The Case Against Numbers and Quotas on Missions

[cinepro]

There are few things that all missionaries accept as universal constants: doors being slammed, (for the men) white shirts and ties, and reporting numbers at the end of the day, week or month.

But recent studies about the affects of "quantifying behavior" have produced some interesting results.  While we're all familiar with the principle that "if you want to improve something, you need to measure it", there is also a downside.

Namely, tracking and measuring an activity or result may cause a person to enjoy that activity less.

This has been studied most thoroughly (and recently) as a part of the FitBit revolution, where more and more people are counting and quantifying almost every physical action in an effort to track their fitness and activity levels.  But as they are doing this, it seems the cost is that they enjoy their activities a little less.

 

 

Quote

 

[N]ew evidence suggests that when we do measure things, we might not enjoy them as much. A new study in the Journal of Consumer Research seems to indicate that measuring an activity, whatever it is, decreases people’s motivation to keep up with it.

In other words, it proposes that the more you quantify something that’s rewarding for its own sake, the less likely you are to enjoy it—and the less likely you are, too, to do more of it. Across a series of experiments, Jordan Etkin, a marketing professor at Duke University, found that people’s intrinsic motivation to do something—whether it be coloring, reading, or walking—declined once it was measured.

http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2016/02/the-quantified-welp/470874/

 

Could all the measuring of missionary (and home teaching?) activity come at a cost of people enjoying those activities less?

Edited April 5, 2016 by cinepro

[cdowis]

I think that may have an effect on having more emphasis on working with the inactive members and service projects.

[bluebell]

Interesting.

Did they say why it decreases someone's motivation to keep doing it?

[Boanerges]

Interesting point. My son recently returned from a mission to Chile. They were involved in a pilot program, initiated by an apostle, that became the standard for the entire area. I don't know why not the whole world. The pilot was pretty simple: measure only lessons taught and baptisms/reactivations (which counted equally). You may know Chile has a huge issue with inactivity, with an activity rate of about 10%. They did this for a few months and the apostle (and I believe it was Nelson) came back to evaluate the progress. In my son's mission it was going swimmingly, it seemed that the baptism/reactivation numbers improved. As reported by my son, the pilot was due to continue for several more months but the apostle decided on the spot to implement it among all the other missions in the area (it was being piloted in 5 missions). A few months later my son's mission president was asked to do a training with other mission presidents because they had issues with the reduced reporting and were, quite frankly, whining.

I think mission service is hard anyway. I recall the rejection, the pressure to perform, the stretches about what we counted as lessons or contacts. I honestly don't think God cares one iota about any data, I think He cares about souls. Most MPs come from the business world (my son's did not) where data and numbers are important and drive everything. In dealing with humans, some things are just not quantifiable. My son's MP often used this quote he attributed to Einstein:

Quote

Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts.

I think missionaries would be much more effective if they didn't have to count so much useless data and could instead focus on saving souls, mostly by serving them. Of course, that takes away a huge segment of power exerted by many mission presidents - strict obedience.

[ksfisher]

So does the fact that this website counts my posts cause me to enjoy posting less?

[Boanerges]

5 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

So does the fact that this website counts my posts cause me to enjoy posting less?

I suppose that depends on what you do or don't do with that information.

[Glenn101]

16 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

So does the fact that this website counts my posts cause me to enjoy posting less?

Fortunately the post counting is computerized and I doubt that the computer doing it has been endowed with A.I. and has no way of getting bored. Now, if you had to count your own posts and rep points, then publish them yourself.......

 

Glenn

[smac97]

1 hour ago, cinepro said:

There are few things that all missionaries accept as universal constants: doors being slammed, (for the men) white shirts and ties, and reporting numbers at the end of the day, week or month.

But recent studies about the affects of "quantifying behavior" have produced some interesting results.  While we're all familiar with the principle that "if you want to improve something, you need to measure it", there is also a downside.

Namely, tracking and measuring an activity or result may cause a person to enjoy that activity less.

This has been studied most thoroughly (and recently) as a part of the FitBit revolution, where more and more people are counting and quantifying almost every physical action in an effort to track their fitness and activity levels.  But as they are doing this, it seems the cost is that they enjoy their activities a little less.

 

 

Could all the measuring of missionary (and home teaching?) activity come at a cost of people enjoying those activities less?

"All the measuring" of missionary work amounts to reporting some pretty basic numbers, such as number of lessons given, copies of The Book of Mormon given out, hours of service, provided.  That's about it, right?  And "all of the measuring" of home teaching amounts to . . . reporting how many assigned families were taught, and perhaps a status update on a particular family.  That's about it.  Neither of these reporting types appears to be aptly compared to "counting and quantifying almost every physical action."

