1 ReMAP II – Retaining Missionaries – Agency Practices Older sending countries in Europe and...
-
Upload
mavis-oconnor -
Category
Documents
-
view
217 -
download
2
Transcript of 1 ReMAP II – Retaining Missionaries – Agency Practices Older sending countries in Europe and...
11
ReMAP IIReMAP II – –
ReRetaining taining MMissionaries – issionaries – AAgency gency PPracticesractices
Older sending countries in Europe Older sending countries in Europe and North Americaand North America
22
ReMAP II was a follow-up study on:
ReMAP – Reducing Missionary Attrition Project World Evangelical Alliance (WEA) Mission Commission 1994-96
Why do missionaries quit service? Why do they come home prematurely? In particular, what are personal factors for attrition?
33
ReMAP II
• What makes missionaries prosper?
• What helps them grow into a fruitful ministry?
• What makes them effective?
• How do they become resilient
• Which organisational factors make them thrive?
44
ReMAP IIReMAP II
Global StudyGlobal Study
601 Sending structures with 40,000 long-term 601 Sending structures with 40,000 long-term cross-cultural missionaries cross-cultural missionaries
These were denominational and interdenominational These were denominational and interdenominational mission agencies as well as local churches or mission agencies as well as local churches or networks sending their own teams independentlynetworks sending their own teams independently
from Older Sending Countries (from Older Sending Countries (OSCOSC) ) CA, US, DE, GB, NL, SE, ZA, AU, NZ CA, US, DE, GB, NL, SE, ZA, AU, NZ
Newer Sending Countries of the Global South (Newer Sending Countries of the Global South (NSCNSC)) Latin America (AR, BR, CR, ES, GU), Latin America (AR, BR, CR, ES, GU), Africa (GH, NG), Asia (IN, HK, KR, MY, PH, SG) Africa (GH, NG), Asia (IN, HK, KR, MY, PH, SG)
ReMAP II:
55
ReMAP IIReMAP II
Responses of Mission executivesResponses of Mission executives
Self Assessment of practices, ethos, performanceSelf Assessment of practices, ethos, performance
Scale 6 (excellent) – 1 (very poorly done) Scale 6 (excellent) – 1 (very poorly done)
Retention of MissionariesRetention of Missionaries
Retention Rates Total (RRT)Retention Rates Total (RRT) Retention Rate Preventable Reasons (RRP) Retention Rate Preventable Reasons (RRP) Retention Rate Unpreventable Reasons (RRU) Retention Rate Unpreventable Reasons (RRU)
Correlations Retention ~ Agency PracticesCorrelations Retention ~ Agency Practices
Methodology:
66
Agency Size ReMAP ReMAP IIII
Annual Attrition Rate 2001/02
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
1-2 3-5 6-10 11-16 17-25 26-50 51-100 101-250 250+Missionaries / Agency
NSC
OSC
Small agencies lose many more missionaries than larger agencies in OSC and NSC. Effective agency size is at 50+ field missionaries.
77
Agency Size ReMAP IIReMAP II
Annual Attrition Rate 2001/02
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
1-2 3-5 6-10 11-16 17-25 26-50 51-100 101-250 250+Missionaries / Agency
NSC
OSC
retirement
The huge difference in attrition rates between OSC and NSC is mainly retirement.
88
Agency Size ReMAP ReMAP IIII
Home Office Staff per active Missionary
0,0
0,5
1,0
1,5
2,0
1-2 3-5 6-10 11-16 17-25 26-50 51-100 101-250 250+Missionaries / Agency
NSC
OSC
2.8
Small agencies in OSC and NSC have a much higher percentage of staff in their home office (per active missionaries). They are neither effective nor efficient.
99
ReMAP IIReMAP II
High retaining agencies have a similar length of experience and a similar percentage of mission families with children (educational needs). These agencies invest the same percentage of allowance into a pension scheme, but have less staff (per 100 field workers) serving in the home office.
