Copyright holder: Tyndale University, 3377 Bayview Ave., Toronto, Ontario, Canada M2M 3S4 Att.: Library Director, J. William Horsey Library Copyright: This Work has been made available by the authority of the copyright owner solely for the purpose of private study and research and may not be copied or reproduced except as permitted by the copyright laws of Canada without the written authority from the copyright owner. Copyright license: Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License Citation: Mittelstaedt, Rainer Eugene. “The Development and Implementation of a Ministry Mentoring Model in a Sri Lankan Context.” D. Min., Tyndale University College & Seminary, 2013. ***** Begin Content ****** TYNDALE UNIVERSITY 3377 Bayview Avenue Toronto, ON M2M 3S4 TEL: 416.226.6620 www.tyndale.ca Note: This Work has been made available by the authority of the copyright owner solely for the purpose of private study and research and may not be copied or reproduced except as permitted by the copyright laws of Canada without the written authority from the copyright owner. Mittelstaedt, Rainer Eugene. “The Development and Implementation of a Ministry Mentoring Model in a Sri Lankan Context.” D. Min., Tyndale University College & Seminary, 2013. [ Citation Page ] Tyndale University College and Seminary The Development and Implementation of a Ministry Mentoring Model in a Sri Lankan Context A Thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Ministry Tyndale Seminary by Rainer Eugene Mittelstaedt Toronto, Canada February 2013 [ Title Page ] ABSTRACT This thesis focuses on developing a ministry mentoring model and creating a mentoring culture in a Sri Lankan context so that ministry leaders in the organization could participate effectively in the development of emerging leadership. The author facilitated a series of seminar-workshops that were guided by two action research cycles and appreciative inquiry. Participant interaction during the workshops provided data which was supplemented by focus groups, natural observation and interviews. Positive mentoring relationships have been initiated that promise to lead to a mentoring culture in the context. The mentoring model developed has potential to serve other contexts. [ Page ] iv DEDICATION To my ministry mentors, with whom I could trust my heart and who are all models of what it means to seek first the kingdom of God: Dr. Paul Hawkes, Dr. Naomi Dowdy, and my parents, Rev. Kurt and Martha Mittelstaedt [ Page ] v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS During the development of this thesis project, I had the opportunity of enjoying the support and encouragement of many people whom I would like to acknowledge. First, I turn to the Sri Lanka ministry context: • I wish to thank the participants of the project who made themselves available to contribute to the research. • I also wish to thank the Executive Committee of the Pentecostal Assemblies of Sri Lanka (PAOSL) who agreed to have this project conducted in their ministry context. • Special thanks go to Rev. Anton Fabion Ratnaraja, the chairman of the PAOSL and to Rev. Kingsley Elton, the Academic Dean of the River of Life College for working closely with me in the planning of the various components of the project. • Thanks to Dr. Ajit Fernando who affirmed the relevance of the topic of ministry mentoring in the Sri Lankan context and for introducing me to Sanath Athukorala whom I also thank for sharing his comparative study of the Jesus and “guru-shishya” models of leadership. • Many other friends in the Sri Lankan context, who offered their support and encouragement at various points in the project also need to be thanked though they are too numerous to mention. Then, in relation to my friends at Tyndale University College and Seminary, • I wish to thank my thesis project advisor, Dr. Robert Shaughnessy for his encouragement, affirmation and helpful comments as the thesis project progressed. • I thank Dr. Mark Chapman, the second reader of this thesis for his encouragement as well as his valuable questions and comments which have taught me to think more clearly about the research process. • I thank Dr. Paul Bramer, the director of the Doctor of Ministry Program and the third reader of the thesis, for his continually reassuring input throughout the whole program and project until the completion of the thesis. • I am also thankful to the professors who taught our group over the three years. Their contribution is evident in the thesis in various ways. • I will never forget Cohort 2 with whom we journeyed together for three years, particularly my thesis working group. I thank them all for providing community, encouragement and prayers which made the journey all the more enjoyable. [ Page ] vi Relating to those to whom I am accountable in ministry at the International Missions office of the Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada (PAOC), • I wish to thank Rev. Peter McIntosh, the Asia Regional Co-ordinator of the PAOC for his encouragement and support. It was with him I first discussed the prospect of doing a Doctor of Ministry project in my ministry context. • I also wish to thank Rev. Murray Cornelius and Rev. Darcy McAlister and their team at the International Missions office of the PAOC who provided their encouragement and support in various ways, but particularly for their hosting of the thesis project presentation. Closer to home, • I am also thankful to my home church, Bethel International Church and particularly our Life Group for their prayer support. • My family and friends, too numerous to mention, were also a source of much encouragement throughout the Doctor of Ministry journey. My heartfelt thanks go out to all of them. • I reserve very special thanks to Elizabeth Mittelstaedt, my beloved wife, who stood with me, believed in me, encouraged me, assisted me, and graciously allowed the temporary intrusion of the thesis project into our lives. I could not have completed it without her unequivocal backing throughout the journey. Finally, I thank God for his guidance into this journey and his sustenance along the way. I also thank him for the privilege of serving him in this part of his kingdom purposes. During this project I was upheld by what the apostle Paul affirmed in Philippians 1:6: “He who began a good work in you will carry it on to completion until the day of Christ Jesus” (NIV). Any shortcomings of the thesis are my own and do not reflect on anyone who assisted me on this journey. —Rainer Mittelstaedt [ Page ] vii TABLE OF CONTENTS Declaration and Disclaimer .... ii Library Release Form for Theses .... iii Abstract .... iv Dedication .... v Acknowledgements .... vi List of Figures .... xi List of Tables .... xii List of Abbreviations .... xiii Chapter One: Introduction .... 1 Background .... 1 The Ministry Context .... 3 Sri Lanka’s Ethnic and Religious Diversity .... 4 The Specific Context .... 5 The Opportunity .... 6 The Response .... 9 Definition and Description of Key Terms in the Field of Ministry Mentoring .... 9 Mentoring .... 10 Ministry Mentoring .... 12 Mentor .... 14 Mentee .... 15 Kinds of Mentoring .... 16 Mentoring Culture .... 19 Ministry Mentoring Model .... 21 Thesis Overview .... 24 Chapter Two: Theological Rationale .... 26 Biblical and Theological Foundations for Ministry Mentoring .... 26 Moses and Joshua .... 29 Other Examples of Mentoring Relationships from the Old Testament .... 33 Jesus as Mentor of the Apostles .... 36 Barnabas as Mentor .... 45 Paul as Mentor .... 47 New Testament Words Relating to Mentoring .... 50 Mentoring in the History of the Church .... 53 The Apostles and the Early Church Fathers .... 54 Ministry Mentoring in the North American Context .... 61 Ministry Mentoring in a Pentecostal/Charismatic Context .... 62 [ Page ] viii Ministry Mentoring in the Sri Lankan Context .... 64 Conclusion .... 66 Chapter Three: Precedent Literature and Cases .... 68 General Literature on Mentoring Research and Practices .... 70 Johnson and Ridley: A Mentoring Overview. .... 70 Lois Zachary: Learner-centred Mentoring .... 75 Additional Mentoring Insights .... 76 Christian Ministry Mentoring Resources .... 81 J. Robert Clinton: Introduction to Christian Mentoring .... 82 Howard Hendricks: The Search for Mentors .... 88 Walter C. Wright, Jr.: Mentee Oriented Mentoring Relationships .... 90 Carson Pue: Mentoring Leaders through a Five Phase Leadership Journey .... 93 Steve Saccone: Mentoring by Focussing on Critical Growth Areas .... 99 Reese and Loane: Mentoring by Paying Attention to What is .... 103 Mentoring Programs in Organizational Contexts .... 105 Lois Zachary: A Mentoring Culture .... 106 Klasen and Clutterbuck: Formality and Control .... 108 Allen, Finkelstein and Poteet: Designing a Mentoring Program .... 109 Concluding Remarks on Precedent Literature .... 112 Chapter Four: Project and Methodology .... 114 Purpose of the Project .... 114 Synopsis of the Project .... 115 My Role in the Research Project .... 116 The Research and Project Questions .... 117 Project Description .... 118 Factors Affecting the Project .... 119 The First Ministry Mentoring Seminar-Workshop .... 134 Interim Communication .... 138 Focus Groups .... 139 The Second Ministry Mentoring Seminar-Workshop .... 143 The Third Ministry Mentoring Seminar-Workshop .... 145 Concluding Interviews .... 147 Methodology .... 148 Action Research (AR) .... 148 Appreciative Inquiry (AI) .... 150 AR and AI in the Project .... 152 Data Collection and Analysis .... 161 Ethical Considerations .... 163 Chapter Summary .... 166 Chapter Five: Findings and Outcomes .... 168 Researcher Reflections on Project Involvement .... 168 Researcher Influence on Data Analysis .... 168 On Being a Foreigner Working in Sri Lanka .... 170 [ Page ] ix Interpretation of the Data .... 171 Data from the First Seminar-workshop .... 172 Data from Focus Group Discussions .... 172 Data from the Second and Third Seminar-Workshops .... 177 The Concluding Interviews .... 180 Findings of the Project .... 181 Mentoring Stories in the PAOSL .... 182 Some Practices of Mentoring in the PAOSL .... 183 Underlying Assumptions .... 187 Improving the Mentoring Experience in the PAOSL .... 189 Changing Our Thinking about the Mentees .... 191 Components of Mentoring .... 192 Access to Mentoring .... 193 System Changes .... 195 Hidden Obstacles .... 196 Deep Changes .... 198 Chapter Six: Conclusion .... 200 What Was Achieved in the Project? .... 200 Components of Ministry Mentoring .... 201 Where Do We Go from Here? .... 204 In the Project Ministry Context .... 204 Potential Value of This Project in Other Contexts .... 206 Appendix A—Johnson and Ridley’s 65 Elements of Mentoring .... 208 Appendix B—Participant Consent Form for the PAOSL Mentoring Project .... 211 Appendix C-PAOSL Ministry Mentoring Project Participant Form .... 212 Appendix D—Outline of Ministry Mentoring Handbook .... 213 Appendix E—Ministry Mentoring Handbook Chapter Samples .... 215 Chapter Two: What Does a Mentor Do? .... 215 Chapter Three: The Character and Attitude of the Mentor .... 220 Appendix F—Checklist for Starting a Ministry Mentoring Relationship .... 226 Reference List .... 229 [ Page ] x LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Relationship of Mentoring to Other Formation Disciplines .... 11 Figure 2: Components of a Ministry Mentoring Model .... 20 Figure 3: Question Askers Who Link Life Influences .... 91 Figure 4: Mentoring Matrix .... 95 Figure 5: Dimensions of Christian Leadership Development .... 98 Figure 6: Timeline Perspective .... 104 Figure 7: Mentoring Relationship Stakeholders .... 106 Figure 8: System Agents Affecting the Project .... 127 Figure 9: Project Organization Chart .... 132 Figure 10: The Action Research Cycle .... 149 Figure 11 : Appreciative Inquiry 4-D cycle .... 151 Figure 12: First Core Action Research Cycle in Ministry Mentoring Project .... 154 Figure 13: Action Research Cycles and Appreciative Inquiry in Project .... 157 Figure 14: A Sample Concurrent Cycle of the Project .... 158 [ Page ] xi LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Comparing Different Expressions of Mentorship Phases .... 80 Table 2: Types of Mentoring Along a Continuum .... 84 Table 3: Spectrum of Mentoring Relationships .... 108 Table 4: Project Implementation Timeline of Key Events and Activities .... 120 Table 5: Breakdown of Participants by Seminar Group and Gender .... 135 Table 6: Focus Group Attendance .... 140 Table 7: Second Seminar Attendance .... 143 Table 8: Third Seminar Attendance .... 146 [ Page ] xii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AI Appreciative Inquiry AR Action Research CAS Complex Adaptive Systems ESV English Standard Version Bible NIV New International Version Bible PAOC Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada PAOSL Pentecostal Assemblies of Sri Lanka RLC River of Life College, Sri Lanka [ Page ] xiii CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION This thesis focuses on developing a ministry mentoring model and creating a mentoring culture in a Sri Lankan context so that ministry leaders in the organization could participate effectively in the development of emerging leadership. In this chapter, I discuss the ministry context of the thesis project, describe the opportunity for the project and the response, define key terms in the field of ministry mentoring, and present an overview of the model of ministry mentoring that was developed through the project. But first 1 introduce the thesis project with some background from a personal perspective. Background Some years ago a younger minister was assigned to me so that I could supervise him and advise him in his ministerial duties and activities. We agreed on some ground rules for the relationship and set a fixed weekly time to meet. In addition we had opportunities to meet from time to time in a variety of ministry contexts. I established an open door policy in which he could have access to me at most times. What we had was an intentional ministry mentoring relationship though we did not call it that at the time. [ Page ] 1 My focus in this relationship was twofold: what was God’s best for this young minister? and how could I help the kingdom of God be advanced through his ministry? His focus was to receive the benefit of my life and ministry experience and to apply it to his life and ministry. In our times together we dealt with character issues, family matters, ministry strategies, ministry competencies, and relationships with other people—essentially no subject was off limits. I would encourage, admonish and rebuke. He would share his heart, his dreams and his concerns. This mentoring context became a safe place for him to test his theories and ideas about life and ministry. I was a sounding board. For the most part I resisted telling him what I thought he should do, but I gave him the benefit of my opinions on ministry practices and relational issues for whatever they were worth. This arrangement was in place for several years and contributed to a fruitful ministry for the younger minister. I was also thoroughly enriched as I gleaned from his perspective and participated in his excitement when things were going well and his disappointments when there were setbacks. As I thought back on this scenario, I was grateful for the privilege of having had the opportunity to make a positive impact on this younger minister as well as having received the blessings of sharing in another’s ministry. I have subsequently had opportunities to mentor others in a variety of ministry contexts with both positive and negative experiences and outcomes. On further reflection, I realised that I was able to be a mentor because I had been the beneficiary of mentors at different times during my own ministry journey. There were leaders who invested time and demonstrated care for my ministry development. I also [ Page ] 2 experienced times of looking for and not finding mentors who would walk with me during some of the crucial phases of ministry. On one occasion as a younger man, I asked a senior ministry leader to help me “learn the ropes” in a certain ministry context. I remember the disappointment I felt when he refused my request. I also remember, with some regret, times when I may not have been as good a mentor as might be expected to some of those who were placed in my care. The combination of these experiences of receiving mentorship, of not receiving mentorship, of being a mentor and sometimes failing to be a good mentor has given rise to a strong appreciation of the value of ministry mentoring. This appreciation is strengthened further by the biblical and theological foundations of ministry mentoring as presented in chapter two of thesis and the literature on mentoring in chapter three. These have become for me motivating forces to promote the improvement of mentoring competencies, to develop systems and structures that include mentoring and cultivating a culture of ministry mentoring in the context of church organizations. In my current ministry context in Sri Lanka, I have begun to do this in partnership with Sri Lankan ministry leaders with this thesis project. The Ministry Context In this section, the general ministry context will be presented first, highlighting Sri Lanka’s ethnic and religious diversity. Then, the specific ministry [ Page ] 3 context, namely the Pentecostal Assemblies of Sri Lanka will be described. My relationship to that context will also be explained. Sri Lanka’s Ethnic and Religious Diversity Sri Lanka is an island nation south of India which has a population of 20,869,000 (Central Bank of Sri Lanka 2012, 1). The majority are Sinhalese (73.9%) who are predominantly Buddhist. The largest ethnic minority are Tamils sub-grouped as Sri Lanka Tamils (12.7%) and Indian Tamils (5.5%) who are predominantly Hindu. The Moors (7.1%) are almost all Muslim. Other ethnic groups include the Burghers and Malays (less than 1%) Central Bank of Sri Lanka 2012, 12).1 The national languages are Sinhala (spoken by 74%) and Tamil (spoken by 18%) with English (spoken by 10%) being considered the link language. Buddhism, with 70.2% of the population being adherents, enjoys the special protection of the state according to the constitution. Hinduism is the next largest religion with 12.8% of the population. 8.5% are Muslims and 8.4% are Christians (approximately 6.9 % Roman Catholic and 1.5 % Protestant and others). About 1.2 % of the population are evangelical. The Christian population is disbursed among the ethnic groups. Given the demographic percentages presented, a safe estimate would be that more than half of the Christian population is Tamil and the Sinhalese population which is not Buddhist is likely to be Christian. _________________________ 1 The percentages used here are from the 1981 census which was the last time a full census number was available. Percentages of census taken in more recent years do not take into account areas affected by the civil war and therefore do not reflect a true overall picture. Data for those areas is qualified by footnotes which indicate that a census was not conducted in all districts (Central Bank of Sri Lanka 2012, 12). [ Page ] 4 Based on estimates presented in Operation World, the largest denomination among the Protestants (approximately 300,000) is the Assemblies of God (approximately 50,000). The combined number of people in the mainline Protestant churches (i.e. Anglican, Methodist and Church of South India, et al) is approximately 74,000. The rest of the Protestant Christian population is distributed among primarily pentecostal/charismatic denominations and independent churches (Mandryk 2010, 770). As a part of promoting ethnic peace, many Christian churches and organizations work hard at serving both of the major ethnic communities, intentionally providing ministry and training in Sinhala and Tamil as well as in English. As they do this, the church in Sri Lanka is uniquely positioned to facilitate reconciliation after a quarter century of communal strife between the Sinhalese and Tamil communities. In the 2010 edition of the Operation World this sentiment is reflected in this way: “Ultimately, no other national structure can meaningfully bring together the bitterly divided ethnic communities with their various castes and political expressions except a flourishing biblical Christianity” (Mandryk 2010, 772). The Specific Context I have been serving in Sri Lanka as a global worker with the Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada (PAOC) for the purpose of providing fellowship support and leadership development for the Pentecostal Assemblies of Sri Lanka (PAOSL). The PAOSL is a growing fellowship of about 40 churches in various [ Page ] 5 parts of the island. My roles include being a coach, mentor, and consultant with the leadership of the PAOSL, as well as serving in the role of principal of the River of Life College (RLC), the primary ministry training institution of the PAOSL. Students from other church organizations are also enrolled in RLC. My wife, children, and I had been full time residents of Sri Lanka from 1988 to 1995 working with the PAOSL. After a 12 year absence, we have reengaged with the same ministry context on a part-time basis since 2007. Many of the leaders and pastors of the PAOSL fellowship are my former students and those relationships provide an opportunity to have a continued influence in this ministry context. The PAOSL had been operating the Pentecostal Assemblies Bible College since 1989. In 2010, the college was renamed as River of Life College to represent a new beginning in its new facilities. The objective of the college is to train and equip Christian leaders, pastors and church planters. Some PAOSL students are also attending other Christian colleges and seminaries. All of these students represent an emerging generation of leaders who we want to integrate effectively into PAOSL ministry. The Opportunity It has been the practice in the PAOSL to ensure that younger Christian workers are under the supervision of older ministers for a time. Though quasi- mentoring relationships had been in place through this arrangement, there is room for growth in mentoring competencies and the need to explore different mentoring approaches to see more satisfying outcomes. For instance, the relationship [ Page ] 6 between older and younger ministers in the organization needed to be intentionally oriented towards ministry development so that the younger ministers can benefit from the experience and practical wisdom of the older ministers. Further, the older ministers needed to be given ministry mentoring tools and competencies that enable them to support younger leaders in leadership development. The students of the college will similarly need to be supported as they prepare for ministry. While formal classroom experience helps to prepare the students and future leaders for ministry at one level, healthy mentoring relationships with experienced ministry leaders will help them to effectively apply their classroom learning in actual ministry contexts. While there have been some happy exceptions, over the years I have observed that adequate opportunities for leadership growth of younger leaders have not always been provided. The ancient cultural Southern Asian "guru- shishya" model continues to influence the context of Sri Lankan church ministry and some of the negative aspects of that model have not always been in the best interest of the younger pastors and students. The term guru-shishya denotes the master/disciple or teacher/student relationship in Sinhala, Tamil and other South Asian languages and contexts. This model often includes the practice of an authority figure expecting unquestioning respect and obedience from the follower in all matters and withholding essential knowledge and expertise so that the follower can never quite attain to the level of the person in authority. Athukorala identifies this particular ancient practice as gurumustiya (literally “fist of the guru”) where the gurus “keep the best part of their wisdom with them not passing [ Page ] 7 it on to their disciples” (Athukorala 2008, 51). He states: “It is sad to observe [that] in our present society the concept of gurumustiya [is] still influencing many institutions including the church” (Athukorala 2008, 53). This has opened the door to abuse of power and generally has the effect of disempowering and discouraging those in lower positions. Thus in a church context while younger ministers have been in mentoring relationships, they have not always experienced the support they needed from their leaders and sometimes even sensed they were being deliberately held back. This has led to a breakdown of trust and to fragmentation in many church contexts. Thus the impact of a guru-shishya learning model on Christian ministry mentoring needed to be evaluated in light of biblically informed spiritual values and present day realities. Insights gained from this evaluation are informing the development of a more effective ministry mentoring model for the Sri Lankan context. It should be noted that the potential for abuse of power is not limited to a guru-shishya model but can be found in other ministry contexts and models as well. An example of this will be seen in chapter two. Within the Pentecostal Assemblies of Sri Lanka there was an opportunity to strengthen the means by which positive ministry values, behaviours and skills could be transferred to the next generation of leaders. This had already been accomplished to some degree through the Bible College, the informal interaction of regular fellowship meetings and events in the organization, and the supervisory arrangements to which I have alluded. Now these are being strengthened further by the intentional relationship building of an effective mentorship model. The [ Page ] 8 executive members of the Pentecostal Assemblies of Sri Lanka, who are also the board of governors of the River of Life College, agreed to work with me on a project to develop such a model for their constituency and to work together to integrate mentoring into the organization. The Response The research question that drove the project was this: How can we build on existing mentoring practices to develop the best practices for ministry mentoring in the Pentecostal Assemblies of Sri Lanka? Or to put it another way: What will it take to train mentors and to create a culture of healthy mentoring practices that will result in more fully equipped ministry leaders for healthier churches? (The research question is expanded in chapter four, pages 117-118.) As this question was explored, we discovered some insights that have the potential to transform the life of the church organization. Since PAOSL leaders interact with other church and denominational leaders, what has been learned can benefit other Sri Lankan churches. The insights gained are also transferable to other international ministry contexts. Definition and Description of Key Terms in the Field of Ministry Mentoring There are a number of terms related to the field of ministry mentoring that will need to be defined for the purposes of this thesis. [ Page ] 9 Mentoring The term “mentor” was introduced into modern usage by way of François Fénelon’s Les Aventures de Telemaque written in 1699 which includes a retelling of Homer’s epic poem, The Odyssey in which Odysseus appointed his servant, Mentor, to take care of his son Telemachus while he was away fighting the Trojan War (Roberts 1999, 5). Roberts states that “it is Fenelon, not Homer, who endows his Mentor with the qualities, abilities and attributes that have come to be incorporated into the action of modern day mentoring”(Roberts 1999, 7). Klasen and Clutteruck suggest that “in time, the word ‘mentor’ became synonymous with trusted advisor, friend, teacher, and wise person” (Klasen and Clutterbuck 2002, 5). One general definition of contemporary mentoring is provided by Johnson and Ridley: “Mentoring relationships (mentorships) are dynamic, reciprocal, personal relationships in which a more experienced person (mentor) acts as a guide, role model, teacher, and sponsor of a less experienced person (protégé)” (Johnson and Ridley 2008, xi). Another general definition by Smither is that “though the contexts and the cultures may vary, mentoring in essence means that a master, expert, or someone with significant experience is imparting knowledge and skill to a novice in an atmosphere of discipline, commitment, and accountability” (Smither 2008, 4). Stanley and Clinton provide a definition from a Christian perspective that describes mentoring as “a relational experience through which one person empowers another by sharing God-given resources” (Stanley and Clinton 1992, 12). [ Page ] 10 For the purpose of this thesis project mentoring is defined as a formational learning activity in the context of a relationship built on mutual trust by which the mentor guides the development of the mentee along critical growth pathways in life and vocation. “Vocation” here refers to a career, a profession, a calling, or a sense of destiny in relation to the mentee’s life’s work. Mentoring has some affinity to other learner-orientated formation disciplines such as counselling, coaching, consulting, etc. Figure 1 below illustrates where mentoring can be seen in relation to other fields. [ Please contact repository@tyndale.ca for Figure 1 details ] Figure 1 : Relationship of Mentoring to Other Formation Disciplines2 _________________________ 2 I have adapted the concept of this diagram from Fairley and Stout (2004, 30) by including areas such as preaching, discipling and spiritual direction. [ Page ] 11 Inasmuch as mentoring overlaps in some respects with some of these fields as it is explained below, it may also shift somewhat from its location in the centre of the illustration depending on the particular kind of mentoring. Mentoring is sometimes seen as a kind of coaching. However, coaching tends to be more focussed on particular behaviours or skills whereas “mentoring often addresses or focuses on issues that are broader than those covered in the typical coaching relationship” (Allen, Finkelstein, and Poteet 2009, 3). In general practice mentoring tends to be more informal and less “professionalized” than some of the other disciplines. It is also sometimes seen as an informal component of the overall adult learning journey with the mentor as the guide (Daloz 1999, 16). However, there is much to be gained from intentional and more formal mentoring relationships in an organization as will be demonstrated in this thesis project report. Ministry Mentoring “Ministry mentoring” for the purpose of this project includes the aforementioned definitions, but occurs primarily in the context of the development of Christian ministry leaders. Ministry mentoring also focuses as much on the growth of Christian character as on ministry competencies. For instance, Carson Pue has developed a model of mentoring that includes a hub of “self-awareness” at the centre of a matrix of “freeing up,” “visioneering,” “implementing,” and “sustaining.” (Figure 4 on page 95 illustrates how these are related.) Referring to the hub of self-awareness, he states: “To have an effective [ Page ] 12 mentoring experience, and to develop as a leader, you must start with an extremely clear awareness of who you are and why you do what you do, and a solid theological foundation for your identity in Christ” (Pue 2005, 21). A significant part of the mentoring focus is in the two areas of self-awareness and freeing up that cannot be short-circuited if the other aspects of leadership development are ultimately going to be effective. Thus ministry mentoring, particularly in the early stages will seem a lot like discipleship and in fact many of the same issues of spiritual development are addressed. In popular understanding, discipleship often refers to the spiritual formation of a newly converted person. However, ministry mentoring from the outset pays attention to leadership development and ministry competencies in a way that discipleship may not necessarily address. Ministry mentoring as described in this thesis project does not only include development of character and competencies for ministry. It also includes a component of spiritual direction, particularly paying attention to ministry calling. As it relates to calling, it includes helping mentees navigate their ministry journey towards appropriate placement in ministry according to their natural ability, acquired skills, and spiritual gifts. Naomi Dowdy writes: Especially in ministry settings, having a mentor to walk with you and help you mature in your ministry will allow you to fail without doubting God’s call. It will also help you learn from your mistakes as you walk with someone who has the experience, wisdom, and ability to help you grow and develop. Proper alignment with a mentor is not only a great source of guidance and support; it can also be crucial to the fulfillment of your destiny and vital to your getting to the next level. (Dowdy 2006, 54) [ Page ] 13 To summarize then, for the purposes of this thesis project, ministry mentoring is defined as a formational learning activity in the context of a relationship built on mutual trust by which the mentor guides the spiritual growth and ministry development of the mentee along critical growth pathways towards Christian maturity, ministry wisdom and discernment for appropriate ministry engagement. Mentor Mentors are typically the benefactors in mentoring relationships in that they make their accrued knowledge, skills, wisdom and experience available to their mentees. They are learning guides for mentees who recognize the need for this kind of relational support for their journey of personal and vocational development. The role of mentor is analogous to that of a teacher, parent, guardian, advisor, counsellor, or similar roles, depending on the particular nuances that have been ascribed to the term in various contexts. While these are helpful to consider in describing a mentor, for the purposes of clarity in this thesis project, a mentor is defined as a guide who agrees to be in a learning relationship with a mentee which primarily focuses on the personal and vocational development of the mentee. The ministry context in which the thesis project was implemented required that the best possible words in Sinhala and Tamil for “mentor” and “mentee” be identified. In the brief discussion above, the term guru-shishaya was mentioned. While it refers to a cultural tradition that can be seen as analogous to a mentoring [ Page ] 14 relationship, we tried to avoid using the term “guru” so as not to import unhelpful nuances into the nomenclature. Since there were no words to completely capture the meanings of the English terms, we used words that had close correspondence with mentoring concepts and ensured that the intended meanings were clear for the project participants. For instance, the Sinhala words used for “mentor” were daenamuththaa (literally, wise person) or upadeshakayaa (literally, trusted counsellor). The Tamil words were nanbagana alosager (literally, relational counsellor) or ubaththiyar (literally, relational teacher). Mentee In a mentoring relationship, the recipient of the mentoring is variously referred to as the “mentoree,” the “mentee,” “apprentice,” “disciple,” “intern,” “student,” “learner” and more formally the “protégé.” This project will primarily use the word “mentee” to refer to the recipient of mentoring unless quoting another author. I concur with Klasen and Clutterbuck, who propose that the term “mentee” is a more neutral term than “protégé” which means “the protected one.” The latter term “suggests the existence of an unequal distribution of power between the mentor and the learner” (Klasen and Clutterbuck 2002, 2). Since power is one of the issues that is being addressed in this thesis the more neutral term “mentee” is more appropriate. The mentee is not just a passive learner absorbing knowledge and wisdom that the mentor dispenses. Rather the mentee is actively engaged in the learning process and takes ownership of it. [ Page ] 15 For the ministry mentoring project in the Sri Lankan context, the Sinhalese term golaya and the Tamil term shesan were used to represent “mentee.” Both of these are a literal translation of the English word for “disciple.” These words were accepted for use in the project because they were already being widely used to refer to ministers-in-training. Care was taken to realign the meaning of the term to the mentoring relationship as defined in the thesis project. With these definitions and descriptions of key terms in place, various kinds of mentoring will be examined. Kinds of Mentoring Stanley and Clinton (1992, 41) speak of different kinds of mentoring relationships on a continuum from more deliberate to less deliberate under three categories of intensive, occasional and passive. For instance under intensive mentoring they include discipler, spiritual guide, and coach; and under occasional mentoring they include counsellor, teacher, and sponsor (See Table 2 on page 84). Some of these, however, are formation disciplines which are not necessarily seen in the recent mentoring literature as mentoring. (This is discussed in more detail in chapter three.) The idea of such a continuum is helpful when trying to define how informal or formal and occasional or intentional a mentoring relationship might be. For instance, formal mentoring relationships tend to be more structured and controlled whereas informal mentoring relationships are more organic and spontaneous (Klasen and Clutterbuck 2002, 21-2; Allen and Eby 2010, 12-13). [ Page ] 16 From a ministry mentoring perspective, Reid speaks about informal mentoring taking place in a less controlled environment: “Informal mentoring lets you see the person as he lives life—how he responds to people, to circumstances, etc.” (Reid 2012, ch. 1; location 197) Nevertheless, he also suggests that there is an intentional component to informal mentoring in terms of the mentor planning for “ministering with” and being available to the mentee in those less controlled environments (Reid 2012, ch. 3; location 406). Clutterbuck also sees a distinction between developmental and sponsorship mentoring. He describes a “development-focused” model of mentoring which has the following characteristics: • out of the reporting line [i.e. a non-supervisory relationship-my clarification] • formal in the sense that it is part of a structured programme, where there is both an organizational purpose and a relationship purpose • one where the power and authority of the mentor are either irrelevant to the relationship or are purposefully ‘parked’ by the participants; where the experience gap rather than the status gap drives the processes of learning and career management. (Clutterbuck 2004, 43) He goes on to contrast that with the “sponsorship-focused” model of mentoring in which it is the mentor’s ability to do things on behalf of someone more junior that drives the relationship. Learning tends to flow one way, from mentor to mentee, whereas in developmental mentoring, learning is typically a mutual activity. In sponsorship-focused mentoring, the mentor plays a strong role in driving the agenda; in development-focused mentoring, the mentee is the main driver of the process (being responsible for their own development and career management), and the emphasis of the relationship is on helping them to become more self-resourceful. (Clutterbuck 2004, 43) [ Page ] 17 Other kinds of mentoring include peer mentoring, reverse mentoring and group mentoring. Peer mentoring is a relationship where the level of expertise is more or less equal between those in the relationship. There is “some level of commonality” but opportunity to learn from peers with “different skill sets” (Zachary 2012, ch. 3; location 2094). Reverse mentoring is where the generally less experienced person has a specific area of expertise from which the more experienced person can learn (Creps 2008). Group mentoring can take several forms such as one mentor meeting with two or more mentees or the mentee relating to several mentors sometimes referred to as “the personal board of directors” model (Zachary 2012, ch 3; location 2168). This thesis project focused primarily on the intentional, development- focused, one-on-one mentoring relationships of a more experienced person mentoring a less experienced person, but did not exclude ideas of other kinds of mentoring. The more experienced people were those who had experience in Christian ministry and the less experienced people were those just starting out in ministry such as student interns and newly graduated students. Younger ministers who required supervision were also in view. Primarily, I was interested in somewhat structured or formal arrangements, but also recognized the value of informal, spontaneous, shared life and ministry opportunities where mentors and mentees interacted in less controlled settings. [ Page ] 18 Mentoring Culture The ultimate objective of the project was to move the PAOSL as a church organization towards a mentoring culture. This included training in mentoring competencies, developing a mentoring model and designing a mentoring program. In embarking on this project, I was aware that the concept of a mentoring culture was more complicated than simply designing a mentoring program. It involved embedding a mentoring mentality within the culture of the organization and aligning the value of mentoring with organizational practices. Zachary says: “Culture is rooted in behavior based on shared values, assumptions, and practices and processes, all of which live within a mentoring culture” (Zachary 2005, 7). A mentoring culture creates an expectation that there will always be sufficient mentors available who see the value of helping someone else in their ministry development. It also expects that mentees will take ownership of their own ministry development and seek out those who are available to mentor them. Eventually those who have been mentored will mentor others. A mentoring culture will enhance the learning experience of the whole church and accelerate the church towards the completion of its mission in the world. Admittedly, it will take longer than the time allotted for this project to fulfill the objective of creating a mentoring culture, but the project has set the PAOSL on a path, which if followed will lead towards an environment that integrates ministry mentoring in every area. Next, the ministry mentoring model which emerged out of this thesis project will be introduced. [ Page ] 19 Figure 2: Components of a Ministry Mentoring Model [ Please contact repository@tyndale.ca for Figure 2 details ] [ Page ] 20 Ministry Mentoring Model The ministry mentoring model includes a number of components that need to be considered in relation to each other. Error! Reference source not found. above shows how these components are interconnected in a “mind map” outline format. Since reference will be made to these various components of the model throughout the thesis, a brief explanation of the diagram will suffice to provide a background for the model. The ministry mentoring model in this thesis was informed by a theological foundation (biblical and historical) as presented in chapter two, by the mentoring literature (ministry mentoring, general mentoring and organizational mentoring programs) as presented in chapter three, and practical experience. Practical experience includes the pre-project experience of the researcher and participants that was brought into the project as well the experience gained while implementing the project as presented in chapters four and five. The ministry mentoring model was contextually shaped by the national and ethnic culture (Sri Lanka), the ministry organization (PAOSL), as well as the church community ethos in Sri Lankan evangelical, pentecostal/charismatic circles. The context is presented earlier in this chapter. In chapter two there is additional contextual information in the description of “Ministry Mentoring in the Sri Lankan Context” (page 64). These same contextual components will need to be considered as the model is adapted into other contexts. The ministry mentoring model assumes intentionality in initiating and sustaining mentoring relationships whether formally structured or informally [ Page ] 21 arranged. This intentionality applies both to controlled environments or less controlled environments. This component is referenced in various ways throughout the thesis. According to this model, mentoring relationships are reciprocal connections between mentors and mentees as seen in chapter three. These are primarily one-on-one or dyadic relationships which can be augmented by mentoring in group contexts. These are usually face-to-face but can also include two-way exchanges through letters, email and other means of communication providing there is an element of “give-and-take.” This ministry mentoring model advocates a developmental focus as opposed to a sponsorship focus as alluded to in this chapter on “Kinds of Mentoring.” The emphasis is on the mentee’s growth in character and enhancement of competency in ministry. Sponsorship in this model is not excluded but remains a secondary concern. In this model, mentoring is a learning relationship that is driven by the mentee who by virtue of learning needs and areas of interest sets the learning agenda. This is highlighted several times in chapter three. The mentor’s role is to guide, to resource, and to facilitate the learning process. This ministry mentoring model uses the analogy of a benevolent parent who has a generous attitude toward his or her child and does whatever it takes to assist the child in their development. This includes the ability to appropriately balance nurturance and discipline. This is explained in the description on Paul’s mentoring model in chapter two. In the same way, the mentoring relationship is [ Page ] 22 primarily for the benefit of the mentee. As the child matures, the relationship with the parent progresses until the two relate to each other as adults. Similarly, the mentor-mentee relationship potentially progresses towards a peer mentoring relationship. An important piece of this component is the mutual trust between the mentor and mentee. This is addressed in chapter three and chapter five. In this model, the heading "critical growth pathways ’’ refers to areas that are critical to the effective development of a ministry leader. There is first an acknowledgement that God is at work in the life of the mentee (divine activity). There are also ministry mentoring resources which provide suggested content as a guide and which are customizable to the needs of the mentees. Several of these resources are described in chapter three. Organizational support is a part of the ministry mentoring model (see chapter three and chapter six). Attention is paid to the nurturing of a mentoring culture through the appointment of a mentoring coordinator in the organization and the training of mentors. Mentees are encouraged to create developmental networks or a constellation of mentors to meet their learning needs. Mentoring that is in any way intentional needs to address the issue of time. At the inception of a mentoring relationship, its potential duration or time period needs to be negotiated. Both the mentor and mentee also need to consider the ongoing investment of time required in a mentoring relationship and make adjustments in other areas of their schedules. This component is discussed in chapter five. [ Page ] 23 This ministry mentoring model emerged out of the various components of the thesis project and is presented here as a map that will facilitate the integration of the various components of ministry mentoring and to keep them in mind as the study of ministry mentoring unfolds in the thesis. In conclusion of this chapter, a chapter by chapter overview provides an outline which highlights the main points of thesis. Thesis Overview Chapter two of the thesis presents the theological rationale that undergirds ministry mentoring. It includes descriptions of biblical examples and biblical words that point towards ministry mentoring. It also includes some historical examples of ministry mentoring and other theological considerations. Chapter three reviews literature and resources on mentoring from a general perspective, ministry mentoring, and mentoring organizations. Key components of mentoring that inform the project are highlighted. Chapter four explains the project and methodology. Factors that affected the project are explored and the project as it unfolds is described in detail. It explains how action research (AR) and appreciative inquiry (AI) were used as methodologies. Ethical considerations relating to the project are also presented in this chapter. Chapter five explains how the data was processed and presents the findings of the project. [ Page ] 24 Chapter six describes what was achieved in the project, reviews the mentoring model and makes recommendations for next steps for the PAOSL and suggestions for implementation in other contexts. [ Page ] 25 CHAPTER TWO: THEOLOGICAL RATIONALE In this chapter, a number of biblical examples which point to a strong tradition of what can be called mentoring in both the Old and New Testaments will be presented and some principles that inform our understanding of ministry mentoring will be highlighted. Mentoring as practised in selected contexts throughout the history of the church will also be examined. These biblical and historical examples are illustrative of some of the issues and principles that are helpful for formulating a model of ministry mentoring for the ministry context of this project. These will contribute to providing a theological rationale for ministry mentoring. Biblical and Theological Foundations for Ministry Mentoring The theological framework which was set around ministry mentoring begins with an understanding that God is a relational being and that he has created us to be relational beings to whom he relates and who relate to others in community. This is alluded to in the creation narratives of Genesis. God deliberates, [ Page ] 26 Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground. (Gen. 1:26 [New International Version]) At another point in the narrative God says, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.” Now the Lord God had formed out of the ground all the wild animals and all the birds in the sky. