Leader Resources Access to High Councilors

Discussions about the Leader and Clerk Resources on lds.org.
lmisner
New Member
Posts: 19
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 9:19 pm
Location: Colorado Springs, CO USA

Leader Resources Access to High Councilors

Postby lmisner » Mon Sep 10, 2012 10:27 am

I know this subject has been discussed in the past, but has the MSR Department given any further consideration to granting Leader Resources access to members of the Stake High Council? Viewing reports and other information for their respective Wards would be very helpful. Our Stake expects a lot from our High Councilors, yet it does not seem like we allow many web privileges except to view or edit calendars. If there is more access that can be granted by a Stake Administrator I would really like to know. Thanks.

User avatar
aebrown
Community Administrator
Posts: 14692
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 8:48 pm
Location: Sandy, Utah

Postby aebrown » Mon Sep 10, 2012 11:02 am

There are no capabilities that a stake administrator can grant to high councilors, except for those that can be granted to any member (such as calendar editor or administrator, or newsletter administrator). Access to Leader Resources cannot be granted manually; access to Leader and Clerk Resources is limited to specific standard callings, which are currently restricted to bishoprics and stake presidencies, including clerks and executive secretaries (and analogous callings in districts and branches).

This has indeed been discussed previously, such as:

Questions that can benefit the larger community should be asked in a public forum, not a private message.

lmisner
New Member
Posts: 19
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 9:19 pm
Location: Colorado Springs, CO USA

Postby lmisner » Mon Sep 10, 2012 12:18 pm

Thank you for the reply. I thought that might be the case, but wanted to make sure.

User avatar
johnshaw
Senior Member
Posts: 1834
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 1:55 pm
Location: Syracuse, UT

Postby johnshaw » Mon Sep 10, 2012 12:41 pm

Is the continued lack of access and the desire among stakes to use the tools being provided going to result in a bunch of Assistant Clerk positions being assigned to the likes of High Councilman? Is there actual policy that says MLS must match the called and sustained member? Reason of course dictates this, but is there enough 'gray' and a desire to work around the perceived painfully slow development cycle the Church is on for this to be happening?

Gary_Miller
Senior Member
Posts: 1218
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2011 10:42 am
Location: Emmett, Idaho

Postby Gary_Miller » Mon Sep 10, 2012 4:34 pm

As a member of the Stake High Council the responsibililty is one of representing the Stake Presidency through advising and instructing assigned Wards and Stake [font=PalatinoldsLat-Roman][size=84]auxiliaries.[/SIZE][/font]
[font=PalatinoldsLat-Roman][size=84][/SIZE][/font]
[font=PalatinoldsLat-Roman][size=84]Therefore there is no need for Stake High Council members to have access to the systems that provide the data. If a High Council member needs the data he should talk to the clerk who is responsible for maintaining the data system, as thats the clerks responsibility.
[/SIZE][/font]

User avatar
johnshaw
Senior Member
Posts: 1834
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 1:55 pm
Location: Syracuse, UT

Postby johnshaw » Tue Sep 11, 2012 5:10 am

Gary,

Tasks assigned to a High Councilor are going to vary from stake to stake and unit by unit within that stake, the needs are so varied that many cases it would be helpful for HC to have direct access to the data for the ward. I think it is a valid use case, maybe one that could be granted by a Stake Presidency (through the clerk) to the correct reports.

There is also an informational evolution which has taken place, and continues to take place all over the world. Access to information is flowing directly to individuals where in the past it used to be housed by special catalogs, or locations where time was needed to request, have approval, and finally obtain information. This meant that personal workflows required timing that was convenient to the other party, and not necessarily to ones self. In the past time was very neatly apportioned among Work, Life, Church (if one chooses to classify church outside of life) and the lines between them were Rigid... But now, people do work, life, and church throughout the day, or at times convenient for the individual. They also transition between them quite frequently, at lunch, I may get on and do church email, or a few times during the day, at church I may need to do a work email, in my personal time with my family, I may get a call from a HC and have them request a print-out from me, I transition quickly to my church work, and back to my family life. This is one of the fantastic blessings of the leader and clerk resources and my calling as a clerk.

