Strategic Planning Committee Notes of the meeting held 1/16/12 Present:

Dora, Bill, Peter, Jeff (facilitator), Michael, Anthony, Bonnie (recorder), Galen (conference call), Kathleen, Alan, Pat, Julia; Jean Ellen. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------DEADLINE for receipt of proposed revisions to the Notes: 1/21. NEXT MEETING: Mon., Jan.
23, 2012, 6:30 pm at KCC Focus for next meeting: Decide on a nish date for creating the strategic plan, based on what we each can commit to doing and a reasonable estimate of the time needed. Based on this decide on a start date for the one year retreat. Aim: Build on momentum from the SWOT and not let it dissipate. Review tasks and time needed - including the overall timeline - and what each of us will commit to doing specically. Facilitator for the next meeting: Peter (back up: Jeff) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ACTIONS TAKEN: Notes for the 1/2/12 SPC meeting were approved. Tasks Assigned - TO DOs: Bonnie - get pdfs of approved notes to Jeff to post on the blog Dora - email us a list of tasks to be done and time estimates for each task ALL - review the task list, decide which tasks and how many hours each of us will commit to doing, respond by email to Dora Bill - send us a chart of all responses in the original format [listed by respondent, with the SWOT
across; vs. sorted by categories then by SWOT pre category]; also enumerate the side issues and assumptions he alluded to in this meeting Jean Ellen - follow up on identifying local experts on the Albion model (developmental stages in growth in spiritual organizations), ascertain availability to consult with us. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ DISCUSSION POINTS: Setting the One Year Retreat Date: Michael noted that todays PC meeting looked at setting a date for the OYR, or at least setting a date to make this decision. He feels its something we are ready to do and could do now, but its unclear whether we will do it. Important to do it soon in order to fuel and sustain the momentum generated in the SWOT. FEEDBACK RE THE SWOT MEETING General observations - apart from the data: Concerns: - People lacked current / accurate information about KCC, so communication needs improving. E.g., many cited a lack of transparency re nances, but info is readily available. So we need to educate folks re how to access it, nd out how to facilitate access.
- SCOL, long term retreat (LTR) were hardly mentioned, even after Michael brought it up. Comments focused on LTR as a detriment to the Urban Center, a drain on resources. Few noted aspirations to do or support LTR. This may reect a lack of understanding, awareness re LTR rather than a lack of support. SCOL got listed as an asset, but without a sense of how its operated and the limits this entails.

SPC Meeting 1/16/12 - Notes - approved

[1]

- Re question What do you think would cause KCC to close its doors, what would you do? - surprise, concern at lack of response, depth. Unclear if it meant folks not that invested, or perhaps have so much goodwill, optimism, not taking this seriously. Timing may have been a factor, coming later in the meeting. People had already gotten to hear, speak, socialize, riding on whatever had already been brought up. Also a big drop in energy after lunch - people seemed tired, less engaged. - Lack of connection with the lineage, the UC as a place to come to meditate, but not with a focus on carrying the practices of our lineage, embodying the mission and vision of KCC. A western emphasis on socializing vs. focus on the the lineage and practice. - Little sense of ownership of KCC, e.g., folks didnt state what they would really like to help do. Usually expect to get more of that in response to the what if the doors were closed query. We know there were folks there who want to be involved and arent yet. - People noted lack of doorways to volunteering, understanding whats going on, the slowness of our process or engaging volunteers - these might have something to do with the lack of ownership issue. Because people arent plugged in as volunteers, they dont have sense of trajectory, what happens to make things the way they are, where its going. If we get a bigger UC and grow - thatll really change our teaching methods and tax resources - a lot of folks wouldnt think about that. - Recurring theme - the aging sangha - us -and the age divide though now we have more young people attending than 10 years ago. Challenge to bring younger folks into deeper level of involvement. Pluses: Enthusiasm, little complaining. People engaged, attentive, expressed loyalty, potential for ownership, an implicit willingness to invest energy - seeking a container, a place to put this energy. How we work with that is critical, to engage that enthusiasm we need to do more than just send bulletins. Opportunities to be involved need to be presented in ways that people recognize them. - We got a strong response, asked a lot from people - reply to surveys, come to and help with the meeting. Dora made 1 appeal to the listserve and 1 to the community list for help, got 15 folks right away, also found people just stepping in to help as needed at the meeting, encouraging to see. - Good facilitating and preparation for the SWOT, with more people engaged and airing more. The prep and support, including detailed meeting format was key to making it easy to facilitate. - Emphasis on importance of socializing among the sangha, desire for more cohort study groups, support groups, less emphasis on silence at retreats - this could be a plus for the planning process, since people come together as a community in meetings to develop it. Fostering socializing, loyalty and bonding - can be seen as skillful means, drawing people to meetings, participate, support practice. What to do with the enthusiasm generated in the SWOT? Could we ride this process, this wave of engagement and have it end in getting a new UC? Moving these people from saying we want it to were going to get it. Maybe that could actually happen. Setting and announcing the OYR date could add fuel to sustain the momentum. Along with people continuing to implement the plan while others are in OYR - a sense that everyone can do their part. ---------------SPC Meeting 1/16/12 - Notes - approved



