Star Trek: Into Darkness - A Theological Critique

Theological Critique of Star Trek: Into Darkness (2013)
David H. Michels, 2013

In two recent classes of Religion in Contemporary Society we had the opportunity to discuss different approaches to religious critiques of films (theological, mythological, and ideological).  Here is my theological critique of Star Trek: Into Darkness.  Comments and responses welcome.

Synopsis

“When the crew of the Enterprise is called back home, they find an unstoppable force of terror from within their own organization has detonated the fleet and everything it stands for, leaving our world in a state of crisis.  With a personal score to settle, Captain Kirk leads a manhunt to a war-zone world to capture a one-man weapon of mass destruction.  As our heroes are propelled into an epic chess game of life and death, love will be challenged, friendships will be torn apart, and sacrifices must be made for the only family Kirk has left: his crew.”1

Background

Star Trek: Into Darkness is the second film in the Star Trek franchise reboot. The Star Trek franchise has a long and complicated relationship with religion, due in part to creator Gene Roddenberry’s reported rejection of Christianity.2 Religion played a small role in Roddenberry’s 1966 TV vision of the utopian United Federation of Planets.  The subsequent film series, where Roddenberry played only a consulting role,3 did explore religious, spiritual, and ethical themes such as life and death, euthanasia, and even the search for God and “the Garden of Eden” (Star Trek V).  The TV series Star Trek: The Next Generation (1987-1998) frequently explored moral and ontological questions (e.g. 2:9 “The Measure of a Man”, 3:3 “The Survivors”, 3:22 “The Most Toys”) but was like the earlier series was critical of religion (e.g.1:1 “Justice”, 3:4 “Who Watches the Watchers”).  The later series Star Trek: Voyager (1995-2001) and Star Trek: Deep Space Nine (1993-1999) regularly explored spirituality and science.  The franchise’s relationship with religion/spirituality offers insight into its audiences evolving attitudes toward religion and the growing interest in spirituality.

Critique

I. Explicit References to Religion and Religious Questions

Explicit religion plays a small role in this film.  In the opening scene we find a primitive alien culture in pursuit of Kirk who has apparently violated a taboo by stealing a sacred text.  In the course of their escape the aliens watch in awe as the starship rises from the water.  This is a violation of the Federation’s non-interference directive, and as a consequence changes the indigenous religion.  This encounter with religion raises a question about the view of religion.  By reducing religious belief to a technological misunderstanding, the scene potentially challenges the Christian doctrine of special revelation through supernatural means, that is, that God does intervene in human history.4

 

Kirk is rebuked by Admiral Pike for “acting like God” in his rejection of the rules.  Later when Scotty is arguing with Kirk over the unjust military orders, Scotty pleads: “Jim, for the love of God don’t use those torpedoes.”  After the Starship Enterprise is saved from crashing a crewman says: “it’s a miracle”.  Spock replies, “There are no such things.”  The use of these common figures of speech provide little insight into the religious perspectives of the speakers, and portray a traditional Christian understanding of God as omnipotent and benevolent.  Spock’s rebuttal conveys his character’s personal disbelief in the idea of divine intervention in the affairs of people.  

II. Implicit Religion and Ethical Questions

a. Resisting Evil

The film subtitle “Into Darkness” reflects the central issue of the film: how do enlightened people respond to evil without becoming that evil?  Characteristically a post- 9/11 film, the once utopian United Federation of Planets is now imperiled from an act of terrorism from within.  Pushed to the brink of war the crew of the starship Enterprise discovers that factions within their own government have lied to them.  Star Fleet plans to use long distance covert torpedoes to assassinate the suspected terrorist Khan in enemy territory, reminiscent of the use of drones in the U.S. war on terror.  Captain Kirk also struggles with his own loss and desire for vengeance.  The questions raised in this film are universal and transcend particular theological traditions.  Most religions for example have engaged the question of war.  It was Augustine in the fifth century who developed Christianity’s first theology of “just war”, 5 though alternative Christian theologies exist.6 The main characters’ crisis however was the place of revenge.  Vengeance/assassination is challenged on both legal (Federation law), and ethical grounds (Spock argues “this action is morally wrong”).  Khan will later speak about Kirk’s conscience.  Yet the basis of the heroes’ moral position is never clear in the film.  Why, in the face of very practical arguments, are these actions immoral?  The Christian tradition for example forbids revenge on the basis of God’s sole jurisdiction as judge: “Do not take revenge, my dear friends, but leave room for God’s wrath, for it is written: “It is mine to avenge; I will repay,” says the Lord.”7 Further, there is a positive obligation of mercy on one’s enemies: “But love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back. Then your reward will be great, and you will be children of the Most High, because he is kind to the ungrateful and wicked.”8 The characters do not discuss their own moral foundations but then appear to act out of a moral code familiar to western audiences influenced by the New Testament tradition.

