicultural organization: A strategy for capturing the power of diversity and Kotter (1995). Leading change: Why transformation efforts fail. Cox (2001) is relatively straight forward indicating that cultural change begins with leadership “behavior that establishes a direction or goal for change (vision), provides a sense of urgency and important for the vision”, motivates others and prepares the conditions for change (p. 19). According to Kotter (1995) the first step is for leadership to establish a sense of urgency (p.61). The two models are in line on this point. However, Kotter indicates that forming a guiding coalition for transformation is a second step for his model (p. 16). Kotter goes on to indicate that this group learn to work together as a team, much to the effect of the motto: “United we stand. Divided we fall.” Form a team with enough power to make the change happen. Kotter’s premise reflects that if a critical mass is not reached, the change will not occur. Kotter also urges that the vision be created and the strategies be develop to fulfill the vision by the coalition, else the organization will be in danger of error number two. While Cox’s method does not invalidate this approach, his model appears to be more of a top down strategy
Cox’s second step is research and measurement, which involves gathering the information for the reason for the change effort in the organization. Kotter actually places this under the first step of establishing a sense of urgency. Kotter’s premise indicates that there should be a competitive reason for the change and that the sense of urgency to meet the change is paramount to the success the transformation.
The next step is education. Cox (2001) contends that: “If you can think of one [a major change introduced in an organization without an intensive effort to help people learn new information and skill], chances are the initiative was not successful (p. 21). Kotter’s approach is more related to communication rather than education. Kotter indicates that if an organization does not “use credible communication, and a lot of it, the hearts and minds of the troops are never captured” (p. 63).
Fourth, Cox insists that the management systems must be aligned with the change effort. Cox uses the term “management systems broadly to include any organizational policy, practice, rule or procedure (p. 21). And finally, follow-up which includes “implementing action, establishing accountability for results, and capturing and recycling the learning so that action steps become more and more precise (p. 21). This does capture the eighth step listed by Kotter, “institutionalizing new approaches – articulating the connections between the new behaviors and corporate success and developing the means to ensure leadership development and succession” (p. 61). It also includes the seventh step of “consolidating improvements and producing still more change” (Kotter, 1995, p. 61).Recent developments at Wilshire Christian Church provide a great opportunity for the membership to participate in the reorganization process of re-building the church from the ground up.
The steps to begin to leverage the existing diversity of the organization are right in line with Kotter’s (1995) model:
1. Establish a sense of urgency with regards to bringing members together on a more personal level. This will assist in negating the concept that the church is some large impersonal organization which is one of the challenges presented by the large historical building.
2. Form a guiding coalition of people from differing cultures to work together and develop a strategy on how to engage members and change the formal worship service to include considerations from various cultural approaches.
3. Develop the vision and paint the picture of how the diversity can be put into action that celebrates the creation of God.
4. The vision must be communicated through the sermons, the communion meditations, fellowship time, bible studies, prayer meetings, Sunday Bulletins and the Church newsletter.
5. The members need to be empowered, engaged and assured that their cultural contributions are not only appreciated but necessary.
6. Milestones need to be set up for acknowledgement, achievement and celebration by the entire congregation. In addition, obstacles to the cultural pluralism effort must be recognized in advance when possible and planned for. Education and explanation from the cultural perspective will be paramount to subverting the negative reactions to changes.
7. Ensure that the developing changes continue and find the balance of cultural contributions until the quilt of Wilshire Christian Church has been sewn together. Lastly, ensure that the effects of the effort will stand the test of time. (p. 61).
Characteristics that will definitely need reconsideration begin with the bylaws of the Church which are designed from 1950’s corporate structure that requires formal committees and committee heads. This paradigm has not worked for quite some time with many of the committees headless and no work being accomplished. The need for governance of the congregation should exhibit characteristics of ad hoc committees concentrating on different projects/ministries on the basis of interest and skill level and including different approaches on a relational structure rather than the hierarchical structure that has been tried in the past.
The other primary characteristic of moving forward will be evidence by the purposeful inclusion of differing cultural groups working together on projects/missions to ensure that the various approaches, considerations and end goals are met. This will mostly likely result in longer, more complete analysis of projects and ministries; but it will result in a more comprehensive plan including the intangible goals of the projects/ministries. In the recent, these types of decision and plans have been developed by individuals or disjointed groups without consideration of the interest or effectiveness of differing approaches and views.
Action PlanWilshire Christian Church is presented with a unique opportunity to go back to the denominational roots of lay person leadership and re-creation of a church based upon the diversity of the members. The fact that individuals from such varying backgrounds consistently attend leads me to believe that they are open to moving from the acceptance level as defined by the Awareness SpectrumTM to the appreciation level. In order to accomplish the appreciation of each other, there needs to be a serious effort in exploring those values that each individual holds as important. Through this effort, we can get beyond saying “Hello” and “How are you” to each other and truly begin to understand each other. This is an effort that should begin immediately.
In the past, the meetings and operational decisions have not included cultural aspects of decisions. The meetings will be conducted to assure that these matters are addressed. This will include the best practice of having “diversity linked to strategic planning process, mission, vision” (ASAE Diversity Committee, 2009). It will also be necessary to ensure that “meetings are accessible to all” (ASAE Diversity Committee). This will require a change of operations where meeting agendas will presented ahead of time where members have the opportunity to consider the cultural aspects of the items to be discussed and voted on prior to the meeting so they do not feel “pressured” to make a decision without those considerations.
Setting goals for membership on the Board of Administration that reflect the make-up of the congregation and goals for church membership that reflect the surrounding geographic area is another active step to ensure that the membership of the organization is diverse and can properly spread the Gospel through the area. (ASAE Diversity Committee). While this has been allowed, it has not been used as a strategy for the organization.
My personal effort in this change is to take the concepts I have learned from the course and influence the leadership to setting measureable goals and objectives to re-form the organization. In addition, it is my responsibility to assist in establishing goals of membership diversity and board diversity. In the past, the organization has not actively pursued building a multicultural, multiethnic, multiracial church. It simply happened. In the beginning of this course, I had the notion that all my organization had to do was “leverage” the diversity we have. Now I realize that we must actively search for inclusion based on the demographics to truly serve God and our community.
References
ASAE Diversity Committee (2009). Retrieved on June 25, 2009 from www.associationforum.org/cmaextras/TopTenDivBP.doc
Cox, T. (2001). Creating the multicultural organization: A strategy for capturing the power of diversity. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Disciples of Christ – Pacific Southwest Region. 2009. Retrieved on May 23, 2009 from http://www.disciplespswr.org/
Kotter, John P. (1995). Leading change: Why transformation efforts fail. Harvard Business Review, 73(2), 59-67. Retrieved on May 22, 2009 from Business Source Complete database.
Professional Development Group, Inc. (2003). Awareness Spectrum™. Capella University: Minneapolis. Retrieved on June 15, 2009 from http://courseroom2.capella.edu/webct/RelativeResourceManager/Template/MBA6250/course_files/cf_awareness_spectrum.pdf
The Holy Bible. New International Version. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House. 1996.
Thomas, D. & Ely, R. (1996). Making differences matter: A new paradigm for managing diversity. Harvard Business Review, 74(5), 79–90.
Trompenaars, F. and Hampden-Turner, C. (1998). Riding the Waves of Culture. (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Wilshire Christian Church. 2009. Wilshire Christian Church weekly Sunday bulletin.
We wanted to take a moment to remind you of the great events on the horizon.
Posts
