Is the Church doing more to retain active converts? And to reactivate the less-active?

[flameburns623]

http://eom.byu.edu/index.php/Activity_in_the_Church

From the article cited, (one of many), the issue of lapses in activity among converts is discussed.

Is the Church doing more to address this?

And do board participants have ideas of things the Church could be doing (within the parameters of it's unique identity and of it's mission) to retain converts and to keep them active?

Are they doing more to find out why members go inactive? And help inactive and less-active get back into activty?

Edited March 16, 2016 by flameburns623
Spelling. Also revised title and OP to avoid need for second thread.

[Dgal]

It's my understanding that it's encouraging new converts to do genealogy for name submission, thus engaging them into temple work sooner. Does it work? Not sure. Personally, I think the church should spend more time teaching investigators prior to baptism so that they get the meat and the milk, thus nothing becoming a surprise.

I also believe one factor in that plays into inactivity rates with converts is that some really don't want to get baptized as the day comes closer, but are too embarrassed to say so, thus end up leaving. 

[VideoGameJunkie]

I've noticed recently that missionaries, especially the sisters, are spending more time on member retention than finding new converts. Could just be an area thing, while they do the converting in places with high baptism numbers like South America.

[mfbukowski]

13 minutes ago, Dgal said:

It's my understanding that it's encouraging new converts to do genealogy for name submission, thus engaging them into temple work sooner. Does it work? Not sure. Personally, I think the church should spend more time teaching investigators prior to baptism so that they get the meat and the milk, thus nothing becoming a surprise.

I also believe one factor in that plays into inactivity rates with converts is that some really don't want to get baptized as the day comes closer, but are too embarrassed to say so, thus end up leaving. 

It works fabulously, if the get to do baptisms within 3 months of joining the church and take some of their own ancestors names to the temple.

They get to attend the temple and feel the strong spirit there, as well as finding out more about their families and "turning their hearts" to their families and seeing families as a "forever" institution

The whole objective is to tie them to their families and in turn help them communicate with their relatives about the beliefs of the church.

https://www.lds.org/ensign/2009/10/temple-worship-a-contagious-fire?lang=eng

We are now having meetings between the Ward Mission Leader and High Priest Group Leader and making sure that all converts are instructed enough in family history to submit some names for baptism- and this has been found to work very well everywhere it has been tried.

Edited March 16, 2016 by mfbukowski

[flameburns623]

Please note revised title and opening post. I broadenwd the scope of this thread rather than create a second thread.

[VideoGameJunkie]

Again, just look at what the sister missionaries are doing now. At least in my old Boston area they were all about trying to reactivate the less active and obtain member retention.

[mfbukowski]

12 minutes ago, flameburns623 said:

Please note revised title and opening post. I broadenwd the scope of this thread rather than create a second thread.

FWIW the temple program above works just as well with re-activations.  Stats show major improvements in reactivation if they get to the temple within 3 months of returning.

What has changed is that it has been traditional to wait a significant period of time for new members or re-activated members to attend the temple.

That has changed.  The feeling is that if one  is worthy to get baptized, they are worthy to attend the temple for baptisms.  For all of us, the commitment to pay tithing is viewed as sufficient, kind of in the spirit of "today is the first day of the rest of my life".  

And of course what happens is that once one enters the temple that extra "shot" of the spirit seems to encourage the member to actually keep the covenants he has made.

For many, the temple experience can become "addictive"- in a good way.

[Glenn101]

Retention of currently actives and re-energizing of less actives can best be done at the local branch and ward levels, in my opinion. Welcoming faces, warm handshakes, strong home and visiting teaching, making people feel at home and welcome all help in that respect. I think that the home and visiting teaching programs should really be pushed. But they shouldn't have to be pushed.

 

Glenn

[flameburns623]

My thoughts.

Converts

1. Take a little longer. Cover the Gospel a bit more slowly.

2. Make sure converts understand there will be frustrations, questions, doubts, struggles. That sometimes the Heavens will "be as brass", that God will seem silent or uncaring, that many believers experience a "dark night of the soul".

And that just after mountaintop experience--SUCH AS BAPTISM--a believer may soon pass through a valley.

3. Since the Internet exists and folks will confront opposition--expose investigators and/or new converts to some trusted apologetics material.

