Calendar help for private events

[russellhltn]

and the clerk will schedule the event on a general ward calendar.

There's two problems with that. In our stake, any requests for the stake center are routed to the stake executive secretary.

Secondly, why would a private event be on a "general ward calendar"? Funerals maybe, but not weddings unless the entire ward is invited. I'd suggest changing that part to "the appropriate calendar".

[Gary_Miller]

In our stake, any requests for the stake center are routed to the stake executive secretary.

Talk about micromanagement.

In general with the exceptions of where the stake offices are located and stake events are held, the Stake Center is just another Meeting House.

[tomjoht]

The problem with your categorical advice -- "Do not contact the building scheduler with event requests.... Building schedulers are not calendar editors nor calendar administrators, and they cannot schedule events" -- is that many stakes have chosen to have building schedulers handle requests to schedule private events. It's a natural choice, after all, since the building scheduler is the only person(s) that the Calendar system actually gives regular members contact information for. Such stakes generally set up a calendar (usually a private stake calendar) and give the building scheduler rights to add such events to it.

Thanks for the feedback. I softened this section a bit:

[INDENT]Unless your ward or stake prefers to involve the building scheduler in event scheduling, recognize that building schedulers are not calendar editors nor calendar administrators, and they cannot schedule events. Building schedulers can create reservations, but a reservation does not reserve the location for a specific group, nor is a reservation an event (see Reservations Versus Scheduled Events for more details). [/INDENT]

I also direct people to the executive secretary rather than clerk.

To be honest, I think we will eventually see a change in the building scheduler role within the calendar application. Not for a while, but maybe in the next major version. We've found that it's harder to change church culture than application functionality. But right now developers have their hands full, so we haven't revisited this topic with the kind of discussion that we want to have.

[jdlessley]

If you don't mind Tom here are some recommendations.

The "Scheduling Events" second paragraph I recommend making this change starting with the second sentence. "If your event doesn't fit on any specific calendar (such as a funeral or wedding), contact a calendar administrator (such as a clerk, executive secretary, or website administrator) or building scheduler with the request. The event can be added to an appropriate calendar. See ...".

Listing all the calendar administrators in the parentheses I don't think is necessary since the user can go to "Rights and Roles" to see who all the administrators are. I think leaving the list generic covers both the ward and stake administrators. Of course the stake has an additional administrator, stake building specialist, that may be the point of contact (calendar editor) for scheduling these special events.

I'm still pondering the "Scheduling Funerals, Weddings, Family Reunions, and Other Private Events" section. The part that is causing the most thought is where it says "In most cases, contact the ward or or stake executive secretary...". Some users could view this as the best, or only, person to contact, or as the only choice for the special events calendar editor. We have seen it many times in these forums that if the help doesn't mention something then some users take that to mean it is not possible or not approved. And likewise, if the help only mentions one way, or in this case, one position, then that position is the only approved position. I'm hoping this is rare across the Church. But it does cause some thought.

[russellhltn]

I'm still pondering the "Scheduling Funerals, Weddings, Family Reunions, and Other Private Events" section. The part that is causing the most thought is where it says "In most cases, contact the ward or or stake executive secretary...". Some users could view this as the best, or only, person to contact, or as the only choice for the special events calendar editor.

How about "Check with your ward or branch leaders to find the contact person for private events ...". Unless you want to go into Handbook territory, you don't want to be specifying a specific calling.

[kisaac]

We've found that it's harder to change church culture than application functionality.

And it's very hard to tell at times what is church culture and what is church policy...the two often become one in our minds.

[tomjoht]

If you don't mind Tom here are some recommendations.

The "Scheduling Events" second paragraph I recommend making this change starting with the second sentence. "If your event doesn't fit on any specific calendar (such as a funeral or wedding), contact a calendar administrator (such as a clerk, executive secretary, or website administrator) or building scheduler with the request. The event can be added to an appropriate calendar. See ...".

Thanks for the suggestion. I incorporated this edit but removed the building scheduler from the list of suggested contacts.

Coincidentally, about an hour ago a colleague stopped by my cube and asked how he reserves a room for a meeting tomorrow in the stake center. What's fundamentally unintuitive about the calendar is that you "reserve"/schedule a room at the same time you schedule an event. I think people are used to seeing these as two separate activities. Even if we change the term "reservations" to something else, people still won't get the idea that they -- regular members -- can "reserve"/schedule rooms.

[aebrown]

What's fundamentally unintuitive about the calendar is that you "reserve"/schedule a room at the same time you schedule an event. I think people are used to seeing these as two separate activities.

I disagree with the characterization of it being "fundamentally unintuitive." Rather, the problem is years of a culture that separates the two activities. If it weren't for that history, I would think it is fundamentally unintuitive to have to do two different actions just to get an event set up properly -- separating the location from the event makes no sense. And for people who use other calendaring systems in a corporate environment (such as Outlook), you always schedule the event with the room.

I'm not saying that this aspect of the system will not be misunderstood -- we have abundant evidence that it is causing confusion. But it's not like the old system was perfect -- we had many, many problems with people scheduling events and failing to contact the building scheduler to reserve the building. Two years into it, I think we have significantly fewer problems now than with the classic calendar. It just takes time for the new system to sink in.

Even if we change the term "reservations" to something else, people still won't get the idea that they -- regular members -- can "reserve"/schedule rooms.

I guess you used the term "regular members" to distinguish from schedulers, but it's only calendar editors who can schedule rooms. That's a much smaller set of people to educate.

[Gary_Miller]

I think people are used to seeing these as two separate activities.

I think your right here. People were alway use to having to call the building scheduler to schedule a room for the event they just put on the calendar. If the room was not available at the time they wanted to have it they just scheduled for a different time.

Change is hard, but changing ones paradigm is even harder. This will take time but it is worth the time.

Even if we change the term "reservations" to something else, people still won't get the idea that they -- regular members -- can "reserve"/schedule rooms.

In this case it even harder trying to help people understand that they don't have to call the "Building Scheduler" all they need to do is put the event on the calendar. Especially when leadership is still putting: "To schedule the building, call Brother Soandso - XXX-XXXX" in the Sunday bulletin, and Bro. Soandso is just the "Building Scheduler".

So Bro. Soandso does what he has always done and puts it on the calendar as a "reservation" just like he has always done, because he does not know any better. Why does this happen, I have a couple of theories, but for the most part it due to a lack of understanding, due to a lack proper training. Not just understanding and training of the "Building Scheduler" but understanding and training of the Stake and Ward leaders, the ones who are suppose to do the training for Brother Soandso.

Did I mentioned; Change is hard, but changing ones paradigm is even harder. This will take time but it is worth the time.

[russellhltn]

Did I mentioned; Change is hard, but changing ones paradigm is even harder. This will take time but it is worth the time.

Ages ago, my company put me though a Franklin seminar (before it became Franklin Covey). One the take-always was "only have one calendar". If you have two, they're going to get out of sync and cause problems.

It really makes a lot of sense to use events to book rooms. That way when events change, the bookings change as well. I would not want to see that go away because of "traditions of our fathers".

What could help is tweaking the language of the Edit Event screen. There's really no clue that the "Location" information is anything but to tell members where to go. If it said "Reserve" or "Block off" then the calendar editors are more likely to understand the purpose - and to select ALL rooms they'll be using and not just the initial meeting place.