That process existed and exists in the church today. Bishoprics now have direct access to data ANYTIME, ANYWHERE, no longer do they have outdated print-outs, no longer do they rely on being at the meetinghouse on MLS to get the most recent data. No longer does a HC have to send an email, make a phone call, not have it returned for a week, oh the clerk is out of town, or busy, or non-functioning, the EQP or HPGL have lists that are 3 months old, etc... There is role in MLS (High Council Advisor) that could be assigned access to limited reports, just like it could be done for organizations outside of the Bishopric, why that hasn't been done already is a great and grand mystery to me, maybe nobody else cares but me and wants to continue to perform work that could easily be given out to secretaries in the organizations, but that thinking seems like a poor use of resources (online, clerk, etc...).

As we make these fantastic improvements online, I feel, part of this direction from Church Leadership is to reduce the impact of fulfilling our callings on our time away from our families. A Clerk continuing to need to provide data to parties that could easily access them online on their own time seems counter to that particular direction.

User avatar
aebrown
Community Administrator
Posts: 14692
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 8:48 pm
Location: Sandy, Utah

Postby aebrown » Tue Sep 11, 2012 5:32 am

JohnShaw wrote:There is role in MLS (High Council Advisor) that could be assigned access to limited reports, just like it could be done for organizations outside of the Bishopric, why that hasn't been done already is a great and grand mystery to me, maybe nobody else cares but me and wants to continue to perform work that could easily be given out to secretaries in the organizations, but that thinking seems like a poor use of resources (online, clerk, etc...).


It's not really much of a mystery. The Church has limited development resources, and making additional subdivisions of features and data within Leader Resources that are targeted to additional roles requires extra development work, as well as additional approval (which is no small task in itself). That necessitates prioritization. In this post and other similar posts you have made you clearly imagine that it would be a very simple thing to grant this access, and that seems to be why you consider it to be a mystery why it hasn't been done.

But the leaders of the Church with responsibility in this area are obviously trying to strike what they consider to be the right balance between making data available to those who need it (note the tremendous efforts that have been devoted to creating Leader and Clerk Resources already) and keeping sacred and private data confidential and not available to those who don't need it. Note that even financial clerks are not given online access to membership records or even individual ordinance summaries. That tells me that the Church is at least as concerned about restricting access as it is about granting access.

We have clear indications that additional access is in the works. Exactly what that will be and when it will happen has not been shared, and in the meantime, we need to have patience and use the capabilities we do have as well as we can to work together as leaders and clerks to accomplish the work of the ministry.
Questions that can benefit the larger community should be asked in a public forum, not a private message.

Gary_Miller
Senior Member
Posts: 1218
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2011 10:42 am
Location: Emmett, Idaho

Postby Gary_Miller » Tue Sep 11, 2012 12:30 pm

The funny thing this about subject is its HCM who were proviously clerks/bishops/Ext Secs looking for these rights instead of working with the person who is responsible for the data program.

While HCM may have good intentions it seems they don't understand their train is in another station therefore they are no longer priviledged to this information. And they need to work with those who have stewardship over the information. After all their responsability is one of helping the wards they are assigned to. Not one of collecting and analizing data.

If they want to know how the HT/VT is in ward ask the ward leaders. Believe it or not face time and communication is still a good thing in this informational evolution world.

russellhltn
Community Administrator
Posts: 20757
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:53 pm
Location: U.S.

Postby russellhltn » Tue Sep 11, 2012 12:38 pm

There's something to be said for asking for the data. It requires the local leaders to know how to get it and look at it. I've always wondered how much of the quarterly reports were for "upper management" and how much was for making the local leaders look.

At any rate, the final decision is up to the Priesthood department, not the developers.
Have you searched the Wiki?
Try using a Google search by adding "site:tech.lds.org/wiki" to the search criteria.

User avatar
johnshaw
Senior Member
Posts: 1834
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 1:55 pm
Location: Syracuse, UT

Postby johnshaw » Tue Sep 11, 2012 3:13 pm

Yes, I am not very patient with this piece of the online tools, it is true, and I'll admit to that, and I'll admit to wanting to understand the priorities a little more. It flares up now and again. It doesn't seem like a very big deal, but I am constantly asked about when this access is going to be granted. We're at the 2 year mark since this solution rolled out and it has remained relatively unchanged, and further access has not been rolled out. The original release notes (since taken down) indicated this would roll out to other auxiliaries in the near future, that was 2010. If the priority is to make it available in 20 languages prior to granting more access at least that is something. If there were feedback links on clerk or leader pages, I'd send in my questions there, perhaps there could be one put up.


Return to “Leader and Clerk Resources”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest