35. Initiating "Automatic" Training and Evaluation of Zone Leaders 

Problem or situation. At the beginning of the mission we had had large groups of 10 and 12 missionaries coming into the mission. Now, almost two years later, these same missionaries were completing their missions and returning home in the same large groups. Many of these returning missionaries were Zone Leaders. Assuring a smooth transition of Zone Leaders. had always been a high priority, but with so many Zone Leaders returning, assuring this smooth transition was becoming critical. With so much activity going on—new missionaries arriving, old missionaries departing, etc.-this important training began to fall by the wayside: in quality, in emphasis, and sometimes in its entirety.

I knew how important the training of mission leaders was. President Benson (1976) had emphasized it as one of the key responsibilities of a mission president: 

            Special emphasis should be given by mission presidents to train their missionary leaders, not only for leadership in the mission, but for future leadership in the Church (p. 11). 

I felt I had to do something to assure that this important training of mission leaders was always carried out. At the same time, I was not paying much attention to the performance of my mission leaders. Without checking, I fell into the trap of assuming again. In studying President Kimball's (Kikuchi, 1981) words, I came across this statement: 

            I believe Elder Monson said, "Progress is easier when it is timed, checked, and measured." "If you don't play to win, why keep the score? "If you don't keep the score, how do you know if you win or lose?" (Kikuchi, 1981, 'p. 60). 

I began applying these concepts to the Zone Leaders through monthly measurement and evaluations. 

Action taken. (3-80) DO SYSTEMATIC ZONE LEADER TRAINING AND EVALUATION. (Productivity label: Training.)

I established systematic training for all newly called Zone Leaders. Part of the instruction given when a missionary was called to be a Zone Leader was information about the training that accompanied the call. Experienced Zone Leaders were given the training responsibility so that at each transfer, if a Zone Leader was affected, the training was automatically assigned and carried out by that trainer."

This automatic training program included monthly evaluations of mission leaders by their file leaders. Knowing they would be evaluated on how well they carried out their duties helped both the new Zone Leaders and the trainers to take the training seriously and be accurate and thorough in it. 

Results of the action. Effective, organized, and complete training began to happen automatically, without the need to continually reproduce it. The regular evaluations helped the Zone Leaders' performance remain high. 

36. Minimizing Problems with Transfers 

Problem or situation. It seemed to me that there was often a lull in some of the missionaries' proselyting activities right after transfers. Parts of the mission seemed to lose momentum during these times. It often took several weeks to build the momentum back. I couldn't understand why this was happening. Then, in a personal interview with a missionary, I discovered one of the causes: some of the missionaries misunderstood or had the wrong perception about the reasons for the transfers. I discovered their feelings or perceptions of the reasons were equally if not more important than the real reasons.

This missionary's experience helped explain what had been happening. Approximately two months prior, I had assigned the missionary to a small town I had opened for proselyting six months or so before. The missionaries there had not enjoyed much success. I felt the area could be a successful one if the right missionaries were there. Not every missionary could do it, but I felt this particular missionary--who had been having considerable success where he had been laboring-was right and could make the area "blossom." I informed the missionary of the new assignment through the normal line of communication--from me to the assistants, to the Zone Leader, to the District Leader, to the missionary. It had been two months since he had been assigned, but so far, nothing much had happened. The area was still the same slow-moving, low-baptizing area. Now, two months later, I was interviewing the missionary of whom I had had such high expectations.

As the interview began, I noticed he seemed a little down and discouraged. After some general questions about how he was doing, I expressed my concern that he had not yet caused the area to "blossom" as I had expected. When I said that, I noticed a change taking place in his attitude. At first he had seemed down and discouraged; then he seemed puzzled, surprised, and even excited. As we continued talking and he explained his side to me, I learned how a very simple process--that of communicating the assignments to the missionaries--had backfired. And I realized it had probably backfired many times.

                From the missionary's point of view this was how he perceived what had happened. He had been working            successfully in a good area, when suddenly (to him) out of the blue. he received a call from his zone leader informing him of the new assignment: he was being taken out of this "good" area and being put in the "worst" area of the mission. The zone leader didn't know anything about the reasons for the transfer but had made some joke about how "bad" the area was. The missionary was devastated. He wondered what he had done wrong to deserve this punishment. The physical setting, the history, everything about the area convinced him this was truly a "bad" area and therefore was meant as a "punishment" for something he had done. Two months later he was still wondering what he had done to deserve it.