Agency
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Y.send %Retire/Allow
OSC H
OSC L
RRT
Staff
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Miss.w.Child HO.Staff/Miss
OSC H
OSC L
RRT
1010
ReMAP IIReMAP II
High retaining agencies are slightly more involved in evangelism and church planting among unreached peoples and reached peoples and slightly less in supporting existing churches and social & developmental work. These differences in their ministry priorities may affect their candidate selection, pre-field training requirements, and leadership structures.
Ministry Priorities
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Ev.Unreached
Evang. Reached
Support churches
Social & DevelopServices
OSC H
OSC L
%RRT
1111
Candidate Selection ReMAP II ReMAP IICandidate Selection
3,0
3,2
3,4
3,6
3,8
4,0
4,2
4,4
4,6
4,8
5,0
5,2
5,4
5,6
5,8
Calling
Doctrin. S
tatem.
Agency Principles
Mature Character
Character R
eferences
Pastor's
Endorsement
Blessing of Family
Church Experience
Crosscult.
Experience
Cope Stress
Health examinatio
n
Psych. Assessment
Content Marit.
Status
Pot. Financ. S
upport
Prayer Support
Rat
ing
OSC H
OSC L
RRT
High retaining agencies put much more emphasis on their candidate selection, especially calling to ministry, character, church experience, spiritual disciplines and prayer support
1212
ReMAP IIReMAP IIEducation
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
6-10 y School
High School
Trade School BA
Master degree
Doctorate
OSC H
OSC L
% RRT
High retaining agencies have missionaries with higher academic training.
1313
ReMAP IIReMAP IIMinimal Pre-field Training Requirements
0,0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
1,0
1,2
1,4
1,6
1,8
2,0
Bible School
Form. Missiol
Prac.Miss.Tr
Crosscult.Intern
Agenc.Orient
Yea
rs
OSC H
OSC L
RRT
High retaining agencies have much higher minimal training requirements, especially in Bible and in particular, in missiology.
Modern informal training methods (e.g. Practical missionary training and Cross-cultural internships) are too little in use as compulsory pre-field requirement to validate or invalidated their effectiveness.
1414
ReMAP IIReMAP II
Vision and Communication
3,6
3,8
4,0
4,2
4,4
4,6
4,8
5,0
5,2
5,4
5,6
Vision
Plans & Job Descript.
Communic. Leaders
Comm. Field - Home
Includ. field decisions
Policies document
Culture of Prayer
Rat
ing
OSC H
OSC L
RRT High retaining agencies put much more emphasis on communication with leadership as well as the home-field. They have specific plans and job descriptions and documented policies. In particular they have a culture of prayer throughout the agency
1515
ReMAP IIReMAP IILeadership
3,2
3,4
3,6
3,8
4,0
4,2
4,4
4,6
4,8
5,0
5,2
5,4
Leaders example
Problems solved
Field Supervision
Annual Review
Handling Complaints
Rat
ing
OSC H
OSC L
RRTHigh retaining agencies put more emphasis on leadership, in particular leading by example, field supervision and an effective system of handling complaints.
1616
ReMAP IIReMAP IIOrientation & Continuous Training
3,4
3,6
3,8
4,0
4,2
4,4
4,6
4,8
5,0
5,2
Field Orientation
Language Learning
Ongo. Language Learn
New Gift Develop
Rat
ing
OSC H
OSC L
RRT
Language and culture learning is generally considered as a lifelong task. High retaining agencies put even more emphasis on ongoing language and culture studies as well as development of new gifts.
1717
ReMAP IIReMAP IIMinistry
2,8
3,0
3,2
3,4
3,6
3,8
4,0
4,2
4,4
4,6
4,8
5,0
5,2
5,4
5,6
Assign to gifting
Shape own Ministry
Spiritual Warfare
Commited to ministry
Commited to agency
Not work overloaded
Spouse ministry
Admin support field
Improve ministry
Rat
ing
OSC H
OSC L
RRT
include the spouse and to maintain a sound work-rest balance.
All missionaries are highly committed to their ministry.
High retaining agencies give their workers more room to shape their ministry, continually improve the ministry,
1818
ReMAP IIReMAP IIMinistry Outcome
3,8
4,0
4,2
4,4
4,6
4,8
5,0
5,2
5,4
Achieving goals
Good Relation People
Becoming Followers
Ntl. Church values
Develop local leaders
Personal Fulfilment
Rat
ing
OSC H
OSC L
RRT Good relationships to the people group and the national church found very high rating in all agencies.