b. Facing Death

The question of death is also briefly explored in this film first in Spock’s telepathic meld with the dying Pike and later in Kirk’s death.  Spock says he experienced Pike’s feelings “at the moment of his passing: anger, confusion, loneliness, fear.“  Kirk, as he dies, says, “I’m scared Spock. Help me not to be. How do you choose not to feel?”  Death in Star Trek: Into Darkness is something to be feared.  There is no sense of an afterlife beyond the grave in the movie.  Resurrection and Life after Death are central teachings in the Christian tradition.9  Accordingly, there is a triumphalism and assurance in New Testament Christianity: “Where, O death, is your victory? Where, O death, is your sting?”10 The characters’ revelations of their own fears make them more easy to relate to, but at the same time offer the viewers little hope. 

c. Sacrifice and Redemption

An important subtheme is sacrifice and redemption.  In the opening scenes Spock is prepared to give his life to save the aliens and his crew on the grounds that “the good of the many outweighs the good of the few or the one.” This is a proverb cited in earlier movies. Kirk also offers his life in exchange for the lives of his crew, and he will later make the ultimate sacrifice to save his ship.  This Christian principle of substitutionary sacrifice is expressed in two New testament passages: “Greater love has no one than this: to lay down one’s life for one’s friends,”11 and the prophetic words of the High Priest regarding Jesus “You do not realize that it is better for you that one man die for the people than that the whole nation perish.”12 Kirk however is a flawed hero: rash, arrogant, self-centered, and womanizing.  Pike earlier claimed that he saw greatness in Kirk but Kirk’s actions have resulted in his loss of command.  He must redeem himself and find his greatness, and he does this by his sacrificial death and subsequent resurrection (though scientific rather than supernatural).  Kirk is a Christ figure in that he is offers a voluntary substitutionary sacrifice.  Christ however is seen as an effective sacrifice in that he was sinless.13  Christ’s death was said to redeem people while Kirk’s death redeemed himself.  Christ’s salvation was considered permanent while Kirk’s was temporary; there will be another deadly movie crisis!  An interesting question to explore is the attraction of a flawed hero such as Kirk to the audience.  Why does such a man inspire trust and confidence?  Is he more relatable than the blameless Saviour of Christianity, and thus the everyman hero?

Summary

Star Trek: Into Darkness is a sci fi shoot-em-up in the full sense of the phrase.  It is filled with firefights, chase scenes, and explosions, and is an entertaining night out.  But on occasion, amid the CGI, the film tries to engage in contemporary social issues like the war on terror, and the ethical questions it raises.  The heroes also wrestle with personal questions like life/death, and sacrifice and redemption.  The movie does not explicitly challenge Christian doctrine and in fact asks more questions than offers answers.  Star Trek: Into Darkness leaves the door open for Christian dialogue about these questions.  The question remaining is whether in an arguably post-christian society we can still engage in these kinds of conversations. 

David

---

1. Synopsis, Star Trek: Into Darkness (2013), Paramount Films, Online: Internet Movie database, http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1408101/.

2. E. Christopher Reyes, In His Name ([S.l.] Authorhouse, 2010), p. 39.

3. See Susan Sackett, Inside Trek: My Secret Life With Star Trek Creator Gene Roddenberry (Tulsa, OK: HAWK Publishing Group, 2002); Greenberger, R. Star Trek: The Complete Unauthorized History (Minneapolis, MN: Voyageur Press, 2012) at 115.

4. See Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1985) at 175ff.

5. Paul T. Jersild and Dale A. Johnson, Moral Issues and Christian Response (Toronto: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1993) at 218-225.

6. Ibid. 225-230.

7. Romans 12:18, Holy Bible, New International Version.

8. Luke 6:35, Holy Bible, New International Version.

9. 1 Corinthians 15:12-31, Holy Bible, New International Version.

10. 1 Corinthians 15:55, Holy Bible, New International Version.