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name. (Gen. 2:18-19 [NIV]) These two brief references provide a theological basis for understanding the relational nature of God and human beings. The first reference shows that there were persons to whom God related during the creative process. A New Testament understanding of this passage would see this as a hint of a deliberation among the persons of the Trinity and/or with a divine council which possibly included angelic beings. The second reference is an introduction to the creation of the woman so that the man would have someone of his own kind to whom he could relate. Both of these passages also introduce the nature of the relationship that God has with humankind in terms of purpose and partnership in creation. Under God’s administration of his world, humankind is to have a stewarding dominion over the created order, illustrated by the task of naming the animals which God gives to the man and then steps back “to see what he would name them.” This is similar to what a good mentor would do to encourage development by releasing a mentee to undertake a project and then to take an interest in the outcome. The patriarchal narratives describe this pattern of divine interaction with the fathers of the Jewish nation (Gen. 12-50). For instance, God invites Abraham to deliberate [ Page ] 27 with him concerning the judgment on Sodom (Gen. 18:16-33). This pattern is also repeatedly demonstrated throughout the rest of scriptures and history as God continually invited human beings into a partnership with him to fulfil his purposes. Thus a theological framework also needs to include an understanding of the ultimate purpose which lies behind ministry mentoring relationships. As Christians, we affirm that ministry essentially exists in service of God’s kingdom purposes in that the mission of God is to reconcile the world to God. The scriptures state that God, the Father “reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation” (2 Cor. 5:18 [NIV]). The ministry of Christians, then, is to make the world aware of what God has done. We embody the good news that the kingdom of God has come and is coming. Ministry mentoring is formed by that underlying truth and with that as its focus facilitates the development of the knowledge, skills and attitudes of mentees so that they can each fulfil their unique roles in the kingdom purposes of God. Another fundamental impetus for mentoring is the awareness of one’s human limitations and mortality. A person who mentors another recognizes that she does not have the capability to fulfil current responsibilities and will not live long enough to accomplish everything she believes needs doing. So she will want to equip those around her to access their energy and capabilities to help address current realities. At the same time she will want to transfer what she has learned to the next generation in order that the next generation can build on that and take it to another level. As such, mentoring is an important component of both team [ Page ] 28 building and succession planning. Mentoring as such is generative activity (See pages 71-72). Accepting our limitations establishes the wisdom of multiplying ourselves by training and mentoring those who will work alongside us. Acknowledging our mortality leads to the practice of equipping and empowering those who will outlive us to carry on the work that we have begun. There is a pattern in the biblical record that demonstrates this notion of transferring knowledge, expertise and authority which in turn provides a strong rationale for the practice of ministry mentoring. The key theological points made so far are that God’s partnering relationship with humanity is suggestive of mentoring relationships, a mentoring ministry is ultimately in service of the purposes and mission of God and ministry mentoring is required and called for because of the limitations of humanity. I will now present some biblical examples of intentional mentoring. These are primarily descriptive and not necessarily prescriptive. However they are instructive and can inform our theology of ministry mentoring (Rom. 15:4; 2 Tim. 3:16). Moses and Joshua While the practice of mentoring was a part of human experience from the beginning, the first clear scriptural illustration of mentoring is seen in the leadership experiences of Moses. His early education was in Egypt in the household of Pharaoh (Acts 7:22). Later life training was under the tutelage of his father-in-law Jethro, who was the priest of Midian. Jethro had a relationship with [ Page ] 29 Moses in which he felt free to give the kind of advice that a mentor would dispense. He helped Moses to understand how to delegate his responsibilities and multiply his leadership capabilities by empowering others to take some of the burden of leadership (See Exod. 18:18-24). As Moses began his assignment of leading the nation of Israel through the wilderness towards the Promised Land, he chose Joshua as his assistant. From the few interactions that are explicitly recorded, we observe some significant mentoring activities that contributed to Joshua’s development as a leader (Haubert and Clinton 1990). The transfer of leadership from Moses to Joshua and the role that mentorship played in that transfer is a primary Old Testament example of how a younger leader grew under the watchful eye of an experienced leader. Haubert and Clinton explain: “Joshua provides a good biblical model for leadership development under mentoring influence” (Haubert and Clinton 1990, 3). The transition from Moses to Joshua was one of the “few biblical models of successful leadership transition” (Haubert and Clinton 1990, 5). “Joshua, the leader, emerged as a product of sovereign intentions, life experiences, and quality mentoring through Moses” (Haubert and Clinton 1990, 9). Joshua first appears in the narrative when he was assigned to marshal an army and fight the Amalekites (Exod. 17:8-16). He may have already been a part of Moses’ leadership team but this was surely an event that had potential to bring him closer to Moses. Though the battle was also being fought on a spiritual plane—as seen by Moses raising the staff of God over his head as a symbol of God’s presence with the people in the battle (Stuart 2007, 398)—when it was [ Page ] 30 over, the record showed that “Joshua overcame the Amalekite army with the sword” (Exod. 17:13 [NIV]). God’s presence, Moses’ holding up the staff of God with the help of Aaron and Hur, and Joshua’s capable military leadership won the day. It appears that already Joshua was being sovereignly positioned as Moses successor. Joshua’s journey up the mountain with Moses gave him an opportunity to observe Moses in the presence of God (Exod. 24:9-18; see also 33:11). Though it may not have been intentional, Moses was modelling for Joshua the importance of intimacy with God. When Joshua comes into leadership, he follows in that same kind of relationship with God (Josh. 5:13-15). Other mentoring events are recorded in the narrative. For instance, on one occasion Joshua receives a lesson in discernment: Moses turned and went down the mountain with the two tablets of the covenant law in his hands... When Joshua heard the noise of the people shouting, he said to Moses, “There is the sound of war in the camp.” Moses replied: “It is not the sound of victory, it is not the sound of defeat; it is the sound of singing that I hear.” (Exod. 32:15, 17-18 [NIV]) Moses had previously heard from God that Israel had turned to idol worship (Exod. 32:7-8) and had already discerned what the noise in the camp was about. On another occasion Joshua receives informal instruction concerning the operation of the Spirit in the case of the men prophesying in the camp. He wanted to rebuke them because they appeared to be insubordinate, but Moses demonstrated a different attitude: “Are you jealous for my sake? I wish that all the Lord’s people were prophets and that the Lord would put his Spirit on them!” (Num. 11:29 [NIV]) [ Page ] 31 As his final mentoring act, Moses passed the leadership to Joshua (Num. 27:18-23), and gave final instructions and encouragement (Deut. 1:38; 3:21, 28; 31:1 -30). After his death, Moses’ writings (the book of the law) were not only God-inspired instructions for the people, but became a continual reminder of Moses’ mentoring for Joshua. God referred Joshua to these writings, saying: “Keep this Book of the Law always on your lips; meditate on it day and night, so that you may be careful to do everything written in it. Then you will be prosperous and successful” (Josh. 1:8 [NIV]). Moses in his last address as leader of the people highlights the urgency of transferring faith to the next generation, specifically suggesting various mentoring activities that will impact those who receive the training: Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength. These commandments that I give you today are to be on your hearts. Impress them on your children. Talk about them when you sit at home and when you walk along the road, when you lie down and when you get up. Tie them as symbols on your hands and bind them on your foreheads. Write them on the doorframes of your houses and on your gates. (Deut. 6:5-9 [NIV]) These instructions graphically portray the importance of intentional mentoring for posterity. Effectively transferring faith to the next generation is the ultimate objective of ministry mentoring. It takes godly leaders who are called to serve him in ministry to constantly hold the ideals of faith before the people so that these ideals will not fade away. This is also the sentiment of the Psalmist who says: He decreed statutes for Jacob and established the law in Israel, which he commanded our ancestors to teach their children, so the next generation would know them, even the children yet to be born, and they in turn would tell their children. (Ps. 78:5-6 [NIV]) [ Page ] 32 There are other Old Testament examples of mentoring activity which will be examined next. Other Examples of Mentoring Relationships from the Old Testament The following examples of mentoring relationships serve as illustrations of a number of mentoring attitudes and activities as described in some of the Old Testament narratives. Naomi and Ruth A beautiful story which anticipates the ancestry of King David is found in the book of Ruth. It describes how Naomi helped her Moabite daughter-in-law, Ruth navigate her way in the environment of Israelite culture and religion. She was a mentor to Ruth in the process of finding a husband and a home where she could find rest and raise a family (Ruth 3:1-5). The very fact that Ruth opted to follow Naomi to a nation where she would be a foreigner is a testimony of a relationship of trust which is essential between a mentor and mentee. Naomi demonstrated concern for Ruth and guided her towards a future that was good for Ruth in the first instance, similarly satisfying for Naomi, and ultimately good for the kingdom. Eli and Samuel The failure of Eli to mentor his sons into faithful effective ministry (1 Sam. 2:22-36) provides a negative example where faith and godly character were not transferred to the next generation. Eli, however, had mentoring success with [ Page ] 33 Samuel (1 Sam. 3:9) in helping him to hear God’s voice and encouraging Samuel to speak the divinely revealed words that prophesied the destruction of Eli’s household. This is also a biblical example of reverse mentoring where a younger less experienced person had something to contribute to an older wiser person who was ready to receive it. It is instructive to note in this relationship that it did not center on either the mentor or the mentee but was focussed on God and his purposes. David and Solomon King David also may not have had great success in mentoring his older sons or with maintaining order in his household among his children (2 Sam. 13 and 15). But he seems to have had some success with a younger son, Solomon, who would become his successor. King David had on his heart to build a temple to the Lord, but the Lord told him that he was not the one to build the temple. Rather, his son Solomon would build that temple. So David spent time with Solomon instructing him how to build the temple, imparting the skills and empowering him with all he needed for the task (1 Chron. 28:9-28). But something which may not be evident on a surface reading of the scriptures is the mentoring that Solomon received relating to other areas of life. In the book of the Proverbs, which has been attributed to him (Prov. 1:1), Solomon often refers to life instructions he had received from his father. An example of such a reference states: “For I too was a son to my father, still tender, and cherished by my mother. Then he taught me, and he said to me, ‘Take hold of [ Page ] 34 my words with all your heart; keep my commands, and you will live’” (Prov. 4:3- 4 [NIV]). Other such references include 1:8; 2:1; 3:1-2; 3:11; 3:21; 4:1; 4:10; and 5:1. It appears that Solomon would have received much wisdom as a result of the mentoring influence of his own father and his mother. The book of Chronicles also records that “Jonathan, David’s uncle, was a counselor, being a man of understanding and a scribe. He and Jehiel the son of Hachmoni attended the king’s sons” (1 Chron. 27:32 [English Standard Version]). Solomon, as one of those sons, propagated the collections of Proverbs (1 Kings 4:32; Eccles. 12:9) which became an ancient mentoring manual for Israel and for us. Elijah and Elisha We get a brief glimpse of another mentoring relationship in Elijah and Elisha (1 Kings 19:19-21 ; 2 Kings 2). After Elijah’s bout with depression when he expressed his wish to die, God instructed him to anoint Elisha as his successor to carry on his ministry (1 Kings 19:16). This is reminiscent of the Moses and Joshua relationship. The same Hebrew word for “assistant” is used to describe that relationship (Hebrew, saret). This word was used of those who served in close proximity to an important person or leader (Harris, Archer, and Waltke 1999, Ref. No. 2472). (This is not the word that is used for menial service. For that the word, ebed is generally used.) Both Joshua and Elisha succeeded their former masters. The close proximity lent itself to being mentored by their leaders and ultimately become their leaders’ successors. [ Page ] 35 Mentor-mentee relationships in the Ancient Near East included the element of serving the mentor. This association ultimately contributed to the credibility of the mentee/assistant. For instance, when King Jehoshaphat was looking for a credible prophet, they suggested to him Elisha the son of Shaphat. As a credential, they added, “who poured water on the hands of Elijah” (2 Kings 3:11 [ESV]) indicating that while the well-known Elijah was no longer around, his successor and former mentee was now available to serve God and king in the same spirit. The biblical narrative does not provide any information about how Elijah mentored Elisha. We read how he called him by putting his cloak on him and then how Elisha left his parent’s household and followed him (1 Kings 19:19-21). Much later in the narrative when it was time for Elijah to be taken to heaven (this had been prophetically revealed to the whole prophetic school), Elisha was adamant on following Elijah until the very end. His persistence was that of a model mentee who knew how to extract the best and the most out of a mentoring relationship. Elijah asked him what he wanted. Elisha replied by asking for a double portion of his spirit upon him. Elijah continued to test his resolve by telling him that Elisha would get what he desired if he actually witnessed Elijah as he is taken from him. Elisha persisted and received (2 Kings 2:1-15). Jesus as Mentor of the Apostles Jesus’ model of disciple-making is essentially ministry mentoring as observed in the Gospels. “He appointed twelve that they might be with him and [ Page ] 36 that he might send them out to preach and to have authority to drive out demons” (Mark 3:14-15 [NIV]). As A. B. Bruce and Robert Coleman have demonstrated, Jesus was very intentional and deliberate in his training of the twelve apostles (Bruce 1995; Coleman and Fish 1993). Bruce points out that the gospels present Jesus beginning “at a very early period of His ministry to gather round Him a company of disciples, with a view to the preparation of an agency for carrying on the work of the divine kingdom” (Bruce 1995, 12). The twelve he selected were to be something more than travelling companions or menial servants of the Lord Jesus Christ. They were to be, in the meantime, students of Christian doctrine, and occasional fellow-laborers in the work of the kingdom, and eventually Christ’s chosen trained agents for propagating the faith after He Himself had left the earth. (Bruce 1995, 30) Coleman’s classic Master Plan of Evangelism can easily be read as a description of Jesus doing ministry mentoring. In answering the question of why Jesus focused on a few rather than the multitudes, Coleman points out that Jesus was not trying to impress the crowd, but to usher in a kingdom. This meant that he needed people who could lead the multitudes.... Before the world could ever be permanently helped, people would have to be raised up who could lead the multitudes in the things of God. (Coleman and Fish 1993, 28-9) Coleman has identified eight principles of disciple-making in Jesus’ master plan of evangelism. These are discussed here in relation to ministry mentoring. Selection Jesus carefully selected and enlisted those he was going to train and send into the world to carry on his work. He selected them after prayerful consideration. The selection was based not on educational qualifications but on a [ Page ] 37 willingness to spend time with Jesus as he called them to follow him (Matt. 4:19- 20). Even later after the resurrection of Christ, when they launched into their ministry, the religious authorities observed “that [Peter and John] were unschooled, ordinary men,... and they took note that these men had been with Jesus” (Acts 4:13 [NIV]). He limited those he selected to a manageable number of twelve (Luke 6:13-17). He also selected a smaller group of three—Peter, James, and John—who were invited to deeper and more interaction with Jesus than the other disciples (Matt. 17:1; Mark 5:37; 14:33). The implications for ministry mentoring are that a mentor, while serving in ministry for the benefit of many, should carefully select those on whom he will focus more attention for the purposes of leadership development. The mentor is well advised to be prayerfully selective so that he will ultimately have those as mentees who are divinely suited for the given time. However, the fact that Judas the betrayer was also among those who Jesus selected can help the mentor to discern that even if the best care is taken in the selection process, the mentee may ultimately choose a different path. Association Jesus invited the disciples to follow him wherever he was going. He spent quality time with them so they could get to know him. They were selected so that they could “be with him” (Mark 3:14). The disciples had opportunity to observe him in a variety of contexts so they could see how he ministered and how he reacted in various life and ministry situations. They had opportunity to hear him [ Page ] 38 teaching and could ask him questions to clarify what they did not understand. “He did not say anything to [the crowd] without using a parable. But when he was alone with his own disciples, he explained everything” (Mark 4:34 [NIV]; See also Matt. 13:10; 18:1). As the time for his departure approached, Jesus spent more and more exclusive time with the twelve in order to impress on them the message of the kingdom of God (Matt. 20:17ff; John 11:54; 13-17). The implications for ministry mentoring are that the mentor will do well to structure her time to provide enough opportunity to associate with the mentee in life and ministry contexts. It is in these different contexts that issues relating to the learning journey of the mentee will naturally emerge and be addressed. Consecration Jesus called his disciples to obedience and sacrifice. The more they heard his teaching as his disciples and designated apostles, the better they understood what that meant. Ultimately it meant to be ready to lay down their lives as Jesus did. Jesus expected total commitment. He made the cost of this commitment clear to them when he said, “Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross daily and follow me” (Luke 9:23 [NIV]). There did not seem to be room for an “on-again-off-again” relationship. To those who thought they may want it both ways, he said, “No one who puts a hand to the plow and looks back is fit for service in the kingdom of God” (Luke 9:62 [NIV]). This was a part of his message to the crowd which also had clear implications for his inner circle of disciples, who had left everything to follow Jesus (Mark 10:28). [ Page ] 39 In a formal ministry mentoring relationship, the commitment level needs to be high in both the mentor and mentee. A mentor will want to invest time in those who are willing to pay the price. Impartation Jesus poured his life into the lives of his disciples in many different ways. He loved them completely and withheld nothing that would add value to their ministry. He gave them the secrets of the kingdom. He vested them with authority. His mission became their mission. And to fulfil it he imparted his Holy Spirit to them. As some of the Spirit who was upon Moses was transferred to the seventy elders and then to Joshua (Num. 11:25; 27:18, 20; Deut. 34:9); and as the Spirit upon Elijah was transferred to Elisha (2 Kings 2:9, 15); so Jesus imparted the Spirit to his disciples (John 20:21 ; Acts 1:8). The Holy Spirit became for them the heavenly Mentor. As the mentee matures, the mentor will gradually impart to him knowledge, experience, and wisdom without holding back. While the mentor cannot give the Holy Spirit as Jesus does, the mentee can nonetheless receive a spiritual impartation through prayer and association (2 Tim. 1:6; Rom. 1:11). Demonstration Jesus was an example to the disciples showing them how to live and how to nurture a relationship with the heavenly Father through prayer and obedience. In his public ministry, he demonstrated to them how to relate to people and how to evangelize. They had many opportunities to observe how he healed the sick and [ Page ] 40 cast out demons. They heard him preach and teach as he applied scriptures to life situations. They were going to continue his ministry after his departure so they needed to have ample opportunity to observe him in action. As followers of the way of Jesus, they would need to know how to do things the way he did them. The four gospels are to a large part a record of Jesus’ demonstration of ministry activity and became the pattern upon which his disciples continued the ministry he began (Acts 1:1). Mentoring of this kind does not take place just in the office or in the classroom but in the field of ministry. The mentor needs to demonstrate how ministry is done and then take time to explain what took place. This also involves a level of vulnerability of the mentor to the mentees. While we are not perfect as the Lord Jesus, “our weaknesses need not impair discipleship when shining through them is a transparent sincerity to follow Christ” (Coleman and Fish 1993, 69). Delegation Jesus gave the disciples opportunity to minister, giving them ministry assignments as well as tasks that related to the maintenance of the group. By the time he finished his earthly ministry, their “hands-on” experience in conjunction with the impartation of the Holy Spirit provided what was needed to fulfill the mission. For example, on one occasion he sent the twelve out on a mission with full authority and detailed instructions (Luke 9:1-6) and on their return gave them opportunity to debrief (Luke 9:10). He followed a similar pattern with an [ Page ] 41 expanded group of seventy-two (Luke 10:1-12, 17-20). These mission advances were initially restricted to “the lost sheep of the house of Israel” (Matt. 10:6 [ESV]). But after his resurrection, he commissioned them for a worldwide mission (Matt. 28:18-20). The implications of delegation for a ministry mentoring context are that the mentee cannot just be taught, affirmed, and encouraged; but must also be launched into ministry action with full empowerment. Supervision The disciples reported to Jesus concerning their ministry activities (Mark 6:30; Luke 9:10). There was continual conversation and interaction with Jesus whereby he could monitor, correct and enhance their understanding of the kingdom and how they need to live in it and advance it. The debriefing meetings demonstrated accountability to Jesus and provided opportunity for course corrections and attitude adjustments. A ministry mentoring relationship involves accountability conversations where the mentor engages the mentee with respect to ministry performance and quality control for the purpose of ministry excellence. Reproduction Jesus expected fruitfulness in ministry. They were to multiply themselves as followers of Christ by making disciples of all nations. They were to take what Jesus gave them and preach the good news of the kingdom and teach people to obey what Jesus had taught them (Matt. 28:19-20). The evangelization of the [ Page ] 42 world depended on their being fruitful (John 15:5, 8, 16). Thus the mission of God is somehow contingent on the multiplication of ministry mentors. To Coleman’s list of eight principles I would add two additional principles, namely, “relational growth” and “personal attention.” to highlight their importance to ministry mentoring. Relational growth There is evidence of a progression of the mentoring relationship that Jesus had with his disciples. The relationship that Jesus had with his disciples at the beginning of the discipleship/mentorship journey started with an invitation to follow him to observe him. This developed into a more mature relationship which included participation in ministry as is also illustrated by the principles of “Demonstration” and “Delegation.” This can also be seen as Jesus increasingly reveals more of himself and his mission. For example; the gospel of Matthew highlights a turning point in Jesus’ ministry where he takes his disciples increasingly into his confidence: He ordered his disciples not to tell anyone that he was the Messiah. From that time on Jesus began to explain to his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things at the hands of the elders, the chief priests and the teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and on the third day be raised to life. (Matt. 16:20, 21 [NIV]) Eventually he was able to say: “No longer do I call you servants, for the servant does not know what his master is doing; but I have called you friends, for all that I have heard from my Father I have made known to you” (John 15:15 [ESV]). This is indicative of the movement toward empowering his disciples to fulfil the [ Page ] 43 ministry to which they had been called. The implication for ministry mentoring is that the mentor needs to be conscious of a changing dynamic in the relationship with the mentee and make adjustments accordingly. This may mean things like giving expanded responsibilities and more autonomy as well as recognizing that the relationship is moving towards a peer mentoring relationship. Personal attention Yet another principle that remains to be mentioned is that of personal attention given to individual disciples. Reese and Loane point out that “Jesus particularized others throughout his earthly ministry—that is, he uniquely noticed them” (Reese and Loane 2012, 182). Though Jesus employed what could be called a group mentoring model with the Twelve, we also observe unique one-on- one moments of Jesus mentoring individuals. We see this particularly in a number of the descriptions of Jesus’ interactions with Peter. Simon Peter’s first recorded contact with Jesus results in the receiving of a new name and a new identity (John 1:35-42). Jesus later calls Peter away from his occupation as fisherman to “fish for people” (Luke 5:1-10 [NIV]). He is commended for receiving a revelation of the true identity of Jesus and shortly thereafter is rebuked for trying to misdirect Jesus (Matt. 16:13-24). The miraculous provision of the temple tax teaches Peter that God is willing and able to provide for even the irritating needs of life such as paying taxes (Matt. 17:27). Jesus washes Peter’s and the other apostles’ feet modelling the humility that his disciples should have (John 13:6-10). Jesus warns [ Page ] 44 Peter that Satan has asked to sift him (Luke 22:31-32) and then predicts that Peter will deny him (Matt. 26:33-37). Jesus invites Peter, James, and John to pray with him in a crucial hour but they are too tired to pray (Matt. 26:37-42). Peter tries to defend Jesus with the sword but Jesus demonstrates that there are higher priorities than defense of his person (John 18:10-11). Peter experiences the great failure of denying the Lord Jesus (Matt. 26:33-37; Luke 22:61) and later Jesus restores and reinstates him (John 21:3-22). All of these events provide a rich resource of how Jesus mentored an individual in the midst of a volatile ministry context. Most of these mentoring moments would have occurred within the hearing of the other disciples and thus their value was multiplied for the group. Jesus, as mentor of the apostles during his earthly ministry, is an important example of ministry mentoring as faith and ministry are transferred to the next generation. Just as Moses prepared Joshua to lead the people after Moses death and David equipped Solomon to build the temple and rule Israel after David’s death so Jesus also empowered his apostles to make disciples of all nations after he ascended to heaven. There are also other biblical examples of mentoring in the New Testament. Barnabas as Mentor Barnabas, with his gift of encouragement and ability to see potential in others, stands out as a mentor in the New Testament though he does not figure as prominently in the narrative as Peter and Paul. Raab and Clinton write that Barnabas performed his first mentor-linking function when he sponsored Paul to the Jerusalem Christian leaders (Acts 9:23, 24). [ Page ] 45 That Paul was accepted by the Jewish Christian leaders is evidence of the growth that had occurred in Barnabas’ life. He was respected for his life, ministry and judgment - all signs of spiritual authority. This divine contact with Paul was to be the key to God’s expansion of Christianity to a Gentile world. (Raab and Clinton 1997, 12) As mentioned, ministry mentoring is fundamentally the making of disciples for Christ. However ministry mentoring also includes an understanding of placing people in ministry according to what Clinton calls their respective “giftedness set,” namely, natural abilities, acquired skills, and spiritual gifting (Clinton and Clinton 1993, 40). This is for the purpose of being good stewards of the gifts that God has given the church through its people. Barnabas as a mentor is an illustration of this principle when he facilitated the placing of Paul into the Antioch church where his “giftedness set” was a match to the needs of the context. Raab and Clinton explain that Barnabas recognized the potential in Paul and sought him out to give him opportunities to grow, especially since the Antioch church was dynamic and now “sanctioned” by the Jerusalem church. This co-ministry with Paul did three major things. It brought Paul into the mainstream of Christianity, it helped him develop his ministry gifts and status, and it built up the Antioch church. This is evidenced by the term “Christians” first being used at Antioch and later by the mention of Paul as being one of the teachers. (Raab and Clinton 1997, 28) Barnabas also had a mentoring role in John Mark’s life. In fact there came a point when he had to choose between John Mark and Paul (Acts 15:36-39). The leadership role of the apostolic team had already fallen to Paul so the mentoring role of Barnabas in Paul’s ministry was concluded. Because of a dispute between them concerning Mark, they went in different directions and Barnabas took Mark [ Page ] 46 under his wings. Mark was the future author of one of the gospels. Thus Barnabas had mentoring influence on two major biblical authors: Paul and Mark. Paul as Mentor Another New Testament example of a mentor is the apostle Paul. He was trained at the feet of Gamaliel using traditional Jewish training methods that included the mentoring relationship between a rabbi and his disciple (Acts 22:3). As mentioned, he was also mentored by Barnabas. Paul demonstrated great passion in his mentoring of Timothy, Titus and others in his apostolic teams. The book of Acts and the letters of Paul, particularly the Pastoral Epistles, include examples of his mentoring practices. This is best seen in the letters to Timothy. Mentoring Timothy In his two letters to Timothy, Paul gives advice and counsel interspersed with instructions for the churches he was overseeing. He was relating to Timothy as a ministry mentor. These letters had the function of building up Timothy as a minister, while at the same time empowering Timothy with delegated apostolic authority, so that he could effectively fulfil his ministry responsibilities. These letters, while addressed to Timothy personally, were also read publicly so that the churches could hear that the things Timothy was instructing them were based on apostolic authority. In the letters to Timothy, Paul reminds him of Timothy’s divine calling (1 Tim. 1:18-19a; 2 Tim. 1:6) and of the content of Paul’s teaching (1 Tim. 4:6-8; 2 Tim. 2:15-16; 3:14-15). He encourages the young man Timothy to stay on task as a teacher and an example (1 Tim. 4:11-16; 2 Tim. 2:1-3; 2:22- [ Page ] 47 23; 4:2). Paul advises him on appropriate relating styles towards the people in his spiritual care (1 Tim. 5:1-2). Paul also encourages him to persevere in the face of worldly distractions (1 Tim. 6:11-12, 20-21). Paul’s Benevolent Parenting Analogy In some of the letters to the churches, Paul uses the analogy of a spiritual parent to describe how he related to the people in the churches he founded (1 Cor. 4:14-18; 2 Cor. 6:11-13; 12:14-15; Gal. 4:19; 1 Thess. 2:7-12). He viewed them as his spiritual children. On several occasions he also used the “father-son” analogy when speaking of his relationship with Timothy (1 Cor. 4:17; Phil. 2:22; 1 Tim. 1:2, 18; 2 Tim. 2:1). The analogy of spiritual fathering and mothering is highlighted as a part of the ministry mentoring model for this thesis project. Of particular interest here is the apostle Paul’s sacrificial attitude for the benefit of his spiritual children that he modelled and expressed: “So I will very gladly spend for you everything I have and expend myself as well” (2 Cor. 12:15a [NIV]). He similarly expressed this sentiment after the Galatian church experienced a spiritual setback: “My dear children, for whom I am again in the pains of childbirth until Christ is formed in you” (Gal. 4:19 [NIV]). His parenting language also included both discipline and nurture. In addressing the church in Corinth he says, “What do you prefer? Shall I come to you with a rod of discipline, or shall I come in love and with a gentle spirit?” (1 Cor. 4:21 [NIV]) [ Page ] 48 Another aspect of Paul’s spiritual parenting or mentoring is his transparent style of relating. For instance, he invites his spiritual children to emulate him: “Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ” (1 Cor. 11:1 [ESV]. See also 4:16; Phil. 3:17; 1 Thess. 1:6-7; 2 Thess. 3: 7-8). This style of relating as an exemplary model is similarly expressed by the apostle Peter as he instructs leaders using the ministry leadership analogy of shepherding a flock: Be shepherds of God’s flock that is under your care, watching over them—not because you must, but because you are willing, as God wants you to be; not pursuing dishonest gain, but eager to serve; not lording it over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock (1 Pet. 5:2-3 [NIV]). Whether the analogy of parenting or shepherding is used, the mentor’s relationship with the mentee is a sacred trust that demonstrates concern for the well-being of the mentee and recognizes the profound influence a mentor can have as an example that points towards Christ. The implications are that in a ministry mentoring relationship the mentor must embrace the attitude of a parent who focuses primarily on the well-being of the mentee. The mentor applies appropriate discipline when necessary and provides nurturing care as required. At the same time, the mentor remains transparent as an example of how to live and work. When considering the parenting analogy in relation to ministry mentoring it cannot be assumed that all parenting practices that have been experienced by children in various contexts are good or even helpful. Nor have all parents been good examples for their children. It is for this reason that the term used to identify this component in the thesis is benevolent parent (See Ministry Mentoring Model in chapter one). This helps to [ Page ] 49 highlight the altruistic aspects of parenting attitudes and behaviours which are also required of good mentors toward their mentees in a ministry mentoring relationship. This includes the appropriate balance of gracious nurturance and constructive discipline. Generativity of Ministry As has been seen in other biblical examples of ministry mentoring, Paul was similarly concerned about the generativity of ministry. He understood the priority of transferring faith from one generation to another. He expressed this to Timothy, his mentee, towards the end of his life: “What you heard from me, keep as the pattern of sound teaching, with faith and love in Christ Jesus. Guard the good deposit that was entrusted to you—guard it with the help of the Holy Spirit who lives in us” (2 Tim. 1:13-14 [NIV]). He continues on this theme later in the same letter and says: “And the things you have heard me say in the presence of many witnesses entrust to reliable people who will also be qualified to teach others” (2 Tim. 2:2 [NIV]). In order to further understand mentoring as a theologically and biblically informed practice, key New Testament words around the concept of mentoring will be examined. New Testament Words Relating to Mentoring There are a number of words in the New Testament that help to inform a theology of ministry mentoring. Smither has highlighted a number of them (Smither 2008, 4-11). One of the more obvious ones is the word “disciple” [ Page ] 50 (Greek, mathetes). It includes the ideas of a follower, student, learner and apprentice. While there are other people referred to in the scriptures as having a following of disciples, primarily the word is used to denote a disciple of Christ. When the apostles were instructed to make disciples of all nations (Matt. 28:19), they understood that they were to “make disciples” of Christ, not their own disciples. Ministry mentoring includes disciple-making but it also involves equipping for contextual ministry (Eph. 4:12). Jesus was called a “teacher” (Greek, didaskalos; or rabbi- Aramaic) who had a following of disciples. It was in this role that he would mentor and train his disciples as described. This kind of teacher-disciple relationship was prevalent in the existing culture and Jesus adapted this form of relating for the purposes of the kingdom. The authoritative source of sound teaching is the Scriptures (Greek, graphai) — or sacred writings (Greek, hiera grammata)— which becomes the foundation of any training and ministry mentoring. But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work. (2 Tim. 3:14-17 [ESV]) “Mentoring or discipleship, as observed in the New Testament and early Christian writings was the work of one Christian helping another disciple or group of disciples grow in their knowledge and application of the teachings of Jesus and the Scriptures” (Smither 2008, 12). [ Page ] 51 Another New Testament word that can be associated with the concept of mentoring is helper, counsellor, or advocate (Greek, paracletos). In the Gospel of John, Jesus gave the disciples this promise: “And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another advocate to help you and be with you forever—the Spirit of truth” (John 14:16-17a [NIV] See also 14:26; 15:26; 16:7). The word has a wide area of meaning which also includes consoler, encourager and mediator (Louw and Nida 1996, Ref. No. 12.19). It is used to describe the divine mentoring activity of the Holy Spirit such as teaching, reminding and guiding into all truth (John 14:26; 15:13) in essence continuing the mentoring ministry of Jesus. A theological consideration is that the activity of human mentoring resembles, but does not replace the ministry of the Holy Spirit. However the ministry mentor can be seen as the human agent through whom the Holy Spirit works, to help the mentee move toward his or her destiny in Christ. As the apostle Paul reflected on his work among the church people in Philippi, he reminded them of God’s continuing activity among them: “He who began a good work in you will carry it on to completion until the day of Christ Jesus” (Phil. 1:6 [NIV]). The New Testament terms that were examined correspond with some of the components of the ministry mentoring model presented this thesis. For instance the disciple (mathetes) is the mentee. The teacher (didaskalos) can be seen as the guiding mentor in the learning relationship. The scriptures (graphai) or sacred writings correspond to the content of the critical growth pathways. The [ Page ] 52 role of the advocate (paracletos) is seen in the various activities of the mentor in a mentoring relationship as directed by the Spirit. In this section, we considered a theological framework for ministry mentoring based on God’s purposeful relational interaction with humankind. Biblical examples of mentoring from both testaments were highlighted. These demonstrated that mentoring was an activity which helped to equip current leaders and to transfer faith and leadership skills from one generation to another. Jesus’ model of leadership development was described in terms of intentional ministry mentoring. The Apostle Paul’s mentoring analogy of a benevolent parent was discussed. Finally, New Testament terms which inform a theology of mentoring were explained. Next, some of the developments of mentoring in the history of the church will be examined. Mentoring in the History of the Church In this section, I will briefly highlight a number of historical examples where mentoring themes have emerged in church ministry contexts. It is not within the scope this study to provide a complete historical survey however these examples will suffice to illustrate some of the development of mentoring as a mode of learning in various contexts. It is instructive to see how New Testament mentoring themes were carried forward and developed in the first few centuries of church history as the ministry context changed. Some developments of ministry mentoring in North America will also be briefly considered focusing on one [ Page ] 53 example