Thanks,

-Smac

[cinepro]

10 minutes ago, smac97 said:

"All the measuring" of missionary work amounts to reporting some pretty basic numbers, such as number of lessons given, copies of The Book of Mormon given out, hours of service, provided.  That's about it, right?  And "all of the measuring" of home teaching amounts to . . . reporting how many assigned families were taught, and perhaps a status update on a particular family.  That's about it.  Neither of these reporting types appears to be aptly compared to "counting and quantifying almost every physical action."

Thanks,

-Smac

I think the actual reporting varies from mission to mission.  On my mission, at varying times we had to count hours knocking on doors, # of doors knocked, hours doing street contacting, # of people contacted, and the regular teaching numbers.  We also had quotas for hours knocking on doors and hours spent street contacting.  Maybe there has been a shift towards more basic numbers overall.

[Buckeye]

On my mission (mid-90s; sourthern california), this quote was basically framed in every apartment - the equivalent of our 'proclamation on the family':

       "When performance is measured, performance improves. When performance is measured and reported, the rate of improvement accelerates" (see Thomas S. Monson, in Conference Report, Oct. 1970, 107).

I swear that if it were allowed my mission president would have had us tattooed with the quote. We tracked everything - number of contacts, first lessons taught, baptism invitations (we were supposed to invite everyone to be baptized during the first conversation), book of mormons placed, service hours, car miles, and on and on. I quickly saw how some missionaries fudged their numbers to get noticed. Others fudged to goof off. The most egregious being a set who "banked" their car miles for a few months - reporting they had drive more than they had - so that they could take a weekend trip to Tijuana with the unreported miles. Ah, the good old days before the bar was raised.

For my part, I hated stats (probably why President left me as a trainer my whole mission, which I loved). I could see how stats could motivate some missionaries. But for me it was just a game, a way to show off and get promoted. Most of the time I was in companionships where we were self-motivated (that goes with being a trainer). So we just recorded the numbers that couldn't be faked - BOMs given, baptisms - and made up numbers for the rest of the categories that would not raise any eyebrows. Being stuck in the 'anonymous middle' was my main goal, as it allowed me to actually focus on the people. 

 

Edited April 5, 2016 by Buckeye

[Boanerges]

15 minutes ago, smac97 said:

"All the measuring" of missionary work amounts to reporting some pretty basic numbers, such as number of lessons given, copies of The Book of Mormon given out, hours of service, provided.  That's about it, right?  And "all of the measuring" of home teaching amounts to . . . reporting how many assigned families were taught, and perhaps a status update on a particular family.  That's about it.  Neither of these reporting types appears to be aptly compared to "counting and quantifying almost every physical action."

Thanks,

-Smac

 

2 minutes ago, cinepro said:

I think the actual reporting varies from mission to mission.  On my mission, at varying times we had to count hours knocking on doors, # of doors knocked, hours doing street contacting, # of people contacted, and the regular teaching numbers.  We also had quotas for hours knocking on doors and hours spent street contacting.  Maybe there has been a shift towards more basic numbers overall.

It does seem to vary by mission and by mission president - that is a new president may add or subtract. I think my mission was similar to Cinepro's. I recall we did report hours teaching as well as lessons taught, meaning there needed to be some correlation there - we couldn't say we taught for 10 hours but only taught 2 lessons. There was some vague rule about lessons lasting 30 minutes or less in most cases.

In the mission where I currently reside, I am aware that missionaries also count things like the number of times they showed the church Christmas or Easter videos. I know this because when they came for dinner appointments they shared the videos even though we had already seen them, and if we had the sisters after the elders or vice versa they were disappointed when the others had done it first. We told them they could count it anyway. Our mission also has a push for all active members to have a "family mission plan," and - again when they come for dinner - they report how many families they reviewed the plan with or helped the family make one.

I'd suggest you ask your missionaries what they report Smac.

(Side note, the mission plan is difficult in our case because they also have a new rule about dinner appointments being before 6 and we're not home until at least 5:30 and because our plan is essentially "If someone asks about the church I'll answer their questions.")

[Duncan]

1 hour ago, Buckeye said:

On my mission (mid-90s; sourthern california), this quote was basically framed in every apartment - the equivalent of our 'proclamation on the family.':

"When performance is measured, performance improves. When performance is measured and reported, the rate of improvement accelerates" (see Thomas S. Monson, in Conference Report, Oct. 1970, 107).

 

I too served in California late '90's and ours was a numbers driven game. I had one comp. who quit halfway through and he just gave up being a missionary, he had no real spirit left in him, so I had to "babysit" him and others but he said our mission was "nothing more than a numbers game" Something that rubs me the wrong way is having numbers and stats and this kind of thing talked about in sacrament mtg. I recall several times hearing stuff like it and telling new converts that you aren't a number, you're a person. I recall last year a missionary posted something about the mission achieving its baptismal goal and a recent convert posted she was happy to be a "notch"-obviously sarcastically and surprise surprise she had her name removed a few months ago. I can go on and on but I won't!