11. John 15:13, Holy Bible, New International Version.

12. John 11:50, Holy Bible, New International Version.
13.  Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1985) at 777ff. Online: Google Books, http://books.google.ca/books?id=0PbBz6-XcssC&lpg=PP1&pg=PA777#v=onepage&q&f=false .

Read More

Monetizing Mommy & My Online Cred

SMSociety13 Conference #2  Online Communities

Mom by Niklas CC

No one is advocating selling your Mom. Let's that get that clear.  But maybe your Mom's blog.

It is cool when a set of presentations builds on each other.  The Saturday morning Social Media conferences presentations explored blogging.  "Monetizing the Mommy: Community and the Commodification of Motherhood in Blogs" by Andrea Hunter explored the world of motherhood blogs where Moms share their personal lives as wives and mothers.  These are opportunities for self expression as well as community building.  The most popular ones command large audiences

Whister's Mother Blogger Mike Licht CC

and not surprisingly have drawn corporate attention.  Many of the leading blogs have become monetized; i.e. they have ads and sponsored posts.  Andrea described how one mommy blogger is estimated to earn $500,000+/yr in corporate sponsorship.  For many followers this has become problematic as the attraction for these blogs is the authenticity and openness of the bloggers.  Research has found that content changes with corporate sponsorships; less about kids and marriage.  I imagine it is hard to empathize with the struggling Mom pulling down big bucks to be "vulnerable" online.  But as one participant countered, these blogs have built strong communities both on and offline that have had impacts on people's lives. 

Laurence Clinnot-Sinois' paper "Working on My Online Cred: a Study of Quebec Women's Blogging" explored how online and offline relationships are used to "solidify and expand one's social networks."  For example if my blog is associated with a popular blog then I perhaps I will gain more followers.  How do I do that?  Well maybe I include popular blogs in my own blog role.  Or I can post on big name blogs and maybe people will notice me and my blog.  You might also draw attention to offline relationships that would help you be seen as more credible.  This goes both ways, I need to be mindful how my online activities impact my offline life.  Will my spouse's offline life be negatively impacted by my blogging for instance?  Or do my kids want me blogging about them after they start junior high?

Trust. Why do I trust you online? Why do I share your posts, follow your tweets, friend your profile? How do you convince me you are authentic, honest, and sincere? I can't meet you in the market, or chat with you at work. I don't see you drop you kids off at school. Why does someone from Russia keep reading my blog?

Laurence's research explored how bloggers drew on the offline to bolster their online cred. That raises an important point: are the offline and online worlds really distinct worlds anymore? That's the next blog post. :-)

Read More

Trust, Twitter, and "Going Viral": SMSociety13 #1

SMSociety Post #1

So I was at the SMSocial13 conference @ Dalhousie University. It is a conference on Social Media: its use, impact, and possibilities.  The presentations from the first morning went from 'big data' analyses (1 billion tweets) to small networks of Canadian military spouse bloggers.  It is good to see old friends and meet some new ones.  Interestingly conversations among both groups turned to when I'm finishing my PhD.  I suspect collusion but I digress.

Saturday Morning Keynote: Our keynote speaker was Sharad Goel, a senior researcher with Microsoft.  He's the guy who has the system big enough to map out 1 billion tweets.  He asked an interesting question: "what does 'going viral' really mean?"  Oddly enough my blog has never gone viral (insert kitten picture here) so I listened intently.  He examined the way videos, online games, tweets, and pics spread online, and mapped out those relationships.  Guess what he found? 93% of stuff posted never gets reposted/retweeted, 5% gets one reposted by one person, and fewer still by two and three.  What percentage of posts get reposted by someone, and in turns gets reposted by another? 0.3%.  This is not viral yet; you have only graduated from friend repost to social repost.  A few of these continue to spread, and these are the ones Sharad focused on.

How do they spread?  Well a variety of ways, sometimes it starts with a broadcast to a wide audience, and some of those begin to repost.  Other times it starts with one person, and then like the common cold you give it to your friend, and it spreads one person at a time.  It can be various combinations of the two; I think of Gangnam style as one that spread through a variety of means including word of mouth.  He did raise questions about this thing the media calls "going viral"; we know it happens but it seems that the way it happens is still the person to person, one "like" at a time.  So in the end Sharad couldn't tell me how to make my blog go viral.  His exact words to us were, "if I knew that I wouldn't be here, I wouldn't tell you, and I'd start a company."