in a pentecostal/charismatic context. Finally, ministry mentoring as observed in a Sri Lanka context will be discussed. The Apostles and the Early Church Fathers In early church history, the Didache (also known as The Teaching of the Apostles) was a pastoral manual which dispensed practical ministry advice. It included the kinds of things a ministry mentor would impart to an emerging leader. Instructions prefaced by statements like “but concerning baptism, thus shall ye baptize...” and “but as touching the eucharistie thanksgiving give ye thanks thus...” (Lightfoot and Harmer 1891, 232). These examples give us a glimpse of how attention was paid to transferring ministry practices to new local church leadership. Further instruction was given on how to discern and receive legitimate itinerant ministers. In a roundabout way this would have also functioned as instruction for itinerant apostles and prophets who would learn what was appropriate for guest ministers. Here is an example of a typical instruction: But concerning the apostles and prophets, so do ye according to the ordinance of the Gospel. Let every apostle, when he cometh to you, be received as the Lord; but he shall not abide more than a single day, or if there be need, a second likewise; but if he abide three days, he is a false prophet. (Lightfoot and Harmer 1891, 233) Such kinds of guidance would have been helpful to a young minister who was trying to learn the nuances of ministry. Smither, in his book on Augustine as Mentor, surveys the mentoring activity of four key leaders as background for his study of Augustine’s mentoring activities: Cyprian (of Carthage (195-258); Pachomius, an Egyptian monk (290- [ Page ] 54 346); Basil of Caesarea (329-279) and Ambrose of Milan (340-397) (Smither, 23- 90). Some of the key principles of mentoring spiritual leaders that Smither highlights from the time of Jesus and the early church to time of Augustine are discussed below. Concerning Augustine, who was mentored and mentored others, Smither writes: “My contention is that Augustine effectively mentored spiritual leaders and set them apart for needed ministries in the church and that many aspects of his mentoring will serve as instructive for the modern mentor” (Smither, 2). Group context Mentoring spiritual leaders in the early church happened primarily in group contexts which took into account relational dynamics that led to the establishment of the church community. Both Jesus and Paul mentored leaders primarily in group contexts. This practice was followed by the early church fathers in their clergy councils and monastic communities that also had a function as training venues for clergy. For instance under Basil, the monasteries and probably the hospice served as an indirect training center for those who would eventually be ordained. Finally, Basil, like Cyprian, valued gathering bishops together at least once a year to strengthen the unity of the church, to set apart leaders, and to deal with heresy. The council gave Basil an opportunity to influence and encourage the bishops, rendering it a form of mentoring in a group context. (Smither 2008, 65) Spiritual formation and effective leadership development necessarily assumes the need to develop the ability to live and work together as well as the leadership skills to build community. Ministry skills are primarily about working [ Page ] 55 with people, so taking a cue from the early church in this regard makes good sense. It must, however, be pointed out that the personal relationship of the mentor with an individual mentee or disciple should not be underplayed as illustrated above in Jesus’ mentoring moments with Peter. Thus the effective mentor pays attention to both the individual mentees and the group dynamics of their interaction with each other. Always a disciple The mentor never graduates from being a disciple. In that spirit, Augustine is quoted as saying “For you I am a bishop, with you I am a Christian” (Smither 2008, 16). This is similar to the attitude of the apostle Paul who never felt that he had arrived: “Not that I have already obtained all this, or have already arrived at my goal, but I press on to take hold of that for which Christ Jesus took hold of me” (Phil. 3:12 [NIV]). Jesus, though he was sinless, modelled a dependence on God taking “the posture of a disciple” (Smither 2008, 15). Even the other apostles, in what can be considered peer mentoring relationships, practiced mutual submission. For example, the apostle Peter received correction from the apostle Paul in the crucial matter of Jews eating with Gentiles (Gal. 2:11-14; 2 Pet. 3:15- 16). The early church also constantly engaged each other in discussions around scripture in the spirit of being simultaneously teachers and learners together. Intentionality With regard to the recruitment of potential ministers in the early church, there is evidence of clearly defined moments of selection and calling, signalling [ Page ] 56 an intentional discipleship/mentorship relationship. This aspect of mentoring has already been mentioned as the first principle of Jesus’ mentoring program in his selection of the first apostles. Barnabas’ intentional recruitment of Paul is another example of this principle. We find a later example of an intentional selection process in the Pachomius monastic movement. In those days many potential monks sought out holy men to be their mentors, so Pachomius found it necessary to have a doorkeeper whose job it was to process applicants. Smither explains that because of his early experience with lax monks, Pachomius did not automatically accept everyone who appeared at his door. Rather, the doorkeeper interviewed each potential monk to ascertain his motivations for joining the monastery. ... Once he passed the entrance exam, the candidate was invited to renounce family and possessions and was taught the rules of the monastery. (Smither 2008, 49) A selection process and intentionality such as we see have seen here indicates a perceivable shift in the life of a mentee which helps to sustain the learning journey. A relationship of discipline and grace The mentor-disciple relationships in the New Testament and early church included rigorous discipline which was tempered by grace. Jesus set high standards for his disciples but he also demonstrated patience while they grew under his mentoring. Though there was an element of power and authority in the relationship, this power was never used inappropriately. The relationship developed from master-servant and teacher-student to friendship. The early church fathers also understood and practiced “a balance between fatherly [ Page ] 57 tenderness and spiritual authority” (Smither 2008, 68). This is the same dynamic that is expressed in the apostle Paul’s analogy of a benevolent parent. Sound teaching Jesus life and ministry were a fulfilment of the Old Testament scriptures and his teaching flowed out of the same scriptures. In his final command to the apostles he said: “Make disciples of all nations... teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you” (Matt. 28:19-20 [ESV]). The early church “devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching” (Acts 2:42 [ESV]). The apostle Paul in giving Titus instructions for a spiritual leader in the church said, “He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it” (Titus 1:9 [ESV]). Thus sound teaching founded in scriptures was a strong feature in the mentoring process of the early church. This is also reflected in the early church fathers. For instance Smither says, “The daily program in Pachomius’ monastery consisted of a great deal of Scripture memorization and teaching from Scripture, as well as the opportunity for dialogue about teaching” (Smither 2008, 51). Much of the correspondence of the early church fathers to their mentees was dedicated to the maintaining of sound doctrine. Modeling and participation The mentorship included both modeling of ministry and invited participation in ministry. We have already seen this principle in the discussion above in Jesus’ mentoring principles of “demonstration” and “delegation.” Paul [ Page ] 58 did the same with his apostolic teams which included Timothy, Titus, Epaphras, Epaphroditus and others over the course of his ministry (1 Tim. 3:14; 4;6-16; Titus 1:5; Col. 4:12-13; Phil. 2:19-30). This dynamic was also present in the mentoring practice of the early church fathers. For example, Smither relates that Valerius, bishop of Hippo, who had a significant mentoring influence on Augustine, was looking for a man superior to himself in communication, and he found that man in Augustine. Early in Augustine's ministry as presbyter, Valerius began to give the former teacher of rhetoric teaching assignments of increasing responsibility. As Cyprian had done with his presbyters and probably deacons as well, Valerius entrusted Augustine with teaching catechumens as they prepared for baptism. (Smither 2008, 119-20) Empowerment and release The mentor, at some point after determining the readiness of the mentees, empowers and releases them into full ministry responsibility. This is what Jesus did with the apostles and Paul did with his mentees and spiritual sons. Early church fathers followed the same pattern. Smither describes an example of this: “Once clergy had passed though Ambrose’s ministry laboratory in Milan, where clergy were entrusted with assignments of increasing responsibility, they were then released to their own ministries” (Smither 2008, 89). Resourcing Even after releasing the mentee into ministry, an aspect of the mentoring relationship continues through ongoing resourcing of spiritual leaders. This relationship however takes on a different form in which the disciple still values and welcomes the mentor’s input but is no longer dependent on the mentor. One [ Page ] 59 way in which this occurred in the early church was through the writing of letters. Paul wrote letters that resourced Timothy and Titus— at least one of the letters was from prison while awaiting his execution. Similarly Cyprian wrote to the clergy under his charge while he was in exile (Smither 2008, 41). The massive amount of literature left to posterity by the early church fathers is a testament to this mentoring practice of resourcing. The principles of mentoring that were used by the apostles and early church fathers laid a foundation for transferring of the faith from generation to generation. For instance the monastic school movement which was started by early church fathers like Pachomius ultimately became one of the key elements that helped preserve the legacy of the Christian gospel through the Middle Ages. Cannell writes about these schools in her book, Theological Education Matters: Instruction took two major forms: the schola interior, in the monasteries, for those training for religious orders, and the schola exterior for clerics (who today would be lay ministers and professional clergy)...The schola exterior, precursors of the Scholastic universities, were usually situated in cities, near cathedrals, and were intended to prepare clerics for pastoral activity (Cannell 2006, 127-8). As these cathedral schools and the European universities which evolved from them became secularized, Schools of Christian Doctrine (Castellino de Castello) and schools to teach practical Christianity (Brethren and Sisters of the Common Life) were started and for a time led to monastic reform which had a positive impact on Christian learning (Cannell 2006, 132). [ Page ] 60 Ministry Mentoring in the North American Context Protestant ministry training in North America also included mentorship. For example, referring to the training of pastors for congregational leadership in early nineteenth century America, Van Gelder writes: “The normal practice was to associate with a mentor who could provide exposure to ministry and guidance in how to read the Bible and how to prepare sermons” (Van Gelder 2009, 20). Cannell speaks of “pastor-tutors” who were sought out by students to be trained by them for church ministry (Cannell 2006, 140-1). This association of students with active pastors in “parsonage seminary” settings afforded the students opportunity to be trained in ministry contexts even though the theological education aspect was sometimes seen as inadequate. Cannell comments further on mentoring as an educational model during that time: The dominant model for professional education through the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries was apprenticeship. This mode ultimately proved unworkable, as the complexity and knowledge base of the professions increased and as the number of willing masters decreased. The professional had enough to do without taking on an apprentice. Also, the strength of the apprentice relationship was also its weakness: ministers in training were influenced by the idiosyncrasies of their mentor. In time, training was taken over by full-time teachers in professional schools, which had the effect of removing the student from the field. Since professional schools tend to be expensive, the shift from apprenticeship to formal schooling with an internship also limited access to professional fields. (Cannell 2006, 191-2) There is however an increased interest in mentoring as a learning model to supplement formal institutional education as is seen in the proliferation of the mentoring literature in recent years (see chapter three). [ Page ] 61 Ministry Mentoring in a Pentecostal/Charismatic Context Since the thesis project was done in a pentecostal/charismatic context in Sri Lanka, an examination of ministry mentoring in a North American context with a similar ethos is instructive. The shepherding movement of the 1970s and 1980s in particular serves well as an example because ministry mentoring and discipleship was a prominent feature of the movement. It is of interest for this thesis because it highlights the potential issue of abuse of power that was being addressed in the project. The shepherding movement which also expressed itself in the form of a house church structure, however, had a rather controversial understanding of authority and governance. Hadaway, DuBose, and Wright explain that the “distinguishing feature of the shepherding groups is the authority structure. Each person submits to the authority of a shepherd, essentially forming a pyramid with the founders at the top” (Hadaway, DuBose, and Wright 1987, 31). They make a distinction between a submission paradigm of authority and a supervision paradigm of authority. The former (oligarchic) tends to foster personal loyalty to the leaders while the latter (democratic) tends to foster loyalty to the cause (Hadaway, DuBose, and Wright 1987, 207-11). There was a strong emphasis on submission that was not just related to church matters but to all life matters. Not only spiritual matters but also marriage and career decisions were brought into the discipleship and mentoring relationship. S. David Moore in his book Shepherding Movement describes and evaluates this dynamic from a historical perspective: [ Page ] 62 While freedom of conscience was always taught, followers knew that obedience to one's pastor was very important. Followers were not encouraged to an unquestioning, blind obedience to their shepherd but to an informal trusting obedience that was an outflow of a close caring relationship. The exercise of spiritual authority was well intentioned and seen as a means to bring health and maturity to people. Still, the emphasis on hierarchically oriented submission to God's delegated authorities led to many cases of improper control and abusive authority throughout the movement. (Moore 2004, 182) He further comments: The movement's leaders failed to recognize the downside of an authoritarian approach. Many of the young people joining the movement had not been adequately parented and were looking for an authority figure to fill their need. The movement leaders did not understand the codependent dynamic in many people. Further, the dictum 'power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely' proved true in many instances. Human carnality got the best of some leaders, who used their authority in self-serving ways without sufficient or timely redress... .The movement's emphasis on authority, submission, and servanthood had a way of silencing dissent. The highly personal, hierarchical, pastoral relationships made it difficult to disagree and challenge one's pastor without appearing disloyal. This was never intended, but it was a practical reality which its leaders have readily acknowledged. As a consequence some problems were perpetuated much longer than necessary. (Moore 2004, 186-7) Anyone developing a repeatable ministry mentoring model will do well to take note of the potential dangers in a mentoring relationship particularly where the mentor is in a position of power. We must not underestimate the allure of power in sustained learner-oriented formation relationships. The matter of submission to authority needs to be carefully defined at every level in authority structures associated with mentoring relationships. The words of Jesus need to be prominently engraved on the hearts of the mentors and firmly entrenched in the habits of their leadership styles: [ Page ] 63 You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. It shall not be so among you. But whoever would be great among you must be your servant, and whoever would be first among you must be your slave, even as the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many. (Matt. 20:25-28 [ESV]) Ministry mentoring models will also need to pay attention to the emotional and spiritual maturity of mentors applying the principles of the apostle Paul’s advice to Timothy with regard to appointing leaders: “He must not be a recent convert, or he may become puffed up with conceit and fall into the condemnation of the devil” (1 Tim. 3:6 [ESV]). Another word of caution which speaks to those seeking spiritual leadership is found in the letter of James: “Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers, for you know that we who teach will be judged with greater strictness” (James 3:1-2 [ESV]). It follows that those who become ministry mentors must not take the mentoring relationship lightly because they are accountable to God for what they say and do in relation to those in their care (Matt. 12:36; 18:6, 7). Ministry Mentoring in the Sri Lankan Context I turn now to briefly consider the Sri Lankan church context and the relatively recent history of the pentecostal/charismatic churches. In the late 1970s and early 1980s, there was an increase in numbers of churches which developed out of the ministries of key leaders who had gathered disciples around them. They trained these disciples and released them to plant churches. These leaders had intentional ministry mentoring relationships with their “disciples,” attempting consciously to emulate the discipling model that Jesus had with his disciples. [ Page ] 64 They were also conscious of tapping into the traditional Asian guru-shishya model of training. One such leader, Dr. Colton Wickramaratne, who was for many years the Chairman of the Assemblies of God in Sri Lanka, launched what was called a Timothean Training Program which was based on an understanding of the mentoring relationship of the apostle Paul with his spiritual son. In his autobiography he writes: Just as the disciples lived with and followed Jesus, just as Timothy walked in Paul’s footsteps and learned a life of ministry from him, so I determined these Bible students would have mentors to spend whatever time was needed with them so they could in turn take the gospel to the spiritually needy across our island and around the world. (Wickramaratne, Wickramaratne, and Donaldson 2007, 210) The Timothean Training Program became a model which was followed by many other Sri Lankan pastors, including some pastors of the PAOSL which was the context of the thesis project. In this section, principles of ministry mentoring as practiced in the early centuries of Christianity were described. Ministry mentoring was done primarily in a group context by a mentor who considered himself a fellow disciple. Mentoring was intentional and administered within a relationship of discipline and grace. The content of the mentoring consisted of sound teaching based on the scriptures. Mentors modelled ministry and invited participation ultimately empowering and releasing ministers into ministry. Mentors continued to resource their mentee through their writings. The monastic school movements founded by these mentors endured beyond their time and became a significant factor for the [ Page ] 65 preservation of the Christian gospel. Ministry mentoring in North America was a dominant component in the training of clergy but after a time gave way to formal ministry training. An example of mentoring in a North American pentecostal/charismatic context sounded a cautionary note to consider how power in a mentoring relationship can be potentially dangerous not only to individual mentees but to a whole movement. Finally, the example from the Sri Lankan context shows that ministry mentoring was already a part of the context in which the project was being implemented. Conclusion To conclude the discussion concerning the biblical and theological rationale of ministry mentoring, I present some thoughts from Houston’s book, The Disciple: Following the True Mentor. He reflects on the major systems of mentoring and how they affect the Christian disciple and cautions that “while we may individually be encouraged, reinforced, even inspired by other individuals, whose ‘roots’ we may grow alongside as in a mentoring relationship, we are also conditioned socially by what the Germans call the Zeitgeist or the ‘spirit of the age.’” (Houston 2007, 27). He comments on historical models of mentoring which inform our society and suggests that “they mark abiding influences that continue to intertwine and to distort the Christian interpretation of the self and of the wise mentoring needed” (Houston 2007, 28). Specifically, the historical models that he refers to are the Heroic, Stoic and Therapeutic models of mentoring. He explains: [ Page ] 66 Briefly, the Heroic is a more bodily expression of consciousness, such as expressed in a warrior morality. The Stoic has a more deliberately moral code of behavior that is legislated and thought out intentionally. The Therapeutic has a more health-conscious behavior that involves individual as well as social health. (2007, 28) In contrast to these, Houston points us to a model of mentoring that has its roots in New Testament discipleship (Houston 2007, 145) and recognizes Jesus as the True Mentor. This is a reminder to those who are mentors that they should carry the presence of Jesus with them into ministry mentoring relationships. Those who are mentees should receive what they see of Jesus in their mentors and for what is lacking they need to relate directly to the Lord Jesus. In this chapter, a biblical and theological rational for ministry mentoring has been established by exploring some biblical themes and examples from church history. These point toward a number of ministry mentoring principles and practices. From a Christian ministry perspective, the insights presented in this chapter provide the spiritual foundations that support ministry mentoring as a practice. In the next chapter, some of the literature in relation to ministry mentoring, mentoring in general, and mentoring in organizations will be examined. [ Page ] 67 CHAPTER THREE: PRECEDENT LITERATURE AND CASES Mentoring, as a practice, has been a part of human experience throughout history though it has not necessarily carried that particular nomenclature. James M. Houston writes: Mentors have been around perhaps as long as the human race. Shamans and witch doctors, prophets and philosophers, leaders and teachers go back deep into our history. Moses and Joshua, Confucius and Mencius, Socrates and Plato, Hillel and the Pharisees, have all transmitted their ways of life from teacher to pupil, mentor to mentee. Thus the minds of great thinkers have been passed from generation to generation. Their efficacy as teachers also has been in being exemplars, providing a way of life that could be imitated in deed as well as thought. (Houston 2007, 23) There has been an increased interest in mentoring in the last thirty years. Houston offers several reasons for the renewed seeking for mentors: the alienation of our age which has forgotten the tradition of apprenticeship roles; the need for wise friends more than for “fixers” or “teachers;” the increasing isolation of individuals within a society that is lacking in honest feedback; and the need for “exemplars who live as they talk” (Houston 2007, 24-5). From the perspective of learning, this renewed interest can also be attributed in part to a growing sense that formal institutional educational models do not by themselves address the needs of learners for the practical realities of life and work. For instance, in relation to [ Page ] 68 professional development and learning, Klasen and Clutterbuck state: “Formal education and induction training alone do not fully prepare individuals for the world of work; continuous learning by way of a variety of learning methods is the only way to achieve maximum performance” (Klasen and Clutterbuck 2002, 3). While mentoring may not be suitable for every person or situation, “among the repertoire of learning and development methods, mentoring stands out as one of the most effective and powerful” (Klasen and Clutterbuck 2002, 4). Mentoring, as a training method, is customizable and enables learners to apply knowledge and skills in their immediate context under the guidance of mentors who have life and work experience. “One of the special pluses of mentoring is that though it is an informal mode of training, it can be adapted to supplement formal and non-formal modes” (Clinton and Clinton 1991, 1-1). In this chapter, we will review selected literature on mentoring. The selection of the literature was guided by three questions the answers of which would inform the ministry mentoring project: (1) what does the general literature on mentoring say about mentoring competencies, processes and approaches? (2) what are Christian leaders writing and saying about ministry mentoring? and (3) what strategies are there for designing mentoring programs in organizations? These three questions are answered in the three following sections of this chapter. The sections will be presented primarily book by book, discussing key points that relate to the mentoring model in this thesis. Occasionally, reference is made to other books and resources that add insight to the model. [ Page ] 69 General Literature on Mentoring Research and Practices Allen and Eby state that “the majority of mentoring research has concentrated on three different focal points, mentoring of youth, student-faculty mentoring relationships, and mentoring with the workplace”(Allen and Eby 2010, 3). Mentoring from a workplace perspective has the most affinity with ministry mentoring in that it address “on-the-job” type learning but the ministry context of this thesis project includes the mentoring of students many of whom are also youth. Therefore, in this section, a general approach to understanding mentoring is followed on which an understanding of ministry mentoring can be constructed. Johnson and Ridley: A Mentoring Overview A concise book on mentoring that provides a helpful guide to mentoring relationships is W. Brad Johnson and Charles R. Ridley’s The Elements of Mentoring (Johnson and Ridley 2008). Their objective was to create a pithy piece of writing about mentoring that cuts out unnecessary words and gets right to the heart of what mentoring is. They say: In preparation for the writing of this book, we conducted an extensive search of the scholarly literature on mentoring and read more than a thousand publications from business, psychology, education, and other fields. We gave more weight to research studies and downplayed “feel-good” pieces on the topic. We searched for findings with direct relevance to mentors; we combed the research for data-supported truths about what makes a mentor excellent...we funnel the voluminous mentoring literature into a terse guide for the practicing mentor (Johnson and Ridley 2008, ix- x). They also point out that “mentoring is an act of generativity— a process of [ Page ] 70 bringing into existence and passing on a professional legacy” (Johnson and Ridley 2008, xi). Wright concurs and says, “Generativity is about investing ourselves in the next generation...Mentoring is an explicit example of generativity, with one person, usually older, making his or her life accessible as a resource to another seeking to realize his or her potential” (Wright 2012, location 172-3). This resonates with the theological rationale for ministry mentoring expressed in chapter two concerning the transferring of faith, knowledge, expertise and authority to the next generation of leaders. Johnson and Ridley are both licensed psychologists and college professors who have researched and written about mentoring and have experienced many successful mentoring relationships in the course of their respective careers. In addition, they explain: “We are also a mentor-protégé pair. Our own successful mentorship during Brad Johnson’s graduate school career triggered an ongoing interest in the various facets of mentoring—particularly the elements of mentor excellence” (Johnson and Ridley 2008, x). In their book, Johnson and Ridley present an overview of mentoring which is primarily addressed to the person of the mentor. The arrangement of the book into 65 key elements presented under six section headings makes the content very accessible. The table of contents in itself provides a succinct summary of what mentoring in general needs to look like in the life and practice of the mentor (See Appendix A). A brief summary of the book follows. The first section of the book is about mentoring skills and competencies, in essence describing “what excellent mentors do” (Johnson and Ridley 2008, 1- [ Page ] 71 48). Johnson and Ridley write about the process of selecting the mentee, the importance of being available to the mentee and making an effort to know the mentee well. Various mentoring activities are highlighted such as teaching, coaching, affirming, encouraging, correcting, and providing challenging assignments. They also encourage mentors to “accept increasing friendship and mutuality” (Johnson and Ridley 2008, 40), in recognition of the fact that mentoring relationships progress. Intentional modeling is also described in which “mentors bear some responsibility for modeling humility, health and the integration of professional and personal roles” (Johnson and Ridley 2008, 46). The second section of the book focuses on the person of the mentor and their interpersonal style of relating (Johnson and Ridley 2008, 49-71). Characteristics such as approachability, trustworthiness and attentiveness attract mentees to the mentor. The mentor needs to respect the confidential nature of the mentoring relationship as well as the values of the mentee allowing freedom to hold different points of view. In terms of how the mentee perceives them, mentors may need to tolerate being idealized (i.e. being seen as heroes) especially in the early stages of the relationship. In terms of perceiving their mentees, mentors need to avoid becoming jealous when the mentees show signs of exceeding them in an area of expertise or begin to seek out other mentors. The third section presents a number of things to consider when beginning a mentoring relationship (Johnson and Ridley 2008, 73-101). These include considering the mentor-mentee compatibility, the clarification of expectations, goal setting, and defining relationship boundaries. The mentor needs to be [ Page ] 72 sensitive to gender, race and ethnicity as he or she arranges the mentoring relationship. From the outset, potential development in the relationship needs to planned for and evaluations of the mentoring relationship should be scheduled. The fourth section deals with the self-awareness and integrity of the mentor which may also have ethical implications for the mentoring relationship. The mentor needs to be aware of the benefits and risks of mentoring. They must take care of themselves so they can serve effectively as mentors. They are productive members of their profession as well as competent in mentoring skills. They must hold themselves accountable through collegial relationships. They recognize the power they may have in the relationship but refuse to abuse this power and never exploit the mentee. Humble mentors demonstrate a sober appreciation of their own limitations and are perceived by mentees as authentic. The fifth section addresses the issue of what to do when mentorships go wrong (Johnson and Ridley 2008, 129-43). This section can be summarized as follows: Mentors should be open to the possibility that things can go wrong. Because of their inherent imperfections and those of their protégés, mentors need to be alert to situations and interactions that might undermine their relationships. If things go wrong, they must address the problems quickly and attempt to restore the relationship. (Johnson and Ridley 2008, 129) Some problems, however, cannot be fixed but care must be taken to minimize the damage. The process needs to be slowed down to encourage thoughtful reflection on the best way forward. The mentor needs to be honest with himself and the mentee about what is happening. Consultation from trusted colleagues should be [ Page ] 73 sought. Careful documentation can also be a help in moving towards a resolution. The final section speaks to matters of closure (Johnson and Ridley 2008, 145-54). Mentorship relationships change and progress as the objectives of the mentorship are fulfilled and the mentee matures. The conclusion of a formal mentoring relationship needs to be accepted and the mentor and mentee need to move on. This can be done by finding an appropriate way to celebrate the closure and transition to an ongoing informal relationship. Interaction may continue but the relationship is redefined. While almost all of the elements mentioned in the book (see Appendix A) are relevant and need to be included in one form or another in training ministry mentors, there are a couple of elements that are not entirely applicable in ministry mentoring. For this reason, I have not referred to them in the above summary of the book, The Elements of Mentoring but now turn to address them here. The elements in question deal with providing sponsorship for mentees (Johnson and Ridley 2008, 13-15) and call for the mentor to give their mentees exposure and promote their visibility (Johnson and Ridley 2008, 28-30). This relates to the aspects of sponsorship mentoring which seek to assist a mentee to advance in his or her career. The mentee’s expectation, in this case, is an increase in power. As mentioned in chapter one, developmental mentoring seeks primarily to assist a mentee in learning and skills development and allows any career advancement to occur naturally. Increase in knowledge and competence is the main focus of developmental mentoring as opposed to the priorities of sponsorship mentoring. To illustrate, we consider the biblical example of James [ Page ] 74 and John who requested to be placed at the right hand and left hand of Jesus in his kingdom (Mark 10:37). They were in effect seeking what sponsorship mentoring might provide, namely power and position. But Jesus offered development mentoring, promoting character growth and servanthood. So in referring to the elements presented above—while not excluding them as possible options— mentoring activities such as providing sponsorship and giving mentees exposure and promoting their visibility may not necessarily be a primary concern within the spirit of ministry mentoring. In this mentoring overview, while the concern about mentoring was for the benefit of the mentee, it was primarily the role of the mentor that was being described. Next, we turn to highlight the learner focus of the mentoring relationship where the role of the mentee receives more attention. Lois Zachary: Learner-centred Mentoring Zachary in The Mentor’s Guide promotes a learner-centred paradigm of mentoring and describes it as a learning partnership. She describes the relationship in this way: The learner—in this case, the mentee—plays an active role in the learning, sharing responsibility for the priorities, learning, and resources, and becoming increasingly self-directed in the process. The mentor nurtures and develops the mentee’s capacity for self-direction (from dependence to independence to interdependence) over the course of the relationship. Throughout the learning relationship, both mentoring partners share accountability and responsibility for achieving the mentee’s learning goals. (Zachary 2012, ch.l ; location 476) In this paradigm are “seven critical elements: reciprocity, learning, relationship, partnership, collaboration, mutually defined goals, and development” (Zachary [ Page ] 75 2012, ch. 1 ; location 484). Note that five of the seven terms to denote these elements specifically indicate the strong sense of interconnectedness between the mentor and the mentee. Reciprocity refers to the give-and-take nature of the mentoring relationship which benefits both parties. Learning refers to the goal of the mentoring relationship in which the mentee is the learner and the mentor is the learning facilitator who creates a learning environment. The elements of relationship, partnership, and collaboration all highlight the need for trust, agreement and consensus respectively between the mentor and the mentee as they work on mutually defined goals that will lead to the development of the mentee’s knowledge, thinking and skills. Since the mentee actively participates and ultimately needs to take ownership of the learning that occurs in a mentoring relationship, it makes sense for mentees to develop the skills which enable them to make the most of such a relationship. They need to know what role they should play and what they can expect. For instance, Zachary and Fischler in The Mentee’s Guide in addressing prospective mentees say: “Before you can engage with a mentor, you need to do some serious and focused preparation that will help you know better what you want to achieve, how you learn best, and what kind of mentoring relationship might work well for you” (Zachary and Fischler 2009, 15). Additional Mentoring Insights In mentoring relationships, mentors are also learners and can benefit greatly as they interact with their mentees and are exposed to different [ Page ] 76 perspectives. For instance, Zachary says, “During the course of a mentoring relationship, mentors are likely to hear views that are different than their own” (Zachary 2012, ch. 4; location 2743). Indeed that concept is taken to a new level in what has been called namely, “reverse mentoring.” Creps says: “Reverse mentoring assumes a completely opposite perspective on learning. While acknowledging the proven value of the older-to-younger approach (teaching down), it provides the vital complement of a younger-to-older method (teaching up)” (Creps 2008, xvii). He goes on to say that reverse mentoring “is cross- cultural in that it actually uses the unlikely possibility of a relationship to benefit both parties through mutual learning from honesty and humility” (Creps 2008, xvii). He laments that there is not much more than positive anecdotal evidence about the effectiveness of reverse mentoring. However, I wonder if we consider the reciprocal nature of the learning that occurs in the newer mentoring paradigms, the need for a term such as “reverse mentoring” is diminished since the notion already exists that learning goes both ways. Another area which adds to an understanding of mentoring relates personal characteristics of mentors and mentoring styles that flow out of the combination of those characteristics. From a study, in which 1011 mentees were asked to describe the personal characteristics of their mentors, eight dimensions emerged: authenticity, nurturance, approachability, competence, inspiration, conscientious, hardworking, and volatility (Darwin 2004, 30-1). Volatility is one of the characteristics of mentors that is not usually included in mentoring descriptions. Yet it apparently has some significance: “Protégés who attributed [ Page ] 77 high Volatility scores to their mentors were able to observe the mentor’s behaviour, utilize the ‘best’ (those actions which teach the learner how to progress forward in an organization) and discard the worst.. ..A good mentor may be a competent person with major flaws so that one can learn what to do and what not to do at the same time” (Darwin 2004, 36). The study helped to clarify some of mentoring relationships that the participants in the Sri Lankan context of this thesis project described as they related some of their pre-project experiences of mentoring. At one level particular mentoring experiences were negative, yet on another level they discerned in themselves positive outcomes for which they were thankful. This will be described further in chapter five. The multidimensional profiles that emerged in the study also determined that there are different styles of mentoring. Some mentors may be more people- oriented who focus on the needs of the mentee. They will tend to be more nurturing, approachable and authentic. Others may be more task-oriented who focus on what needs to get done in a given context. They may be inspirational, push for hard work and have volatile tendencies. At least one implication for consideration in a mentoring program is this: For organizations intent on developing formal mentor programmes it would also be important that protégés who are new to the organization or lack confidence are matched to mentors high in characteristics such as Nurturance, Approachability and Authenticity, while those at a higher management level or who possess a healthy dose of confidence are encouraged to find their own mentors, according to their ‘just-in time’ learning and career development needs. Interestingly, protégés whose mentors were reportedly high in Volatility took an active role in the relationship and went out of their way to attract their mentor. In other words, they knew what they wanted and went for it. (Darwin 2004, 40) [ Page ] 78 In terms of the individual mentors, insights from this study also helps a mentor be aware of the mentoring style to which she gravitates in relation to the needs of her mentee. Sometimes what is needed for the mentee is a season of nurturing and healing, but in order for mentees to become useful in their roles in the organization or community, they may need to experience a more directive approach that challenges them to get on with the job. If a mentor does not match the needs of her mentee, one option is to refer the mentee to another mentor appropriate to the mentee’s needs. Another option is to adapt her mentoring style between the polarities of people-orientation and task-orientation according to the mentee’s needs and in this way sustain a mentoring relationship throughout its progressing phases. Different phases of the mentoring relationship call for different mentoring competencies because of the way mentoring relationships evolve. The effective mentor, who is aware of this, recognizes and adapts appropriately to the changes that each phase requires (Clutterbuck 2004, 45-6). The phases of a mentoring relationship have been articulated in different ways in the literature as is seen in Table 1 below. [ Page ] 79 Table 1: Comparing Different Expressions of Mentorship Phases [ Please contact repository@tyndale.ca for Table 1 details ] Clutterbuck (Row A) speak of five phases: building rapport, setting direction, progression, winding up, and moving on (Clutterbuck 2004, 44-5). Zachary (Row B) speaks of four phases: preparing, negotiating, enabling growth, and coming to closure (Zachary 2012, part 2; location 2449). Johnson and Ridley (Row C) also speak of four phases: initiation, cultivation, separation, and redefinition (Johnson and Ridley 2008, 96-97). As is seen in Table 1 above, these phases correspond generally to the beginnings of a mentoring relationship, the period during which core learning takes place in the relationship, and the endings of a mentoring relationship. However these phases are labelled, they are predictable and knowledge that they exist help both the mentor and the mentee adapt to the changes that occur during the life-time of the mentoring relationship. Understanding this dynamic and planning with this in mind is part of what makes the mentoring relationship intentional. In this section, we have considered the kinds of skills and competencies that are required of a mentor. We have also seen that mentoring is a learning- centered relationship primarily for the benefit of the mentee but can also benefit the mentor. We have briefly examined a study that made the connection between [ Page ] 80 characteristics of mentors and the mentoring styles. Finally, we looked at the phases of mentoring relationships. Next we will examine a number of Christian ministry mentoring resources. Christian Ministry Mentoring Resources Most of the Christian ministry mentoring resources that are examined in this section have been primarily written for those who have an interest in mentoring as a means for developing Christian leaders. The authors typically draw on biblical examples and personal examples from ministry experiences to portray mentoring as a useful tool for personal and leadership development. These books have helped to address what some have perceived as a growing deficit of mentors in Christian circles. The key books and resources are presented in chronological order to illustrate development in the literature on ministry mentoring. Stanley and Clinton (1992, 238) observe that one of the first books on Christian mentoring is Ted Engstrom’s book The Fine Art of Mentoring (Engstrom and Rohrer 1989). Gordon MacDonald, in the forward to the book, states that mentoring was not written about in earlier times because it was an assumed part of life. He says, In contrast to the past, the mentoring function today is in short supply. .. .Today what passes for people development happens in a classroom, and the certification of a person is by diploma from an institution rather than the stamp of approval from an overseer, a mentor. (Engstrom and Rohrer 1989, x) Engstrom was an influential evangelical leader who wrote over 50 books in the area of administration and leadership for Christian organizations. He was a [ Page ] 81 mentor to many Christian leaders. In his book, he paints a multi-perspective picture of ministry mentoring using many