Report
of Ad Hoc Communications Committee
Summary
The
Ad Hoc Communications Committee sees a communication system in our church that
has recently been intentionally improved in many ways, e.g. the web site was
fully revised in the past year and a standard format for the QCU, designed in
the recent past, is being used. However
we also see existing communications challenges including:
q
Ensuring understandability for newcomers –
Our in-house jargon and acronyms can be confusing.
q Ensuring
consistency of messages - All communications should
provide consistent information.
q Ensuring
timeliness of all communications – It is a challenge to
make certain information is timely.
q Identifying
current communication policies and procedures – We presently
have a one-page grid descriptive of our communication methods and bits and
pieces of policies scattered in history and documents. Communication policies and procedures are not
readily identifiable or available.
|
Overall
Communication Recommendations[1] |
|
1.
We recommend a
permanent “communications committee” meet quarterly or as needed to ensure
consistency of the web site, QCU and other major communications methods.
Ad Hoc Committee members will participate.
Publicity and social justice will invited as well. |
|
2. We
recommend the board authorize the communications committee to draft formal,
written policies and procedures (P&P) regarding all of our various
communication media. These
P&P will include length limits, submission deadlines, and guidelines for
appropriateness of material and will give staff and volunteers preparing our
communications the authority to enforce P&P. |
|
3. For your information (FYI) (no vote necessary): we plan to create a
list of communications tips” to be published in QCU, posted on bulletin
boards and included in the directory or in a separate “how to be a member”
manual. |
Why Review Our Church
Communications?
Because
(1) churches that grow from smaller to larger (“pastoral” to “program”) in size, usually find that
previous informal communication systems need to become more intentional and
formal to ensure that “everyone knows,” and (2) our church appears to be making
this transition, as discussed in the “Raising the Roof” study completed in our
church last year, in November 2005 the board of trustees appointed an Ad Hoc
Communications Committee to review our current communications and make
recommendations for future communication system development. This committee based its review on
recommendations in the UUA’s new public relations manual.[2] We
also looked at sample communication and public relations policies in mid-sized
churches in
Goal: to maximize the
amount of information that flows efficiently and effectively to all who need it. Please note: communication among people is imperfect and
no communication plan will solve all communication problems. However, we do believe that implementing the
following recommendations can help smooth communication as we grow.
Committee Members: Len Adams – QCU
newsletter editor; Laurie Bertsche – membership coordinator; Karen Fowler –
website (qcuu.org) committee chair; Ann Reese – QCU compiler, responsible for
room use, orders of service, and much more; Barb Robinson – board of trustees
representative, committee convener
Focus: The committee has focused its initial
efforts on internal communications. In the future, it would be advisable to
ensure consistency between internal and external communications
Organization of Report: Per
the UUA materials already cited, we have taken an inventory of current
communications within our congregation and have organized our report in the
following sections:
q
Explicit Communications
q Unconscious
Messages
Both sections of this
report include text boxes with recommendations for future action. Some of our recommendations can be
implemented by the committee and are not of sufficient change from current that
they require board approval. These are
shown in normal type. Others are
policy changes or major changes that the committee requests the board to
consider. These are indicated in bold, italic type. For three topics in the “unconscious
messages” section, we noted issues of concern for the board’s attention but
made no recommendation.
Explicit
Communication
The
QCU (Newsletter)
Strengths:
q Inclusivity
– The QCU offers a great deal of information – clearly delineates activities
for all to see. Includes mission, staff
and volunteer names and numbers, key e-mail addresses, business hours.
q
Availability to visitors – The QCU is sent
for a limited time to visitors who sign the guest book so that they have a
taste of who we are and what we do but is not a nuisance to those who have no
interest.
q Availability
to regular mailing list - The QCU is published every two weeks by mail, e-mail
and web posting, making it accessible several ways. This schedule seems to work. The QCU is also available on-site.
q Readability/format
– The QCU is not cluttered with quotes and artwork for sake of filler. The font is readable. (When we make the font smaller to save space,
some cannot read it.) (See challenges
below.)
q Organization
– We have a standard format, which we do follow.
q Cost-effectiveness
– We have maximized cost-effectiveness (1) through use of a single color of ink
(black) and (2) by mailing over 200, thus qualifying for bulk rates.