High retaining agencies invest more in local leadership and missionaries find personal fulfilment in their ministry.
They are probably more relationship- than task-oriented. Unexpectedly they put less emphasis on the goal “people become followers of Christ”.
1919
ReMAP IIReMAP IIPersonal Care
3,4
3,6
3,8
4,0
4,2
4,4
4,6
4,8
5,0
5,2
5,4
5,6
Supportive Team
Pastoral Care
Interpers.Conflicts
Personal Spirit.Life
MK-Schooling
Health Care
Annual Vacation
Risk Assessment
Home Church Involv.
Rat
ing
OSC H
OSC L
RRT
care, risk assessment and involve the home church in the personal care.
All agencies put very high emphasis on annual vacation.
The quantity of Member Care is not much different. High retaining agencies put more emphasis on the personal spiritual life, health
2020
ReMAP IIReMAP II
Fig. 2: Retention and Member Care in OSC
96%
97%
98%
99%
100%
< 5%5 -10%
10-20%20-30%
Ret
entio
n R
ate
for
Pot
. Pre
vent
. Attr
ition
R
RP
Percentage of Total Staff Time for Member Care
OSCLittle investment in member care (MC) is associated with high attrition. Yet very high investment in member care is also correlated with increased attrition. But it doesn’t appear that MC in itself is detrimental, but that these agencies often do mediocre candidate selection and pre-field training which would prevent problems down the road.
In OSC, the optimum is 5-10% of total staff time at home and on the field invested in member care.
2121
ReMAP IIReMAP IIFig. 3: Retention Total and Prevent. Member Care
90%
91%
92%
93%
94%
95%
96%
97%
98%
99%
100%
0- 5% 5-10%
10-30%30-50%
50-70%70-100%
Ret
entio
n R
ate
for
tota
l Attr
ition
R
RT
Fraction of Preventative Member Care
MC Time 5-10% OSCPreventative member care means the build-up of resilience by the strengthening of character and personal spiritual life.
Preventative member care as well as crisis intervention is needed. Agencies that focus only on one at the expense of the other are associated with increased attrition.
2222
ReMAP IIReMAP IIFig. 4: RRP and Preventative MC
91%
92%
93%
94%
95%
96%
97%
98%
99%
100%
0- 5% 5-10%
10-30%30-50%
50-70%70-100%
Re
ten
tion
Ra
te fo
r P
ot.
Pre
ven
t. A
ttriti
on
R
RP
Fraction of Preventative Member Care
MC Time 5-10% OSC The need for preventative and curative member care is obvious in total attrition, attrition for potentially preventable causes as well as unpreventable attrition which includes end of the project and not going for a new assignment, evacuation, medical reasons, new assignment after retirement age etc.
2323
ReMAP IIReMAP II
Newer Sending Countries of the global South show a similar u-curve, yet the optimum for member care is at a higher time investment (10-20% of total staff time at home and on the field) as they are relational cultures.
2424
ReMAP IIReMAP IIFig. 7: Retention Rate Preventable and Prevent. MC
91%
92%
93%
94%
95%
96%
97%
98%
99%
100%
0 - 5%
5 -10%10-30%
30-50%50-70%
70-100%
Fraction of Preventative Member Care
Re
ten
tion
Ra
te fo
r P
reve
nt.
Attr
itio
n
RR
P NSCMCTime 10-20%Preventative and curative member care is needed in NSC agencies too.
Regarding attrition for potentially preventable reasons, the optimum is found at 30-50% preventative MC while the optimum for total attrition was at slightly less preventative MC.