anecdotal examples from a wide variety of contexts. Interspersed throughout the book are many nuggets of mentoring wisdom. He contrasts mentoring with other formation disciplines in this way: Mentoring is much more expansive than simply teaching and/or training. It is investing time and prayer. It is building relationships and investing emotionally in the transfer of values and skills and attitudes. Discipling talks about discipline, while mentoring talks about relationship. (Engstrom and Rohrer 1989, 73) The notion of mentoring as an investment of time is a theme that also emerges in chapter five as one of the challenges to ministry mentoring in the Sri Lankan context. We now turn to what other Christian leaders have to say about ministry mentoring beginning with an introduction to Christian mentoring that emerges out of J. Robert Clinton’s contribution to the literature. J. Robert Clinton: Introduction to Christian Mentoring J. Robert Clinton has studied mentoring from a Christian perspective in conjunction with his study of the formation of Christian leaders. As a professor of leadership studies at Fuller Seminary, he has studied over 600 leaders (both leaders in biblical times and in church history). Out of that background emerged a study on mentoring and a model of training mentors which is presented in The Mentoring Handbook: Detailed Guidelines and Helps for Christian Mentors and Mentorees (Clinton and Clinton 1991). This is an extensive resource (405 pages) for mentoring practitioners which Clinton co-authored with his son, Richard. At around the same time, J. Robert Clinton co-authored another book with Paul [ Page ] 82 Stanley, Connecting: The Mentoring Relationships You Need to Succeed in Life (Stanley and Clinton 1992) which was intended to be more motivational and written for a broader market (Clinton and Clinton 1991, preface-2). Clinton has done research in the field of leadership emergence theory particularly in the Christian ministry context. In his book, The Making of a Leader (Clinton 1988), mentoring is included as an important factor in leadership formation. He refers to his studies on leaders who have finished well and concludes that one of the characteristics of such leaders is that “they had a network of meaningful relationships and several important mentors during their lifetime” (Stanley and Clinton 1992, 215). Clinton’s work in the area of ministry mentoring is relevant to this thesis project in that he has demonstrated the impact of mentoring through biblical and historical examples. Some of the biblical examples he has studied have been presented in chapter two of this thesis. The attention he has paid to the development phases of leaders is instructive to ministry mentors as they facilitate the development of future leaders. For instance, a recent book, Deep Mentoring: Guiding Others on Their Leadership Journey (Reese and Loane 2012), describes a mentoring approach built on Clinton’s leadership emergence theory. Mentors are encouraged to pay attention to the significant events and phases in the mentees’ lives, “noticing God’s already present action” (Reese and Loane 2012, 27); and then come alongside them in their leadership journey. This is described later in this section. As mentioned in chapter one, Stanley and Clinton define mentoring as “a relational experience through which one person empowers another by sharing [ Page ] 83 God-given resources” (Stanley and Clinton 1992, 12). An expanded version of that definition highlights the individual components in the relationship: Mentoring is a relational process, in which a mentor who knows or has experienced something, transfers that something (resources of wisdom, information, experience, confidence, insight, relationships, status, etc.) to a mentoree, at an appropriate time and manner, so that it facilitates development or empowerment. (Stanley and Clinton 1992, 40) They outline different types of mentoring relationships on a continuum from more deliberate to less deliberate, which Stanley and Clinton (1992, 41) have categorized as follows: intensive, occasional, and passive. Table 2: Types of Mentoring Along a Continuum [ Please contact repository@tyndale.ca for Table 2 details ] They include various helping disciplines under the categories which are not necessarily seen in the recent mentoring literature as types of mentoring. Rather, these are usually identified as formation disciplines in their own right. However, since mentoring does overlap into these other areas, it is nonetheless a useful framework to discuss ministry mentoring. An intensive mentoring relationship involves a lot of time, intentionality and a high level of commitment on the part of both the mentor and the mentee. In the “discipler” role, the mentor focuses on basic Christian growth. In the role of “spiritual guide,” the mentor focuses on “spiritual development and maturity at certain critical junctures in a disciple’s life” (Stanley and Clinton 1992, 65). In the [ Page ] 84 role of a “coach,” the mentor facilitates the development of life skills or ministry skills. Each of these roles in the contemporary landscape is fulfilled by different formation disciplines. For instance, with regard to the “discipler,” some local congregations will encourage trained staff and/or volunteers to build relationships with new believers and disciple them. However, some are beginning to label this process “mentoring” to distinguish it from curriculum-based discipleship programs. For instance, in The Be-with Factor: Mentoring Students in Everyday Life, Boshers and Poling say: “Mentoring is not the same as discipling....Because of all the baggage and confusion, we prefer to use the term “mentoring” to describe what we’re doing, even though some people reading this book will say we are promoting basic discipleship” (Boshers and Poling 2006, 34). I would concur with Bobb Biehl who says that “mentoring can be [seen as] a logical extension of the discipling process for a few...” (Biehl 1996, 31). With regard to the other roles mentioned, the learner-oriented formation disciplines of spiritual direction and coaching have carved out their own niches quite apart from mentoring with spiritual direction dealing almost exclusively with the discernment of divine activity in an individual’s interior spiritual life and coaching dealing with specific skills according to the needs of the moment. Ministry mentoring as described in this thesis does include aspects of all of these at different times in an intentional mentoring relationship. The next point along the continuum is described as an occasional mentoring relationship which happens for a specific purpose and season. Stanley [ Page ] 85 and Clinton mention the counsellor who provides “timely advice and an impartial perspective” (Stanley and Clinton 1992, 89); the teacher who imparts “knowledge and understanding of a particular subject” (Stanley and Clinton 1992, 101); and the sponsor who uses his “credibility and positional or spiritual authority within an organization or network” (Stanley and Clinton 1992, 124) for the benefit of the mentee. The ending point in the continuum is described as a passive mentoring relationship in which the mentor is not aware of the relationship. Even so, the mentee views him or her as an example or role model to imitate in certain areas of life and ministry. This mentor may be either a historical person or a contemporary to whom the mentee has no direct personal access but is nonetheless influenced through writings or other media. For some, like Wright, this does not fully qualify as mentoring because in a mentoring relationship “learning goes both ways” (Wright 2004, 29, 56). I concur with Wright, but would not want to diminish the value of what Clinton and Stanley want to highlight when they speak of passive mentoring. 1 would consider it as an aspect of self-directed learning which may be part of a mentee’s overall development journey. But a mentoring relationship as defined in this thesis is reciprocal in that there is ongoing interaction between the mentor and the mentee. In addition to the mentoring types referred to in Table 2 above, Stanley and Clinton also advocate that leaders embrace a “constellation model” of mentoring which is a network of relationships that includes peer mentoring (both inside and outside a mentee’s organization), upward mentoring and downward [ Page ] 86 mentoring. As Stanley and Clinton use the term, the upward mentoring relationship is one from which the leader as mentee draws on the experience of those who are further along the journey. (This is not to be confused with “reverse mentoring” which has also been called upward mentoring.) The downward mentoring relationship is one by which the leader as mentor invests into the next generation. The cumulative impact of the constellation model is that “each category of mentoring relationships involves development and a degree of accountability” (Stanley and Clinton 1992, 162). In this regard Johnson and Ridley add a helpful perspective: Research clearly shows that early career professionals with several different developmental relationships (mentorships) enjoy greater career success and satisfaction. Sure, having a primary mentor is critical, but augmenting that relationship with a broader network—a constellation of supportive career helpers, identified in the literature by such names as developmental networks, mentoring constellations, or composite mentoring—creates a distinct advantage. (Johnson and Ridley 2008, 94) Constellation mentoring has relevance in the context of the thesis project in that a mentee can benefit from having access to mentors who have expertise in different areas. However, the multiplicity of mentors requires that clear parameters be established in a climate of mutual trust, particularly in relation to the primary mentor. Next, we look at the advice Howard Hendricks gives to those who are looking for mentors. [ Page ] 87 Howard Hendricks: The Search for Mentors Howard Hendricks, a professor at Dallas Theological Seminary for more than sixty years, was an influential Christian educator and mentor of prominent evangelical Christian leaders. He has written books on Christian education, family and leadership. He has also co-authored a book on mentoring with his son, William Hendricks, namely, As Iron Sharpens Iron: Building Character in a Mentoring Relationship (Hendricks and Hendricks 1995). The target audience of the book was primarily men since it was specifically prepared for distribution at Promise Keeper venues in 1995. However, they explain in the introduction that “mentoring is a process that can benefit women as well as men, so by targeting this discussion toward men we do not mean to exclude women” (Hendricks and Hendricks 1995, 10). Of relevance to this thesis is their focus on the fact that the primary initiative for mentoring generally comes from a mentee. This is because, as they have observed, there are many more mentees than available mentors. Hence, the first part of the book suggests how a mentee can find a good mentor. A mentee should look for a mentor who: 1. seems to have what [the mentee] personally need[s]; 2. cultivates relationships; 3. is willing to take a chance on [the mentee]; 4. is respected by other Christians; 5. has a network of resources; 6. is consulted by others; 7. both talks and listens; [ Page ] 88 8. is consistent in his lifestyle; 9. is able to diagnose [the mentee’s] needs; 10. is concerned with [the mentee’s] interests. (Hendricks and Hendricks 1995,63) They state that mentees must be aware that they are not likely to find the perfect mentor or someone who meets all their criteria, but a checklist such as this will give them a set of standards to help them find the person most suited to their needs. I concur that it is good to encourage mentees to take the initiative in seeking a mentor. However, such an approach may not be appropriate in all cultures nor will it work for all mentee personality types. There are occasions that a mentor may need to be attentive to the prospective mentee who for whatever reason may not be comfortable in asking to be mentored. Howard Hendricks explains that there “are three kinds of mentoring relationships that a man desperately needs to pursue: a Paul, an older man who can build into his life; a Barnabas, a peer, a soul brother to whom he can be accountable; and a Timothy, a younger man into whose life he is building” (Hendricks and Hendricks 1995, 78). The second part of the book seeks to encourage men to be mentors and explains what it takes to become an effective mentor. The general thrust of the book is to promote widespread mentoring relationships that will facilitate the transfer of a legacy of faith, wisdom, and godly character to the next generation. It follows that if mentees are looking for potential mentors, such mentors will need to understand what mentoring is and seek ways to equip themselves for [ Page ] 89 the task. This is a part of the rationale for creating a mentoring culture which is discussed in the next section. Wherever a mentoring culture is developed, mentees will also be aware of the best way to find a suitable mentor. This will establish from the outset that a mentoring relationship is mentee-driven and mentee- oriented. We now turn to consider what such a relationship looks like as explained by Walter C. Wright, Jr. Walter C. Wright, Jr.: Mentee Oriented Mentoring Relationships Walter C. Wright, Jr. has served as administrator at Fuller Seminary in California; president of Regent College in Vancouver, Canada; and executive director of Max De Pree Center for Leadership. He has written and taught on relational leadership. In his book, Mentoring: The Promise of Relational Leadership Wright presents a reflective approach to the subject of mentoring within a relational leadership framework. “At the heart of relational leadership” he says, “lies a passion for relationships and mentoring—choosing to invest oneself in the life and leadership of another” (Wright 2004, 25). He uses his own experiences of being mentored and mentoring as the context from which he describes the principles of mentoring. He presents his model in this way: Mentors tend to ask questions that help us reflect on the link between character, leadership, and culture. Executive coaches tend to ask questions that help us think about the applications linking leadership to productivity. Spiritual directors help us see how the gods we follow shape everything else. These are not intended to be tightly defined distinctions. The three roles often overlap with one another and with teachers and counselors (Wright 2004, 10) [ Page ] 90 Figure 3: Question Askers Who Link Life Influences3 (Wright 2004, 10) [ Please contact repository@tyndale.ca for Figure 3 details ] For clarification, Wright uses the term “gods” as illustrated in the following manner: “God may be one, but will the behaviours of your people suggest other gods as well?” (Wright 2004, 8). The role of the mentor in Wright’s model as it relates to other formational disciplines is seen in Figure 3 above. This understanding forms the background of the relational mentee-oriented approach that Wright espouses in mentoring relationships. In his book on Relational Leadership, Walter Wright states: Mentoring is a relationship with a purpose. There is no formula, no ideal model, and no program of steps to success. It is a relationship connected by a shared interest in learning and growth, and it must be constantly nurtured and recreated. It has purpose and structure defined by the learning needs of the mentoree and shaped by the wisdom and experience of the mentor (Wright 2009, 68). The mentoring model of this thesis similarly expresses mentorship as a learning relationship which is mentee driven and mentor guided. Wright presents some _________________________ 3 Taken from Mentoring by Walter C. Wright, Jr. Copyright © 2004. Used by Permission of Paternoster Press, a division of Authentic Media, Waynesboro, GA. [ Page ] 91 ground rules that emerge in mentoring relationships: 1. Mentoring focuses on the one being mentored. 2. Mentoring includes the vulnerable sharing of one’s self. 3. Mentoring includes forgiveness. 4. Mentoring is more about following than leading. 5. Mentoring is mutually beneficial. 6. Mentoring requires an appropriate fit. 7. Mentoring involves listening and asking questions. 8. Mentoring sustains relational leadership (Wright 2004, 65-69). Some of these ground rules have already been referred to in the summary of Johnson and Ridley’s Elements. They are reiterated here as they appear in Wright’s list. These ground rules assume a high level of maturity on the part of the mentor as well as that of the mentee. They also assume a cultural environment where social conventions allow for leaders and their followers to interact as equals. In some cultural contexts, the power distance between leaders and followers or mentors and mentees is relatively higher than in other contexts. This is addressed specifically in relation to the cultural context of the project in chapter four (pages 122-125). These ground rules may need to be adapted to local conventions. For instance, in some contexts vulnerability to the degree that Wright speaks of may create awkwardness for the mentor and/or the mentee, especially in the early phases of the mentoring relationship. Johnson and Ridley note that “some protégés hold personally rigid or culturally hierarchal views of seniors. For these protégés, collegiality with a supervisor is destabilizing and [ Page ] 92 disorienting... In these cases, mentors have to be sensitive to the needs of the protégé” (Johnson and Ridley 2008, 41-2). Wright states that “mentoring is a leadership relationship in which both the mentor and mentoree add value and benefit, but at its core, mentoring is a relationship of learning directed by the mentoree” (Wright 2004, 72). This, as mentioned in the discussion about learner-centered mentoring, corresponds to recent mentoring trends. This newer approach to mentoring “emphasizes the value of the mentees engaging actively in their own learning...” (Zachary and Fischler 2009, 2). However, there are also models of ministry mentoring where the mentor guides the mentee along a prescribed development path. The mentoring model of this thesis labels this as critical growth pathways. We now turn to look at some of the literature that describes such approaches to mentoring. One of these is Carson Pue’s approach of mentoring leaders through a five phase leadership journey. Carson Pue: Mentoring Leaders through a Five Phase Leadership Journey Carson Pue was the president of Arrow Leadership for over a decade. Arrow Leadership focuses on training emerging Christian leaders. As a part of the program, students are set in intentional mentoring relationships. In his book, Mentoring Leaders: Wisdom for Developing Character, Calling, and Competency (2005), Pue presents a model of ministry mentoring which grew out of that program. The book does not describe the mechanics of mentoring as much as the process of character and leadership skills development which occurs within the [ Page ] 93 mentee. This model defines the leadership journey as having five phases: self- awareness; freeing up; visioneering; implementing; and sustaining. (These phases are not to be confused with the phases that describe the life-cycle of a mentoring relationship.) Figure 4 provides a graphic of the mentoring matrix showing how the five phases relate to each other. This model was used in the training of the mentors who participated in the project as is described in chapter four. The self-awareness phase is foundational in leadership development. The primary and core question that is dealt with in this phase is this: “Where are you in your relationship to Jesus?” (Pue 2005, 40) This is a basic discipleship question from which we will never graduate. In working with Christian leaders in the role of mentors we cannot assume that this issue is adequately dealt with in the lives of leaders we are mentoring. It is highlighted in a myriad of temptations to which Christian leaders are exposed. Pue names these frontal attacks as “pride, sensuality, spiritual excess, spiritual lust, tiredness and sloth, surrounding with abundance, and lukewarmness” (Pue 2005, 42-3). Each of these is a potential talking point with the mentee on the leadership development journey. The ultimate objective of this phase is to help the mentee learn how to function from his core as a child of God. What is not mentioned in the explanation of this phase is self-awareness in relation to abilities, skills and gifts of the mentee. This is addressed more directly in the description of the “visioneering” and “implementing” phases. [ Page ] 94 [ Please contact repository@tyndale.ca for Figure 4 details ] Figure 4: Mentoring Matrix4 (Pue 2005, 20) The next phase is “freeing up.” This addresses negative issues in the leaders’ past which have the potential of holding them back in their leadership journey. Some of these things include past experiences, parent-child issues, family of origin issues, spiritual chains, and addiction to power. These restraining spiritual issues need to be dealt with as they surface, preferably sooner than later. Pue explains the underlying principle of this phase: _________________________ 4 Taken from Mentoring Leaders by Carson Pue, Copyright © 2005 Used by permission of Baker Books, a division of Baker Publishing Group, Grand Rapids, MI. [ Page ] 95 The freeing-up stage of the mentoring matrix is really all about satisfying needs. It is searching for and understanding your core needs as an individual and as a leader. We try to help leaders understand these needs, and evaluate where they are turning to have these needs met. Many of us try to meet our needs ourselves rather than turning to God and allowing him to meet our needs. (Pue 2005, 21) In the “visioneering” phase, the leader begins to be aware of something to which God is calling her. “God is the originator of vision” (Pue 2005, 81). The mentor helps to encourage, clarify and guide. Visioneering begins with a burning passion, develops into a clear vision of a preferred future, and then the formulation of a mission. The birthing of a vision and seeing it in focus often involves a lengthy process that includes times of solitude, interaction with mentors as well as a good self-awareness of the leaders’ giftedness set. The “implementation” phase deals with implementing the vision. Here one of the roles of the mentor is to help the mentee assess whether he has what it takes to fulfill the vision. This, in essence, helps to further clarify the vision. The vision then needs to be communicated, the team assembled, time and budget allocated and finally a system of evaluating outcomes needs to be established. A ministry mentor will work with the mentee leader to ensure that these implementation steps are carried out effectively. With regard to the “sustaining” phase of the leadership journey, Pue says: “Learning to sustain yourself in leadership and in your ministry is one of the most challenging phases of the mentoring matrix. It is the nature of leaders to always be moving forward, but as their organizations mature, an ‘unsettledness’ begins to grow” (Pue 2005, 201). It is important to recognize changes in ministry that go [ Page ] 96 with the life cycles of organizations. It becomes necessary to adapt through reorganizing and other means to sustain ministry. Often fear of change may prevent the necessary planning and action that is required. A mentor will help the leader navigate through such times and hold him accountable. Pue explains that when a leader goes through the “sustaining” phase, there is an increase in self-awareness. This begins the process again. With each cycle the leader gets closer to God and his purposes for him. I believe going through these phases sequentially is a good model to follow in a mentoring journey with a mentee. However, there may be times that it is best not to be too rigid in the application of the model since each phase may trigger a need to revisit earlier phases. Conceivably one may be working on several issues that relate to various phases at the same time. As an overlay to the five phases, a model of Christian formation can be used to guide the development of the mentee in ministry mentoring. These interconnected dimensions are illustrated in Figure 5 above. This model highlights the importance of concurrent development in four dimensions of the Christian minister. In his book, Pue mentions “four primary interdependent components in Jesus life—intimacy, character, community, and ministry” (Pue 2005, 96). Steve Brown, the current president of Arrow Leadership in Canada, develops these components or dimensions into “An Integrated Model of Christian Formation” of “spiritual intimacy, character development, community relationships, and ministry service” (Brown 2006, 57). [ Page ] 97 [ Please contact repository@tyndale.ca for Figure 5 details ] Figure 5: Dimensions of Christian Leadership Development (Brown 2012, 4) He summarizes a discussion of these dimensions: For young Christian ministry leaders, the development of each of the four dimensions in Christian formation is critical and has added importance for the life of a ministry leader. Whether a leader has supernatural or natural gifting, ministry leaders need to lead from an inflow of spiritual intimacy with God, build trust and avoid the consequences of character failure through the development of godly character, develop a safe and healthy spectrum of community relationships, and seek to serve God and make disciples through identified gifts, clarified vision, and leadership practices like communicating vision and developing other leaders in ministry service. (Brown 2006, 76) Evaluating the areas of the life of a mentee which each of these dimensions represent will enable the mentor to guide the mentee towards a balanced life and ministry. [ Page ] 98 I conclude this sub-section by framing Pue’s Mentoring Leaders in terms of the ministry mentoring model of the thesis. The mentoring matrix represents the critical growth pathway. Issues which are described as critical to the development of Christian leaders are the content which guides the critical growth pathway of a mentee. The content in combination with the discernment of divine activity in the life of the mentee is customized by the mentor according to the need of the mentee. Next, another resource which speaks to critical growth areas for mentees will be examined. Steve Saccone: Mentoring by Focussing on Critical Growth Areas Steve Saccone is the founder of Protégé, a two year global leadership program which was launched while he was a pastor at Mosaic in Los Angeles under the lead pastor, Erwin McManus. They sensed the need to create a different forum for developing emerging leaders which was based in the local church and included an emphasis on mentoring. They wanted “to maximize intentionality and [their] focus in how [they] customized each individual’s development process over two years...” (Saccone and Saccone 2012, 17). The book, Protégé: Developing Your Next Generation of Church Leaders which Steve Saccone co- authored with his wife Cheri Saccone, describes critical growth areas for ministry leaders and suggests a number of mentoring paths and practices that have emerged in the implementation of the program. Of primary interest for the purpose of this thesis are the critical growth areas that are addressed. Saccone begins with character transformation issues and [ Page ] 99 highlights four critical temptations or “deadly sins” that emerging leaders need to overcome: 1. The Sin of Imitation: Envy 2. The Sin of Performance: Self-Reliance 3. The Sin of Overconfidence: Foolishness 4. The Sin of Entitlement: Greed (Saccone and Saccone, 32) He then addresses three critical tensions in relational leadership which are “core to effective, God-honouring ministry leadership” (Saccone and Saccone 2012, 84). These are as follows: 1. The Tension of Commitment: Overcommitters and Underdeliverers 2. The Tension of Conflict: Avoiders and Evokers 3. The Tension of Attachment: Overattachers and Detachers Working with mentees or protégés on understanding where their natural tendencies lie and helping them to avoid extremes is an important component of ministry mentoring. “It is good to grasp the one and not let go of the other. Whoever fears God will avoid all extremes” (Eccles. 7:18 [NIV]). For the mentoring model in the project, the critical issues addressed by Saccone are supplementary content that can be used in the “self-awareness” and “freeing up” phases of Pue’s mentoring matrix. Another critical area he deals with is communication. He highlights the need for ministry leaders to develop communication skills and provides a very practical model in the form of learning labs which “are informal and interactive environments for groups of leaders to participate in executing leadership skills in [ Page ] 100 real time” (Saccone and Saccone 2012, 138). The mentor is encouraged to create such environments for her mentees and ensure that both “affirmative” and “constructive” feedback is provided as appropriate. Communication that keeps missional concerns at the forefront is also addressed. Emerging leaders not only need to learn how to communicate well but also how to communicate in ways that engage effectively those outside the faith. This area can supplement the “visioneering” and “implementation” phase of the mentoring matrix. Since ministry mentoring at its core is about the “mission of God,” as mentioned in chapter two, the mentor will want to facilitate learning that shifts the mentee towards a missional focus. To be missional is to be aware and involved in the “Missio Dei” that includes paying attention to engaging those outside the Christian faith in culturally relevant ways. Saccone speaks of five shifts, beginning with a shift from being generally inattentive to being attentive to God’s direction when it comes to engaging outsiders (Saccone and Saccone 2012, 182). Then there is the shift in the conversation from monologue to dialogue (Saccone and Saccone 2012, 188). Another shift is in the relationship with the unbeliever from invasion to invitation which means to pay attention to the relational space of the outsider (Saccone and Saccone 2012, 193). A fourth shift relates to the outsider becoming part of the Christian community moving from individual conversion to communal conversion (Saccone and Saccone 2012, 202). A fifth and final shift relates to the gospel: from temporal understanding to eternal awakening. This is “about helping people connect their temporal story with the eternal story” (Saccone and Saccone 2012, 207). [ Page ] 101 The final segment of the book encourages the development of an environment that promotes “kingdom entrepreneurs” where new ideas of ministry and innovation are welcomed. Saccone states: “In far too many churches, I’ve observed young ministry leaders who aren’t empowered to lead in ways they are gifted to lead” (Saccone and Saccone 2012, 221). He follows this observation with a rhetorical question: “Is it possible that future success in the church could be contingent on whether seasoned leaders create space for young entrepreneurial leaders to emerge with innovative, culture-shaping ideas?” (Saccone and Saccone 2012, 222) This issue of empowering younger ministry leaders is an integral part of the motivation for this thesis project. While this invariably involves risk of failure, younger leaders must be released to try the new things about which they have strong convictions. A “Mentor Tip” that Saccone offers in this connection: “When a protégé takes a risk, steps out in courage, or initiates, make sure you affirm their proactivity.. .Celebrate the right kind of risks even if the desired outcome doesn’t happen” (Saccone and Saccone 2012, 227). Both Pue and Saccone place a strong emphasis on addressing critical character issues that impact the development of the Christian leader. They also have respective guiding structures as critical growth pathways (albeit more explicitly laid out in Pue’s book as the mentoring matrix). We now turn to look at one final ministry mentoring resource that considers mentoring from the “big picture” or lifelong view of a mentee. This approach emphasizes paying attention to what God is doing in the life of the mentee or as it framed in the ministry mentoring model in chapter one, namely, “divine activity.” [ Page ] 102 Reese and Loane: Mentoring by Paying Attention to What is As mentioned earlier in this section, Reese and Loane (2012) have developed a mentoring approach built on Clinton’s leadership emergence theory. They explain some umbrella concepts of this theory: Foundational to Clinton's discoveries is that there are three concepts that compose Christian leadership development: (1) God's processing or shaping activity in a person's life, (2) over time and (3) a person's response to God's shaping action. (Reese and Loane 2012, 62) Additionally, there are “three types of formation critical to a Christian leader’s development: character formation, skill formation and strategic formation” (Reese and Loane 2012, 64). This mentoring approach considers a leader’s life from a timeline perspective, dividing it into four development phases: foundation, preparation, contribution, and multiplication. Transitions between these phases are called boundary times that signal the leader’s movement into the next phase. Figure 6 below illustrates these phases. These phases and boundaries represent general categories which help to describe seasons and transitions in a mentee’s life as compared to others who have finished well. They help the mentor to predict what may be encountered in the mentee’s life. As a result, the mentor is in a position to prescribe what may be needed next in the mentee’s journey. [ Please contact repository@tyndale.ca for Figure 6 details ] [ Page ] 103 [ Figure 6 continues, please contact repository@tyndale.ca for Figure 6 details ] Figure 6: Timeline Perspective5 (Reese and Loane 2012, 66 ) In this mentoring model, mentors are trained to pay attention to factors which have shaped mentees in their past and what continues to shape them in their present. “If we are going to walk alongside others, seeking to pay attention with them to what God is up to in their lives, then we must pay attention to the story of their lives” (Reese and Loane 2012, 57). The attentiveness of the mentor to the mentee has implications on how the mentee is viewed in the ministry context. She is not seen simply as a means to the fulfilling of ministry objectives, but as a significant focus of ministry itself. Reese and Loane put forward that there is a need for a subtle but critical paradigm shift—moving from an enlisting way of ministering in our communities to more of an investing way of ministering. So much of our leadership culture is dominated by the need to enlist volunteers for the various activities of the church. ... The work of enlisting others will always be part of our leadership culture, but what if our primary attention was given to people investment? (Reese and Loane 2012, 20-1) The “big picture” view that Reese and Loane present of the mentee’s journey helps the mentor locate where the mentee is in his or her leadership journey and at the same time keep the end in view. While Pue’s mentoring matrix is cyclical and provides a framework for conceiving of a spiralling forward and upward progression, the timeline perspective has an eye on the seasons and _________________________ 5 Taken from Deep Mentoring by Randy D. Reese and Robert Loane. Copyright © 2012 by Randy D. Reese and Robert Loane. Used by permission of InterVarsity Press, PO Box 1400, Downers Grove, IL 60515. [ Page ] 104 transitions of life that potentially culminate in a good finish. Both the matrix and the timeline can be used by the mentor to help the mentee navigate the critical growth pathways towards mature ministry. In the Christian ministry mentoring literature, we have seen some authors who provide insight into the dynamics of ministry mentoring (Clinton, Hendricks Wright), while others (Pue, Saccone, and Reese) suggest critical growth areas and strategy to guide the input and direction of a ministry mentoring relationship. Both emphases help to inform what needs to be considered in the design of a ministry mentoring model and a mentoring program. Next we will look at mentoring initiatives and structures from an organizational point of view. Mentoring Programs in Organizational Contexts While an understanding of the mentoring relationship as a stand-alone arrangement is of utmost importance and remains the heart of any corporate mentoring initiative, it is also necessary to explore what it would take to incorporate mentoring into an organizational structure. It is here that we consider a third stakeholder in the mentoring relationship, namely the organization. [ Page ] 105 [ Please contact repository@tyndale.ca for Figure 7 details ] Figure 7: Mentoring Relationship Stakeholders Additional matters to consider as all three stakeholders seek to align the purposes of the mentoring relationship are addressed in this section. Adding the third stakeholder creates a potential for additional assistance to undergird the relationship as will also be demonstrated. Three resources that specifically focus on the development of a “mentoring culture, “mentoring scheme,” or “mentoring program” (representative terms used respectively in the resources examined in this section) provide insight for organizations as they develop a broader developmental support structure. These will briefly be examined as they relate to the development of a ministry mentoring culture in the project context. Lois Zachary: A Mentoring Culture Lois J. Zachary in Creating a Mentoring Culture: The Organizations Guide suggests a comprehensive model that develops such a support structure and embeds mentoring into the corporate culture (Zachary 2005). This model is designed with a large scale organization in mind but is helpful even for smaller organizations. A brief summary adapted for a smaller organization based on Zachary’s model follows. [ Page ] 106 First of all, a discovery process needs to be initiated by which one can understand the culture of the organization. Those structures which are most likely to support the development of mentoring in the organization need to be identified and enlisted. Then, based on that discovery one develops a plan for implementation which includes criteria for selecting people, training opportunities and a means of ongoing evaluation. The aspects that are important to the development of a mentoring program are: • infrastructure (leadership, time, human resources, and knowledge resources); • alignment (consistency of mentoring practice within organization’s cultural values); • accountability (includes understanding shared intentions, setting goals, clarifying expectations, measuring results, and gathering feedback); • communication (among the stakeholders); • value and visibility (demonstrating how mentoring is adding value in the organization); • creating a demand for mentoring; multiple mentoring opportunities (various approaches, kinds, and venues); • education and training for potential mentors (includes seminars and ongoing resourcing); and • creating safety nets (to counteract potential pitfalls to mentoring). These aspects were considered in the design and development of the mentoring program for the PAOSL. However, an issue that needed particular attention was consideration of the degree of formality and the level of control that the various mentoring stakeholders would have in that context. For this Klasen and Clutterbuck’s book was consulted. [ Page ] 107 Klasen and Clutterbuck: Formality and Control Klasen and Clutterbuck’s Implementing Mentoring Schemes: A Practical Guide to Successful Programs (Klasen and Clutterbuck 2002) provides a number of steps informed by a several cases studies of diverse kinds of mentoring schemes. Though this approach to the subject of mentoring as part of organizational structures is somewhat different, many of the aspects of planning and implementing are similar to Zachary’s model. Klasen and Clutterbuck focus a little more on describing the nature of mentoring relationships. Table 3: Spectrum of Mentoring Relationships (Adapted from Klasen and Clutterbuck 2002, 125) [ Please contact repository@tyndale.ca for Table 3 details ] One particularly helpful insight they provide, relates to exploring the degree of formality of the mentoring relationship and program espoused by an organization. The possibilities are demonstrated in Table 3 above. The table outlines the number of possible ways that mentors and mentees can find each other. Klasen and Clutterbuck observe: [ Page ] 108 From the evidence existing to date, informal mentoring appears to benefit mainly the mentee. Formal mentoring, on the other hand, seems to promote a more equal balance between organizational and individual benefits. Furthermore, practitioners maintain that formal programs can provide a wider range of benefits for the mentor than informal programs. (Klasen and Clutterbuck 2002, 127-8) Whatever the benefits or disadvantages may be in the various options, this table is a useful tool to help determine a design that fits a particular organization. This table was used in the project to facilitate discussions as we were discerning what level of formality and control would work best in the context of the PAOSL. Allen, Finkelstein and Poteet: Designing a Mentoring Program Another helpful and concise resource book is Designing Workplace Mentoring Programs: An Evidence Based Approach by Allen, Finkelstein, and Poteet (2009). In researching for the book, they interviewed people from a number of companies who managed mentoring programs (Allen, Finkelstein, and Poteet 2009, xiii). This enabled the authors to provide the reader with real life case studies which are disbursed throughout the book and actionable best practices for designing a mentoring program. The book describes the steps of designing a mentoring program. These steps are similar to Zachary’s mentoring culture model which was outlined above. These steps are presented in more detail as a framework for the design of a program for the project context. The first step relates to planning and providing infrastructure. This includes doing a “needs assessment,” providing for organizational support, setting program objectives, integrating and harmonizing [ Page ] 109 with other Human Resource initiatives and administrating the program (Allen, Finkelstein, and Poteet 2009, 11). In particular, a program administrator (I prefer “mentoring coordinator”) should be assigned to oversee the program (Allen, Finkelstein, and Poteet 2009, 20). The second step is to recruit and select participants. The issue of voluntary or mandatory participation must be decided (Allen, Finkelstein, and Poteet 2009, 24). The criteria for selecting mentees need to be determined based on the pool of available mentors. Mentors need to be recruited and selected according to the need of the mentees. Further, the mentors need to be interested and have time to participate (Allen, Finkelstein, and Poteet 2009, 23-35). The third step is to match mentors and mentees. The mechanism for matching mentors and mentees will need to be informed by the organization’s culture. The matching process should be based at the very least on the program’s objectives. The matching decision should be based on multiple factors. This process can be assisted by mentors and mentees filling out forms that describe their skills and needs respectively (Allen, Finkelstein, and Poteet 2009, 37-57). Training participants in mentoring, which is the fourth step, gives the best chance for effective implementation of the mentoring program. The training content should include general basic foundational information on mentoring and also specific contextual information based on the objectives of the program in the organization. This should be followed by post-training support and evaluation (Allen, Finkelstein, and Poteet 2009, 59-68). [ Page ] 110 The fifth step is to address mentoring structure and processes. Allen, Finkelstein and Poteet provide six issues that need to be considered in developing structural guidelines: “(1) determining confidentiality standards; (2) expectations for the relationship; (3) meeting frequency and method; (4) relationship duration; (5) guiding protégé career development; and (6) planned activities” (Allen, Finkelstein, and Poteet 2009, 71). The final step is to include way of monitoring the mentorship relationships and evaluating the overall program Monitoring and evaluation allow you to support and strengthen individual relationships and to also gain insight into ways to improve the overall effectiveness of the mentoring program. The focus of monitoring is at the level of the individual relationships while evaluation is focused on the program as a whole. (Allen, Finkelstein, and Poteet 2009, 86) Both the frequency of monitoring and the method of collecting data need to be determined. A suggestion is that a set of interview questions be developed for mentors and mentees which can be used on a regular basis. Evaluating the program can provide information that will help promote the program, determine that goals are achieved, and improve the program. This can be done by one-on- one interviews with participants as well as surveys and questionnaires (Allen, Finkelstein, and Poteet 2009, 85-102). Before we leave this section, a comment from Allen, Finkelstein, and Poteet on the effectiveness of formal mentoring in an organizational context provides further insight. The potential benefit of formality in mentoring in relation to the mentee and the organization has already been addressed above. To add to this, they say. [ Page ] 111 The design of formal mentoring programs can vary considerably. Some programs are highly structured while others take a more casual approach. Research shows that programs with a greater degree of organizational facilitation and structure are generally more effective than those with little support and oversight.. .Notably facilitation and structure should not be equated with rigidity and inflexible formality. The form that the facilitation and structure takes needs to fit with the culture of the organization. (Allen, Finkelstein, and Poteet 2009, 5) Thus, in designing an ongoing ministry mentoring program for the PAOSL, it was necessary to understand the nuances of the existing organizational culture as ministry mentoring was integrated and embedded as a part of that culture. Concluding Remarks on Precedent Literature In this chapter, we have examined selected literature on three aspects of mentoring, namely: Mentoring from a broad-based perspective, Christian leadership ministry mentoring, and mentoring in organizations. First, from the general literature on mentoring, we learned about research-based mentoring competencies and characteristics which provide insights that can be incorporated into a ministry mentoring training curriculum. These insights concerning mentoring practices promise to make the mentor who is trained more aware of what is actually occurring in a mentoring relationship. Then, from the literature on ministry mentoring, we saw that for Christian ministry leaders to be mentored effectively there need to be mentors who are relational and attentive to their mentees throughout the phases of their leadership journey. Such ministry mentors need to learn how to facilitate effective mentoring relationships. [ Page ] 112 Finally, we learned what can be done to incorporate and embed mentoring into an organization so that mentoring relationships are supported, strengthened and sustained by an intentional mentoring culture. A Christian organization or church that is serious about developing leadership for the future will be well served by including ministry mentoring into its corporate structure. The three areas of literature that have been explored in this chapter have informed the ministry mentoring project which will be described in the next chapter. [ Page ] 113 CHAPTER FOUR: PROJECT AND METHODOLOGY In this chapter the project’s purpose will be reviewed, a synopsis provided, and the author’s role in the project described. The questions which drove the research and gave shape to the project will be outlined. This will be followed by a detailed description of the project. Next, the methodology used in the research will be described. Finally ethical considerations relating to the project will be discussed. Purpose of the Project The purpose of the project was to develop and field test a sustainable ministry mentoring model that enables busy pastors in the PAOSL to participate more effectively in the development of emerging ministry leaders. This model envisions an overall structure that defines the purpose and nature of mentoring relationships, provides a framework for critical growth pathways; is adaptable to a variety of ministry contexts and persons, and nurtures an organizational culture that supports ministry mentoring. This model has been described in more detail in chapter one. While there are existing models for mentoring in the Sri Lankan context, the positive aspects of these models needed to be strengthened and the negative aspects of these models needed to be replaced with approaches that [ Page ] 114 better serve the mentees in leadership development. The best and most appropriate findings and theory from current literature will be integrated. In addition, intentionality and consistency of mentoring relationships needed to be encouraged through a mentoring program that promises to create a healthy culture of ministry mentoring in the PAOSL. Synopsis of the Project The purpose of the project was fulfilled by gaining an understanding of existing practices and experiences in the PAOSL context and establishing the need for such a project (chapter one); establishing a biblical and theological rationale (chapter two); and becoming aware of mentoring practices, competencies and programs that have been researched and developed in a variety of other contexts (chapter three). The insights gained in this study informed the model and content of ministry mentoring seminar-workshops that were held for the benefit of PAOSL pastors. These pastors were then invited to participate in the project by selecting mentees and begin an intentional mentoring relationship with them. After several months, focus groups were held with active participants who provided feedback on their experiences. Based on this feedback, the model was modified and a second set of seminar-workshops was held with additional content. Some of the sessions included guided discussion on how such a program may be designed for the ongoing mentoring of emerging ministry leaders. Later, a third set of seminar-workshops was held at which a number of mentoring concepts were reviewed and the design and development of a mentoring program [ Page ] 115 was discussed. Finalization of the design of a mentoring program was referred to a post-project design team. My Role in the Research Project I had been a missionary-teacher and organizational advisor to the PAOSL from 1988-1995 as a resident in Sri Lanka. My recent re-engagement with the PAOSL since 2007 has placed me in a similar role. This has worked out to be less of a “hands-on” involvement than was the case previously for a couple of reasons: first, the maturity level of the leaders of the organization over the years had increased; and second, in this recent engagement, the times I was able to spend in Sri Lanka have been limited to 4 to 8 week periods several times a year. For the purposes of the research project, my aim was to position myself in the role of a resource person and facilitator. I taught ministry mentoring, suggested approaches and strategies for individual mentoring and facilitated conversations that would lead towards the embedding of a mentoring culture into the PAOSL. I recognized that my other roles in the context, both past and present blended into that role and influenced the project both positively and negatively. For instance, the pre-existing relationships I had with the participants was an advantage in that lines of communication were open for frank discussion and we could generally get right down to business. The majority of those who participated in the project were former students of mine. There was, therefore, some shared history, common understanding, and mutual trust. A disadvantage was that for some participants the project appeared to be just another teaching [ Page ] 116 venue like a Bible College class or seminar session. They were primarily geared up to receive a “download” of information to process and were not necessarily in a mindset of providing an “upload” of meaningful input to the project. This was particularly evident in the latter part of the project where I was trying to elicit input into the design of the mentoring project. The Research and Project Questions The questions which drove the research portion as it progressed are presented here with a brief reflection on how they were derived: 1. What positive mentoring stories do people in the organization relate? (This question is a part of Appreciative Inquiry (AI) as described in this chapter on pages 150-150.) 