Challenges:
q
Timeliness – QCU submissions often come in
after the official deadline - forces secretary to rush.
q
Readability/format – Several factors make
the QCU less readable than it might be:
(1)
Because we have no guidelines, submissions are often wordy, or in need of
editing/rewriting.
(2)
Because we limit the QCU to one color of ink (for the sake of cost), we do not
have the attractiveness of color.
(3)
Because we minimize the cost of paper, ink sometimes bleeds through.
q Some
sections are not as fully utilized as they might be. E.g. Committees have a section but may not
remember to post information that needs to be shared.
|
QCU Recommendations: |
|
4.
FYI: In addition to developing
formal P&P’s to address length and content issues, we plan to: q
Re-explore potential options and costs
for adding color (e.g. pre-printed color letterhead, risograph, quick-print
options, etc.). We will report back. q Explore
cost of using higher quality paper. We
will report back. |
QCUU.
Strengths:
q
Very well organized, informative and easy
to use.
q
Initial impression is “serene,”
“beautiful,” “fresh.”
q
Pictures are excellent, thanks to Joe
Maciejko and to Internet Committee.
q
Most information is up-to-date.
q
Sermons and other thoughtful pieces are
available in written form on the website.
The committee plans to add audio recordings of Sunday sermons in the
future.
q
Clipped information from the electronic
version of the QCU is included on the website. Full newsletters are not posted for reasons of
privacy (personal phone numbers and
e-mails.) For these reasons, PDF
versions of the newsletter haven’t been kept up to date but no one has
requested them.
q
Generates interest on the part of people
surfing the web – we receive visitors as a result.
q
Lists committee members as well as
chairs. The Internet Committee is
working on ways to make certain this list is up-to-date.
Challenges/Issues:
q Currently,
we have no written policies and procedures as to what is appropriate for
posting on the site (e.g. children’s names or info, e-mail addresses or other
member contacts).
q
q List
of committee chairs is not current and there is not a mechanism for keeping it
current on the website or having a consistent hard-copy list of committee
chairs/members with secretary/others.
q Other
than the names and numbers of key board contacts, there is nothing about the
board or its responsibilities or our type of governance on the website.
q Maximizing
search engine access to our site is an ongoing challenge.
|
Website
Recommendations: |
|
5. In addition to developing recommended
P&P for the website, the Internet Committee is now working on several
improvements including: q
Creating an updating system for the
committee chair/member list so that it is current and consistent on both the
web site and in hard copy. q
Putting the mission and vision statements
on an introductory page for the site or making them more visible (to be
completed when vision/mission process is done). q
Including more information on governance
and the board (however, we do not recommend posting the board minutes
at this time. (These are available in
hard copy and are not being requested and the board chair does a good job of
creating informative columns on relevant topics in the QCU.) q
Maximizing search engine access to our
site. q
Adding audio access to Sunday services on
the site. |
Directory (220 copies)
Strengths:
q Double
entry for couples with different names - easy to find spouses/significant
others.
q Very
inclusive – updated annually. Great
resource.
Challenges/Issues:
q May
include too much information: do we need
hobbies? birthdays? employment?
The more information included, the harder it is to keep it current and
the more paper/cost.
q Should
we add a field for “significant other”?
q Would
a smaller font or different layout consume less paper and cost less?
q Current
directory includes two parts: (1)
names/addresses and bio information and (2) “how to be a UU” information –
everything from how to make coffee to discussion of what membership means. We re-publish the whole thing every year when
only the bio section changes appreciably. This takes time and wastes paper.
q Would
like to use color (see QCU discussion above).
In-house or commercial printing?
q Currently
comes out in February to allow for inclusion of fall new members. Some would like to see it come out in the
fall.
|
Directory
Recommendations: |
|
6.
