Some thoughts on technology and the Texas Conference

The vision was commendable.  At the time that DOVE came into being, the plans included low cost internet access and webmail service for all churches and pastors.  We were trying to use the cloud before it even had a name.

I said on another post that we were ahead of the curve for most churches and Annual Conferences, we were a little behind the curve for best practices in business, and DOVE was obsolete in implementation from day one. The first clue? You couldn’t access the web-based program from a Mac. I don’t know the percentage of Mac users at the time DOVE was launched, but you know we were vocal. Unfortunately, the advice the conference was getting on cross-platform compatibility was just flat wrong. I checked the Central South District web stats this morning.  Approximately 1/4 of the visitors accessed the site using a platform other than Windows. About 3% of the visitors used a mobile device (a cell phone or tablet). The even more astounding statistic is that 40% accessed the site using a browser other than Internet Explorer. Windows techies liked to think that Mac users didn’t use real computers, but another way to look at it is that we were the creative types who were ahead of the trends, and some of us are among the most tech savvy members of the conference.

It occurs to me that our leadership was unable to discern between voices who objected to the way DOVE was implemented technologically and those who just objected to DOVE altogether, for whatever reason.  Bishop Huie once said that she longed for the day when the people were as important as the money. That makes sense to me, and it’s what DOVE was supposed to be about.  The bishop said that she could easily find out where a church was financially, but it was difficult for her to see trends in membership and attendance to get some feedback on how the people were.  DOVE was also supposed to help candidates, committees, and the Board of Ordained Ministry keep track of paperwork and processes for ordination–again, a commendable vision. Where our general agencies were failing, we as an Annual Conference were trying to set the standards. We just chose the wrong company to help us do that and then failed to discern between implementation issues and supervisory issues because they sounded the same.

It also occurred to me as I was reading through Facebook posts last night, that the ongoing issues with DOVE were more relational than technological.  The fact that we couldn’t discern between those whose problems were with the technology and those who are just gonna be problems is relational.  It takes conversation to hear those who can spell out the problems with the technology, even if you don’t quite understand what they’re saying, and to evaluate those who are griping because something’s new or because they’re afraid. That we stayed with a company that wasn’t providing the service we needed is relational.  It’s hard to break up when a relationship isn’t healthy, and it’s hard to hear those who are pointing to the red flags.

I’m glad we’re finally moving on.

Here are some lingering questions (for me) that I think can provide some learning for all of us:

When we need support from areas that are outside our expertise, how do we find out if our “experts” are really giving us the most reliable information?You want to think that the insurance agent who is a member of the church is giving you the best information, but how do you know?

How do you discern in any relationship whether a little more investment will pay off or whether it’s time to walk away?

And the most important learning for the Texas Annual Conference: listen to the Mac users!