13. Building "Ensign" Teams

Problem or situation. Almost four months had passed since the mission began. An entry from my personal journal on October 27, 1978, explains what I felt was the problem or situation at the time:

            It doesn't look like October is going to be too good as far as baptisms are concerned. We only have 16 so far. And with only 5 days to go, my hopes are not too high. It is so discouraging to have given so much material, so many techniques, so much encouragement and vision, and then not have it happen. I feel that the things we are doing are right and acceptable to our Heavenly Father, and in wondering what I'm doing wrong and what I need to change, I keep hearing the encouragement, "Keep doing what you're doing," and "Don't give up; you're headed in the right direction (Groberg, 1978-1981).

            With all that had been done to this point, the improved productivity I had expected to come in floods came only in small trickles. I couldn't accept that the missionaries were doing the things I was presenting in zone conferences and other training meetings and not be getting better results. I believed the methods we were pursuing would work if the missionaries would just apply them. I felt a huge inertia still at work. I felt I was trying to move too much at once.

About this time I received a letter from my brother John in which he shared some of the ideas that had worked when he was a mission president in the South Pacific. One of his ideas kept cycling my mind:

            Another thing I discovered is how much more beneficial it is to work with a few leaders with a few basic ideas and really get them deeply and forcibly going on their own in the right direction than it is to try to superficially change everyone (Groberg, 1978-1981).        

I had to find a way to get a few missionaries--a smaller group--to really do things differently and better. I felt that when some of them began making breakthroughs, others would become more receptive to the things that helped in the success. What I needed were vanguards, pioneers, or ensigns.

Action taken. (11-78) BRING IN, CONCENTRATE, AND TRAIN SOME OF THE BEST MISSIONARIES AND HELP THEM TO MAKE BREAKTHROUGHS; THEN REPLANT THEM IN VARIOUS PLACES IN THE FIELD TO SPREAD THE FIRE OF SUCCESS. (Productivity label: Organizational.) 

I brought four more sets of outstanding missionaries into the mission headquarters area at Higashi Fuchu. I selected the best missionaries I could find in the field at the time. These missionaries already had good visions of what we were trying to accomplish and wanted to play a part in accomplishing it. I let them know that their mission was to make breakthroughs and demonstrate to the rest of the mission what could be done. I worked with them each morning, modeling the teaching techniques we had been discussing at the zone conferences, and having them practice them on each other. I had them alternate playing the roles of missionary and investigator.

After these ensign teams acquired acceptable levels of teaching skills and confidence and began to experience some proselyting success, I transferred them back to the field, like coals from a burning fire, to start "fires" in the missionaries there. This way we could demonstrate that the vision of President Kimball and Elder Kikuchi--which was becoming more and more our own vision--really could be realized.  

Results of the action. In working with these "Ensign" missionaries, I discovered that even my best missionaries had not been learning and applying the new teaching skills I had been emphasizing. They were ill at ease and ineffective in teaching situations. But, after a few weeks, these special teams of missionaries began to improve their skills and techniques to the point that they had real confidence in teaching. With confidence in their teaching ability, they wanted to find more and more investigators so they could apply their newly developed skills. The English classes became a primary source of investigators for them, and gradually convert baptisms began to occur right in the area around the mission office.

The area around the mission office had heretofore had the reputation of the worst proselyting area in the mission and had been almost entirely unproductive. But, through the efforts of the ensign teams, within two or three months it became not only a good proselyting area, but the most productive area in the mission. Even though the productivity was modest (each companion set had one or two baptisms a month), at the time there was nowhere else in the mission that was doing as well. The fact that it was happening in Higashi Fuchu--mission headquarters, the worst area in the mission--gave credence to the improved teaching techniques. Missionaries began to believe more and more that by doing things differently and better, they could make a difference.

When these enthusiastic "Ensign" teams were reassigned to various branches in the field, most of them continued to successfully find, teach, and baptize people in those areas. Missionaries working with them in those districts and zones became much more receptive to what they could learn from them. More missionaries began to use the new teaching skills and, at the same time, began to catch a better vision of the work.

Focusing on the top performers and building and developing their vision and skills was like stretching a rubber band: as the best got even better, they caused other missionaries at every level to stretch and grow to some degree. (See Figure 6.)            

14. Conducting Teaching "Pass-Off" Conferences 

            Problem or situation. The eight missionaries in the ensign teams demonstrated that the new proselyting techniques were effective. But 8 out of 130 missionaries were not enough to sustain the new direction and momentum; it would take too long for their influence to seep out to all of the other missionaries. In the meantime I felt that too much missionary energy was being wasted in unproductive efforts and activities. The experience with the special ensign teams had demonstrated to me that in general the missionaries were not using the methods I had been teaching them, and I now knew it was possible to teach them in such a way that they would learn and apply the new techniques. I expressed that thought in my journal: 

            JOURNAL ENTRY (October 31, 1978): I feel encouraged at this point. It's encouraging to see how poorly the missionaries perform. It's encouraging because I know it's because they are not using the things I'm giving them which I know will work. And I'm convinced that I can train them to use them. (Groberg, 1978-l98l).

            One of the things I had been encouraging--but had not yet been able to get them to do--was to teach the lesson concepts in their own words rather than to present a word-for-word regurgitation of memorized lessons. It seemed that none of them ever mastered the memorized plan well enough to make it really theirs, so while they were trying to remember the dialogue, their attention was on themselves and their presentation rather than on the investigator and his learning and understanding. Yet the content of the lesson plan had to be given--and given in such a way that it was understood and, hopefully, accepted.