4. Where investigators have lifestyle or moral struggles--prepare the Missionaries to help the person take BABY STEPS toward progress. More on this below.

Inactive/Less-Active (abbreviated IA/LA)

1. Ask WHY. And ask AGAIN. And ask in a manner that is safe for the IA/LA. There may be several issues, and the person may not lead or mention all of them at once. Some examples I could think of:

 *Boredom/change in interests.

 *Members seem cliquish: IA/LA feels left out.

 *Real or imagined hurts.

 *Work, transportation, accessibility or other impediments to Sunday service.

 *Doubts. Questions. Opposition frim family or friends.

 *Moral failings/spiritual obstacles.

 *Emotional issues (depression, anxiety).Self-consciousness or shyness or embarrasment.

 *Too many demands/left out of callings.

I could add to the list but the point is to realize there can be a number of factors in play.

2. Don't try to make Celestial Olympic athletes out of every last member. Mormons are big on high-energy motivational speaking. Not a bad thing, but it tends to make some people feel the challenges are never-ending, that the bars are spaced too widely apart.

I'm in a weight-loss program thru the VA. One of the big things they are about is: set weekly goals so low that you can hardly fail to achieve them.

We had a 435 pound veteran join the program (NOT me--I have never been quite THAT heavy). He was all gung-ho when he started, talking about how he had been on all kinds of diets and lost tons of weight in the past.

And now here he was: 435 pounds, using a walker, injecting insulin several times a day.

The dietician put him on an exercise regime: two ten minute walks a week.

Long term, the goal is 150 minutes of sustained cardiovascular exercise weekly, in three to four sessions. But she started this guy off with a goal of 20 minutes a week.

After figuring out his daily calorie intake was something like 6800 calories per day, she put him on a 3500 calorie per day meal plan.

Optimal daily intake is about 2000 calories for an adult male, and rhis guy was ready to live on broth and stewed veggies: but she put him on a plan with plenty of food.

He showed up the next week a bit glum. He had exceeded his calories a couple of times, and his only consolation was that he'd gotten outside and walked an extra ten minutes one day. So 30 minutes that week instead of 20.

Oh, and when the dietician averaged all his food journal entries, he'd turned out to have averaged something like 3400 calories, despite his "cheats". 

Real proof was on the scale: he had lost 9 pounds. He went from being glum to glad, and wanted to step up his goals.

Dietician told him to stick with those same goals for a couple more weeks. Until those behaviors vegan to engrain as habits. And he kept right on losing.

Eventually they tweaked those goals a bit of course: but at almost glacial speed.

Wee little increments at a time, making sure that each little change worked and fit the guy's lifestyle, and was something he could slowly habituate into.

He has been in the program about two years and is just below 300 pounds: but he is off the injectable insulin, does aerobics twicr a week, and no longer uses a walker or a cane.

Sorry to belabor the diet thing, and I know I've been away from the LDS Church quite awhile so things might've changed.

But when I was doing missionary "splits" (one missionary with me, his companion with another ward member) to reach out to inactives, many of whom had problems: the push was to make the IA/LA go "cokd turkey": quit that coffee or beer or abandon that bad attitude or whatever totally, RIGHT HERE AND NOW.

With not a lot of compassion for how many struggles it might cost that member, with not a lot of encouragement for any small successes they might achieve. 

Hopefully things are some different these days: if not, the Church might look at how behavioral therapists are using the strategy I just outlined to help folks progress. 

Some of my thoughts, anyhow. 

 

Edited March 16, 2016 by flameburns623
Spelling.

[Scott Lloyd]

3 hours ago, flameburns623 said:

http://eom.byu.edu/index.php/Activity_in_the_Church

From the article cited, (one of many), the issue of lapses in activity among converts is discussed.

Is the Church doing more to address this?

And do board participants have ideas of things the Church could be doing (within the parameters of it's unique identity and of it's mission) to retain converts and to keep them active?

Are they doing more to find out why members go inactive? And help inactive and less-active get back into activty?

Rather than rely on our pooled ignorance here on this board to answer your questions, why don't you take a look at these recorded presentations from the Worldwide Missionary Broadcast that happened in January and this very thing was discussed by Church leaders. The segments are available to watch as videos or as downloaded text to be read and studied.