Edited April 5, 2016 by Duncan

[Buckeye]

57 minutes ago, Duncan said:

I too served in California late '90's and ours was a numbers driven game. I had one comp. who quit halfway through and he just gave up being a missionary, he had no real spirit left in him, so I had to "babysit" him others but he said our mission was "nothing more than a numbers game" Something that rubs me the wrong way is having numbers and stats and this kind of thing talked about in sacrament mtg. I recall several times hearing stuff like and telling new converts that you aren't a number, you're a person. I recall last year a missionary posted something about the mission achieving its baptismal goal and a recent convert posted she was happy to be a "notch"-obviously sarcastically and surprise surprise she had her name removed a few months ago. I can go on and on but I won't!

San Bernardino 96-98.

I trained an Elder from Canada, but of Russian decent. One of my favorite companions. He never tired of trying to get us Americans to use the proper terms for candy (M&Ms are "smarties", etc.) We tracted a lot and he had a habit of picking up loose change whenever he saw it. I teased him at first. But after two months he'd collected over $50 so I ate crow. Good memories.

[Duncan]

Just now, Buckeye said:

San Bernardino 96-98.

I trained an Elder from Canada, but of Russian decent. One of my favorite companions. He never tired of trying to get us Americans to use the proper terms for candy (M&Ms are "smarties", etc.) We tracted a lot and he had a habit of picking up loose change whenever he saw it. I teased him at first. But after two months he'd collected over $50 so I ate crow. Good memories.

ah! yes! Smarties are good and Wunderbars are DEE-VINE!!!!! So did you know Elders Sumner or Wilwand? he would have been out 97-98 something like that. I was in Arcadia '98-2000. Every week I go swimming in the giant pool across the street and so I wonder how the poor B^&(*^%Ds are doing dying to death of the heat in SoCal!!!! hahahahhahahha

[Scott Lloyd]

Metrics are useful in establishing whether or not there has been genuine and diligent effort.

For example, when my son mentions in his letters to us how many street contacts he made on a given day, it gives me confidence that he's giving courageous and diligent effort, as I have served in the same mission and I know how difficult it was for me to approach strangers when I didn't yet know the language very well.

 

Edited April 5, 2016 by Scott Lloyd

[Buckeye]

6 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Metrics are useful in establishing whether or not there has been genuine and diligent effort.

For example, when my son mentions in his letters to us how many street contacts he made on a given day, it gives me confidence that he's being courageous and diligent effort, as I have served in the same mission and I know how difficult it was for me to approach strangers when I didn't yet know the language very well.

 

I actually agree with you somewhat. Some metrics can help a missionary (or other worker) visualize what's possible. And when goals can be achieved through nothing more than one's own efforts, they certainly can be a means of motivation. My sons are in boy scouts and I can attest that merit badges get them motivated (for now).

That said, some metrics can be very defeating if they depend on others' actions. The primary case for missionaries is baptisms. My kid brother served in Italy. He is twice the worker I am but had 1/10 the baptisms. Also, so metrics are just drudgery. I put counting "contacts" in that category.

[cinepro]

To be clear, I didn't post the article to argue that tracking anything is terrible and missions should stop collecting any sort of data for missionary efforts.  I just thought it was interesting to show that, in addition to the benefits, there can be a cost to such tracking, and so those who would implement such tracking should probably be aware of this.

[Scott Lloyd]

3 minutes ago, Buckeye said:

I actually agree with you somewhat. Some metrics can help a missionary (or other worker) visualize what's possible. And when goals can be achieved through nothing more than one's own efforts, they certainly can be a means of motivation. My sons are in boy scouts and I can attest that merit badges get them motivated (for now).

That said, some metrics can be very defeating if they depend on others' actions. The primary case for missionaries is baptisms. My kid brother served in Italy. He is twice the worker I am but had 1/10 the baptisms. Also, so metrics are just drudgery. I put counting "contacts" in that category.

I have tried to impress upon my boy that he is called to give people the opportunity and occasion to receive the gospel message. To the extent he diligently accomplishes that, his mission is already successful, with or without baptisms. People have their own agency to deal with the invitation as they will.

He has been involved in a couple of conversions so far -- finding and teaching individuals who were eventually baptized. But both were in the Washington Vancouver Mission, where he was temporarily and briefly assigned while waiting for his visa to Sweden. He is a better-skilled missionary now, and working at least as hard as he did in Washington, but has had no baptisms in Sweden yet.

[strappinglad]

Boy, I must have been naïve. It never occurred to me to play with the numbers. I reported what was done ,handed it in and promptly forgot  about it until the next time. I came in with such a large group that most of us didn't even make ' senior ' until we were in about a year. I was happy to be in the anonymous middle. Less stress, more freedom.

[Storm Rider]

Stats, stats, stats; we are out for goals not for souls was the old mission refrain.