I had a good discussion with a couple of other attendees about the role of "trust" in online sharing.  We share through our personal networks, but we share differently based on trust relationships.  The broadcast post assumes we trust in the broadcast source.  In an earlier post I noted that Lady Gaga and "the Beib" have many more followers, but religious leaders like the Joyce Meyers, Joel Osteen and Dalai Lama are much more likely to be retweeted.  The trust relationship is different.

In the 1980s before online communication, I read a lot about the role of trust in the context of cross cultural communication and religion. Religious conversion is one of the most dramatic shared experiences, and requires a prior trust bond: I trust you so I am more willing to trust your Jesus.  Religious proselytizing had its own broadcast models through traditional media. Evangelists like Billy Graham reached many people this way.  But rarely was this their first experience with the message. They usually had a prior one-to-one interpersonal trust relationship (the friend who brought them).  Broadcast played a role but by building on the trust of individual relationships.

The theme of trust came through in other social media presentations so we'll continue this conversation later this week.  In the meantime enjoy one of my favourite viral videos again.

Cheesy but fun!

Read More

Brother, can you spare an interview?

It is finished.  No, I am not quitting my PhD.  I have considered it, and I have asked the existential question "why am I doing this? often"  But I digress.

It is time to quit gathering data on the information seeking of leaders of churches in transition.  Did I get all the data I wanted? No, but I got enough.

WHY DOESN'T EVERYONE WANT TO BE IN MY STUDY?

Hey, I'm a great guy! Why aren't leaders lining up to participate?  I have been reflecting on why it has been so difficult to recruit church leaders.  I have identified five reasons.  Can you think of any more?

1. Closing the Deal

My prospects are busy people.  They need to know how participation will benefit their church.  I need to clearly communicate that benefit and sometimes I am too timid.  Do I believe my research is important?  How can I communicate that better?  This is something I need to think through when I am designing my study.  This is a question about both style and substance.

2.  Ships that Pass in the Night

Sometimes we just can't connect.  The research usually occurs over many months so if the church is not local this would require extended travel and might not be feasible for a researcher with a full-time job.  Their timetable may to be too tight to accommodate me.   We have a complex game of email/phone tag and it just doesn't work in the end.  This eliminated a couple of my prospects.

3.  Transition Trauma

The churches I am seeking are engaged in transition or change.  They usually have good reasons to change.  The process of change might have significant legal and social repercussions for that church so church leaders might not want someone looking over their shoulders.  If the change is theological, the church might be at odds with their denomination.  If the change is structural, board members and staff might be removed.  Some transitions can be disastrous.  This removed a couple more from my list.

4.  Transparency Troubles

Churches are not all comfortable with the same level of transparency.  Churches have legal requirements for financial accountability that most take seriously.  Some open their business meetings to visitors, and some restrict them to members only.  I have been overwhelmed by how welcome some leaders have been to let me, an outsider, be a "fly on the wall."  Others have not.  But I should add that this isn't just a church issue.  It is human nature to seek to protect oneself from potential criticism, and it happens in the university context as well.  So others buzzed off.

5.  Professionals vs. Academics

I am an academic and a professional.  There is a huge divide between these worlds sometimes.  I have written in the fields of law and librarianship.  Research has shown that judges are decreasingly citing academic writing, finding it "unhelpful for the bar." In librarianship much of the theoretical work has failed to make an impact on library management.  I believe this is applicable to the Church context.  Many church leaders, especially lay leaders, are occupied with the "how" and "what" questions, and not the "why."  I need to make my world accessible to them if I wish to engage with them and they with me.  The list gets shorter.

I am very grateful for the leaders who had opened themselves and their churches to me.  I hope and pray that I represent them fairly, and that my research finds a usefulness.  Time to quit and finish writing.

Thank you for your time.

David


"Sale Sale", Simon Gregg, CC License, http://www.flickr.com/photos/xrrr/
"Ships that Pass in the Night", Lynn Hand, CC License, http://www.flickr.com/photos/your_teacher/3160970910/
"Change", busy.pochi, CC License, http://www.flickr.com/photos/busy-pochi/5170100206/
"Fly on the Wall", Matthileo, CC License, http://www.flickr.com/photos/matthileo/5105598473/
"Ivory Tower", David Schumaker, CC License, http://www.flickr.com/photos/rockbandit/9052784451/

Read More

Navigating the Family Tree...