Once you've spent some time there, you might be a bit better prepared with some information already under your belt.

Edited to add:

Also see my news report of the Family History leadership session at the RootsTech family history conference that occurred in Salt Lake City in February.

(I see that mfbukowski is already well acquainted with the new plans and directives that were discussed there. Perhaps he has seen what I saw.)

What was emphasized was a holistic approach whereby new converts are taught and encouraged to find names of ancestors and to take these names to the temple where baptisms can be performed vicariously for them. The interesting thing that came out from it is that convert retention improved dramatically where the new converts are encouraged to get involved right away in family history.

Again, we could give our best guesses to answer your questions, but you would do a lot better to go to the authoritative sources I am pointing you to with these links.

Edited further to add:

Here is an excerpt from my article:
 

Quote

 

A recent multi-year study showed that when recent converts perform baptisms and confirmations in the temple with family names within the first two months of their baptism, convert retention improves significantly, Elder Nielson said. He added that this finding “is one of the most significant breakthroughs in improving convert retention that we have seen in many years.”

President Shawn Douglas, who returned last July from presiding over the Peru Lima South Mission, was invited to share his experience. He said two sister missionaries were assigned in each stake in the mission, along with their proselytizing duties, to be family history specialists.

“These sister missionaries, along with their other work, would meet with every convert in that stake through the ward council coordination and help every convert and every rescued member complete ‘My Family,’ help them go online, help them obtain their own family names and then take them to the temple.” Some days, there were over 70 converts in the temple, President Douglas said.

Within a year, more than 500 converts and more than 300 reactivated members went to the temple through the instrumentality of this missionary force and the ward councils, he said.

“We saw retention go from 20 percent to over 80 percent for those that participated,” he added. “Talk about hastening the work on both sides of the veil!”

Missionaries went “from font to font,” beginning with white in mind, he said, baptizing converts and then preparing them to do baptisms for the dead in the temple. A video was shown illustrating how family history work, temple work and missionary work all combined in one to bless the life of a new member, Zayna Chubb, who was baptized last Nov. 15 in the Arizona Tempe Mission.

Using the new pamphlet, “Families and Temples,” they taught her in new member lessons to identify ancestors through FamilySearch.org, fill out a four-generation family tree, find information through FamilySearch.org, prepare the names for temple work and then go to the temple to participate in baptisms for her ancestors.

 

 

Edited March 16, 2016 by Scott Lloyd

[flameburns623]

24 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

 

Post deleted.

Edited March 16, 2016 by flameburns623
Deleted

[The Nehor]

We do what we can. I am trying to work with the missionaries to get a couple to the temple now. While we do what we can there is no magic formula that will make people stay. Jesus couldn't make people stay when he was on the Earth. There is no program or technique that will fix that. We should improve as we can but we also need to understand our limitations.

I like the story President Hinckley told:

Quote

To illustrate, I think I would like to share with you one of my failures. I suppose some people think I have never experienced failure. I have. Let me tell you of one such instance.

Sixty-three years ago, while serving as a missionary in the British Isles, my companion and I taught, and it was my pleasure to baptize, a young man. He was well educated. He was refined. He was studious. I was so proud of this gifted young man who had come into the Church. I felt he had all of the qualifications someday to become a leader among our people.

He was in the course of making the big adjustment from convert to member. For a short period before I was released, mine was the opportunity to be his friend. Then I was released to return home. He was given a small responsibility in the branch in London. He knew nothing of what was expected of him. He made a mistake. The head of the organization where he served was a man I can best describe as being short on love and strong on criticism. In a rather unmerciful way, he went after my friend who had made the simple mistake.

The young man left our rented hall that night smarting and hurt by his superior officer. He said to himself, “If that is the kind of people they are, then I am not going back.”

He drifted into inactivity. The years passed. The war came on, and he served in the British forces. His first wife died. After the war he married a woman whose father was a Protestant minister. That did not help his belief.

When I was in England, I tried desperately to find him. His file contained no record of a current address. I came home and finally, after a long search, was able to track him down.

I wrote to him. He responded but with no mention of the gospel.