2525
ReMAP IIReMAP IIFinances
3,2
3,4
3,6
3,8
4,0
4,2
4,4
4,6
4,8
5,0
5,2
5,4
Reg.Finan.Support
Finan. Back-up
Project finances
Agency Finances
Rat
ing
OSC H
OSC L
RRT
High retaining agencies provide regular financial support to their missionaries; their project finances are spent wisely and effectively and their agency’s finances are transparent to donors and missionaries
2626
ReMAP IIReMAP IIHome Office
3,0
3,2
3,4
3,6
3,8
4,0
4,2
4,4
4,6
4,8
5,0
5,2
5,4
5,6
5,8
Prefield Screening
Prefield.orientation
Home office prays
Re-entry Program
Debriefing Home
Rat
ing
OSC H
OSC L
RRT
The agencies’ home office rate their own activities highly. In particular the prayer support by the home office, pre-field screening, debriefing and re-entry program for those coming on home assignment were rated higher by high retaining agencies.
2727
ReMAP IIReMAP IIAverages
1,82,02,22,42,62,83,03,23,43,63,84,04,24,44,64,85,05,2
Average
Education
Selection
Prep.Time / y
Orientation
Spiritual.Life
Person.Care
MemCare/2
Organisation
Leadership
Staff.Develop
Ministry
Min.Outcome
Finances
Home.Office
Rat
ing
OSC H
OSC L
RRT
High retaining agencies gave a higher rating in almost all areas (groups of questions), especially pre-field training. Exception is the amount of member care. It is not so much the quantity but the quality of MC that counts.
2828
ReMAP IIReMAP IIAnnual Retention Rates
89%
90%
91%
92%
93%
94%
95%
96%
97%
98%
99%
100%
RRT RRU RRP
OSC H
OSC L
RRT Low retaining agencies lose 10% of their work force per year, 4 % for potentially preventable reasons and 6% for unpreventable reasons;
High retaining agencies lose only 2.9% per year; 1.3% for potentially preventable reasons and 1.6% for unpreventable reasons.
This assessment is made not on the basis of hypothetical definitions but the actual performance of large groups of agencies (30% of all agencies of the study in each case.)
2929
ReMAP IIReMAP IIAnnual Retention Rates
89%
90%
91%
92%
93%
94%
95%
96%
97%
98%
99%
100%
RRT RRU RRP
OSC H
OSC L
RRT
Retention after 10 years
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
RetTot 10y
RetUnprev 10y
RetPrev 10y
OSC H
OSC L
RRT
Within 10 year these differences in retention rates accumulate to a vast amount: 75% staff turnover vs. 25%.
3030
ReMAP IIReMAP II
Retention Rate for Pot. Prevent. Attrition
93%
94%
95%
96%
97%
98%
99%
100%
1981-85 1986-90 1991-95 1996-00
OSC H
OSC L
RRT
The diagram shows the retention rates (for potentially preventable causes of attrition only) of missionaries that first left for the field in the stated 5 year period.
The diagram shows the general trend towards earlier return, shorter assignments, higher staff turnover. Mission agencies in general are affected by this global trend, and low retaining agencies in particular.
Yet high retaining agencies have maintained their very high retention rates. They were able to offset this global trend by improved leadership systems, communication, member care, candidate selection, pre-field training and continuous training.
3131
ReMAP IIReMAP IILength of Service of
Attriting Missionaries
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Yea
rs
OSCHOSC L
RRT
Ann. Attrition Rate
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
5%
6%
7%
8%
9%RRT In the years 2001-02
the large group of high retaining agencies showed only half of the number of total returnees as the group of low retaining agencies and their average length of service was 15.5 years vs. 7.9 years. Considering the fact that it takes a person 2 years to learn the language and culture and become effective in ministry, the difference is almost a factor of 2.5
3232
Major Findings ReMAP IIReMAP II
Clear purpose and vision of agency Specific plans Flexible, dynamic structure Lean administration Consultative interactive leadership style Personal trust throughout the agency Empowerment of staff Effective communication Prayer throughout agency Careful candidate selection Quality prefield training Missiological training Effective on-field orientation Intensive language training & cultural studies
3333
Major Findings 2 ReMAP IIReMAP II
Supportive team Maintenance of personal spiritual life Effective personal care Preventative member care & crisis intervention Assignment to gifting Work-rest balance Continuous training and development of new gifts Ongoing improvement of projects Regular performance reviews Flexibility & acceptance of new challenges Stable financial support Good relationship with home church Good relationship with National church in country Debriefing during home assignment