2. In what ways are current practices of mentoring in the organization perceived to be helpful? (In chapter three the need was explained for a discovery process of the culture of an organization for those intending to embed a mentoring culture. This is also a part of AI.) 3. What are the underlying assumptions about mentoring that are being brought into the project from all stakeholders? (This is part of the discovery process but also speaks to the specific context and the opportunity as described in chapter one and the historical description of ministry mentoring in a Sri Lankan context as presented in chapter two.) 4. What do people in the organization suggest about ways to improve the mentoring experience? (The second phase of AI provides the impetus to ask this question of the participants. Chapters two and three provide the resource material that can guide them toward the answer.) 5. What evidence exists, if any, that our thinking about the mentees needs to change in order to improve the mentoring experience? (In chapter three, learner-centered mentoring (page 75) and mentee-oriented relationships (page 90) are described, giving rise to this question.) 6. What are the components of a mentoring model that would guide the organization towards an improvement in the current state of affairs? (This is derived from a reflection on the components that could result in a viable ministry mentoring model [See chapter one on pages 20-24.]) [ Page ] 117 7. What can the organization do to ensure that every Christian worker or pastor has an opportunity to receive highly effective mentoring? (In chapter three on pages 105-112, the descriptions of mentoring programs included infrastructures with training components. This question invites reflection on those aspects.) 8. What system changes are required to incorporate highly effective mentoring as a part of the organization’s culture? (Same as question 7.) 9. What obstacles do leaders in the organization identify that can be minimized in order that a healthy mentoring culture can be nurtured? (The theological rationale as presented in chapter two speaks to spiritual obstacles and the mentoring literature in chapter three speaks to relational and systemic obstacles.) 10. Based on findings in this study, what changes are required in the values, behaviours and culture of the organization that will lead to a healthy mentoring culture in which all emerging leaders will experience the support they need in their leadership journey? (Both chapter two and three, are informed by values, behaviours and culture that will sustain a healthy ministry culture. This question invites reflection on those and how they can be incorporated ) These questions provide the framework for the discussion of the findings in chapter five. In the next section, the project will be described in detail Project Description As stated, the objectives of the project were to research and develop a ministry mentoring model as an aid towards embedding a culture of mentoring into the PAOSL. This involved research and planning. The research involved developing teaching content for training sessions that would be context appropriate. It needed to have a strong biblical basis, demonstrate general awareness of best practices of mentoring, and be culturally appropriate and structured for easy implementation. Planning involved getting the approval of the organization’s leadership for the project, appointing a project assistant, and [ Page ] 118 scheduling the seminars and promoting the mentoring project among the leaders and pastors of the organization (See “Planning Action,” page 154). Before describing the project in detail, first a number of factors that had a significant impact on the project will be discussed. Factors Affecting the Project Factors that affected the project include the time duration of the project, the languages of interaction, cross-cultural concerns, systems impact, relationships in the project, and pedagogical methodology. These will each be discussed in turn. The Time Factor The duration of the actual project implementation (not including preliminary research) for the purpose of this thesis was 16 months (August 2011 to November 2012). I travelled to and from the ministry context several times during this period. When I was not in Sri Lanka, I was able to continue research and maintain regular contact by email, telephone and video calls. Table 4 below provides a timeline of key events and activity in relation to the project. [ Page ] 119 Table 4: Project Implementation Timeline of Key Events and Activities [ Please contact repository@tyndale.ca for Table 4 details ] The events were scheduled when I was able to be in Sri Lanka and the groups of participants would be available. [ Page ] 120 The Language Factor The seminars were taught in English and translated by translators into Sinhala and Tamil. The participants’ discussion and feedback were translated to English at the same time. Since my fluency in the Sri Lankan languages is limited, this has been standard operating procedure for my preaching and teaching ministry in that context so the participants were quite used to this way of relating. I generally used a simplified form of English in my teaching being aware of potential for translation difficulties. Many of the seminar participants also had sufficient knowledge of English so that they could understand the original teachings and some of the discussions could be held directly in English. Helpful by-products of this arrangement were that many times those discussions clarified the language used for key concepts and facilitated the full engagement of seminar attendees. The project planning committee decided to hold the seminars in two streams because we wanted to include both the Sinhala and Tamil language groups (See Figure 9 on page 132). It was also important to include both language groups in this project to ensure that the whole organization would benefit from the research. While most of the Tamil speakers with whom we worked also speak and understand Sinhala, their primary language of ministry is Tamil. We also wanted to provide easy access to the seminar-workshops for the pastors of the two major geographical areas in which the PAOSL has churches. The areas are the coastal area around Colombo (mostly Sinhala speakers) and the hill country tea estate areas (mostly Tamil speakers). We did not have any participants of Tamil [ Page ] 121 speakers from the North and East of Sri Lanka since the PAOSLs ministry activity in those areas was still somewhat limited. Some Tamil speakers opted to attend the Sinhala translated seminars in Colombo because of the proximity to their place of ministry and the fact that their knowledge of Sinhala was sufficient to participate. The Cultural Factor Stacey Blake-Beard in her article on “Mentoring as a Bridge to Understanding Cultural Difference” suggests that while the study of mentoring has become more and more popular over the past three decades, there are still gaps in our understanding, places where we don’t know as much about how relationships unfold between mentoring partners who are very different from one another because we have not yet paid sufficient attention to increasingly complex and nuanced dynamics. (Blake-Beard 2009, 14) As a result there is a dearth of research of mentoring from cultural perspectives other than from predominantly Western viewpoints. She goes on to say: Studies of mentoring are undergirded by an assumption of similarity in cultural origin. In addition, many mentoring studies have been done in a Western context, reflecting the predominance of studies based on data collected in the United States. (Blake-Beard 2009, 17) That being said, this project was not primarily about cross-cultural mentoring since the participants were of similar cultures. However, the context of the project was in Sri Lanka and I, as a foreigner, was doing research cross-culturally. Therefore, it needs to be considered briefly how the cultural factor had implications for the project. [ Page ] 122 Though my exposure to the Sri Lankan cultural context as a Canadian has been relatively extensive, I could not presume to pick up on all of the cultural nuances. However I was able to rely on “bridge persons” with whom I had good relationships. These included the national chairman of the PAOSL, the project assistant, and others within the context who kept me informed concerning cultural matters. In speaking of “the bicultural bridge” that such working relationships create, Paul Hiebert says that “the most effective cross-cultural communication takes place when missionaries and nationals form intimate relationships and work as a team” (Hiebert 1985, 235). Indeed, this principle of collaboration is what action research is all about. Another cultural factor to consider was the diversity of cultures within the context. The two language groups represent two somewhat different cultures. As the brief description of the Sri Lankan context in chapter one shows, Sri Lanka is culturally diverse. In relating to the individual participants it was helpful to be aware of their particular cultural background to understand better their perspectives. Hofstede, Hofstede, and Minkov (2010) in their study on Cultures and Organizations have a model that they use to compare national culture differences through a grid of six cultural dimensions: “power distance..., collectivism versus individualism, femininity versus masculinity,... uncertainty avoidance,... long- term versus short-term orientation,” and “indulgence versus restraint” (Hofstede, Hofstede, and Minkov 2010, 31, 38, 45). While all of these are helpful in understanding cultural differences, with regard to the ministry mentoring project, [ Page ] 123 it was particularly important to be aware of the issue of power distance; first of all between the mentor and the mentee, then between the organization and both the mentors and the mentees and between the trainer and the trainees. For instance as a Canadian, I would have preference for an equalitarian approach to mentoring relationships. However, I observed in the Sri Lankan cultural context as compared to my Canadian experience, that the “power distance” was much greater between those having authority (teachers, mentors, pastors) and those under their authority (students, mentees, parishioners). In relation to the “collectivism versus individualism” dimension, I needed to pay attention to a possible cultural preference for group mentoring in the Sri Lankan context, even though the focus of the project was on one-on-one mentoring relationships. For instance, in an article on “The Development of a Youth Mentoring Program in the South of India,” Julia Pryce concludes: Many non-Western cultures value a collectivist identity in which multiple individuals play an important role in the lives of children. In these cul- tures, group mentoring, rather than a one-on-one approach, should be con- sidered to emphasize a collective team approach. (Pryce et al. 2011, 60) This resonates with the group mentoring demonstrated by Jesus and the early church fathers as described in chapter two. Another dimension is the “femininity versus masculinity” dimension which also had implications for the Sri Lankan cultural context of the project. There are cultural conventions concerning male-female relationships that require sensitivity. The roles that women are culturally permitted to take on in ministry contexts also have a bearing on how mentoring can be applied. In this matter there [ Page ] 124 are some differences even between the two broad cultural groups represented in the project. Further, this is also an area where the dynamics are rapidly changing as females are sometimes taking on roles that have been previously exclusive to males. But the rate of change is not the same in all local contexts. Mentoring relationships are also affected by some aspects of an “honour- shame” culture especially when it comes to vulnerability and trust required between a mentor and mentee. This issue was raised by the participants in the project and is a common feature of cultural dynamics in Asian and Middle Eastern contexts. In that it was also a factor in New Testament times, a brief but helpful description concerning this comes from a historical biblical background perspective: First-century Mediterranean people were oriented from early childhood to seek honor and avoid disgrace, meaning that they would be sensitive to public recognition or reproach. Where different cultures with different values existed side by side, it became extremely important to insulate one’s own group members against the desire for honor or avoidance of dishonor in the eyes of outsiders, since only by so doing could one remain wholly committed to the distinctive culture and values of the group. (de Silva 2000, s.v. "Honor and Shame") Any approach to mentoring in the Sri Lankan context will need to take this cultural dynamic into account in order to be effective. As a researcher, I needed to be sensitive to the existence of differences between my own cultural background and that of the research context. This was accomplished with the help of bridge persons and paying attention to the cultural differences in the areas of power distance, collectivism versus individualism, gender issues, and honour-shame issues. [ Page ] 125 The Systems Factor The ministry mentoring project was an intervention into an existing system of relationships. As a researcher, I needed to be conscious of how the project affected the system and how the system affected the project. A complex adaptive systems (CAS) framework is one way of considering those impacts. In this framework, the system agents of the organization are seen as semi- autonomous units which interact over time and develop patterns of self- organization. The three factors that contribute to these self-organizing patterns are called “containers, significant differences, and transforming exchanges.” Any change in any one of these impacts the others and ultimately the whole system (Olson and Eoyang 2001, 15-16). First, some of the system agents in the project needed to be identified. Figure 8 below illustrates the different categories of system agents. The people of the system were as follows: the PAOSL executive committee as a whole; the five individual committee members; the chairman of the PAOSL as the significant leader; the project assistant; the project participants; other church pastors and their spouses; students and faculty of RLC; and the PAOC global worker who is also the researcher. Concepts, ideas and structures as system agents include: the concept of affiliation to the organization; the financial support structure; the affiliation of the organization to the PAOC; regional sub-groups of pastors; individual family structures within the organization; the RLC as the ministry training institute; the identity and perceived role of the PAOSL in the wider church context and the context of Sri Lankan society. System agents external to [ Page ] 126 the immediate organizational structure include: communication systems; transportation infrastructures; political structures; inter-religious dynamics; and overall cultural realities. [ Please contact repository@tyndale.ca for Figure 8 details ] Figure 8: System Agents Affecting the Project There were undoubtedly many other people, ideas and things that could have been added to the list of system agents which interacted at multiple levels and thereby contributed to the complexity of the organizational dynamic. But these will suffice to demonstrate the complexity of context in which the project was [ Page ] 127 conducted. For the purposes of the project, the set container included: • the participants; • the timeframe of the project that was presented above; • the two primary venues where the seminar-workshops occurred; and • ministry mentoring as an area of focus. The boundaries of the container included the simple rule of intentional interaction of the mentors with their respective mentees, with one another and with the change agent during the timeframe of the project. Each of agents in this container was impacted by their involvement in other areas of their life and ministries. A significant difference existed between some of the participants’ understanding of ministry mentoring on one hand; and that of the change agent and some of the key leaders of the PAOSL on the other hand. There were also some differences between the prevailing cultural view of leadership and Jesus’ teaching of leadership. As mentioned, there were also cultural differences between the potential participants and the change agent. There were differences between the mentors and their mentees as well as between the participants themselves. Some of these differences include levels of education, ministry experience, personalities, abilities, philosophies of ministry and philosophies of leadership development. As the change agent, I needed to identify which of these differences had the potential to lead towards the emergence of the most helpful patterns in order to facilitate the desired change. Transforming exchanges occurred when the system agents in the container interacted as information was received and responses were shared. As already [ Page ] 128 described, this happened during the seminar-workshops, focus groups, interviews, and other informal discussions. Mentor-mentee connections were also a part of these exchanges. Olson and Eoyang describe how change can be affected in CAS: The rate of change in a self-organizing system is affected by the size of the container, the frequency of the transforming exchanges, and the number of significant differences. A change agent can adjust these conditions to shift the speed of the self-organizing process. (Olson and Eoyang 2001, 57) Change in the ministering mentoring project was affected in the following manner. In light of the time constraints of the project, we kept the size of the container to a manageable proportion; we created an environment that multiplied connections of the system agents within the container, and focussed on significant differences in just a few areas. For instance, I focussed primarily on the differences around the knowledge, skills and attitudes of ministry mentoring and encouraged sustained dialogue. This was the simplest intervention that could be done with a potential of a wide impact over time. We created the spaces for transforming exchanges between the participants in the above-mentioned venues. To summarize, as a change agent, I needed to assess the state of the containers, the significant differences and transforming exchanges; choose the easiest one to affect; make an intervention; and then evaluate what happens throughout the system. This dovetails with the action research methodology that is described in the next section. In CAS, as in action research and appreciative inquiry, predictability of the outcomes is less certain than in tightly constrained environments. The [ Page ] 129 challenge of the project was to set the container with just the right balance between control and freedom so that the patterns of self-organization which emerged did not have the feel of top-down imposition on the one hand or on the other, an absence of genuine change. This was managed to a certain degree as I had opportunity to assess connections, intervene as required and to evaluate the emerging patterns of self-organization. For instance, the interactivity in the seminar-workshops and focus groups was a prime example in that some of the agenda for discussions simply emerged spontaneously. I had opportunity to let discussions evolve and as necessary redirect them. The Relationship Factor The project linked people in various ways. The ministry mentoring project was approved by the PAOSL executive committee. As the project researcher, I needed to be in communication with the executive. I did this by relating primarily to the chairman of the committee who was a part of the planning for the project events. However my primary connection relating to the project was with the project assistant who facilitated communications with the participants particularly when I was not in Sri Lanka. I interacted directly with the groups during the sessions and discussions and with individual participants both informally and formally as I had opportunity. The project assistant worked with the group leaders to set up the learning events and facilitated the translation of the teaching materials as well as during the events. The interaction between Groups A and B was minimal because of the [ Page ] 130 cultural and geographic differences. Group A participants were mostly from urban settings while the ministry context of Group B participants was in a tea estate workers environment. Since most of the responses and issues raised were similar, the reporting of the data was blended to safeguard anonymity of individuals. Figure 9 below illustrates some of the organizational relationships in the project. [ Page ] 131 [ Please contact repository@tyndale.ca for Figure 9 details ] Figure 9: Project Organization Chart The Pedagogical Factor We used the seminar-workshop format as learning events for ministry mentoring and since the groups were no larger than 15 people, we were able to [ Page ] 132 create a learning environment that encouraged interaction by sitting in a circular formation. The overall style of each of the seminar-workshops was highly interactive with much discussion. The term “seminar-workshop” is being used to highlight the fact that these events were not simply teaching but required a high level of participation by the attendees. (Sometimes in this thesis “seminar- workshop” is shortened to “seminar” and “workshop” is used to refer specifically to the dedicated discussion sessions). In designing and teaching the seminar, I was guided by a learning task model from the “dialogue education” approach (Vella 2008) which includes four components (inductive work, input, implementation, and integration): (1) a learning task that connects learners with what they already know and with their unique context; (2) a learning task that invites them to examine new input (concepts, skills, or attitudes)—the content of the course; (3) a learning task that gets learners to do something directly with that new content, somehow implementing it; and finally, (4) a learning task that integrates this new learning into their lives. (Vella 2001, 33) For example, I asked the participants how they had experienced mentoring, both as recipients of mentoring and as practitioners of mentoring. Then I taught what was for them new information about ministry mentoring while the participants took notes. They were invited to ask questions, to comment on what was taught, to reflect openly on it and to apply the content to their respective contexts. We did some role play and envisioned various mentoring scenarios with them and finally sent them out to put into practice what was learned in their ministry contexts. The focus groups also functioned as learning events where the participants could debrief and learn from each other’s feedback. [ Page ] 133 With the factors of time, language, culture, systems, relationships and pedagogy having been explained, the project description can now be described in detail as it progressed through the seminar-workshops and other activities. The First Ministry Mentoring Seminar-Workshop Two ministry mentoring seminar-workshops with similar content were held, one for Tamil-speaking pastors and spouses in Talawakelle on September 16th and 17th in the hill country of central Sri Lanka and another for Sinhala- speaking pastors and spouses at the River of Life College in Moratuwa, just south of Colombo on October 6th and 7th. The seminar was advertised primarily to pastors and leaders of the PAOSL but open to others as well. The pool of potential attendees from the organization itself numbered about 50 to 60 leaders. The first seminar had 15 attendants and the second had 14 for a total of 29 people. Of these, 25 consented to participate in the project by signing a consent form (Appendix B—Participant Consent Form for the PAOSL Mentoring Project). In this way, by virtue of attendance and agreeing to sign the form, the project participants were self-selected. Only those who had attended the seminar- workshop at one of these two venues were eligible as participants. We determined that the method of self-selection was preferred to initiating a directed selection process, because the number of potential participants was already seen as manageable and we anticipated that there would be some attrition as the project progressed. Table 5 below provides a numerical breakdown of the project participants after the first seminar including only those who signed on as [ Page ] 134 participants. For reference purposes the participants at the Colombo venue will be labeled as Group A and those at the Hill Country venue, Group B. Table 5: Breakdown of Participants by Seminar Group and Gender [ Please contact repository@tyndale.ca for Table 5 details ] All the participants were from the PAOSL except for one person who was also the Tamil translator for Group B. The objectives of the preparation and presentation of this first seminar were: 1. to discover what experience the participants had of ministry mentoring; 2. to raise the awareness of the participants concerning intentional ministry mentoring; 3. to provide the participants with insights that would help improve their mentoring skills; 4. to get a sense of what the equipping needs of the organization might be in relation to mentoring; and 5. to invite participants to an ongoing journey of learning how to mentor more effectively. The teaching content was developed from some of the biblical background information on mentoring that is presented in chapter two and from some of the information in chapter three of this thesis. I adapted the outline of The Elements of Mentoring (Johnson and Ridley 2008) that is presented in chapter three (pages 72- [ Page ] 135 75) to the needs of the local ministry context and the priorities of the project. The material was shaped and illustrated by my own and others’ experiences of mentoring and by the local context as I understood it. What was finally taught in the sessions was determined to a large degree by the questions and discussions of the participants. At each venue there were six sessions over two days. The sessions lasted between 60 to 90 minutes each. Session 1 During the first session of the seminar, opportunity was provided for each of the participants to share their experience by answering the question: “Who helped you get to where you are in ministry today?” Their responses provided data for the research as well as a means to adapt the presentation and the development of resources to actual needs in relation to mentoring. Session 2 In the next session a clear definition of ministry mentoring was provided, an explanation of different kinds of mentoring was given and mentoring was compared with other formation disciplines. There was also a discussion of Sri Lankan cultural models of mentoring and how Christian ministry is impacted by them. Session 3 The third session focused on biblical foundations of mentoring providing a theological rationale and suggesting biblical models that can inform ministry [ Page ] 136 mentoring. A particular emphasis was given to the kind of mentoring that Jesus modeled in his interaction with the disciples. The apostle Paul’s benevolent parenting model of mentoring was also presented. Session 4 This was followed by teaching about what a mentor does, focussing on essential mentoring skills. Various mentoring competencies were highlighted such as selecting the mentee, knowing the mentee, setting standards, encouraging, teaching, calling forth the gifts, counseling, stimulating growth, providing correction, and intentional modeling. It was emphasized that highly effective mentors are those who are competent in their own work; growing in character; show consistent interest in the development of their mentees; and work at improving mentoring skills. (For a detailed presentation of this session see sample chapter two of the Mentoring Handbook in Appendix E) Session 5 We then had a session discussing how what had been taught so far connected with the present Sri Lankan ministry context. Some of the questions that were raised to generate discussion were as follows: • How do some of the things that have been taught thus far relate to your experience? • What do you think will work? What do you think will not work? • What are some things which you have seen are that are good examples of mentoring? • What are some things which you have seen that should be avoided? • Describe in one sentence what kind of mentor you would like to be. These questions were designed to encourage discussion and reflection on how to [ Page ] 137 further contextualize what was taught. Session 6 A final session was taught on the character and attitude of a mentor. Areas of discussion included maintaining a relationship with God, practicing self-care, continuing to be productive in your own ministry, holding yourself accountable, accepting the burden of power, practicing humility, not exploiting mentees, listening actively and confidentiality (For a detailed presentation of this session see sample chapter three of the Mentoring Handbook in Appendix E). Invitation to Participate in Project At the conclusion of the seminars, we invited attendees to participate in the ministry mentoring project and commit to beginning or continuing an intentional mentoring relationship with one or two mentees based on insights and skills received at the seminar. We explained the consent form (Appendix B— Participant Consent Form for the PAOSL Mentoring Project) and allowed a number of weeks for them to consider the invitation to participate. The project assistant collected signed forms from them after several weeks. Interim Communication In order to continue engaging the participants a provisional ministry mentoring handbook based on the seminar was prepared, translated and distributed to the participants as a resource. (An outline of the handbook can be viewed in Appendix D and two sample chapters in Appendix E). A “Checklist for [ Page ] 138 Starting a Ministry Mentoring Relationship” was sent to the participants to help them process the new mentoring relationships (See Appendix F). Direct communication with participants was limited to the times when I was in Sri Lanka. I occasionally sent text messages to the project assistant who broadcast these to the participants in order to maintain their motivation. Here is a sampling of these SMSs: A godly mentor will seek God’s best for the mentee and how the kingdom of God will be advanced through the mentee’s life. To be a mentor you do not need to be a perfect person but you need to be a growing person. Let your spiritual progress be seen by all, especially those you are mentoring (1 Tim. 4:15). The ministry mentor is often the human agent through whom the Holy Spirit works to help the disciple move toward his or her destiny in Christ. For a full mentoring experience, give the disciple opportunity to observe how you function in as many different settings as possible. Focus Groups We held five different focus groups in March/April 2012 with the participants to give them an opportunity to provide feedback on their mentoring experience as mentors since the seminar-workshop they had attended in September/October 2011. Because these were smaller than the seminar groups, we were able to set the focus groups up according to language groups as follows: one English-speaking group (Al), one Sinhala-speaking group (A2), one Tamil- speaking group (A3)—in the Colombo area (subgroups of group A); and two Tamil-speaking groups (Bl and B2) in the hill country (subgroups of group B). The attendance of the participants of the focus groups is given in Table 6 below. [ Page ] 139 There were 6 less people attending the focus groups than signed up as participants. Three of these did not continue as participants because of ministry commitments. The other three, though not attending the focus groups, remained engaged and participated at subsequent seminar-workshops. Table 6: Focus Group Attendance [ Please contact repository@tyndale.ca for Table 6 details ] The focus groups discussed questions around the mentoring experience in relation to the organization, the mentoring experience in relation to the mentors themselves and the mentoring experience in relation to the mentees. The questions were developed to invite discussion with the participants to discover how best we might establish the interconnectedness between all the stakeholders in the mentoring relationship: the organization, the mentor and the mentee. They were also designed as a learning task for the participants to reflect on how they have begun to integrate mentoring into their ministries. The questions relating to the organization were: 1. Why does the PAOSL exist? 2. What does the PAOSL value? 3. Is the way the PAOSL trains and mentors younger ministry leaders aligned to those values? 4. How will we know if the ministry mentoring program is working? [ Page ] 140 5. How do you think ministry mentoring can improve the PAOSL? 6. What role do you think the River of Life College should play in the ministry mentoring program? The questions above were derived out of reflection on “Mentoring Programs in Organizational Contexts” that highlight the need to understand the culture of an organization for the purpose of embedding a mentoring culture. I wanted to discover which values are present in the organization that would help sustain a future mentoring program. Questions relating to the mentor’s personal skills development were as follows: 1. What have you done differently in mentoring since the Ministry Mentoring Workshops in September/October? 2. What have you done the same as before? 3. How do you feel in the role of a mentor? 4. What kind of help do you need to be a highly effective mentor? 5. What have you learned about mentoring from your experience in the last few months that you would like to share with the group? 6. What difficulties have you faced in your mentoring experience? These questions were developed to evaluate the impact of the seminar on the mentoring practice of the participant. We were looking for developmental changes in behavior and attitudes in relation to mentoring. We also asked some questions in relation to the mentee: 1. What do you think the mentee should know to take the most advantage of the mentoring relationship? 2. If we were to teach a class to mentees about the mentoring relationship, what should we teach them? [ Page ] 141 The questions concerning the mentee were developed to explore how mentees in the Sri Lankan context can benefit from a mentoring relationship. Direct interaction with mentees was not in the scope of this project, as important and helpful as such interaction might have been. The reason for not engaging them was a logistical issue given the time and language factors and to protect the integrity of their relationships with the mentors since they had not signed consent forms. There was some discussion about having some teaching sessions that would include mentees together with their mentors but it was determined that this would be planned for another time outside of the project period. Each of the focus group sessions opened with an opportunity for the participants to discuss some of their mentoring experiences since the seminar. I also took some time with each of the groups to present the Appreciative Inquiry 4-D Cycle (See Figure 11 on page 150) with its questions to provide the rationale for the focus group sessions and to prepare the participants to beginning thinking about what a mentoring program for the PAOSL might look like. Some of the time was also spent on troubleshooting and helping the participants to fine tune their mentoring strategy. The responses of the focus groups suggested some common themes. The results of these focus group sessions will be presented in chapter five. [ Page ] 142 The Second Ministry Mentoring Seminar-Workshop In August/September 2012 the second ministry mentoring seminar material was taught to the same two groups as was done for the first seminar- workshop. The attendees of the second seminar are presented in Table 7 below. The total attendance of 14 shows a reduction of 5 attendees from the Focus Groups. This reduction is accounted for in that one participant had left the country, four were unable to attend because of ministry responsibilities but continued to participate in the project, one was unable to continue because of ministry commitments, and one who had missed the Focus Groups was able to attend this second seminar-workshop. Table 7: Second Seminar Attendance [ Please contact repository@tyndale.ca for Table 7 details ] While the previous seminar-workshop focused primarily on mentoring competencies and attitudes and how these might be applied in ministry contexts, this second seminar dealt with the content of ministry mentoring and focused more on the developmental needs of the mentees. We also began to look towards the development of a broader ministry mentoring strategy for the PAOSL. [ Page ] 143 Sessions 1 and 2 In the first and second sessions, a ministry mentoring model was presented that included a holistic approach to the needs of the mentee. Pue’s mentoring matrix (Figure 4 on page 95) was presented as a potential leadership development model for mentees. This model outlines “five phases of mentoring and growth for Christian leaders” (Pue 2005, 261). I decided to use this model since it provides prescribed critical growth pathways for the mentor to follow with the mentee. It is also easily customizable to the unique needs of the mentee as well as adaptable to various cultural contexts. This was described in chapter three in the subsection on “Carson Pue: Mentoring Leaders through a Five Phase Leadership Journey” (See pages 94-99). As explained, this model begins with the mentee’s self-awareness and also looks at areas in which the mentee needs to be freed up or released from debilitating baggage. It then examines the calling of the mentee and corresponding ministry vision. The next step is to move toward successful implementation of vision through strategy and action. Finally, the importance of developing a sustainable ministry outlook and posture for ongoing positive influence and service in the present context and/or new contexts is highlighted. I also presented a model of Christian formation (See page 98) that the mentor can use to guide the development of the mentee in ministry mentoring throughout all five phases. [ Page ] 144 Sessions 3 and 4 The third and fourth sessions focused on designing a program for the organization. In preparation for a discussion with the groups, I presented a report on the feedback from the focus groups. I reviewed the appreciative inquiry questions (See Figure 11 on page 151) to focus on the ultimate goal of the project. I presented Klasen and Clutterbuck’s “Spectrum of Mentoring Relationships” (Table 3 on 108) as a discussion starter concerning the degree of formality and control that the PAOSL might wish to incorporate into the design of a mentoring program. Some of the questions that were presented for discussion are as follows: 1. How will mentors be trained? 2. How will the mentors and mentees find each other? 3. How will mentors and mentees be connected to the organization? 4. How will we know it is working? How do we measure success? 