I also wanted to insure that the missionaries continued to progress in their language and teaching skills. I believed what President Kimball had said about millions of people being prepared and willing to listen if they could hear the gospel in their own tongue and in a way that they could grasp and understand. Too many missionaries were reaching a minimal survival level of language and teaching ability and not progressing beyond it. A few were even learning to cope without really learning the language and the lessons at all. And they managed to keep it a secret from everybody. Then there were a few who continued to learn and progress throughout their missions. But I needed something to keep all of them growing in these vital language and teaching skills. The counsel of President Benson (1976) gave me direction in this: 

            I would recommend that every missionary pass off his discussions to his companions, and with regularity to his district leaders. Passing off your discussions once at the beginning of the mission is not sufficient to stay sharp. Teaching must be done with excellence to be effective. The discussions should be learned word perfect, taught professionally and with the Spirit, and the missionary's effectiveness in doing this should be measured at regular intervals (p. 10). 

Action taken. (11-78) HOLD REGULAR PASS-OFF CONFERENCES (WHERE MISSIONARIES TEACH IN THEIR OWN WORDS), CRITIQUE AND MEASURE THE SKILL LEVELS, AND RECORD THE RESULTS. (Productivity label: Training.) 

This process of measuring and critiquing the missionaries' language and teaching skills developed and evolved over a period of many months. It required considerable effort on my part and on the part of the missionaries to make the pass-off conference always a positive, growing, learning experience. The first several pass-off conferences were held in the special meeting room we had prepared in the mission office. We had one zone--about 24 missionaries--attend at a time. Since the pass-off conferences were new to everyone, and accompanied with a little fear and trepidation by many of the missionaries, I, as the mission president, personally prepared, organized, and conducted the conferences for the first several times.

I divided the missionaries into two groups of 12 or so each. We placed three chairs in front, two facing the other one. The missionaries sat in a semicircle around the three chairs. To relieve the anxiety many were feeling at the prospect of performing in front of their peers, I began myself by modeling what I expected them to do. I asked one missionary to be my companion and sit next to me on one of the two chairs, and another to play the role of an investigator and sit on the facing chair. I asked him to role play, as well as he could, a real person, preferably someone he had recently taught. I had previously prepared critique sheets containing a checklist and a rating scale for the missionaries to use in evaluating the presentations. I distributed the sheets and explained how to use them. Before beginning my presentation, I asked one of my assistants, who I knew to be a good teacher, to choose a topic he felt he could teach well and be prepared to go next.

I then chose a topic from the lessons--for example, the story of how the Church was founded by Joseph Smith--and, with the missionaries watching, began teaching it. I presented the same content contained in the lesson plan but did it in my own words. After teaching for five or ten minutes, I stopped and asked the person playing the investigator and the one observing what they thought was effective about the presentation. After we had discussed their observations, I asked what they thought could have been done to make it even better. I then asked them to rate the presentation--both language ability and teaching skills--using the rating scale on the form I had given them, which I then collected. The whole cycle took about 15 minutes.

I next asked the assistant who was to follow me to select someone to role play an investigator, announce his own topic, and, with his companion by his side, teach for five to ten minutes--not memorized, but in his own words. When he finished, I asked, "What did he do well?" After getting several responses, I asked, "What could he do to make it even better?" By phrasing it this way instead of "what did he do wrong" or "how could he improve it," I created a safe environment in which the missionaries were less threatened or intimidated. I always tried to leave them feeling they had done a good job and that, by doing a few small things, they could do it even better. I always ended the critique on a positive note, recalling something that had been done well.

After getting the first group started, I had my assistant continue it while I got the second group going in the adjoining room. After cycling through all of the missionaries once--and after appropriate breaks--we went through everyone again. This second time, rather than letting them choose their own topics, I randomly assigned the topics or concepts that had not yet been presented. We continued to point out the things each person did well and what he could do to teach the topic even better. We evaluated and scored each presentation on both language ability and teaching skills and recorded and reported the scores. To get through all twelve missionaries, the whole process took approximately six hours.

Though there were adjustments and refinements along the way, I continued the basic format of these pass-off conferences every other month for the next two and a half years. Over this time, I made two significant changes: (1) I started holding them in a large-church stake center nearby so all of the zones could do pass-offs at the same time using different classrooms, and (2) I trained the Zone Leaders so they could oversee and implement these conferences without my direct involvement. (See Figures 7 and 8.)

Sometimes a relatively new missionary would notice for the first time, by listening to even newer missionaries, that he had indeed made progress. He would thus feel relieved that he had progressed and determined to keep working.

At one of these first pass-off conferences, a missionary who had slipped by for over a year without learning how to speak the language or teach was so embarrassed at his inabilities that he broke down in tears. At the next one, he still didn't do too well, but he had made considerable progress which everyone noticed and commented on. He slipped me the following note at the conclusion of the pass-offs:

            I want to thank you for today. I have a desire to learn and work now. For a year and more I have had no desire to do anything. This past month I have learned why I haven't been happy. Today I see why it's important to study. By the end of my mission I am going to be the best Japanese speaking American missionary here in Japan! Thanks for everything (Groberg, 1978-1981).

            On a long-term basis, the pass-off seminars had many benefits. The best language and teaching skills were modeled and shared and adopted by the other missionaries; nobody imitated those that were not-so-good, but they did give encouragement to the struggling missionaries. Gradually the not-so-good presentations diminished and disappeared. Essentially all of the missionaries grew and progressed steadily in both language ability and teaching skills. (See Figure 9, Chart of Language Growth.)

Return to previous page