In my research I do not question my respondents' faith (though I can explore its impact on a persons' life and community.)  On a personal level the people I meet, from across the Christian spectrum, often challenge my own faith.  It has been an unintended yet rewarding part of my research experience.

But I am reminded of an old joke:

A man died and went to heaven, and Saint Peter took him on a tour. He showed him the harps, the streets of gold, the cherubs. The man noticed that there were groups of people gathered in different spots, so he asked about them. “Those over there, sitting quietly and looking very serious—those are the Presbyterians. And those eating the big potluck meal—those are the Methodists. The ones with all the tambourines are the Pentecostals.” As he went on, the man noticed one group set apart from the others. “What about them over there?” he asked. “Keep your voice down,” Peter said. “Those are the Baptists, and they think they’re the only ones here.”

Lots of stereotypes here! I have heard this joke naming different groups, but this version hits home for me.  It points out the fragmentation of Christianity: divided by history, culture, and theology. 

Also I am a Baptist.  It is neither the tradition I was born into (Roman Catholicism) nor raised in (Plymouth Brethren) but the one that I have chosen.  The Baptist tradition does interpret the Bible's standard for membership in the family of God narrowly.  Jesus' words in the Gospel of Luke are oft cited: “Enter through the narrow gate.  For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it.  But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it."   It is more than religious prejudice (though there exists some of that too.)  Baptists often describe faith and salvation in different terms than Catholics, Anglicans, Pentecostals, Mennonites, United Church, etc.  Sometimes the differences are semantic and sometimes substantive; differences we can gloss over and differences that are deal breakers.  There are groups that come knocking on my door that might consider themselves Christian but are so fundamentally different as to be another religion.  There is also the concern among Baptists that many in mainline Christian denominations are culturally Christian but have no personal faith.  I have heard members of mainline groups express the same concerns "that the mission field is in our own pews."  To be fair, I believe there are also many cultural Christians in Baptist Churches.  Canadian Sociologist Reg Bibby reminded us in Restless Churches that evangelicals have our own home missions.

In my research I engage with Christians whose beliefs and practices are different from mine.  I also encounter those whose relationships with God seems personal, powerful, and far deeper than mine.  So I am faced with a conflict.  I cannot ignore theology.  Theology transforms my worldview and enables me to interpret my experience.  I must reject some teachings as incompatible with what I understand from the Bible.  That is a Christian responsibility.  But I am know that God does not require perfect theology to be part of His family (which is good or I wouldn't get past the Pearly Gates!)  The requirements to be saved are remarkably few. 


The researcher must maintain his objectivity.  The believer will take each profession of faith at face value.  I will explore each faith story to understand it and on the word of their testimony I will consider them my brother and sister in the faith regardless of the church they attend.  Hopefully they will do the same for me.  We'll work on their theology later (and perhaps they will try to work on mine.)


Enjoy this short video from the folks at Muddy River Media on the Entrance Interview for Heaven.

Read More

Yielding the Middle: the Decline (and Fall?) of the Academic Library

From where I sit I can see Gibbons "The History of the Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire" on my bookshelf.  It seems pretentious to claim to understand all the factors that led to Rome's collapse, though many historians has attempted to do so.  Equally pretentious would be my assessment of the decline (and fall?) of the Academic Library.  I have blogged before about academic libraries, sometimes optimistically and often not.  Librarianship is experiencing a sea change no doubt, and times are hard for academic libraries in Canada.  When my own library opened its new building in 1989 there were 19-20 staff; when I joined the library in 2000 I think there were 14 staff and a small army of part-time students.  Now we have 10 staff; a handful of students, and an a growing belief that if anyone leaves they will not be replaced.  I'm not a stats guy but I see where this is heading. 

When I scan the national librarian jobsites (FIMS, FIS, LibraryJobs, CLA) I believe I see a disquieting trend: a rise in the percentage of part-time or term academic librarian positions, and the downgrading of existing positions to lower paying entry level (a form of ageism but that is another post.)  I regularly provide job references for new library school graduates and I know it is a hard market.  Collection budgets, once protected from cuts, are now relentlessly being whittled away.  Some might like to describe this as a re-tooling to be a new lean mean fighting machine.  I think it is something else.

I fear as a profession we are yielding the middle ground.  I'm referring to the Ackoff's Data-Information-Knowledge hierarchy where data are those disorganized facts and observations that becomes usable information when given structure and context and thus meaning.  Knowledge then might be thought of as information applied; where experience, skills, and information are combined to address a problem.  I do these concepts an injustice by my brevity but you get the idea.

