MLS Temple Recommend Permissions

[aebrown]

Clearly defined responsibilities are a help but loose control of access leads invariably to unnecessary problems.

Clearly defined responsibilities are not just "a help" -- they are essential. No matter what MLS does with permissions (and you'll see in my next paragraph that I agree that the permissions implementation should be adjusted), it is appropriate and actually required that multiple people in a ward have permission to perform each of the MLS roles. Thus if you are looking to MLS permissions to avoid people stepping on each other's toes, you are bound to be disappointed. There is no substitute for good leadership and organization to define who has each primary responsibility, and who backs up the primary person when he or she is not able to perform a required task.

I feel the Edit Membership facility should be disconnected from View Recommends. Those needing Edit Membership access can easily have that allocated in System Settings. For the record, I fail to see why viewing Move In/Out requires Edit Membership rights.

I agree that viewing recommends and editing membership should be disconnected. I would guess that this was an implementation oversight, but perhaps there is some technical reason why it was done this way. In either case, as a general principle, granting one permission should automatically grant another permission only when those permissions are inextricably connected (for example, it is impossible to do financial work in a ward if you can't see the members).

All of these can be implemented on a discrete basis. So I am asking the rationale behind automatically linking access privileges . . . Why do they in fact have to be linked?

This would be a question for the product manager or developers of MLS; you're not likely to get a response to that question on this forum. As I said before, it's my opinion that they do not have to be linked, but the current MLS implementation simply makes that a requirement. It's good to raise this issue, and hopefully it will be refined in future releases (as has happened with many MLS features over the years).

[russellhltn]

For the record, I fail to see why viewing Move In/Out requires Edit Membership rights.

Maybe it doesn't but that would be breaking down the "edit membership" into more discrete steps. Since a move out is not much different then a move within a ward, or changing the grouping of families, it is a form of membership change.

You may want to double-check, but I believe the usual arrangement is for the assistant membership clerk to handle the membership records. The ward clerk only gets involved for things like disciplinary actions or to pass along information from the various meetings. That's probably why move outs are connected to the Edit Membership functions.

[iamdavid]

Hmm RussellHltn, I see what you mean but that was not what I was meaning.

The person who "Views" Move-Ins and Move-Outs, for the purposes of updating Class Rolls and notifying auxiliary leaders does not DO any of the "Moving". He just needs to View that page in MLS so as to sort out his paperwork.

We also do a little Move-In sheet (A5) which is given to the Bishopric and assists the Quorum and Group leadership to sight and welcome newcomers and gather information - especially in the case where we get the record but the member(s) never shows at Church.

The second point in there, "The usual arrangement", fails to impress. I have seen many usual arrangements that don't work at all and in our case I try to establish 'arrangements' that do. The system we have is not perfect but currently limits errors and shortcomings to manageable levels. There is a great deal to be said for farming out responsibilities to individuals, to help them to gain experience and to obtain a sense of responsibility in the Kingdom - the outcome has to be effective though. If the outcome is undesireable then it becomes necessary to look again at what caused the apparent 'problem'. If it was the 'arrangement', then that arrangemnent should be dropped.

There are two limits in effective callings, what the individual can do and what the individual will do. Training and instruction can do a lot to influence what they can do. Influencing what individuals will do can require professional skills. Good intentions do not take the place of training and motivation.

But still I maintain it's the persons in the ward who are best suited to tailor access according to their and the individual's needs. I think that is accepted in this forum as an ongoing feature of MLS development and all I was seeking to do here was to add my voice to those who try to add impetus to the manner of change.