5. What will we do to make sure this program continues to fulfil its purpose in the future? We were not able to finish discussing these questions at that time (at either of the venues) so it was decided to follow these up at a later time. This was taken up at the end of the third ministry mentoring seminar-workshop. The Third Ministry Mentoring Seminar-Workshop In November 2012, we had planned to hold a joint seminar with both groups so that there could be a cross-fertilization of ideas. However, because of logistics and unavailability of many of the participants, we opted to hold the [ Page ] 145 seminar in the same separate groups as previously. For this particular seminar, planning a suitable time for the seminar for both of the venues was a challenge. For instance, the hill country seminar needed to be postponed because of poor weather. Because of time constraints, we were able to hold only two sessions for a half-day at each of the venues. The attendees of the third seminar at these venues are presented in Table 8 below. The total of 16 attendees represents the participants who remained engaged until the conclusion of the project. Two others were also still active participants but were not able to attend the third seminar because of ministry commitments, bringing the total to 18 active participants. Table 8: Third Seminar Attendance [ Please contact repository@tyndale.ca for Table 8 details ] There was little new teaching content presented at these seminars. The first session was used to provide the participants with a brief overview of some of the project highlights to date. I also reviewed some of the content of previous seminars. In the second session we reopened the discussion of designing a mentoring program using the same questions as presented in the second seminar. We concluded with one additional final summary question for both groups: “Where do we go from here?” The outcome of these discussions will be presented in chapter five. [ Page ] 146 Concluding Interviews In order to determine the nature of the participants’ mentoring experience at the conclusion of the project, I conducted concluding interviews with as many participants as possible in conjunction with the third seminar. Out of the 18 active participants, I was able to interview 13.1 wanted to find out the degree to which they had embraced mentoring in their ministry context by asking the following questions: 1. how many people are you currently mentoring? 2. how often do you meet with your mentees? 3. in what ministry skills are you training them? 4. how are you mentoring them? 5. what are the greatest joys you have experienced in mentoring? and 6. what are the greatest challenges you have experienced? The first three questions asked for specific information around the mechanics of their mentoring activities. They were simple questions that would probe the level of actual engagement. The last three questions were open and invited reflection on their experience of mentoring. These questions would enable me to know how deeply engaged they were in mentoring relationships and based on previous interaction with them how they had developed as mentors. This concludes the description of the project as it was implemented over the 16 month period of the project. We now turn to consider the research methodology that guided the project. [ Page ] 147 Methodology The general approach to the project was action research (AR) which also included a subset of AR, namely, appreciative inquiry (AI). These will be explained in this section under separate headings. Then, how these methodologies were used in the project will be described. To conclude this section, the means by which the project data was collected will also be described. Action Research (AR) In action research, the researchers are active participants in the community or organization seeking to bring about beneficial change in a given area of common concern. They are not just observers who distance themselves from the context seeking to remain objective. Rather, they are a part of the context they are researching and work as facilitators and resource persons together with the stakeholders in the organization towards the goal of solving a problem or taking advantage of an opportunity. Stringer explains, Action research is a systematic approach to investigation that enables people to find effective solutions to problems they confront in their everyday lives. Unlike traditional experimental/scientific research that looks for generalizable explanations that might be applied to all contexts, action research focuses on specific situations and localized solutions. (Stringer 2007, 1) The aim of action research is not only to find solutions for problems in the specific research contexts, but at the same time to generate new knowledge that can point the way toward solutions in other similar contexts (Coghlan and Brannick 2010, 44). [ Page ] 148 As illustrated in Figure 10 below, action research typically begins by seeking to understand the context of the project, determining the purpose and aims of the project, and then constructing (or diagnosing) the issues that need to be addressed (Coghlan and Brannick 2010, 8). The researcher builds on that by planning a course of action with the stakeholders, they then take the action and subsequently evaluate the outcomes of the action taken (Coghlan and Brannick 2010, 9-10). [ Please contact repository@tyndale.ca for Figure 10 details ] Figure 10: The Action Research Cycle The evaluation then feeds into the next cycle of constructing, planning action, taking action, and evaluating action. Several action research cycles may be required before the desired objectives are achieved. Within these cycles there can be several sub-cycles which are in operation each contributing to the whole. [ Page ] 149 Coghlan and Brannick use the image of an analog clock to describe the concurrent cycles of action research where the hour hand, the minute hand and the second hand represent respectively the long term cycle, the medium term cycles and the short term cycles (Coghlan and Brannick 2010, 10-11). The short cycles help advance the medium term cycles and the medium term cycles advance the long term cycle. Appreciative Inquiry (AI) A subset of action research which I used in the project is “appreciative inquiry (AI)” which can be defined as the cooperative, coevolutionary search for the best in people, their organizations, and the world around them. It involves systematic discovery of what gives life to an organization or a community when it is most effective and most capable in economic, ecological, and human terms. (Cooperrider and Whitney 2005, 8) AI focuses on what already works and builds on how that can be improved. For instance, there had already been occasional quasi-mentoring arrangements in place in the PAOSL. We began our interaction with the seminar attendees by exploring their experiences of mentoring. This in essence was a part of the first phase of four phases in the appreciative inquiry cycle. The four phases are described by Cooperrider and Whitney as follows: Discovery: Mobilizing the whole system by engaging all stakeholders in the articulation of strengths and best practices. Identifying ‘The best of what has been and what is.’ Dream: Creating a clear results-oriented vision in relation to discovered potential and in relation to questions of higher purpose, such as, ‘What is the world calling us to become?’ [ Page ] 150 Design: Creating possibility propositions of the ideal organization, articulating an organization design that people feel is capable of drawing upon and magnifying the positive core to realize the newly expressed dream. Destiny: Strengthening the affirmative capability of the whole system, enabling it to build hope and sustain momentum for ongoing positive change and high performance. (Cooperrider and Whitney 2005, 16) How this approach was adapted to the ministry mentoring project is illustrated in Figure 11 below. The questions that are outlined under the 4-D headings helped provide a future orientation for us as we moved towards the ultimate goal of a ministry mentoring project in the PAOSL. [ Please contact repository@tyndale.ca for Figure 11 details ] Figure 11: Appreciative Inquiry 4-D cycle Next, the project will be described within the framework of action research in combination with appreciative inquiry. [ Page ] 151 AR and AI in the Project First, the steps of the first core action research cycle in the project will be described under individual headings. Then, concurrent cycles of AR will be described briefly in their respective contexts. This will be followed by a description of second AR cycle. How appreciative inquiry was integrated will also be explained. Figure 12 below illustrates the first core AR cycle. Context and Purpose The action research pre-step of understanding the “context” and determining the “purpose” of the project was taken in the following manner: While interacting with a number of leaders in the Sri Lanka ministry context in which I am engaged, I had over time observed that younger leaders were often being held back by older leaders who sometimes appeared to be threatened by the new ideas and energy of younger leaders. I became aware of the need for a more relational way of developing young ministry leaders than was being achieved through Bible College training alone. Having personally experienced the benefit of mentoring relationships as both mentor and mentee, I sensed that here was an opportunity to facilitate positive change in this area. I then explored how mentoring is being done in the present Sri Lankan ministry context by general contextual research (See chapter one, pages 7-8; and chapter two, pages 65-66), natural observation and informal interviews. I spoke to leaders both inside and outside of the PAOSL, who confirmed that research with a view to developing a healthy ministry mentoring model and creating a mentoring culture would address [ Page ] 152 a deficit in leadership development practices. In particular, I spoke to the executive committee members of the PAOSL, who are the primary leadership group of the organization. They approved that a ministry mentoring research project be launched within the PAOSL. They committed their full support to this project and demonstrated their commitment by actively participating in the project throughout its duration. Constructing The action research step of “constructing” the specific issues that were addressed resulted in this diagnosis: There was insufficient awareness or knowledge concerning ministry mentoring as a viable leadership development possibility that could be facilitated by existing leaders. This resulted in a corresponding lack of motivation and intentionality in the practice of mentoring. Therefore, there was also little structure for mentoring in the organization other than the occasional pairing of a senior leader with a younger one for supervisory purposes. The way to address these issues was by increasing awareness, knowledge and skills of ministry mentoring and to create space within the PAOSL organizational structure for intentional ministry mentoring. This would be accomplished by working together at developing a mentoring model that fits the context and becomes a part of the culture. These conclusions are based on the assumption that when people are better informed about a practice they are more likely to be motivated to actually do it. [ Page ] 153 [ Please contact repository@tyndale.ca for Figure 12 details ] Figure 12: First Core Action Research Cycle in Ministry Mentoring Project Planning Action In consultation with the leadership group, I appointed a project assistant who helped with the logistics of communication and provided administrative support for the duration of the project particularly during my absences from Sri [ Page ] 154 Lanka. I needed a project assistant to coordinate the learning event planning and the translation of the materials. The project assistant also had a keen interest in this project because of his leadership role in the Bible College. In taking the action research step of “planning action,” we determined together with the leadership group that the best way to get started on the project was that I should hold a seminar-workshop on ministry mentoring that would be open to pastors and Christian workers of the PAOSL, as well as any other Christian leaders who might wish to attend. At the conclusion of that seminar we would invite attendees to become voluntary participants in the ongoing project. We envisioned that these participants would link up with mentees and begin to apply the principles and insights learned at the seminar. We would then elicit feedback from them and hold a second seminar-workshop where we would present the feedback, teach additional mentoring skills and begin to talk about an overall mentoring program. Taking Action I began the next step of “taking action” by preparing the material based on a set of ministry mentoring assumptions for the seminar with a view to increasing awareness and knowledge of ministry mentoring. The material was shaped by the specific ministry contexts of the prospective attendees as we understood them; by the theological rationale for ministry mentoring as presented in chapter two; and by some of the insights gained from the literature on leadership development and mentoring presented in chapter three. We then held the seminar-workshop after which those attending the seminars were invited to become part of the “action” [ Page ] 155 and join us in the journey of applying what has been learned and be prepared to continue to interact with us on this journey. This was the first ministry mentoring seminar-workshop described above (See pages 134-138). Evaluating The step of “evaluating action” was done in several ways. Some of the evaluation of the seminar material was done as the seminar-workshop was being conducted based on the discussion and feedback of the attendees and natural observation. This was reflected in the development of the ministry mentoring handbook. There was also evaluation done based on the interaction with the project committee. Several months later we took the step of “evaluating action” by receiving and processing feedback from the participants’ application of mentoring principles primarily through focus groups (See pages 139-143). The insights from the evaluation then informed the next cycle of the project. Next concurrent cycles will be described. Concurrent cycles Since there were a number of things that were being evaluated, a number of concurrent cycles spun out of the evaluation of the first core AR cycle. These are examined briefly: teaching content, project development cycle, program development cycle and integrated ministry mentor model development cycle. The teaching content development cycle will be explained in a little more depth for illustrative purposes. Figure 13 below shows an integrated view of the AR cycles and the AI phases. In the illustration, the concurrent cycles are the smaller cycles. [ Page ] 156 [ Please contact repository@tyndale.ca for Figure 13 details ] Figure 13: Action Research Cycles and Appreciative Inquiry in Project Teaching Content Development Cycle The teaching content was being evaluated by the researcher and the participants for contextual appropriateness in a dynamic exchange in the discussions even as the material was being taught. It was evident that some concepts needed to be emphasized; some needed to be amended to fit the context better; others did not fit the context; and more content was needed to provide a fuller picture of mentoring. This led to the action research cycle as follows: constructing the issue that further contextualization is needed; planning the action of consulting resources and persons; taking the action of further research and development of teaching content, integrating the new material, and testing the material; then finally evaluating by eliciting feedback. This cycle is presented in Figure 14 as a sample of a concurrent cycle in the project. [ Page ] 157 [ Please contact repository@tyndale.ca for Figure 14 details ] Figure 14: A Sample Concurrent Cycle of the Project Here is an example of how this concurrent AR cycle worked using one point of teaching content: During the first seminar-workshop at the first venue (Hill Country-see page 120), the attendees shared how they had experienced mentoring. I noted that some of them mentioned some negative personal characteristics of their mentors, yet they affirmed that even though they experienced this negative behaviour, it was good for them because it made them stronger. I reflected on that between the seminar venues. I had opportunity to consult the literature and discovered that the research concerning personal characteristics of mentors included a characteristic of “volatility” which in combination with other characteristics actually worked in favour of the mentees [ Page ] 158 (See pages 78-79). This insight was included in the next seminar venue (Colombo) at which the amended material was taught. Similarly the interactive teaching in the context throughout the project provided input for what eventually became the Ministry Mentoring Handbook (See Appendix D, E and F). Project Development Cycle Another concurrent cycle emerged out of evaluating the participants’ response to the first seminar and their subsequent engagement as mentors. The seminar-workshop had generated enough interest so that the participants proceeded to begin mentoring based on what they had learned about mentoring. It was necessary to sustain interest, provide support and begin to create vision for an ongoing mentoring program for the PAOSL (constructing issue). A plan was made to provide material and communication that would sustain interest and provide the support; to elicit more feedback and to provide an opportunity for questions and answers through focus groups; Action was taken as explained in the project description under the headings “Interim Communication” and “Focus Groups” (See pages 138-142138). The feedback and interaction in the focus groups contributed to the evaluation of the first AR cycle which then led to the second AR cycle. Second Action Research Cycle The second core action cycle emerged out of evaluating action from the first cycle and the concurrent cycles. It was determined that the participants needed continued support and were ready to receive additional mentoring [ Page ] 159 training. Planning included preparing additional teaching material, setting the dates of the next two seminar-workshops. For these seminars there were two agenda: training in understanding critical growth pathways in a mentee’s development and preparing the ground for the design of an ongoing mentoring program in the PAOSL. Action was taken as described in the project description under the headings “The Second Ministry Mentoring Seminar-Workshop” and “The Third Ministry Mentoring Seminar-Workshop (See pages 142-145).” In evaluating the action, I found that while some participants had embraced mentoring concepts well, others had not fully grasped the practice of effective mentoring. Thus, a post-project action research cycle will address this by continuing the further development of a mentoring culture in the PAOSL which was initiated in this project. Appreciative Inquiry Appreciative Inquiry was an undergirding method which was integrated in the overall project. At the beginning of the first seminar, the first phase of AI, “Discovery” was used when the participants were asked how they had experienced mentoring in their ministry development (See page 135). This was also used in the Focus Groups when they were asked about how they perceived what was valued in the PAOSL (See page 140). This was followed by the second phase of AI, “Dream,” where at various points throughout the project the participants were invited to consider what a future with highly effective mentoring might look like in the PAOSL. When it came to the “Design” phase, [ Page ] 160 only some of the participants were ready to contribute. In the concluding session of the project, the design of a mentoring program was delegated to a PAOSL ministry mentoring program design team that would continue to work on this post-project. The findings and recommendations of this thesis will inform the team with the expectation that this will move the PAOSL toward the Al “Destiny” phase where a healthy mentoring culture can continue and be sustained. The AR cycles and AI guided the processes of the project which provided the research data. How data was collected and analyzed will now be described. Data Collection and Analysis Data relating specifically to the participants was collected after the first seminar. Those who consented to participate submitted two forms: the Participant Consent Form for the PAOSL Mentoring Project (See Appendix B) and the PAOSL Ministry Mentoring Project Participant Form (Appendix C). In the latter form they provided information concerning their own ministry and some information about the mentoring relationships in which they were implementing what was learned in the seminar. The purpose of this form was to ensure intentionality of the mentoring relationship without specifically naming the mentee(s) who were only indirectly involved in the project. The form also provided information about the nature of the relationship and how it was initiated. Data during the implementation of the project was gathered using qualitative research methods that included natural observation; logs and journals of activity in relation to the project; and notes of interaction during the seminars [ Page ] 161 and focus groups. I took notes of discussions with the leadership group as well as during interviews with participants. While I taught the seminars, facilitated the focus groups and otherwise interacted with the participants, others assisted with the taking of notes documenting the discussions which took place at the various venues. These notes became a part of the data which was processed for the project report. Data not only included what I heard from the participants in the form of their comments and questions. It also included what I observed in them while they talked—body language, voice inflection and level of intensity; what I observed in the group context—body language that signaled assent, disagreement or absence of response; and my own reaction to what I had observed. In the various conversations, I paid attention to how the participants responded to the various subjects and individual points of the teaching material. In the normal course of a seminar teaching venue such feedback helps the presenter to adapt the subject matter to best fulfill the learning objectives. In this project the verbal and visual feedback also became data for the research project. The data was analyzed by reading the notes and recalling the researcher’s exchanges with the participants. The verbal responses, comments and questions of the participants were highlighted in the notes identifying for the researcher the specific comment and identifying who made it. The key issues which related to and affected ministry mentoring were identified and categorized. These were then interpreted against the background of the theological foundations of ministry mentoring as presented in chapter two and the mentoring literature as presented in chapter three. The researcher’s understanding of the ministry and cultural context [ Page ] 162 also had some influence on the analysis of the data as explained in the “Researcher Reflections on Project Involvement.” The research and project questions (pages 117-118) provided the interpretive framework of the data that led to the findings. This is explained in detail in chapter five in the “Findings of the Project” (See pages 181- 198). The data arising out of the first seminar-workshop and focus groups helped to determine specific areas that would need to be addressed in subsequent seminar-workshops and to evaluate the concerns that were addressed as we moved toward designing a mentoring program for the PAOSL. The data arising out of the second and third seminar-workshops and the concluding interviews helped to determine the next steps that can be followed in the PAOSL ministry mentoring program after the conclusion of this thesis project. This is discussed further on pages 176-180. Next, ethical considerations as they related to the thesis project research are presented. Ethical Considerations In this project it was necessary to gather data of various types from the participants. The project required several subjects to be involved in the activity of mentoring. I interacted with those subjects at various times throughout the duration of the research project through training opportunities, discussions and evaluation. Each of the activities provided data for the research. Much of the data gathered was information that had come to me in the normal activities of my [ Page ] 163 ministry in the context. Other data was gathered during my interaction with project participants. I had no personal or financial gain in the conducting of this research other than the satisfaction of potentially leaving a legacy of better equipped mentors and completing a self-designed requirement for a doctor of ministry program. The research was totally for the benefit of the specific ministry context within which the research took place. It will also have potential benefit for the broader context of the Christian ministry in Sri Lanka and other contexts. Each of the participants was informed at the conclusion of the first seminar-workshop orally and in writing in their language concerning the purpose of the research. The role that their responses were likely to play in the research was explained as well as any risks or benefits. They were given opportunity to process and discuss what was being asked of them and then asked to sign a document of consent if they agreed to participate in the project (See Appendix B—Participant Consent Form for the PAOSL Mentoring Project). The research involved only adults of sound mind and no one under the age of majority was a subject of the research. The data collected related primarily to mentoring experiences in the context of Christian ministry. The types of data included natural observation in the course of normal ministry contexts such as responses in seminar-workshops and focus groups. There were also some informal and structured interviews. In the reporting of the data, care was taken to ensure anonymity. There will be no divulging of information which has no bearing on the research. The [ Page ] 164 project assistant was instructed fully in the ethical implications of the research and signed a confidentiality agreement. Care was taken to keep any data in which individuals can be identified in locked filing cabinets or drawers and in the case of electronic data, safeguarded with password protection. Three years after the completion of the thesis, all forms used in data gathering for this project will be destroyed. Any data on the subjects which has been collected for other purposes will be used only when it can advance the research without the loss of anonymity of the subjects. In the context of the PAOSL, it was important that the research include subjects from both Sinhala and Tamil ethnic groups as much as possible. While the nature of the ministry in Sri Lanka is such that the majority of those in full- time ministry are males and are therefore more readily available as research subjects, effort was successfully made to have both male and female representation as research subjects. There was a slight potential for emotional stress in the context of the mentor-mentee relationships. However, this was not likely to be any more than what takes place in other relational interactions in a ministry context. The benefit for the subjects outweighed any harm in that they were a part of a learning community in which they had opportunity to grow in helpful ways of relating as mentors and mentees. The benefits included learning more effective ways of relating with people in general. We minimized harm by monitoring the emotional well-being of those who participated in the research and provided guidance to work through any areas of [ Page ] 165 difficulty. There was freedom to withdraw safely and with dignity as participants, which some chose to do. They had access to me and the leader of the organization to express any concerns about any aspects of their participation in the project. The experience of the mentor-mentee relationship which was researched has potential not only to benefit those who participated in the research, but the lessons learned have the potential to provide insight leading to more satisfying relationships in various ministry contexts. The positive results of the research will be disseminated in ongoing teaching contexts and mentoring programs for the benefit of the immediate ministry context and the wider contexts of Christian ministry and beyond. Chapter Summary In this chapter, I described the project as it unfolded, starting with a brief description of the purpose, a synopsis and my role in the project. We looked at the questions which drove the research and the questions which shaped the project. The project was then described in detail. I discussed several factors which influenced the project such as time, language, culture, systems and pedagogical approach. I also described the various seminar-workshops and focus groups at which the participants were engaged. I then described the research methodology used in the project which is a combination of action research and appreciative inquiry. I also explained how data for the research was gathered and summarized the process of analysis of the data. Finally, I discussed ethical considerations in relation to the project. [ Page ] 166 In the next chapter the analysis of the data will be described and the findings of the project will be presented. [ Page ] 167 CHAPTER FIVE: FINDINGS AND OUTCOMES In this chapter, reflections of the researcher’s project involvement in the context will be presented, the data relevant to the project will be considered and the findings that answer the questions which drove the research and shaped the project will be described. Researcher Reflections on Project Involvement Before describing the data, I will first explain the nature of my pre- understanding of the ministry context going into the project. This relates to my roles in the project which were those of researcher, facilitator, resource person, seminar leader, and curriculum writer. These were in addition to my roles as missionary, teacher and advisor in the context of PAOSL. This reflection is presented here because the observation and interpretation of the data is influenced by my pre-project experience of the context. Researcher Influence on Data Analysis Though care was taken care to minimize this impact in the observation and analysis, I do not assume that I was entirely successful in that regard. Stringer in speaking of data analysis states that “those involved in data analysis must ‘bracket’ their own understandings, intuitions, or interpretations as much as [ Page ] 168 possible and focus on the meanings that are inherent in the world of the participants” (Stringer 2007, 98). I had knowledge of the history of the organization from its inception twenty-five years ago, notwithstanding the gaps of knowledge from the time period when I was not engaged in the context. I also had some understanding of the ebb and flow of the relationships between the various participants of the project. That knowledge can also be seen as part of the data or as background to the data. In the analysis, that “database” was important for the process of “making sense” of the data which was acquired during the course of the project. This is particularly evident as the findings are presented. One example of researcher influence on the data is in relation to my awareness of the nature of some of the mentoring relationships that had existed in the organization. This understanding was helpful in that I could give appropriate weight to the feedback of individuals based on their ministry track record and also be sensitive to the dangers related to responses of those who were prone to tell me what they thought I wanted to hear. So as an active participant in context, I was analyzing the data by putting it through a filter that had developed in the course of ministry. This initial analysis was checked as I processed the feedback with the project assistant and chairman of the organization. There are some instances, however, in which the cautionary comments of Coghlan and Brannick can certainly be applied: “There are some disadvantages to being too close to the data. When you are interviewing you may assume too much and so not probe as much as if you were an outsider or ignorant of the situation” (Coghlan and Brannick [ Page ] 169 2010, 115). While to some degree I am an insider, I also need to qualify this insider status, since I am a foreigner working in Sri Lanka which has its own unique challenges. On Being a Foreigner Working in Sri Lanka In my experience I have found, that there are a number of conflicting dynamics that influence whatever work one is engaged in as a foreigner in Sri Lanka. My perception of these dynamics has been corroborated by discussions I have had with leaders both inside and outside of the PAOSL. There are some in the ministry context who sometimes have put unwarranted weight on what a foreigner might say and do, not necessarily assessing the intrinsic value of the words and actions. Underlying such a reception can be attributed to a “messenger- from-afar” phenomenon (an illustration of the principle that “a prophet is not without honor except in his own town” [Matt. 13:57 [NIV]]) or possibly the potential of financial benefits that may be a by-product of association with foreigners. This expectation of material benefits is part of a larger pattern relating to how guest ministries working in Sri Lanka have functioned from time to time. There are others—mostly among the leadership—who do not appreciate such blind acceptance of the foreigner. As one Sri Lankan Christian leader told me: “They listen to you because you are a foreigner; but they do not listen to us, their local leaders. When you leave, we need to deal with the fallout of the encounters.” Such a reaction is due at least in part to a perception that such interaction tends to undermine the authority of local Christian leaders. This is not necessarily a [ Page ] 170 reaction motivated by jealousy. It can be about contending for what is right and appropriate in relationships with people from other countries and seeking to minimize unhelpful dependencies on foreign funds. Many Sri Lankan Christian leaders have come to terms with these kinds reactions and found that a good response is simply to work with the “messenger- from-afar” phenomenon utilizing the spiritual gifts, skills and sometimes funding that foreigners bring into the context for the greater good of the kingdom of God and as necessary manage the expectations regarding whatever the financial benefits may or may not be. As a foreigner working in that context, I have found it is best to be aware of these dynamics, remain low key and do what I can to support and strengthen the local leadership and work closely together with them. When I have not done so, it has sometimes resulted in some painful and awkward moments. In my case, a long history of engagement with the PAOSL has helped to mitigate some of the dangers concerning these dynamics. Next, the data will be presented and interpreted. Interpretation of the Data In chapter four, data collection and analysis for the project research was described (See pages 161-163). In this section, the data will be examined in the order in which it was collected. [ Page ] 171 Data from the First Seminar-workshop Two of the objectives of the first seminar-workshop mentioned in chapter four (page 134) included discovering what experience the participants had of ministry mentoring and getting a sense of what the equipping needs of the organization might be in relation to mentoring. Session 1 of the seminar in particular provided data that informed the researcher concerning the assumptions and understandings that the participants brought into the project concerning ministry mentoring. This was observed in the way they described their previous mentoring experiences. Sessions 2, 3, 4 and 6 was comprised of data that came in the form of responses to the material that was taught. This informed the researcher with regard to issues that connected to the participants’ previous experience of mentoring and the issues which need further attention. Session 5 provided further data with regard to contextualizing the teaching material. Data from Focus Group Discussions As described in chapter four, there were five focus groups which met once at different venues. The researcher was the facilitator at each of the discussions. The focus group questions were arranged around the three stakeholders of the mentoring relationship: the organization, the mentor and the mentee (See pages 140-141). These groups served a dual purpose: First, the discussions were primarily for the purpose of gathering data. They also became an opportunity to raise issues from the respective mentoring contexts of the participants by asking follow-up questions to the seminar. Not only were the answers to the focus group [ Page ] 172 questions part of the data; the kinds of questions the participants asked were also a form of feedback. Time was taken to discuss answers to their questions reviewing as needed some of the material that had been taught in the seminar. Analysis of the data included the following steps: (1) reading the notes of each of the focus group discussions; (2) collating the comments and responses of the participants to the questions (3) selecting the data that was relevant to the research questions; (4) preparing an integrated report of the focus group data that was presented to the participants in the second seminar-workshop; and (5) reflecting on the implications of the data for a ministry mentoring model and culture. The data from the focus groups is discussed in five categories: organizational context of mentoring, evaluating the impact of the first seminar-workshop, mentoring experience, training needs, and mentee preparation for mentoring relationships. Organizational Context of Mentoring The responses concerning the PAOSL as an organization indicated that there was a high value placed on relationships in the organization. The word “family” was used on several occasions to describe the organization. This confirms what I have also had opportunity to observe in various contexts and venues of organizational events. The feedback indicated that there was an overall sense of individuals receiving care; of having security in the relationships with the organization; and of having a place to belong. Another value was expressed in this way: “We all work on the same level. We do not treat anyone as inferior.” This speaks to the value of impartiality in the organization that was perceived. Such a [ Page ] 173 response is significant in the midst of a culture which is still influenced to some degree by caste system thinking. Another value was that of spiritual training and education which was exemplified by Bible College programs and other special event training venues. Other responses relating to mentoring in the organizational context are given below in the section on “Improving the Mentoring Experience in the PAOSL.” I observed that these responses tended to highlight the more positive aspects of the organizational culture. They also tended to be framed in contrast to other organizations or previous experience of other organizational contexts. There was also the possibility that some of the responses reflected a desire to please the researcher. These insights were useful insofar as they pointed to what was seen as ideal and desirable. Indeed it was worthwhile to celebrate these discoveries with the participants since we would be able to show how a mentoring culture could strengthen the incorporation of these values and ideals. Values that competed with these positive ideals, while not necessarily expressed in this particular discussion, were encountered at different points throughout the project duration. These will be addressed at different points in the findings below. Evaluating the Impact of the First Seminar- Workshop One of the purposes of the first seminar-workshop was to raise awareness of mentoring as a viable means of leadership development, to train the participants in mentoring skills, and to encourage them to develop a heart for [ Page ] 174 mentoring. After all, if the ultimate goal is to embed a mentoring culture into the organization, we must first have people within the culture who know how to mentor and also see the value of ministry mentoring. We used the focus group forum to discuss their experiences of mentoring in order to evaluate the impact of the seminar-workshops and the learning task of integrating insight from the ministry mentor training. For instance we asked: “What have you done differently in mentoring since the Ministry Mentoring Workshops in September/October?” Some of the responses were as follows: “I became intentional about mentoring two people.” “I gave them more leadership responsibilities.. .while I observed, paying more attention to their personal and ministry skill development.” “I have learned to listen better.” “I understood and used the father-son model of mentoring.” “Before, I used to wait for people to do something; after the seminar, I started showing them how to do things...noted where they were lacking and used mentoring tools to help them.” “I invested more time in building relationships and saw that the disciples were becoming more open.” “Before 1 was just teaching curriculum to a group of disciples, now 1 have begun to build one-on-one relationships.” Some participants affirmed that as a result of the teaching they experienced greater self-awareness in their role as mentors and became more aware of the importance of being an example in life and ministry. An unintended positive consequence of the training was that the mentoring skills acquired also helped them in other areas of life and ministry. For instance, one participant mentioned that he had become a better listener even in his family relationships. [ Page ] 175 Mentoring Experiences Some of the challenges that the participants experienced in their mentoring activities since the seminar were as follows: making enough time for mentoring; distinguishing between a supervising and mentoring role; and disappointment in those they had started to mentor, but who did not continue. A number of participants mentioned the issue of developing mutual trust. The intensity of the discussion in one group indicated that this was a common issue. The mentors found that the mentees did not trust easily and seemed to have concerns with regard to confidentiality in the mentoring relationship. The participants suggested that this is to some degree a part of a wider issue that relates to the “honour- shame” culture in the Southern Asian context. However, some of the mentors found that after spending more time building relationships with their mentees they were increasingly willing to open up. There were several participants who observed that developing a mentoring relationship can prove to be a long process. Another challenge that emerged in some contexts was jealous reactions from others in their spiritual care when the mentor selected one or two mentees to spend more time with them than with the others. Training Needs When we asked what kind of help they needed to become highly effective mentors, there were a number of responses. There was a strong consensus that more training in mentoring skills would be helpful. They requested more exposure to mentoring ideas so they could better integrate them into their ministry practices [ Page ] 176 and think more like mentors. A number of participants suggested that there should be more opportunity for interaction and sharing experiences as mentors to learn from one another. Continual review of mentoring practices by various means was seen to be helpful. For instance, one participant said that she found the mentoring SMSs which were broadcast during the project to be encouraging. They reminded her “to keep at it.” Another participant said that time management training in relation to mentoring would be helpful. Mentee Preparation for Mentoring Relationship Concerning the mentees we asked: “What do you think the mentee needs to know in order to take the most advantage of a mentoring relationship?” The responses to this question are summarized as follows: Mentees in the first instance will need to know what a mentor is and the nature of the relationship; They should be aware of the 2 Tim. 2:2 principle out of which biblical mentoring flows: “And the things you have heard me say in the presence of many witnesses entrust to reliable people who will also be qualified to teach others” (NIV). Mentees need to learn to trust that their mentors care for them. They need to be transparent. They will also need to know how to keep confidences and respect the relationship. Data from the Second and Third Seminar- Workshops The data from the second and third seminar-workshops was generated in discussions that were about how best to design a mentoring program in the [ Page ] 177 PAOSL context. Since the discussions of the third seminar-workshop were a continuation of the second seminar-workshop, the responses to the questions are combined for the purpose of clarity. Training of Mentors The question of how mentors would be trained was considered. The consensus was that a seminar format as we had been doing should continue to be implemented but that it should also be a part of the Bible College curriculum. Thought should be given to make mentoring training mandatory in the PAOSL or as one of the participants suggested at least it should be given priority status. After mentors are trained and begin to implement mentoring relationships, we should make sure there is follow-up by someone who is designated as a mentoring coordinator. Some of the participants suggested that a small team be formed to design a program that would fit the PAOSL in terms of what is feasible and sustainable. Initiating Mentoring Relationships in the Organization Then a discussion was held on how mentors and mentees would find each other and how they would be connected to an organizational structure. We examined the table which portrayed the “Spectrum of Mentoring Relationships” (Table 3 on page 108) followed by a discussion on what would work best in our context. We considered the options of degrees of formality of the mentoring relationships and who would initiate the relationships. There was a consensus that [ Page ] 178 a semi-formal approach with some organizational initiative and control would be the best option. The description of this option in the table is: “organization develops and trains pool of mentors and encourages relationships to happen.” Measurability Further discussions were held on how success will be measured and how will it be known to work. One of the participants answered, “Success comes when the mentees are observed mentoring others themselves.” Another participant suggested that we must elicit feedback from the mentees to determine how the mentoring relationship is working from their perspective. Someone else added that we can measure