When next I was in London, I again searched for him. The day I was to leave, I found him. I called him, and we met in the underground station. He threw his arms around me as I did around him. I had very little time before I had to catch my plane, but we talked briefly and with what I think was a true regard for one another. He gave me another embrace before I left. I determined that I would never lose track of him again. Through the years I wrote to him, letters that I hoped would give encouragement and incentive to return to the Church. He wrote in reply without mentioning the Church.

The years passed. I grew older as did he. He retired from his work and moved to Switzerland. On one occasion when I was in Switzerland, I went out of my way to find the village where he lived. We spent the better part of a day together—he, his wife, my wife, and myself. We had a wonderful time, but it was evident that the fire of faith had long since died. I tried every way I knew, but I could not find a way to rekindle it. I continued my correspondence. I sent him books, magazines, recordings of the Tabernacle Choir, and other things for which he expressed appreciation.

He died a few months ago. His wife wrote me to inform me of this. She said, “You were the best friend he ever had.”

Tears coursed my cheeks when I read that letter. I knew I had failed. Perhaps if I had been there to pick him up when he was first knocked down, he might have made a different thing of his life. I think I could have helped him then. I think I could have dressed the wound from which he suffered. I have only one comfort: I tried. I have only one sorrow: I failed.

I like this because it teaches us to never give up and to strive to do better but also acknowledges there will be times we fail even when we try.

[Scott Lloyd]

10 minutes ago, flameburns623 said:

There stands a man so full of himself his disdain for all others echoes from the everlasting hills.

Sorry I should presume to ask or to opine.

The moderators may close the thread and/or remove it at leisure. Mr. Lloyd has directed us elsewhere lest we pollute the board with collective ignorance.

Sorry i came across that way. I altered my wording a bit even before I saw this response post.

I'm not trying to shut down discussion. On the contrary, I'm seeking to enhance it with information and content that is already freely accessible in the interest of not trying to re-invent the wheel, as it were.

 

Edited March 16, 2016 by Scott Lloyd

[flameburns623]

Just now, Scott Lloyd said:

Sorry i came across that way. I altered my wording a bit even before I saw this response post.

I'm not trying to shut down discussion. On the contrary, I'm seeking to enhance with information and content that is already freely accessible.

 

My apologies as well.

I just spent 45 minutes on that long post just above yours. I am well aware I could be traversing well-explored territory. But I opened this post, and tendered my own thoughts, with good intentions.

The resources you suggested are likely good but the topic remains one which gets brought up. It deserves some open discussion, I would think.

And most threads on message boards reflect "collective ignorance". 

I wil delete my hard words above. 

[mtomm]

 I felt your list was well thought out and I'm sure quite accurate. Our ward has a fair number of converts each year and I've seen many of those issues arise.  We are all learning how to do our best for them. 

[Scott Lloyd]

8 minutes ago, flameburns623 said:

My apologies as well.

I just spent 45 minutes on that long post just above yours. I am well aware I could be traversing well-explored territory. But I opened this post, and tendered my own thoughts, with good intentions.

The resources you suggested are likely good but the topic remains one which gets brought up. It deserves some open discussion, I would think.

And most threads on message boards reflect "collective ignorance". 

I wil delete my hard words above. 

No need. I probably deserved them.

[flameburns623]

There is wide variability in how well religious groups retain adult converts.

Catholics and most Eastern Orthodox put adult catechumens through a process which takes upwards of a year. Their retention rates, last I looked, were very very good at the one-year and five-year markers. Notable because the RCC in particular does somewhat poorly in keeping its birthright membership. 

And these are churches which are heavily stratified and professionalised, where volunteer opportunities for ordinary congregants is limited.

Interestingly, the Antiochian Rite of Orthodoxy, a Westernised and Americanized variant, has accelerated reception of converts with Christian backgrounds from other churches: instead of taking a year or more, they often take three months or less. Their dropout rate is higher than normal in other Orthodox jurisdictions.

Jehovah's Witnesses also take six months or longer to receive members. Their retention rates are also good, although this may be skewed by thr harsh discipline imposed upon defectors.

By contrast, " Evangelism Crusades" (think of Billy Graham), are notoriously unlikely to effect permanent discipleship.

I have no idea how well the LDS retention ratea compare/contrast with those of other groups. But it does look as if taking a little time can be one piece of the puzzle.

[why me]

4 hours ago, flameburns623 said:

http://eom.byu.edu/index.php/Activity_in_the_Church

From the article cited, (one of many), the issue of lapses in activity among converts is discussed.