Data was the domain of researchers; they created data, managed it, structured it, and created new information.  Then that new information became the domain of librarians, who created structures to preserve it and make it accessible.  Ideally practitioners would take that new information we provide and use it in applied ways for the good of society.  Again an over-simplification.  There were gaps in the system, not all that info got into the hands of practitioners which is why there is a new emphasis on Knowledge Mobilization. 

In the information age, information access is big business, and academic libraries lost their monopoly.  We began to scramble to find a new role, increasingly yielding that middle ground to the Corporate Information Services offering "comprehensive one point of access", and looking instead to the other sides of the pyramid.  Academic Libraries have seen an opportunity, as research data has grown in size and complexity, to become curators of that data.  But they aren't the only ones, and we have no monopoly.  My non-sensitive research projects, for example, are housed on commercial project management sites.  They offer shared access and scalability tools beyond the capacity of most Canadian academic libraries.  Open Access repositories offer some possibilities but how many repositories does a country Canada's size need.  As positions like data analysts become the new hot career choice,  Library/Information Schools who may be facing declining enrollment are focusing more on data, as are the faculties of Management and Computer Science.  The other growth priority is knowledge management particularly in business, though this has not attracted the attention of academic libraries. 

I wonder what comes next.  What will the campus look like A.L. (After Libraries)?  What do librarians do when libraries become simply student centers?  If they have technology skills they migrate to university IT departments.  If they have field research or project management skills they can slide into research centers.  Many will simple retire or drop out.  Perhaps I am being needlessly morose and melancholy, but I have another 19 years until retirement.  I need to be thinking ahead.

Read More

Borrowing from the World or being Strategic?

After a long hiatus I am back to my doctoral research.  There were a few times over the past year when I felt like giving up.  I am inspired by a college roommate who recently successfully defended his dissertation after long years and personal struggles.  He might not think he is an academic inspiration but he is. :-)

So what did I do on a mild Saturday morning beginning a week of vacation?  I met with one of my research congregations for a three hour visioning and operational structuring meeting.  Yes, it was a good meeting and I learned a lot.  Coincidentally, I have spent a lot of time recently engaged in workplace strategic planning processes.  Several of the processes and activities discussed in the church meeting were similar like SWOT analyses and Balanced Scorecards.  Secular strategic planning theory and practices are increasingly being used by church organizations, as well as theories about marketing, media, and communication.  These are not without controversy, and the churches I've met with who have taken this direction are very conscious that they are not businesses like Harvey's or The Bay, or even service groups like the Kiwanas.  They are very concerned with remaining faithful.

On the long bus ride home I had time to think about what might make a church process different from a corporate process.  I thought of three possible differences:

1. The meeting began with prayer.  At one critical junction someone asked "do we need to stop and pray before we vote." 
   
   I believe that my respondents saw this as more than a religious formality; they invited God into their process.  I've previously blogged about prayer in information seeking.  Whether you believe in the active involvement of a God in the activities of people (I do) or not, the participants in the churches I have studied do believe in it.  This will affect the process adding both weight (God is among us) and expectation (God leads us).
2.  A church is predominately a volunteer organization.
   
   Are paid employees more or less motivated to engage with the organizational vision than volunteer staff?  I think it would make a difference.  Larger churches do tend to have a number of salaried staff, but in few cases are these positions well paid.  They aren't there for the money; staff and volunteers are largely motivated by a sense of calling to the work of the organization.  Is the level of "buy-in" the same for corporations?
   
   
3. A vision rooted in faith is very powerful.
   
   Employees of corporate organizations may have strong service ethics, lofty ideals, and the desire to pursue excellence.  These would all inform their visioning and strategic planning.  But when a vision is rooted in one's personal faith how does that change things?  One of my former directors used to say when we would get riled about something "It is only a library, nobody will die."  She was not saying what we were doing was not important or necessary but that we had to put things into perspective.  By contrast when someone says they believe in the eternal spiritual results of the work of the church in people's lives, how does this re-shape how we view the guiding vision and planning of the church?  This certainly came through in the church meeting I attended.

This is worth exploring deeper, and I have a strategic planning trainer friend who will be getting a visit from me soon as I wrestle through this. :-)

As Dilbert is the final authority on strategic planning I will let him have the last word.  May none of our strategic planning processes be like this.

Read More