success when the mentees are involved in ministry. We will then be able to observe that they function with greater effectiveness and demonstrate a higher level of maturity. To summarize, the responses indicated that the proof of success of individual ministry mentoring relationships is going to be evident in the life and ministry of the mentees themselves. It follows that the degree to which this is multiplied in the organization will be the measure of success of a mentoring program. Next Steps Finally we came to the question: “Where do we go from here?” There was a consensus that a local design team will need to be established to take the ministry mentoring in the organization to the next level. As a researcher, I had hoped we would be able to go beyond this point and actually begin to design a program together but because of time constraints and other limitations this was as [ Page ] 179 far as we were able to reach for now. Matters that will need to be processed further by the design team of the ministry mentoring program in the PAOSL will be highlighted in the presentation of the findings and in chapter six. The Concluding Interviews From the interviews, I ascertained that the respondents were all regularly mentoring one to three people. Most of the encounters were weekly. In many of the cases I had personal knowledge of who the mentees were. I was also aware that in some cases that the mentees that they were mentoring were different from those with whom they had started. Typical ministry skills in which the mentees were being trained were how to lead a small group or a prayer meeting. The training process involved bible study, counselling, planning ministry and giving responsibility for a particular ministry activity. The relationships were mostly supervisory, although two of the participants were mentoring at least one pastor each from other organizations in non-supervisory relationships. I also determined from some of the responses that much of what was happening was counselling and basic discipleship. I had expected more training of leaders since this was the thrust of the seminar teaching. When I asked the project assistant about this, he suggested that in a number of local contexts there was a deficit of discipleship process and some of the ministry mentoring training was being applied as basic discipleship. Another interpretation of this could be that the some of the participants did not yet fully understand the ministry development of mentoring as [ Page ] 180 it was presented and have shifted back into their default formational paradigm of discipling and counselling. Some of the greatest joys of the participants included the deepening of relationships and observable growth in the mentees. Those who mentored outside the organization were encouraged by the positive impact they were able to have beyond their own particular context. Some of challenges included the dropping off of mentees, lack of commitment and the time it takes to mentor. The concluding interviews provided data about specific mentoring activities of the participant as we approached the conclusion of the project. This data will inform recommendations presented in chapter six for continuing the implementation of the ministry mentoring program in the PAOSL after the conclusion of the thesis project. Next the findings of the project will be presented in relation to the research questions. Findings of the Project In chapter four, questions that drove the research and shaped the project were presented (See pages 117-118). These questions concerned the organization and the ministry mentoring project in the following areas: (1) positive mentoring stories (2), helpful current practices of mentoring in the organization, (3) underlying assumptions about mentoring, (4) improving the mentoring experience, (5) need for change in thinking about the mentees, (6) the guiding components of a mentoring model, (7) increasing access to mentoring for [ Page ] 181 mentees, (8) required system changes to incorporate mentoring into culture, (9) hidden obstacles to mentoring, and (10) required value changes for a mentoring culture. Mentoring Stories in the PAOSL At the beginning of the first seminar-workshop in both Group A and B venues as part of the introduction to the sessions, I posed the question: “Who helped you to get to where you are today in ministry?” I asked this question to generate discussions of discovery relating to mentoring as they had already experienced it. In both of the venues there was no shortage of names of people that were mentioned. Most of the participants mentioned a number of names and described the mentoring relationships from which they had benefited. I noticed that many of these names were of people in their past. For instance in Group A (Colombo) there was a name that had been mentioned by seven of the members of the group and in Group B (Hill Country) there was another name mentioned by six of members of the group. Both of these individuals had been leaders of the organization in the past but are currently not in leadership in the PAOSL. As we reflected on the stories of their “mentoring” influence on those present in the respective seminar-workshops, it was clear that they used to have a strong mentoring ministry. There was a clear intentional relationship of “discipling” their “disciples” for ministry, in effect doing we are here presenting as “ministry mentoring.” One participant said in referring to one of these leaders: “Our pastor did not use this terminology, but what you are describing, he was doing in [ Page ] 182 practice.” Both of these had different styles but each had left a lasting legacy of enduring ministry practice in the lives of those in the organization today. As the participants shared, they spoke candidly of positive characteristics which they were able to embrace as well as some undesirable characteristics they had learned to avoid. There were a number of other individuals who were mentioned including some presently serving in the organization. Most of the relationships that were described can be seen as “hands-on” apprenticeships for ministry training. Some of them were primarily discipleship relationships which simply facilitated basic Christian formation. Celebrating the contributions at the outset of this project provided a surprising discovery insight for the participants demonstrating that we were not introducing something new. Rather, we were building on what was already a part of the organization. Some Practices of Mentoring in the PAOSL A number of mentoring practices in the PAOSL were discerned primarily from data gathered in the first seminar-workshop. This was supplemented with my own observations over time in the ministry context as well as during the time of interaction with participants of the project. Initiating a Mentoring Relationship The primary occasion for the initiating of a mentoring relationship in the PAOSL is when pastors recruit or enlist people to help them in ministry. Sometimes the recruitment happens when the pastor notices someone he sees as [ Page ] 183 having a potential for ministry. Other times the individual himself expresses an interest to serve in ministry. There is also in the culture a tradition that cuts across all of the religions that a family will encourage one of their own to seek a spiritual ministry vocation. Further, there is evidence in the PAOSL, as in other church organizations, that children sometimes follow their parents calling into ministry. Whichever way people are recruited or come to ministry, their “on-the-job” ministry training experience becomes the context for a mentoring relationship. This practice of mentoring in the organization is helpful in that the mentee has opportunity to learn practical ministry skills and ministry is actually being fulfilled in the process. People need to be visited and counselled. Worship services need to be planned. Prayer meetings need to be led. Preaching and teaching needs to be done in a variety of contexts. The leader cannot do all this so he recruits a disciple to bear some of the ministry load. This pattern of selecting mentees has been a longstanding practice and as I have observed seems to be the pattern for many of the Pentecostal churches in Sri Lanka. In relation to hands-on ministry observation and training, the current practice offers much opportunity for ministry exposure as the participants described in stories of how they experienced mentoring. While it is clear that a mentee can gain a lot of ministry experience as he interacts with his mentor in these practical ways, it should be an essential concern of the mentor that this experience also translates into making the mentee into an effective ministry leader for the future. This concern for the mentee’s development is not always evident. When considering the ministry mentoring model, we can look to the apostle [ Page ] 184 Paul’s benevolent parent analogy in particular as demonstrated in his relationship to Timothy (See pages 47-50). His strong affirmation and continual encouragement of Timothy as his spiritual son provides an example of the attitude a supervising leader can have while mentor those who are accountable to him in ministry. Linking of Mentoring and Supervising Roles Mentoring relationships in the PAOSL tend to be linked to supervisory roles and when the ministry performance of the disciple or mentee does not measure up to expectations, the disciple’s role in ministry is reduced or terminated and the mentoring aspect of the relationship also ends. Some of the comments during the seminar about current practices suggested that finances were also a common concern. As described by number of the participants, mentees in the role of “disciple-as- ministry- assistant” often have some expectation of remuneration since they may not have other means of support. In some cases there is an informal employment agreement with the pastor or the church. In other cases, disciples are encouraged to engage in ministry on a faith-basis, trusting God to provide for their needs. (On a side note, this faith exercise is often seen as part of ministry training and served to filter out some of the less sincere ministry hopefuls.) Sometimes ministry engagements were on a part-time volunteer basis particularly in contexts where other employment or means of income were available. The recruitment process as outlined above is also a part of a typical informal track towards fulltime ministry and is often combined with a [ Page ] 185 recommendation and sponsorship to attend Bible College. When the supervisory role, the employment role, and the Bible College sponsorship role of the mentor is considered, it can be inferred that the combination of these add up to a lot of power in the hands of a leader or mentor with regard to the mentee. This power can work towards keeping the mentee on task (which actually makes the mentor a manager), but can also become occasion for discouragement of the mentee if inappropriately applied. However, where finances were not an issue or were controlled by a church board, the power of the mentor is somewhat mitigated. The discussions also revealed that a shortage of finances was a demotivating factor for the mentee and often led to attrition in ministry notwithstanding the earlier allusion to the filtering process. Another way that a mentoring relationship develops is when the executive committee assigns a ministry leader (often a member of the executive committee) in a supervisory role over a younger leader to monitor progress, to report back to the committee and give advice to the younger leader as needed. The scenario develops particularly in a new church planting context. This is also the case when a larger church sends a Christian worker or young pastor to start a branch church. In both scenarios the objective is supervisory but a mentoring relationship is encouraged and is seen as a positive development. However since at the outset it is framed in supervisory terms, this is really more about people management than people development. It can therefore move away from being a mentoring relationship perhaps to the point where actual mentoring is not being experienced, hence the term, “quasi-mentoring” relationship has been used to describe these [ Page ] 186 arrangements in this thesis (See page 6). There was discussion around the issue of the conflict between the supervisory role and the mentoring role. One participant cited a personal example where he was the mentor of a pastor and also his supervisor. As it turned out, he was forced by his supervisory role to become the messenger of terminating the ministry agreement of the organization with this pastor. He sensed that the pastor thought his mentor had betrayed his trust. From these findings it emerges that the issues of linking supervisory roles with mentoring roles need to be addressed. This will first require a conceptual paradigm shift of de-linking these roles. When it is not possible to have two different people functioning in these roles separately at least the person holding the dual role can learn how to wear a “mentor’s hat” when required and a “supervisor’s hat” as appropriate. The research question posed was, “In what ways are current practices of mentoring in the organization perceived to be helpful?” To answer this question specifically from the data presented above, it can be concluded that two helpful practices are that (1) mentees are being recruited and receiving “on-the-job” trained for ministry and (2) mentees are being linked with supervisor-mentors in quasi-mentoring relationships. These practices provided a connecting point from which more effective mentoring methods were developed based on the ministry mentoring model presented in this thesis. Underlying Assumptions The question asked: what were the underlying assumptions about [ Page ] 187 mentoring which had been brought into the project from all stakeholders? As the researcher who initiated the project, I am also a stakeholder. An assumption that I brought into the project about mentoring was that I would have to work harder to convince people about the importance of mentoring. I learned, however, that this was not the major concern. Rather, the greater challenge was in helping people make the life-style changes that would enable them to mentor effectively and consistently. On the part of the project participants, one of the assumptions about mentoring, or what I have referred to as the quasi-mentoring relationships in the organization, is that mentees or disciples are primarily seen as supervised Christian workers in training. The emphasis was on their abilities and talents to fulfil their expected roles in ministry. Their development as leaders was sometimes seen to be a secondary issue or relegated to the realm of Bible College education. One of the ways this assumption was challenged was through the second seminar-workshop presentation of Pue’s mentoring matrix and particularly the dimensions of Christian leadership development. These include the dimension of spiritual intimacy, character development, community relationships and ministry which provide a holistic view of a leader’s life and ministry (See page 98). Another assumption was that mentoring was primarily the domain of senior leadership people. This was addressed as we included people in the mentorship training from various levels of leadership. One of the things that we encouraged was that even while mentees were mentored, they could in turn begin [ Page ] 188 to mentor others. The underlying assumptions of some mentees was also indirectly observed through the comments of the participants relating to the expectations that some mentees have (This was alluded to briefly in the previous subsection). In the seminar-workshop session in which the management of expectations in a mentoring relationship was taught, a discussion provided this piece of data: One possible expectation of a mentee was that their mentor or pastor will provide for their food, clothing and sometimes shelter needs out of ministry resources. This expectation also extends to Bible College sponsorship. This assumption flows out of a Christian subcultural ethos that tells them that they are now serving God in ministry under the covering of God’s servant, the pastor. This expectation is sometimes unconsciously nurtured by the pastor who happily welcomes an addition to his ministry team but does not clarify expectations at the outset. The teaching on managing expectations in a mentoring relationship provided some direction for pastors as mentors of mentees (who are also ministry assistants) to take the initiative in uncovering underlying assumptions of mentees and clarifying those expectations. Improving the Mentoring Experience in the PAOSL The question addressed here relates to what participants suggest about improving the mentoring experience. The participants affirmed the need for training in mentoring skills. They reiterated the importance of PAOSL pastors and leaders becoming aware of ministry mentoring, learning how to mentor, and [ Page ] 189 making it a part of their ministry skill set. In the discussions held in the focus groups and reiterated in the discussion of the second and third seminar there was a consensus that after the initial training of a group of mentors there will need to be a system of follow-up with those who have been trained. Follow-up will need to include some kind of monitoring, a means of reminding mentors to stay on task and to troubleshoot when difficulties arise. Someone will need to be empowered within the organization to fulfil these functions. In chapter three, steps that show how these things can be incorporated are explained in the section on “Mentoring Programs in Organizations” (See especially pages 109-112). One of the ways to keep the profile of mentoring high in the organization will be to have an ongoing system of mentoring training sessions supplemented by other communications. In the Sri Lankan context, text messages (SMS) are the best way to get the attention of people to announce meetings and communicate short messages. Not everyone is able to check their email regularly because they do not have computers but most have a mobile phone so a common way of communicating bits of information quickly is by SMS. In one the focus groups the suggestion came that in addition to formal training of mentors, opportunity for joint mentor-mentee training should take place in more relaxed settings and should include games and role play to emulate actual life and ministry situations. He felt that this would help to reduce the unnecessary formality of the relationships between the mentor and the mentees. Another suggestion was that during the time in which RLC students are enrolled in a college program, they should be linked with a mentor, have exposure to [ Page ] 190 different ministry styles through weekend ministry opportunities and then process these with their mentors. Changing Our Thinking about the Mentees One of the concepts I introduced during the first seminar-workshop related to reverse mentoring. This concept stimulated a surprising intensity and amount of discussion. The participants were quite willing to concede that younger people were able to teach them about some technological things but not all were so sure about what spiritual things could be learned from them. As the discussion moved towards the subject of understanding youth culture, one participant observed, “When we see that even though young people have different ways than we are accustomed to and yet spiritual growth takes place in them, we should listen to what they have to say so that new people don’t go back to the world.” In other words, he was contending for reverse mentoring with regard to youth culture. The discussion then went on to the questions of balancing the contemporary with the traditional. I was quite surprised by the level of engagement on this point and it signalled for me that here was an opportunity for mentors in the organization to shift towards a more equalitarian perception in the mentor-mentee relationship. Participants’ feedback during the focus groups indicated that as they began to focus on developing relationships with their mentees and reduced their emphasis on teaching curriculum and skills, they found there was a better response from the mentees. This suggests that the thinking towards the mentee needs to change from seeing them only as recipients of the mentors’ knowledge [ Page ] 191 and wisdom to seeing them as partners in fellowship and ministry. The concerns of balancing and/or blending supervisory and mentoring roles are also resolved when the mentors see mentees as those who are seeking to grow in leadership and not just people who fulfill ministry responsibilities. In general, mentees need to be seen not only for what they can contribute in the present but also for how they can be developed for their roles in future ministry. This is seen from what the positive response mentors experienced from the mentees when they began to focus on the development needs of the mentees and not just on ministry priority. This is also specifically addressed in chapter three on page 104 where mentor attentiveness to the mentee is described as a priority. Components of Mentoring The next question concerns what the components are of a mentoring model that will lead to an improvement of mentoring in the organization. These components are outlined in chapter one (pages 21-23) and again in chapter six (pages Error! Bookmark not defined.-204). Only four of the ten will be considered here as other components are addressed in various ways in the other findings. The component of intentionality calls for proactive engagement of mentoring by the mentoring partners. As pastors in the PAOSL plan for mentoring as a part of their ministry activities, the quality of mentoring will improve. For instance, as participants in the focus groups discussed their mentoring experiences as mentors in intentional mentorships, they found that they [ Page ] 192 were able to relate more effectively with their mentees and began to see the possibilities of what intentional mentoring could achieve for the long term notwithstanding some of the disappointments they also experienced. The focus on the developmental component including aspects of character development and an increase in competency as primary and sponsorship aspects as secondary will also help to improve mentoring. Mentees need to focus on learning in a mentoring relationship and set aside other expectations (as described in underlying assumptions) which have sometimes become a distraction to learning in mentorships. An understanding that derives from the learning relationship component which is defined as mentee-driven and mentor-guided will help recalibrate thinking about mentoring. The energy of the relationship will come primarily from the mentee who takes ownership of his or her own learning. In the focus groups, the participants spoke of their mentees as needing to learn what a mentoring relationship is so that mentees can benefit from such relationships. Critical growth pathways are divinely orchestrated, content-guided by theological and organizational priorities and customizable to the developmental needs of the mentees. Attention to these aspects provides another level of intentionality in the mentoring relationship by making it purposeful and providing direction for the mentee’s development journey. Access to Mentoring While we had observed that many of the emerging leaders had access to [ Page ] 193 some form of occasional mentoring, there was a lack of intentional connecting of these younger leaders to highly effective mentors. As defined, highly effective mentors are those who are competent in their own work; growing in character; show consistent interest in the development of their mentees; and work at improving mentoring skills. In order to provide every young pastor with a good mentorship opportunity, we need first to develop a pool of mentors through an effective training program. We need to equip them with a good working model of ministry mentoring and then develop a system that will connect trained mentors with those who need to be mentored. Initially this will require a more directive approach that includes a system of follow-up and monitoring until ministry mentoring in the organization becomes a part of the culture. Even though a directive approach is indicated, it will be more strategic to start with the “early adopters” who have “ caught the spirit” of what mentoring is and work closely with them to refine a model that is easily transferable to others and then gradually bring others on board through training opportunities. For instance, as I was teaching, I observed that those who appeared to really grasp what was being taught were those who had experienced intentional mentoring at some point in their ministry development. As various items in the teaching material were taught, they repeatedly verbalized connective references to their own experiences. With the input of the teaching they received a renewed impetus for developing mentoring relationships because they now had language to describe what they had experienced. Because this connection between experience and teaching concerning mentoring has been made, they are better positioned to offer highly [ Page ] 194 effective mentoring to mentees who are looking for mentors. Another approach may be through tandem training (training mentor and mentee simultaneously) by identifying naturally occurring mentor-mentee relationships and create training opportunities specifically designed as “just-in- time” training for those in such mentoring relationships. “Just-in-time” training is training that targets those specific areas in which the trainee recognizes the need for certain skills because of emerging circumstances in his or her context and therefore the trainee has a high motivation to learn them. System Changes In order to embed mentoring into the culture of the organization, we will need to demonstrate with a few mentoring relationships that mentoring is a desirable and a crucial part of leadership development. Early on in the project, we determined that the incorporation of ministry mentoring into the PAOSL culture would best be facilitated through the RLC and include this aspect of leadership development as a part of its mandate. The system change would need to include the relinquishing of some of the authority that the sponsoring pastors and churches may have over their students. This claim is based on what I have observed as the leadership of the RLC have needed to negotiate with pastors for the ministry time of students who are enrolled in the programs of the college. Students would need to be linked to mentors who would receive ministry mentorship training as a part of the college program requirement. Another system change that would need to occur is a clearer distinction [ Page ] 195 between supervisory roles and mentoring roles especially when the supervisor and mentor is the same person. In some cases it may be advisable for younger pastors to be linked with mentors who are not their supervisors. But in order for that to take place there would need to be clear understanding and trust established between the supervising pastor, the mentoring pastor and the mentee. A way to frame this would be in terms of a mentoring constellation. Bringing an emphasis of ministry mentoring into the organization will mean that the stakeholders will need to create space for it in terms of time, training, resources and moral support. As space is given for this, it will create perceived deficits in other areas as we had already begun to observe through the feedback concerning the time required for mentoring. Based on what has been observed so far as pastors struggle to incorporate mentoring time into their ministries, this will be one of the challenges that will need to be addressed as the development of a mentoring culture continues after the conclusion of the project. Hidden Obstacles Another question that was considered was about the obstacles that leaders in the organization identify that can be minimized in order that a healthy mentoring culture can be nurtured. As mentioned, a major obstacle to mentoring was the lack of trust that is inherent in the broader cultural context and is also evident in the church context. The participants found that in order for good mentoring relationships to develop, their mentees needed be more forthcoming in sharing their life and ministry challenges. However, they realized that it was often [ Page ] 196 difficult for mentees to trust them. When I probed for the reasons behind this difficulty, they suggested that for many of them their trust had been betrayed by others in positions of authority. This may also be related to the “honour-shame” aspect of the culture where public persona is seen as having a higher value than authentic relationships. But the mentors also found that when they invested time to build the relationship on more of a personal level than a professional arrangement, the mentees seemed more likely to open up. Also when the mentors themselves became more vulnerable, the trust level increased. One participant related how she had shared about some of her struggles with her mentee and consequently the mentee became more open in sharing. Another obstacle was the issue of lack of time to give to mentoring. Most of the leading pastors are extremely busy in their own ministry and found that when they added to their responsibilities that of intentionally mentoring someone, it was difficult to find the time. As mentioned, it was proposed that we incorporate some time management training into the mentorship program. My own observation was that they would need to include making leadership development a higher priority to the point of delegating other responsibilities to others or let some activities go altogether. I would also recommend that if mentoring is going to be a part of their ministry, they may need change their style of ministry to include mentoring and develop a mentoring mindset. A further obstacle is the possible resistance to reducing the power distance in the mentoring relationship. As mentioned in the discussion on the cultural factor in chapter four (page 122), in Sri Lanka power distance between those in [ Page ] 197 authority and their charges is greater than would be the case in a western culture. Yet, as pointed out in chapter two (page 63), Jesus made the universally counter- cultural statement to his apostles and by extension to all his followers: “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. It shall not be so among you” (Matt. 20:25 [NIV]). Deep Changes Finally, we consider this question: Based on findings in this study, what changes are required in the values, behaviors and culture of the organization that will lead to a healthy mentoring culture in which all emerging leaders will experience the support they need in their leadership journey? One of the required changes would be from valuing the achievement of present visible ministry successes to valuing the principle of generativity that is achieved through mentoring the emerging generation of ministry leaders. This would mean that mentees should not only be seen as those who assist their leaders to achieve current ministry results. Instead, they need to be viewed as those who will one day surpass them and continue developing future generations of ministry leaders. Some of the participants’ own children who are considering entering the ministry have begun to provide a perspective that helps the current leadership look beyond the present ministry context to future possibilities. In terms of leadership development, the view that sees classroom education as the only intentional means of ministry training needs to include intentional ministry mentoring as a valuable supplement of theological and [ Page ] 198 ministerial education. Ministry mentoring as a leadership development model effectively administered in the organization will enable the knowledge and skills learned in a Bible College or seminary to be appropriately applied in everyday ministry contexts. In Sri Lankan culture, schooling has a high value and consequently mentoring may be undervalued as a learning model. In terms of leadership behaviour and the culture of mentoring relationships, the mentoring model should move from a guru-shishya model to a benevolent parent model of mentoring that appropriately balances nurturance and discipline and that allows for the mentees to develop freely in the direction of their calling even if it eventually takes them beyond that of their mentors. The issue of positional authority needs to play a reduced role in these relationships and move towards the attitudes and behaviours that were demonstrated in the servant leadership that Jesus taught and modelled. In this chapter, the researcher reflected on his project involvement, the process of how data interpretation was outlined and the findings of the project was presented following the outline of the questions which drove the research and shaped the project. In the next chapter what was achieved in the project will be summarized , the components of the ministry mentoring model of this thesis will reviewed and suggestion be concerning some of the ways in which the findings presented in this chapter can be used for strengthening ministry mentoring both in the ministry context of the project as well as in other contexts. [ Page ] 199 CHAPTER SIX: CONCLUSION In this project we have looked at what effective ministry mentoring in a Sri Lankan context might look like and moved towards a sustainable model of ministry mentoring which is promoted and sustained in an organization. In this closing chapter, I will outline what was achieved in the project, review briefly some of the key components of ministry mentoring that we considered in this project. Then I will suggest further work that will be required in the ministry context in relation to ministry mentoring. Finally, I will discuss how this thesis report may be helpful in other contexts. What Was Achieved in the Project? This section briefly summarizes some of what has been achieved in this project. As an outcome of the project, there is greater awareness of the option of intentional mentoring in the ministry context as a viable method of ministry leadership development. This method is available to all leaders who are prepared to learn how to mentor and to commit to a mentoring relationship with a mentee. There are, in the PAOSL context, some leaders who have now received mentorship training, are using their acquired skills in ministry mentoring, and have embraced the practice of mentoring younger leaders as a part of their [ Page ] 200 ministry. We have discovered mentoring practices in the ministry context upon which a ministry mentoring model has been built. We have gained insights concerning mentoring in the Sri Lankan context that will continue to shape a mentoring program for the PAOSL. We have identified a group of people who are committed and have the interest in working together to design a mentoring program that will lead to the embedding of a mentoring culture. We have presented a basic format that can be adapted to develop a sustainable mentoring program. A key outcome of this project was to incorporate an intentional mentoring program into the internship requirements of the River of Life College. The next interns are being intentionally paired with mentors under the supervision of the college. Components of Ministry Mentoring A number of the key components of a ministry mentoring model were developed in this thesis. These were briefly described in chapter one (pages 21- 24) and then highlighted individually as they emerged at different points in the thesis. They are reviewed here again in conclusion. Figure 2 on page 20 shows the components in a “mind map” outline format. In general, the ministry mentoring model was informed by a theological foundation as presented in chapter two, by the mentoring literature as reviewed in chapter three and by the practical experience of the researcher and the participants—including the experience brought into the project and the experience gained through the project (chapters four and five). [ Page ] 201 The model was developed in relation to the specific Sri Lankan context of a particular organization, namely the Pentecostal Assemblies of Sri Lanka with the River of Life College as its ministry training institution. The ministry mentoring model, however, is not restricted to the project. It can be adapted and contextualized to work in other settings. A central component of the model is its intentionality, indicating that ministry mentoring in this model is a planned, proactive engagement on the part of both the mentor and the mentee. An organization becomes a third party in this intentionality when it implements a mentoring program. Intentionality is not contingent on whether a relationship is formal or informal. Both of these aspects of mentoring can be a part of intentional activity. Reciprocity is another component of the ministry mentoring model which includes both one-on-one mentoring and group mentoring. This is to emphasize that mentoring is a relationship that flows two ways. Both mentors and mentees are aware of the relationship. In essence, then, this model excludes the possibility of a mentoring relationship with authors who would never know specifically of readers who may call them their mentors. As valuable as that is, it is not mentoring, rather self-directed learning. The developmental component puts the focus on the mentee’s character development and increase in ministry competencies. Sponsorship is secondary though not excluded. The developmental agenda is driven by the critical growth pathways component. [ Page ] 202 The learning relationship component determines that the primary driving force in the relationship is the mentee and the primary role of the mentor is that of a guide. That is not to say that the mentor never leads. On occasion, particularly in the early stages, the mentor may need to take the initiative until the mentee develops sufficiently to take more of the ownership of his or her learning. A mentor in this ministry mentoring model adopts the attitude of a benevolent parent, who knows when to use gracious nurturing with the mentee and when to apply constructive discipline. The mentor is sensitive to and appreciates the progression in the mentoring relationship, much like a parent observes the development of a child from infant to adult. The mentor orients his or her attention toward the benefit of the mentee and rejoices when the mentee develops beyond even the mentor. An attitude such as this makes for an environment in which mutual trust can flourish in the mentoring relationship. The component of critical growth pathways gives purpose and direction to the ministry mentoring relationship. The mentor pays attention to the divine activity in the mentee’s journey. The content which guides the development of the mentee is provided by theological and organizational priorities, yet is customizable to the developmental needs of the mentee. Organizational support is a component that involves the organization which provides the context for the mentoring relationship. The organization which has mentoring embedded within its culture is positioned to support mentoring relationships by way of training mentors and mentees, appointing a coordinator who champions the mentoring culture and providing for the [ Page ] 203 possibility of mentoring constellations for broader development of individual mentees. The time component is presented as separate component to emphasise the need for creating mentoring space in schedules though it can also be seen as a part of the intentionality component. On one hand mentors and mentees need to negotiate the time span or period that this mentoring relationship will last (e.g. one year, two years or more). On the other hand, the week to week investment of time in the mentoring relationship needs to be determined and scheduled. This would help make ministry mentoring a high priority in the ministry schedules of mentors and mentees. Where Do We Go from Here? In conclusion, some suggestions are made to take what has been achieved in the project to another level in the project ministry context. The potential value of this project for other context is also considered. In the Project Ministry Context In order to capitalize on the work of the mentoring project, a design team needs to follow up on the discussions of the seminar-workshops and continue the action research through the next cycle. This will ensure that the process of designing a ministry mentoring which has begun will be completed. This design team will need to determine the issues arising from the evaluation of the last cycle concerning the mentoring program. They should then plan to address those issues with specific action steps. A Sri Lankan mentoring coordinator who has [ Page ] 204 experienced highly effective mentoring and is passionate about ministry mentoring should be assigned to lead this team and oversee the ongoing development of the program. A system of follow-up should be set up which empowers the mentoring coordinator or his designate to engage the mentors in a conversation about how the mentoring relationships are going. It would also be a good time to include mentees into the next phase of the research by having a mentee orientation workshop at which the mentors are also present. As a part of this workshop, opportunity should be given for the mentors and mentees to have times of interaction and then reflect as a group on the experience. Some other possible initiatives that could be considered include the following: 1. Training opportunities of various formats and venues should be provided to continue raising the profile of ministry mentoring in the organization. 2. Key ministry competencies that are known to be necessary for ministry in the various contexts in the organization should be identified and specific mentoring strategies developed and shared with the mentors. 3. Let those who are particularly gifted and passionate about mentoring be identified and given permission to lead the way by mentoring effectively and helping others mentor. 4. Everyone in the organization should be encouraged to become aware of and learn basic mentoring skills even if they are not planning to be in intentional mentoring relationships. 5. All RLC faculty should be incorporated into the mentoring program by being trained as mentors so a mentoring culture would be nurtured on the campus and potentially flow out from there. 