Is the Church doing more to address this?

And do board participants have ideas of things the Church could be doing (within the parameters of it's unique identity and of it's mission) to retain converts and to keep them active?

Are they doing more to find out why members go inactive? And help inactive and less-active get back into activty?

I think that they are trying to do both: more converts and more retention. Both are important. I believe that home teachers and members who know of less active members are encouraged to do outreach. And the missionaries too are encouraged to bring less actives back. This is happening all over the world. But has it been a success? Difficult to say. Of course, if members have just lost interest in attending church for various of reasons, it is difficult to bring them back. If they are very anti church, then it is more or less left up to a very spiritual experience to bring them back. We have seen this happen too to members who left, became active in being critical of the church on the web and then returned.

However, all churches have problems with retention rates. It is not easy being a christian these days.

[why me]

26 minutes ago, flameburns623 said:

I have no idea how well the LDS retention ratea compare/contrast with those of other groups. But it does look as if taking a little time can be one piece of the puzzle.

This is true. There should be more time before one is baptized.

[flameburns623]

Mr. Lloyd: the system has a glitch, or else a limitation has been placed on my account, impeding my ability to PM you.

I am unable to identify a means via the link you provided, to view printed transcripts.

I am not in a position to review audio files. Is there something I am missing?

Thanks!

[flameburns623]

48 minutes ago, why me said:

This is true. There should be more time before one is baptized.

I discovered a cache of missionary blogs and have been reading these for several days. A lot of fun to read the reactions of outsiders to the St. Louis area.

I notice, however, that missionariea feel a tremendous crush of pressure to keep their baptism numbers high. Not certain this is conducive to finding people who will stay active.

I worked 20 years in a contract agency which takes 200% turnover in employees for granted. They hire anyone who can pass certain pre-employment background checks, give them 24 hours of  preassignment training and put them to work.

One in four qualified applicants can expect to be hired.

Their HR department has incentives and disincentives for controlling turnover, and the post-employment skills training programs are top-of-the-line. Stay with that company five years or so, utilising their free training resources, and you will have broad knowledge of the field. Very few stay that long or are interested in the training.

I changed employers nine years ago. My current employer actively seeks candidates experienced in the field and gives forty to forty-eight hours of pre-employment training.

Only about one in ten qualified applicants are hired. Post-employment training resources are comparable. Participation is generally much higher.Turnover: 50%/year or less, fairly low by industry standards.

Not exactly analogous to a religious commitment, but reflective of the difference between a system basically resigned to turnover, as opposed to one which seeks longer tenure.

[why me]

1 hour ago, flameburns623 said:

I discovered a cache of missionary blogs and have been reading these for several days. A lot of fun to read the reactions of outsiders to the St. Louis area.

I notice, however, that missionariea feel a tremendous crush of pressure to keep their baptism numbers high. Not certain this is conducive to finding people who will stay active.

I worked 20 years in a contract agency which takes 200% turnover in employees for granted. They hire anyone who can pass certain pre-employment background checks, give them 24 hours of  preassignment training and put them to work.

One in four qualified applicants can expect to be hired.

Their HR department has incentives and disincentives for controlling turnover, and the post-employment skills training programs are top-of-the-line. Stay with that company five years or so, utilising their free training resources, and you will have broad knowledge of the field. Very few stay that long or are interested in the training.

I changed employers nine years ago. My current employer actively seeks candidates experienced in the field and gives forty to forty-eight hours of pre-employment training.

Only about one in ten qualified applicants are hired. Post-employment training resources are comparable. Participation is generally much higher.Turnover: 50%/year or less, fairly low by industry standards.

Not exactly analogous to a religious commitment, but reflective of the difference between a system basically resigned to turnover, as opposed to one which seeks longer tenure.

 I think that many people who join a church or change their churches are usually in some kind of crisis. It doesn't have to be a serious crisis, just perhaps something new to hold on to. A way to survive a very difficult world. The lds church faces much hostility on the web. But the question is why? Basically, the lds church teaches great values, and it does guide people toward good directions. So why the hostility? When a person finds comfort in what the missionaries say or find peace inside a lds church and then goes to the web and read antimormon interpretations and no longer becomes interested in the lds faith, is this person better off now? Maybe but maybe not.