FYI: The committee is
undertaking a number of improvements we believe are not of sufficient scope
to require board approval as follows: q
Re-evaluating which biographical
information fields are important to the congregation - delete or add fields
as required. q
Considering reformatting to improve
readability and cost-effectiveness.
This may involve different size and different plastic binding. q Evaluating
potential improvements offered by using existing database software to create
biographical portion of directory (MemInfo, Publisher “catalog”). q
Dividing the current directory into two
publications – one including biographical listings and one with the “how
to’s” of membership and church activity. q
Considering expanded use of color and
budget implications. The committee may
make a future recommendation to the board on this. q
Keeping the current publication date but
adding an update to be distributed in the fall. If
any of these prove to have budgetary impact, we will follow the appropriate
procedures for recommending budget changes. |
Communications from
Minister (in QCU and Sermons)
Strengths:
q
Minister is an engaging writer and speaker
who chooses interesting topics. These
talents give the church a public “face”/“personality.” Sermons are often dynamic and spontaneous.
q
Some sermons are available in written form
on the website and minister is willing to give hard copies to those who
ask.
q
Minister is very active in both internal
chair affairs and in the community as a whole – frequently writes letters to
the editor, participates in community events.
Challenges/Issues:
q
Although changes (such as Children’s
Chapel, silent announcements) have helped create more time for sermons, if time
is tight, it is the sermon that is cut.
This committee feels sermons are the highlight of Sunday morning.
|
Ministerial
Recommendations: |
|
7. Support minister and religious services
committee in continuing to explore options for limiting other portions of
Sunday service and expanding time for the sermon or message. |
Order of Service –
Written and Verbal
Strengths:
q The
recent addition of color to the printed order of service is a great
improvement.
q Secretary
chooses excellent images.
q Each
week there is an organized welcome for guests and all attendees. Guests are invited to coffee hour and told
who to contact for further information.
q
Order of service includes mission
statement.
Challenges/Issues:
q Getting
material in a timely manner is a challenge.
(When the committee drafts policies and procedures, it will recommend a
firm submission deadline for the order of service.)
Silent Printed
Announcements
Strengths:
q
Silent, printed announcements and weekly
calendar in order of service work well and preserve time for sermon and other
elements in order of service.
Challenges/Issues:
q Because
timing is so tight, silent announcements are run just as they are submitted
(without editing). Sometimes they are
wordy. (When the committee drafts
policies and procedures, it will recommend a firm submission deadline and
length limit for silent announcements.)
Committee/Group/Board
Communications
Strengths:
q Board
minutes are taken and approved at meetings.
q Some
committees take minutes or post actions/decisions. We have established places
for such postings – on the bulletin board in the social hall and in the QCU.
Challenges/Issues:
q Members
of the board, the committees, and associated groups do not always keep written
minutes or list or notify all who need to know about actions and
activities.
q Secretary
often needs to know who committee members are (in addition to who is chair of
each committee). Although this is posted
on website, it is not always current.
(See QCUU section and recommendation 5 for proposed solution.)
|
Committee/Group/Board
Communication Recommendations: |
|
8. The Communications Committee will: q
Encourage all groups to use existing
mechanisms to communicate decisions and actions or minutes of meetings. (Existing mechanism include: the QCU, which
has a “committees” section, and the bulletin board in community room, which
has a space dedicated to committee, group and board use. ) q
Clarify who is responsible for bulletin
board in community room, whether anyone would/will read items posted, whether
there are guidelines for posting. If
not, draft these. |
|
9. The committee recommends against posting
board minutes on the website. They are
available to anyone who asks in hard copy.
The board chair does a good job of summarizing information of interest
to the congregation in the QCU. |
Signs
Strengths:
q
Two UU consultants (Raising the Roof and
q
The new fluorescent pole/sign on Eastern
just before the drive makes it clear that the turn is near.
Challenges/Issues:
q It
is very difficult to keep the sign at the bottom of the driveway (where Sunday
topics are posted) current. This sign
could also be more attractive.
q