6. The Mentoring Handbook needs to be reviewed from time to time as the mentoring program design team becomes aware of important insights that [ Page ] 205 should be incorporated into the training. Potential Value of This Project in Other Contexts While this project was done in a specific context, there are many concepts which are transferable to other contexts. At least some of the questions that were asked about ministry mentoring in the context of this project can be asked and considered in other ministry contexts. The issues raised in this project are context specific but are likely to have similar manifestations in other contexts. We have seen that mentoring-type relationships are a universal phenomenon. They have existed throughout history from earliest times and have their expression in many cultures. Mentoring can be done well and it can be done poorly. We have seen some examples of both. Any consideration of how mentoring can be practiced more effectively for the benefit of those who are seeking to be mentored is worth the investment of time and energy. In chapter two it was shown that the apostles and early church fathers practiced mentoring relationships with a combined emphasis on intentional development of Christian leadership and sound doctrine. They left a legacy of faith and ministry for the following generations. Also for these times, highly effective ministry mentoring as a practice combined with sound theological education has the potential to transform emerging Christian leadership to advance the kingdom of God to new levels. I am convinced that the Lord is looking for godly and experienced leaders who have fought and defeated giants to find and adopt spiritual sons and daughters who can stand on their shoulders to fight and overcome even greater [ Page ] 206 giants. Similarly, the Lord is looking for churches and Christian organizations to embed a ministry mentoring culture that will give younger leaders access to healthy mentoring relationships. Such relationships promise to prepare and sustain them in the challenges of ministry in this generation and set a pattern of effectively transferring vibrant faith and dynamic ministry to succeeding generations until the Lord Jesus returns. [ Page ] 207 APPENDIX A—JOHNSON AND RIDLEY’S 65 ELEMENTS OF MENTORING In this appendix the outline of Johnson and Ridley’s book, The Elements of Mentoring is presented for reference purposes. The book is arranged into 65 key elements presented under six major headings: • What excellent mentors do: Matters of skill 1. Select your protégés carefully 2. Be there 3. Know your protégés 4. Expect excellence (and nothing else) 5. Affirm, affirm, affirm, and then affirm some more 6. Provide sponsorship 7. Be a teacher and a coach 8. Encourage and support 9. Shape behavior using reinforcement 10. Offer counsel in difficult times 11. Protect when necessary 12. Stimulate growth with challenging assignments 13. Give protégés exposure and promote their visibility 14. Nurture creativity 15. Provide correction-even when painful 16. Give the inside scoop 17. Narrate growth and development 18. Self-disclose when appropriate 19. Accept increasing friendship and mutuality 20. Teach faceting 21. Be an intentional model 22. Display dependability • Traits of excellent mentors: Matters of style and personality 23. Exude warmth 24. Listen actively 25. Show unconditional regard 26. Respect privacy and confidentiality 27. Tolerate idealization 28. Embrace humor 29. Do not expect perfection 30. Attend to interpersonal cues [ Page ] 208 31. Be trustworthy 32. Respect values 33. Do not stoop to jealousy • Arranging the mentor-protégé relationship: Matters of beginning 34. Carefully consider the "match" 35. Clarify expectations 36. Establish measureable goals 37. Define relationship boundaries 38. Consider protégé relationship style 39. Describe potential benefits and risks 40. Be sensitive to gender 41. Be sensitive to race and ethnicity 42. Foster mentoring constellations 43. Plan for change at the outset 44. Schedule periodic reviews or evaluations • Knowing thyself as a mentor: Matters of integrity 45. Consider the consequences of being a mentor 46. Practice self-care 47. Be productive 48. Resist cloning 49. Make sure you are competent 50. Hold yourself accountable 51. Respect the power of attraction 52. Accept the burden of power 53. Practice humility 54. Never exploit protégés 55. Balance advocacy with gate-keeping • When things go wrong: Matters of restoration 56. Above all, do no harm 57. Slow down the process 58. Tell the truth 59. Seek consultation 60. Document carefully 61. Dispute your irrational thinking • Welcoming change and saying good-bye: Matters of closure 62. Welcome change and growth 63. Accept endings [ Page ] 209 64. Find helpful ways to say goodbye 65. Mentor as a way of life (Johnson and Ridley 2008, iii-v) [ Page ] 210 APPENDIX B—PARTICIPANT CONSENT FORM FOR THE PAOSL MENTORING PROJECT I, __________________________________________________________ of ________________________________________ agree to participate in the Pentecostal Assemblies of Sri Lanka (PAOSL) mentoring project. My participation is voluntary and I will receive no remuneration for participation in the project. I understand that I can freely withdraw from project participation at any time. I understand that this project is a part of a Tyndale Seminary and University Doctor of Ministry Research Project conducted by Rainer Mittelstaedt. The data collected during this project will relate primarily to mentoring experiences in the context of Christian ministry and will be held in confidence. Information which is not relevant to the thesis project will not be included in the report. I understand that I will not be individually identified in the report without my consent. I understand that information which emerges from the responses and activities and which is related to the research can be used in the thesis project report as well as any subsequent publications such as journal articles and books. I understand that this project provides a potential benefit to me in the development of my ministry in the area of giving and receiving mentorship and that there is no risk of harm beyond what is experienced in regular life and ministry. I also understand that this project has a potential to benefit the ministry of the Pentecostal Assemblies of Sri Lanka and the River of Life College specifically and Christian ministry in general. I understand that as a participant in the project I will be informed of the outcomes of the research. I have had opportunity to ask specific questions concerning my participation in this project and am satisfied that I adequately understand what is involved and that I can continue to ask any questions throughout the duration of the project. I also understand that I can ask questions about the research in this project from Dr. Mark Chapman at Tyndale Seminary and University, who is one of the project supervisors. If English language is an issue these questions can be forwarded to Dr. Chapman through [name of project assistant]. _______________________________________________ __________________________________ Signed Date [ Page ] 211 APPENDIX C-PAOSL MINISTRY MENTORING PROJECT PARTICIPANT FORM NAME OF MENTOR: _____________________________________________________________________ ADDRESS _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ PHONE _____________________________________________________________________ EMAIL _____________________________________________________________________ MINISTRY POSITION _____________________________________________________________________ DESCRIBE YOUR MINISTRY IN BRIEF _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ NOTE: Only select one or two disciples who you will mentor as part of this project. You may mentor others but will only be reporting about your mentoring experience with the one on this form. DISCIPLE A: □ Male; □ Female What is the nature of your relationship with the disciple? □ Supervisory; □ Not Supervisory; Family Relation? □ Yes; □ No If yes, what is the relationship? _____________________________________________________________________ How was this disciple selected? □ Assigned to you; □ Requested by disciple □ Selected by you _____________________________________________________________________ Name three qualities of this disciple which give you hope for his/her ministry 1. ___________________________________________________________________ 2. ___________________________________________________________________ 3. ___________________________________________________________________ DISCIPLE B: □ Male; □ Female What is the nature of your relationship with the disciple? □ Supervisory; □ Not Supervisory; Family Relation? □ Yes; □ No If yes, what is the relationship? _____________________________________________________________________ How was this disciple selected? □ Assigned to you; □ Requested by disciple □ Selected by you Name three qualities of this disciple which give you hope for his/her ministry 1. ___________________________________________________________________ 2. ___________________________________________________________________ 3. ___________________________________________________________________ [ Page ] 212 APPENDIX D—OUTLINE OF MINISTRY MENTORING HANDBOOK I. Chapter One: Introduction A. Defining Ministry Mentoring: B. Who is Being mentored? C. Kinds of Mentoring D. The Mentoring Relationship II. Chapter Two: Biblical Foundations of Mentoring A. Old Testament Examples 1. Moses and the people of God: 2. Moses and Joshua: 3. The book of Proverbs: A Mentoring Handbook B. New Testament Examples 1. Jesus, Peter and the Twelve 2. Barnabas, Paul and Timothy 3. New Testament Mentoring Concepts 4. A Theology which Informs Ministry Mentoring III. Chapter Three: What Does a Mentor Do? (Appendix D) IV. Chapter Four: The Character and Attitude of the Mentor (Appendix D) V. Chapter Five: The Mentoring Relationship A. First things B. Clarify Expectations C. Scheduling 1. Formal time 2. Informal time D. Evaluation E. Constellation Mentoring F. How to transition the relationship VI. Chapter Six: Walking with the Mentee A. A Highly Effective Mentor B. The Mentoring Matrix 1. Self-awareness 2. Freeing up 3. Visioneering 4. Implementing 5. Sustaining C. Dimensions of Christian Leadership 1. Spiritual Intimacy 2. Godly Character 3. Community Relationships 4. Service VII. Chapter Seven: A Mentoring Culture A. The Mentoring Model [ Page ] 213 B. The Organizational Structure [ Page ] 214 APPENDIX E—MINISTRY MENTORING HANDBOOK CHAPTER SAMPLES Chapter Two: What Does a Mentor Do? First, we want to get an understanding of the activities of a mentor. The headings below represent only some of these activities. The material in this chapter is based in part on the section on “What Excellent Mentors Do” in the book The Elements of Mentoring by Johnson and Ridley (2008, 1-48). Every situation and context will require the mentor to adapt and adjust the things they do depending on the ability and availability of the mentor, the needs and commitment of the disciples, as well as the boundaries of the culture and specific context.6 Selecting the Disciple Mentoring takes time so invest your time wisely. Pray and ask God for wisdom to choose—Jesus prayed all night before he chose the twelve (Luke 6:12- 13). You cannot mentor everyone so you need to ask how many can you handle in your present situation. Other questions to ask yourself: • Who is willing to be mentored? • How well do you fit in terms of personality? • Why do you want to mentor a particular person? Check your motives for mentoring a person. Ask yourself: what is the best for that person and what is the best for the kingdom? Disciple selection can happen in three ways: (1) You are assigned the disciple by the organization (2) Sometimes disciples request to be mentored by you (3) Sometimes you select the disciple directly. However it happens you finally need to accept or reject that responsibility according to how you sense the Spirit of God is directing you in this ministry. Other things to discern are whether or not the person is called; whether he or she is has a willing and teachable spirit. Don’t waste valuable time on an individual who is clearly not called or willing even though they are talented (unless the Lord has shown you something in that person that they have not yet seen). Be Available A mentor needs to be available to the disciple and is willing to-make time. To develop a relationship in which healthy mentoring takes a lot of time, _________________________ 6 Note on nomenclature: While in the thesis we were using the word “mentee,” in the ministry context 1 often used the word “disciple” as well. This is reflected in the handbook. [ Page ] 215 especially at the beginning when you are working out the framework of your mentoring relationship. Don’t let other less important things push this aside. But ultimately the mentor needs to make the choice to take on the mentoring responsibilities taking into account all the other responsibilities in his or her life. Know Your Disciple Take time to get to know the person you are mentoring. Observe and learn these things about your disciple: • What are their gifts and abilities? • What are their fears? • What is their pain? • What are their passions? • What is the best way of helping them align their priorities and reach their potential? (Stoddard and Tamasy 2003, 11) • Assess where they are in their spiritual journey and in the discipleship process • Relationships: 1. How do they relate to God? (Prayer life; worship; growing in knowledge of God) 2. To other Christians? (Friendly, transparent, with wisdom) 3. To their family members, friends, neighbours, work colleagues, strangers? • Character: 1. How Christ-like are they? 2. What aspects of the fruit of the spirit are present? 3. How do their ethics reflect biblical instructions? • Ministry: 1. How are they serving God? 2. How are they serving fellow Christians? 3. How are they serving outsiders? • Progress: 1. How far have they advanced since you last saw them? 2. What are indicators of their eagerness to grow spiritually? • Your Input: 1. What input is God calling you to have in their lives at this time based on your assessment? As you mentor someone, always be asking the Lord, “What are you doing in this disciple’s life and how can I cooperate with what you are doing?” [ Page ] 216 Set a standard of excellence In an intentional mentoring relationship it is good to set a high standard. But you can only set as high a standard for them as you set for yourself both in character and ministry skills. We do well to strive for excellence—to be the best we can be with what we have been given in ability and opportunity. However it is important that we do not confuse excellence with perfection. Perfection is not generally possibly for most people but everyone can have a spirit of excellence. What we are looking for in the disciple is a robust movement in the right direction: Are they moving toward God’s best for them or away from it? Are they passionate about doing the best they can or only do what it takes to get by? Excellence rejoices in progress: Have they advanced in their character and skill development? Is there evidence of increasing maturity? Encourage and Affirm Your Disciple Often Encouragement is one of the most important mentoring activities and is something the mentor must do as often as possible but particularly when the disciple may be experiencing setbacks in whatever areas in their life. Negative feedback wherever it comes from sticks to a person more readily and leads to discouragement so an increase in genuine encouragement is always welcome. Even talented people need to be encouraged from time to time. Along with encouragement affirmation is also important. Disciples need to be appreciated as person of value. There are in most cases many voices that may discourage them particularly when it comes to ministry so affirmation and encouragement can help them see things more positively. It has been suggested that “.. .it takes five positive comments to offset the impact of a single negative one” (Schwartz, Gomes, and McCarthy 2010, 168). A disciple or young ministry leader may share with you great visions and dreams concerning future ministry plans and expectations. As a mentor you may know that some of what they are sharing is not realistic. A skilled mentor will know how to affirm the heart out of which the dream flows while at the same time gently suggest more realistic scenarios and make the disciple aware of the limitations that may reduce the scope of the vision. Be a Teacher and a Coach Teach them what they need to know and give specific instructions when necessary. If you do not know specifically what they need to know, help them find someone who does or point them to some resource materials that will help them. Coach them through ministry activities as they need it. If you are in a position to do so, find opportunities to let them try a variety of ministry activities which require increasing levels of competence and then walk them through these activities until they gain confidence. [ Page ] 217 Just as a teacher gives homework to help the student grow and develop, in the same way mentors give assignments to the disciples which will stretch them towards greater capacity. It is good to make the assignments difficult enough to challenge them but not so difficult that they are overwhelmed lest they be discouraged. As they launch out, help them overcome fears; during the assignment provide continued encouragement as necessary; after completion provide opportunity to discuss how it went and provide feedback including correction if required. Combine the correction with repeated affirmation. Call Forth the Gifts As the mentor gets to know the disciple, a picture emerges of what potential exists within the disciple. It is the mentor’s responsibility to call that potential forth into behavioral reality. The mentor should not try to call something forth which is not already present. The mentor needs to work with what is before him not trying force something out of the mentee that is not there. Every disciple is unique—possessing different gifts, different abilities, different experiences and different passions. The mentor needs to discern what those things are and reinforce them. The disciple may not always be aware of them so the mentor needs to help identify those strengths and encourage their development. When you see the disciple’s appropriate use of their gifts and ability and growth in those areas be quick to acknowledge it. Offer Counsel in Difficult Times Sometimes the mentor plays the role of the counsellor. As such it is important have a relationship in which you can be open to discuss all issues of life and ministry. An important counselling skill includes active listening. Active listening means to listen carefully and then reflect (like a mirror) back to the individual what they have said using your words. If they confirm your interpretation of their words then you have heard them and they know it. Listen to the emotion in their voice. It is also important to listen to them with your eyes and take note of the body language. “To answer before listening— that is folly and shame” (Prov. 18:13). Help them to understand their feelings by asking appropriate questions such as “When you say... what are you feeling?” Why do you think you are feeling like this?” If it is an issue of making decisions, help them to see the full range of alternatives. Be prepared to offer wise counsel but recognize your limitations as a mentor. There may be some issues that are outside of your expertise and experience. Help your disciple to find the help they need elsewhere. Do not hesitate to refer them to someone who has the expertise in the area you do not have. [ Page ] 218 Stimulate Growth with Challenging Assignments In the mentoring relationship you want to see the disciple expand their capacity for ministry. One of the ways to do this is to give them assignments that challenge them and stretch them. Do not give them assignments that are beyond their ability, lest they fail and become discouraged. Neither should they be too easy, lest they lose interest in growing. They should be based on what area in his or her ministry represents a need of growth for the disciple. As they launch into their assignments help them to overcome their fears by encouraging them. After the assignment take time to debrief providing correction and encouragement. Provide Correction When correction is needed, balance it with affirmation. On one hand it is important to quickly point out things that are improper, ungodly and sinful. On the other hand it is good to demonstrate that you are aware of and appreciate where they have done well. This is the approach the apostle Paul took in his letters to the churches: first commendation; then correction followed by instruction and encouragement. When you provide correction do not to be overly negative and judgemental in a way that discourages. Rather in a gracious way provide correction that shows a way forward. It is usually best to provide correction away from the ears of other people. Publicly shaming the disciple is usually not helpful. Do not label them with negative names rather deal with specific negative behaviours and suggest alternative positive behaviours. Invite them to share why they think how they can do better if given another opportunity. Narrate Growth and Development As a mentor it is good from time to time to help the disciple see how far they have come and the direction they seem to be going now and then encourage them to think of the future. Give them a big picture view of their development. (Example statement: “I remember when you used to [be like this]...; now you [are like this]...; soon you will progress to [be like this]...”) Sometimes the disciple may not be aware of their progress until you describe it to them. This reflection can be an encouragement to the disciple in their growth. Nurture Creativity A discussion time with the mentor should be a time when the disciple feels safe to discuss new ideas. In fact new ideas should be encouraged. Take the time to talk with your disciple about these ideas and give them the benefit of your experience. In this kind of discussion the mentor may find that he or she will learn new things. [ Page ] 219 Self-Disclose When Appropriate Do not try and appear as faultless hero to the disciples. Do not let the disciple put you on a high place where he can never reach. If you are at too high a place in the disciple’s mind the relationship becomes hero worship. While in the beginning you might be a little like their hero, it is not healthy for them to have that perception very long. Tell about some of your own struggles, but in an appropriate way—-just enough information to achieve the purpose of helping the disciple understand that he or she is not the only one struggling in life and ministry. You should not try and appear as the one who has mastered every challenge but as one who by the grace of God has managed to cope. The disciple is likely to learn much from how you worked through your weaknesses. In self- disclosure the motive should be only to help the disciple not just to talk about your own needs or victories. Accept Increasing Friendship and Mutuality Mentoring relationships develop—from young child to adult child; from less-experienced student worker to co-worker in the kingdom; from formal relationship to friendship. In this development, pay attention to the comfort level of the disciple. They may not feel comfortable to be on the same level—consider what is culturally appropriate. Be an Intentional Model Let the disciple observe you in various contexts. Be an example of humility. Be dependable, following through on commitments. Be self-controlled. Let the disciple see you the same way no matter where you are - the same character in every place. You may play different roles (or wear different hats) but your character should be consistent (or have the same face not wear a mask). Chapter Three: The Character and Attitude of the Mentor Mentors know that in a sense they are giving themselves away. This speaks of a generous spirit and attitude that mentoring inevitably requires. There is always a willingness to help even it costs something in terms of time, money and energy. Mentoring is not for those who are interested only in their own development and advancement. The mentor is basically unselfish and does not hold back what will help his or her disciple. In almost every activity, “what we do and how we function” flows out of “who we are.” In this part of the handbook, we want to focus on the heart of the mentor. Jesus said “The good person out of the good treasure of his heart produces good, and the evil person out of his evil treasure produces evil, for out of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaks” (Luke 6:45 [ESV]). An OT [ Page ] 220 proverb reads: “Above all else, guard your heart, for everything you do flows from it” (Prov. 4:23 [NIV]). We may acquire mentoring competencies and understand how mentoring is supposed to work but if we fail to pay attention to our heart, our character and attitude in this matter of mentoring others, we are not likely to be effective. This does not mean as mentors we need to be perfect for the disciple to learn. The astute disciple can learn from us even if we do not have all the best characteristics that we may normally expect of a mentor. An interesting point to consider is this: “A good mentor may be a competent person with major flaws so that one can learn what to do and what not to do at the same time (Darwin 2004, 36). We also need to consider that there are different styles of mentoring. Some mentors may be more people-oriented who focus on the needs of the disciple. They will tend to be more nurturing and approachable. Others may be more task- oriented who focus on the needs of the work of the ministry which needs to get done. They may push for hard work and even seem harsh in some cases. It often depends on the maturity and personality of the disciple as to which is the best style to use. A good mentor who is able to use both of these styles as required could be seen as a gracious disciplinarian. Sometimes what is needed for the mentee is a season of nurturing and healing but in order for the mentee to become useful in the kingdom he or she needs to be “toughened up” so they can get on with the job. This keeps in view both priorities of ministry mentoring: what is best for the disciple and what is best for the kingdom of God. Maintain your Relationship with God The ministry mentor in order to be effective needs to continue growing as a person and as a servant of the Lord. A mentor, as mentioned before, is not someone who has already become perfect but is one who is moving towards excellence. The apostle Paul reflects such an attitude when he said, “Not that I have already obtained this or am already perfect, but I press on to make it my own, because Christ Jesus has made me his own” (Phil. 3:12 [ESV]). The best gift of a mentor to the disciple is a godly life that flows from an ever deepening relationship with God. The mentor is always conscious that the disciple is observing his or her life. For instance the disciples of Jesus observed him when he prayed and wanted to learn from him how to pray. It became a teaching opportunity. Let our spiritual habits and practices as observed by our disciple become opportunities to teach our mentees. Let our lifestyle take into account that God is watching but also that those being mentored by us are also watching. And then let them ask questions of us. [ Page ] 221 Practice Self-care Be an example to your mentee by keeping a good balance between your ministry and personal life. Build into your life that keeps you physically healthy, emotionally healthy and spiritually health. Monitor all the relationships in your life. If you have children spend enough time to be a good parent; if you are married be a good spouse; if your parents are still alive honor them. Be an example to your mentees in that as well. Let them get a glimpse of how you live even in contexts outside of formal ministry. Some pastors are so tied up in their ministry that if you take that away they have nothing. That’s not healthy. Sometimes they cannot say “no” and take on more responsibility than they can realistically handle. They wear themselves out and fail to pay attention to the other areas of their lives. If a mentor does not take care of all matters in his or her own life and ministry, it will be difficult to mentor someone effectively. When we have a broad foundation in our life, our ministry will be much stronger. The mentee needs to observe how you operate out of a broad and balanced foundation. Resist Cloning The mentee will often imitate the mentor and take on styles of ministry from the mentor. While this is to be expected and natural, the mentor needs to encourage the mentee to develop his or her own style. God has given everyone their own gifts, abilities and personalities which need to be called forth. In other words, the mentor should not try to make the disciple into a copy of him or herself. Make Sure You are Productive and Remain Competent The best ministry mentors keep active in ministry, always being ready to take on new challenges. They continue to grow and never stop learning. They model this attitude to their mentees. For the mentee who is serious about growing, it a great encouragement and inspiration if they see their mentor is also continually pushing forward. It is an opportunity for both the mentor and mentee to share in the journey of growth. The mentor also needs to be competent. First, she needs to be a competent in the area of ministry in which she serves and continuously striving for excellence. It is good for the mentee to be able to have confidence in the ability of the mentor in their ministry. But she needs to be competent in the area of mentoring skills. The mentor needs to understand how to transfer their wisdom and knowledge to the mentee in a beneficial way. As mentor you need to assess your current life situation and your current ministry situation to make sure where you are in you in your life and ministry journey you will be able to serve the [ Page ] 222 mentee. For instance, if you have major issues that you are dealing with which may have the potential for a negative impact you should not be mentoring anyone unless they are mature enough to process with you what is taking place. Hold Yourself Accountable As a mentor in order to remain credible you need to be honest, consistent and have integrity in your relationships. Honor commitments to yourself, your mentee and others in your life and ministry. It is better to “under promise” and “over-deliver” than to “over-promise” and “under-deliver.” If there is failure in this area, admit to it and deal with it. Do not cover up. It is good to be accountable to someone else regarding your mentoring relationship. You do not need to share the details, but let some person (possibly your own mentor) be generally aware of how your mentoring activity and relationships are going. Practice Humility As a Christian ministry mentor, one of our most important virtues should be humility. This is seen gracious acceptance of limitations as well as in transparency with respects to weakness and faults. As we admit our limitations and our mistakes the disciple is then also free to be human as well. We should not be afraid to say, “I don’t know,” and apologize when called for. Accept the Burden of Power Whether we like it or not there is power a mentoring relationship. The degree of power often depends on personal influence you may have in other arenas. The mentoring relationship may itself lead to some power because of the respect that the mentor gains from the mentee. It may also be because in some cases there is a supervisory element to the relationship. Whatever power you have in the relationship, it is never appropriate to abuse it. Power in this relationship should be used only for the benefit of your disciple. Use power to encourage and support, never to exploit. Never take unfair advantage of the disciple for your own benefit. Tolerate Idealization At the beginning of the relationship, it is possible that the mentor may be looked on with a high level of respect. He may gain a kind of a hero status with the mentee. It may be uncomfortable for the mentor to be placed at that level in that it may create unrealistic expectations. The mentor should deal with it graciously. It can be a good thing since it does strengthen the relationship at the early stages. But there should be a maturing of the relationship where the disciple continues to identify with the mentor with a more realistic perception of who the [ Page ] 223 mentor is. Idealization becomes a healthy identification. The mentor is still important but is no longer the great “cure-all.” In any case, the mentor should point to Christ as the ultimate mentor and say as Paul did: "Follow my example, as I follow the example of Christ" (1 Cor. 11:1 [NIV]). Encourage without Becoming Blind As the relationship between the mentor and disciple strengthens, there is a danger that the mentor becomes blind to the faults of the disciple. It is important for the mentor to be honest in the ongoing evaluation of the disciple and confront with frankness the issues that arise in the ministry of the disciple. As you encourage the advance of the disciple, keep an eye out for dysfunctional things that need to be addressed. Failure to do so at the earlier stages of leadership development with set your disciple up for a fall in later ministry seasons. Do Not Expect Perfection Do not expect perfection in yourself nor your disciple. Perfectionism leads to negativity and unrealistic evaluations. A more appropriate and helpful approach is modelled by Paul, who continued to strive towards the purpose that Christ had for him while acknowledging that he was not perfect: “Not that I have already obtained this or am already perfect, but I press on to make it my own, because Christ Jesus has made me his own. Brothers, I do not consider that I have made it my own. But one thing 1 do: forgetting what lies behind and straining forward to what lies ahead, I press on toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus" (Phil. 3:12-14 [ESV]). As mentors, we should model imperfect excellence: not pretending we have arrived but continue to pursue excellence. Respect Privacy and Protect Confidentiality In order to maximise the benefit of the mentoring relationship, the disciple needs to feel safe with the mentor. That includes having confidence that what is shared privately will not be made public or shared with someone else. If the mentoring relationship however is of a supervisory nature then it will be important for the mentor and the disciple to be clear as to what can remain confidential. Generally a discussion about the same person in the role of a mentor as well as a supervisor will help set the boundaries in this area. It is also important that the mentor does not unduly pry into the private matters of the disciple forcing them to share things that have no bearing on the ministry mentoring agenda. Use Humor Learn to laugh at yourself. Use humour so that the disciples do not take themselves too seriously. A healthy mix of work and laughter can go a long ways [ Page ] 224 to strengthen the mentoring relationship and ministry effectiveness in general. However never use humour to belittle the disciple. Do Not Stoop to Jealousy Sometimes the gifts, qualities and skills of a disciple exceed that of the mentor in some areas so there may be a temptation for the mentor to become jealous of the mentee. Jealousy undermines mentoring and signals that the mentor needs to deal with their own fears and insecurities. A biblical example is that of Saul becoming jealous of David. Saul invited him to the king’s table as a part of a mentoring imitative but when David was perceived by the people as more successful than Saul, Saul began to sabotage and to undermine David. It is far better that from the outset of the relationship the heart of the mentor should be that the disciple grow and if possible exceed the mentor. We should celebrate the success of the disciples but also help them to evaluate their success with grace and humility. The mentoring relationship is after all about how they can grow. If jealous becomes an insurmountable problem for the mentor, it may be best to hand the disciple over to another mentor while the first mentor works on their fears and insecurities. The Heart of a Mentor is Generous Highly effective mentors do not think of themselves first. They consider what is best for the disciple and for the kingdom of God. They ask the question: “How can I help this disciple with his or her unique gifts, abilities and skills advance the kingdom of God? [ Page ] 225 APPENDIX F—CHECKLIST FOR STARTING A MINISTRY MENTORING RELATIONSHIP NOTE: This is only a list of guidelines that you may want to think about as you begin an intentional mentoring relationship. Not all points will apply in every case. FIRST, Think About These Things □ How the disciple has come to you: assigned to you; requested by disciple; selected by you? □ Have you prayed whether this is the right time and right person to be mentoring? □ Is there a supervisory obligation in the relationship? □ Is there any issue of finances connected to the relationship? Is there a way to remove finances from the relationship (i.e. by delegating the matter to a church board)? □ What are your own motives in this relationship? (There may be mixture of motives, such as wanting to help the disciple grow as well as getting someone to help in certain areas of ministry. This is not a bad thing but you need to be aware of it and make sure the priority is for the best of the disciple in particular and the kingdom of God in general) Clarify Expectations from All Sides Expectations of disciple □ Are you aware of all the expectations the disciple may have, spoken and unspoken? □ Time that you will spend with them in discussion □ Learning opportunities given—college or in church training □ On the job practice opportunities □ The giving of ministry responsibilities □ Coaching through ministry assignments □ Ministry expenses (if applicable) [ Page ] 226 □ Ask the disciple what he/she hopes to gain from the mentoring relationship Your Expectations as Mentor Remember: think first of how you can help the disciple grow as a leader, then of ministry needs. But many times you will find that in the ministry mentoring context both things can be accomplished: the growth of the disciple meeting the ministry needs through ministry assignments with a follow-up discussion (debriefing). □ Disciple willing to learn □ Disciple willing to submit to basic rules and instructions mentoring relationship and ministry context □ Regular meeting times—one on one and group mentoring times as applicable □ Attendance at church meetings; small group meetings □ Ministry and other responsibilities □ What are you as mentor hoping for from the relationship? Expectations in the Ministry Context □ What is the church expecting through this relationship? (if applicable) □ Does anyone else have expectations in this relationship? (Another pastor or Bible College if applicable) Learning Goals and Objectives □ Make a list of things that you the mentor and the disciple both agree should be the learning objectives of the mentoring arrangement. (These can be evaluated and amended from time to time) Other Matters to Discuss With the Disciple □ What are rules and boundaries in the relationship? □ Speak about matters of confidentiality [ Page ] 227 □ When and how often will you meet one-on-one? □ Does the disciple have other people in his/her life which having mentoring-like role in their life and ministry? (This is not a bad thing but you need to be aware of this) □ What is the disciple’s awareness of the call to ministry? □ Set a specific time when you will review the relationship (perhaps in six months or so). □ How long will you continue in this mentoring relationship? (There is no need to fix a date of conclusion, just establish the fact that this is not a relationship that will continue in the same way for more than a few months or years) General Considerations □ How will having a disciple impact your life and ministry? □ Is there anything that concerns you about the disciple? (be aware of any issues that will need to be faced □ Are you the best person available to mentor this disciple at this time? (If yes, go for it...if not, prayerfully consider helping them connect with someone else.) [ Page ] 228 REFERENCE LIST Allen, Tammy D. and Lillian Turner de Tormes Eby. 2010. The Blackwell handbook of mentoring: A multiple perspectives approach. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. Allen, Tammy D., Lisa M. Finkelstein, and Mark L. Poteet. 2009. Designing workplace mentoring programs: An evidence-based approach, Talent management essentials. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. Athukorala, Sanath Kumara. 2008. A comparison of Jesus leadership model and Sri Lankan guru model to develop a leadership curriculum for the Pentecostal church in Sri Lanka. Master's thesis, Christian Education, Torch Trinity Graduate School of Theology, Seoul, Korea. Biehl, Bobb. 1996. Mentoring: Confidence in finding a mentor and becoming one. Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman Publishers. Blake-Beard, Stacy. 2009. Mentoring as a bridge to understanding cultural difference. Adult Learning 20 (1-2). Boshers, Bo, and Judson Poling. 2006. The be-with factor: Mentoring students in everyday life. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan. Brown, Stephen A. 2006. Evaluating leadership development curriculum based on learning contract feedback. DMin thesis, Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, South Hamilton, MA. -------. 2012. Leadership Development. Lecture in DMIN 0909 "Developing Leaders" Tyndale Seminary, Toronto, ON, May 16, 2012. Bruce, Alexander Balmain. 1995. The training of the Twelve: or, passages out of the Gospels, exhibiting the twelve disciples of Jesus under discipline for the apostleship. Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc. Original edition, 1877. Cannell, Linda. 2006. Theological education matters: Leadership education for the church. Newburgh, IN: EDCOT Press. Central Bank of Sri Lanka, 2012. Economic and Social Statistics of Sri Lanka. Vol. 34. Colombo, Sri Lanka: Statistics Department, Central Bank of Sri Lanka.http://www.cbsl.gov.lk/pics_n_docs/10_pub/_docs/statistics/other/e con_&_ss_2012.pdf (accessed October 19, 2012). [ Page ] 229 Clinton, J. Robert. 1988. The making of a leader: Recognizing the lessons and stages of leadership development Colorado Springs, CO: NavPress. Clinton, J. Robert, and Dr. Richard Clinton. 1991. The mentoring handbook: Detailed guidelines and helps for Christian mentors and mentorees. Altadena, CA: Barnabas Publishers. --------. 1993. Unlocking your giftedness: What leaders need to know to develop themselves and others. Pasadena, CA: Barnabas Publishers. Clutterbuck, David. 2004. Mentor competences: A field perspective. In The situational mentor: An international review of competencies and capabilities in mentoring, ed. David Clutterbuck and Gill Lane, 42-56. Burlington, VT: Gower. Coghlan, David, and Teresa Brannick. 2010. Doing action research in your own organization. 3rd ed. London, UK: SAGE. Coleman, Robert Emerson, and Roy J. Fish. 1993. The master plan of evangelism. 30th anniversary ed. Grand Rapids, MI: F.H. Revell. Cooperrider, David L., and Diana Kaplin Whitney. 2005. Appreciative inquiry: A positive revolution in change. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler. Creps, Earl G. 2008. Reverse mentoring: How young leaders can transform the church and why we should let them. Leadership Network (Dallas Tex.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Daloz, Laurent A. 1999. Mentor: Guiding the journey of adult learners. The Jossey-Bass higher and adult education series. San Francisco, CA: Jossey- Bass. Darwin, Ann. 2004. Characteristics ascribed to mentors by their protégés. In The situational mentor: An international review of competencies and capabilities in mentoring, ed. David Clutterbuck and Gill Lane, 29-41. Burlington, VT: Gower. de Silva, D. A. 2000. Honor and Shame. In Dictionary of New Testament background: A compendium of contemporary biblical scholarship, ed. Stanley E. Porter and Craig A. Evans. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press. Dowdy, Naomi. 2006. Moving on and moving up: 10 practical principles for getting to the next level. Dallas, TX: Naomi Dowdy Ministries. [ Page ] 230 Engstrom, Theodore Wilhelm, and Norman B. Rohrer. 1989. The fine art of mentoring: Passing on to others what God has given you. Brentwood, TN : Wolgemuth & Hyatt. Fairley, Stephen G., and Chris E. Stout. 2004. Getting started in personal and executive coaching: How to create a thriving coaching practice. Hoboken, NJ: J. Wiley & Sons. Hadaway, C. Kirk, Francis M. DuBose, and Stuart A. Wright. 1987. Home cell groups and house churches. Nashville, TN: Broadman Press. Harris, R. Laird, Gleason L. Archer, and Bruce K. Waltke. 1999. Theological wordbook of the Old Testament, electronic ed. Chicago: Moody Press. Haubert, Katherine, and J. Robert Clinton. 1990. The Joshua Portrait: A study in leadership development, leadership transition, and destiny fulfillment. Altadena, CA: Barnabas Publishers. Hendricks, Howard G., and William Hendricks. 1995. As iron sharpens iron: Building character in a mentoring relationship. Chicago, IL: Moody Press. Hiebert, Paul G. 1985. Anthropological insights for missionaries. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House. Hofstede, Geert H., Gert Jan Hofstede, and Michael Minkov. 2010. Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind: Intercultural cooperation and its importance for survival. 3rd ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Houston, James M. 2007. The Disciple: Following the true mentor. Vol. 5, Soul's longing series. Colorado Springs, CO: David C. Cook. Johnson, W. Brad, and Charles R. Ridley. 2008. The elements of mentoring. Rev. ed. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. Klasen, Nadine, and David Clutterbuck. 2002. Implementing mentoring schemes: A practical guide to successful programs. Oxford, UK: Butterworth- Heinemann. Lightfoot, Joseph Barber, and J. R. Harmer. 1891. The apostolic fathers. Logos ed. London, UK: Macmillan and Co. Louw, Johannes P., and Eugene Albert Nida. 1996. Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament: Based on semantic domains. electronic ed. of 2nd ed. Vol. 1. New York, NY: United Bible Societies. [ Page ] 231 Mandryk, Jason 2010. Operation world: The definitive prayer guide to every nation. 7th ed. Colorado Springs, CO: Biblica. Moore, S. David. 2004. Shepherding movement. London, GBR: Continuum International Publishing. Olson, Edwin E., and Glenda H. Eoyang. 2001. Facilitating organization change: Lessons from complexity science. Practicing organization development series. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer. Pryce, Julia, Alison Niederkorn, Margaret Goins, and Melissa Reiland. 2011. The development of a youth mentoring program in the south of India. International Social Work 54 (1): 51-65. Pue, Carson. 2005. Mentoring leaders: Wisdom for developing character, calling, and competency. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books. Raab, Laura, and J. Robert Clinton. 1997. Barnabas, encouraging exhorter: A study in mentoring. Altadena, CA: Barnabas. Reese, Randy D., and Robert Loane. 2012. Deep mentoring: Guiding others on their leadership journey. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Books. Reid, Alvin L. 2012. With: A practical approach to informal mentoring. Kindle ed. Colorado Springs, CO: NavPress. Roberts, Andy. 1999. Homer’s Mentor: Duties fulfilled or misconstrued. http://www.nickols.us/homers_mentor.pdf (accessed March 24, 2011). Saccone, Steve, and Cheri Saccone. 2012. Protégé: Developing your next generation of church leaders. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Books. Schwartz, Tony, Jean Gomes, and Catherine McCarthy. 2010. Be excellent at anything: The four keys to transforming the way we work and live. Kindle ed. New York: Free Press. Smither, Edward L. 2008. Augustine as mentor: A model for preparing spiritual leaders. Kindle ed. Nashville, TN: B & H Academic. Stanley, Paul D., and J. Robert Clinton. 1992. Connecting: The mentoring relationships you need to succeed in life. Colorado Springs, CO: NavPress. Stoddard, David A., and Robert Tamasy. 2003. The heart of mentoring: Ten proven principles for developing people to their fullest potential. Kindle ed. Colorado Springs, CO: NavPress. [ Page ] 232 Stringer, Ernest T. 2007. Action research. 3rd ed. Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications. Stuart, Douglas K. 2007. Exodus. Logos Library System; electronic ed. Vol. 2, The New American Commentary. Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman Publisher. Van Gelder, Craig. 2009. The missional church and leadership formation: Helping congregations develop leadership capacity. Missional church series. Grand Rapids, Mich.: W.B. Eerdmans Pub. Co. Vella, Jane Kathryn. 2001. Taking learning to task: Creative strategies for teaching adults. The Jossey-Bass higher and adult education series. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. -------. 2008. On teaching and learning: Putting the principles and practices of dialogue education into action. The Jossey-Bass higher and adult education series. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Wickramaratne, Colton, Dishan Wickramaratne, and Hal Donaldson. 2007. My adventure in faith: How one man dared to trust God for the impossible. Springfield, MO: Onward Books, Inc. Wright, Walter C., Jr. 2012. The third third of life: Preparing for your future. Kindle ed. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Books. Wright, Walter C., Jr. 2004. Mentoring: The promise of relational leadership. Waynesboro, GA: Paternoster. --------. 2009. Relational leadership: A biblical model for influence and service. Kindle; 2nd ed. Colorado Springs:CO: Paternoster. Zachary, Lois J. 2005. Creating a mentoring culture: The organization's guide. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. --------. 2012. The mentor's guide: Facilitating effective learning relationships. Kindle; 2nd ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Zachary, Lois J., and Lory A. Fischler. 2009. The mentee's guide: Making mentoring work for you. The Jossey-Bass higher and adult education series. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. [ Page ] 233 ***** This is the end of the e-text. This e-text was brought to you by Tyndale University, J. William Horsey Library - Tyndale Digital Collections *****