Catholic member sponsored websites can be very hostile to mormonism. But this mormon site  is not. That says a lot about mormons here but not so much about catholics on such negative catholic websites.

[flameburns623]

37 minutes ago, why me said:

 

 . . . . Catholic member sponsored websites can be very hostile to mormonism. But this mormon site  is not. That says a lot about mormons here but not so much about catholics on such negative catholic websites.

The particular Catholic apologetic forum I am thinking of is pretty hard on Muslims too.

And Baha'i.

And JW's.

And traditionalist Catholics.

And progressive Catholics.

Like "Mikey" from the cereal comnercial: they hate everything. LoL!

Edited March 16, 2016 by flameburns623

[flameburns623]

9 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

It works fabulously, if the get to do baptisms within 3 months of joining the church and take some of their own ancestors names to the temple.

They get to attend the temple and feel the strong spirit there, as well as finding out more about their families and "turning their hearts" to their families and seeing families as a "forever" institution

The whole objective is to tie them to their families and in turn help them communicate with their relatives about the beliefs of the church.

https://www.lds.org/ensign/2009/10/temple-worship-a-contagious-fire?lang=eng

We are now having meetings between the Ward Mission Leader and High Priest Group Leader and making sure that all converts are instructed enough in family history to submit some names for baptism- and this has been found to work very well everywhere it has been tried.

Read Mr. Lloyd's article. Sounds like very promising results.

Any conern this needs to be contolled to rule out the Hawthorne effect?

I don't want to sound negative. My BA is in Sociology, so one of the first things that leaps to mind in regards to human behavior is that, initially, any liitle change can seem to make a disproportionate impact. If deep-seated issues aren't identifed & addressed, the good results often evaporate.

The larger Christian movement has been dabbling in faddish adventures for awhile. Seeker-sensitive churches, contemporary Protestant worship, Centering prayer, liturgical reform.  

Mormons seem to have avoided most of that. And there are healthy reasons for opening access to the Temple to new members early: I always felt that "Templed" Mormons were an elite caste, a clique of The Holiest, whose ranks I might aspire to but likely never gain admittance among. 

But: still want to look askance at whether this new policy is likely to be the real reaaon for improved activity numbers.

I'm still inclined to think that early baptism rates can artificially inflate conversion numbers. Because the endorphin rush of new stuff distorts perceptions. Extra-friendly missionaries at one's door, super-nice people at meeting-houses, loads of new stuff to learn can all gin up one's emotions.

Can make someone feel stronger than ever in a long time: strong enough to pitch those cigarettes out the window, dump the coffee in the trash, poor the alcohol down the sink.

And feel right good about one's progress till a few weeks after baptism, as the new wears off and life resumes it's usual humdrum state.

Suddenly it's clear that problems haven't gone away. Bills have to be paid, appliances break, kids still act badly at the worst of times, spouse is still an abusive jerk--and/or the convert still has underlying depression or anxiety which the cigs or caffeine or pills or alcohol masked. 

Longer discipling times prior to baptsm,would allow the workaday existence to be integrated more effectively with the covenants and commitments of being a Latter-Day Saint.

Or so I surmise off the top of my bald head.

Still sounds like an exciting initiative, Mr. Bukowski. Don't mean to sound like a Donny Downer.

[stemelbow]

I think it obvious we have a bit of a problem on our hands.  It's been mentioned, I believe by the Brethren a few times over the years.  How do we keep new members?  I think temple work is an excellent idea.  Sometimes that spirit of Elijah catches people just right and gets them hooked.  But it's proven to not be for everyone, as a very tiny percentage in the Church actually participate.  \

My concern is our messaging and our vain missionary efforts.  We often go out telling people we are the best.  We are the happiest, the smartest, the bestest around.  I think that appeals to some, but when they join and see there's nothing special, they quickly leave.  And why shouldn't they?  We should accept that we are the least in the world.  There is none better than another.  We are not more happy.  We might even be a little more troubled, if there is truth to our message.  We should probably be meekly serving others rather than boldly proclaiming they are wrong, whatever that means.  Our message would resonate far more and people would feel far more compelled to stay.  Forget legalistic step taking and move to open embracement and love. 

But I speak to empty ears when I bring this up, it seems.