After I explained the great confidence I had felt in him as one of the few missionaries that could really make that area blossom, everything changed. He saw the area, the people, the physical setting, the challenges in a totally different light. He knew he wasn't being punished by the assignment for doing something wrong; rather he was recognized as one who had been doing things right and as one who had the unique ability and potential to turn what would be an unproductive area to most missionaries into a productive one. His new excitement over what he could do in this "bad" area was confirmed by his actions. Over the next several months the area became one of the most productive in the mission.

He was sad that he had essentially wasted the past two months. And I was sad that I had allowed such an outstanding missionary to be undermined by our communication system. I had known that feelings and perceptions were important--equally if not more important than facts. Now I had to insure that my feelings were communicated as effectively as the facts. 

Action taken. (4-80) HAVE ASSISTANTS CALL OUT TRANSFERS DIRECTLY TO EACH MISSIONARY RATHER THAN THROUGH THE ZONE LEADERS AND DISTRICT LEADERS, EXPLAINING THE FEELINGS AS WELL AS THE FACTS OF THE TRANSFER. (Productivity label: Motivational.)

Even though I always made the final decisions on transfers, my assistants were usually present and made their suggestions and observations. Thus they were always aware of the confidence and trust the feelings-that accompanied each call. Because they were involved in the transfer discussions and decisions, they knew there was no such thing as "punishment" transfers. I had confidence that my assistants could communicate that trust and confidence--the feeling of the transfer--to the individual missionaries. But I was not sure we could go through several layers of mission administration and still retain it. So, from this point on, all transfers were called out by either myself or one of my assistants directly to the individual missionaries, with as much emphasis on the feeling of the assignment as on the facts of it.

To keep the mission administration lines intact, the District Leaders and Zone Leaders were also called and informed of the transfers of anyone within their districts or zones but not until after the individual missionary had been told.

Results of the action. It is impossible to estimate the cumulative effect of nipping these negative feelings before they began and implanting positive ones in their place. If the axioms were true which say "Whether you think you can or you think you can't, you're right" and "Success breeds success" are true, the cumulative gain must have been tremendous.

After I made this change, I felt there was added excitement, vigor, and enthusiasm at the time of transfers. The lull after transfers all but disappeared. There was more success soon after transfers than we had ever had before. This small change resu1ted in a large increase in positive feelings and positive actions. As Bruce R. McConkie (1975) observed:  

            Programs per se do not have much to do with whether or not missionaries are successful. Whether or not missionaries baptize is almost totally dependent upon their attitude. To the degree that programs are successful in changing the attitude of missionaries about baptizing, to that degree they will be effective (from tape recording).

As small as this change may seem, it affected and changed attitudes and thus made a big difference in missionaries' performance and results.

Things Learned

            Two years had passed since my mission began. This last six-month period was one of growth and progress in many areas.. Many barriers to the work had been removed or minimized. Changes made during this period, such as working out better methods for explaining baptism to investigators' parents, changing the negative labels

missionaries were using, and communicating feelings of trust and confidence in transfers had all contributed to our growth and progress. As a result, the numbers of introduction lessons and regular lessons had both increased (Mission Statistic, 1978-1981):  

The missionaries were teaching twice as many total lessons per week as they had a year earlier, but that didn't account for all of the increase. More important than the increased numbers was the improved teaching: the missionaries were teaching their investigators better. It seemed clear to me that the Open-Heart teaching was having a major influence on the teaching effectiveness of the missionaries. To illustrate, in June 1980 my 201 missionaries taught 6,005 regular lessons (not including introduction lessons) and baptized 483 converts. That was a ratio of about 1 baptism for every 12 lessons taught compared to 1 baptism for every 18 lessons a year earlier.

The numbers of convert baptisms had risen steadily during this six-month period: 

                                                            January          218

                                                            February        300

                                                            March             310

                                                            April               356

                                                            May                455

                                                            June                483 

The six-month summary for the area showed the following: 

 Return to previous page