[2]

Consideration of the SWOT data: The data: Recorded in a SWOT response chart, and a list consolidated by topic/issue (aka buckets or pots - by Dora and Bonnie) - 30 pages so far - and sent to the SPC list. Responses from the SWOT meeting are still being tabulated as of this meeting - estimated to be less than 10 more pages. The top issues cards from the meeting are being charted by Peter Frothingham. We need to decide what to do about items that didnt get mentioned but should be included. Reviewing the data: Some want more time to digest the data - its a lot of info. This will take more than 1 meeting. Others want to dive in and get started. Take an issue and work with it to see if its still a focal point. We should distinguish between immediate, pressing concerns - e.g., communications (e.g., re this process thats already happening) - and longer term issues, issues which need to be addressed before we can go forward - e.g. communications.. Tackling the categories: Go through the pots to se whats missing. Or - take a rst run at narrowing it down to 5 - 6 pots. Value of putting equal amount of stuff to deal with in each. E.g., communication seems too big to include in organization category The pot, the soil, the plants life and growth process: All are important, related but different. So its not just a matter of choosing, naming a pot but looking at a succession of time frames. Also, not just picking a date, but also a performance standard. The pots endure in an organization. Need to be aware of the whole pot, but focus on only a few (1-2) parts for 1-3 years, not everything all at once. Michael: Nice to have 4 simple categories, fundamentally like metal buckets, but the conceptualization never captures what were planning. Its a process. Growth involves some stumbling. Distinguish between the trees growth and the vessel that holds the soil that the tree is in - that never captures what it is the tree is doing. We still need to do the categorizing, but be clear what part were doing. Growth stages / Alban Institute: Jean Ellen: Its a transformational process, not static - therell be surprises along the way. The AIs model of stages of growth of spiritual organizations can help us see where we are in the process, what helps a group move to the next stage. Shell us nd local expertise on this. Nancy Boros also willing to help. Urgency: We should dive in, work with the actual data and stumble forward with it, learn as we go. We need to do this, consider the naming of these, get started ASAP - the sangha is waiting to see it. We need to something about the UC or well run out of patience in the community. Increasing efciency: Need to commit to action, make decisions, caution re tendency to spend a lot of time on process. Dont have to do everything as a whole group. Jim Kimballs email - e.g., using multiple working groups..running in parallel. Limit plan scope: Julia noted in a group this size its key not to bite off too much. E.g., whats important to get done in the next 3- 5 years, not the next 15 - at least for now - to accomplish the mission, vision. Vs. the risk of spinning out too far in the future with too broad a scope of work. There are classic categories - people, program, facilities - brainstorm for an hour re what our categories would be. Dora noted that with the length of LTR we should look farther out than 1-5 years.

SPC Meeting 1/16/12 - Notes - approved

[3]

Need to set tasks, timeline, to set OYR start: Michael: Clearly all the questions have not been noted - but not much to gain by trying for a complete list. The list changes as we go along - e.g., what wed say differs before and after the SWOT. We need a list of things we need to do. If we actually want to set a sate for start of OYR a year out - we need to know how well get this plan done in that period of time, with condence about that. We need to look at the steps in the planning process. Need to identify buckets to set tasks and timeline: Need 2 + meetings to identify the issues. Starting that rms timeline. Need if/then scenarios - so we know what to do with a part if x happens. Getting data to the SPC: Bill will send us all the data in the format used in the questionnaire [listed by respondent, with the SWOT across; vs. sorted by categories then by SWOT pre category]. Taking a stab at data categories - some possiblities: Volunteer System / Engagement: Much concern expressed on this one - e.g.,too few people doing too much work, failure to nurture volunteers, lack of goals, poor follow up. Expertise is available re making a volunteer system work well - we should consult an expert on this. Calling it Engagement would include volunteers, membership, socializing. Stafng should go with this. Communication: Its the single biggest thing, covers so much - so it should have its own pot. But its very context dependent - so should be addressed within each pot. If done as a separate pot its harder to get the right tool for the right thing depending on the context. Value of making communication a separate pot - it has so many parts. KCC lacks even a fundamental level of communications strategy. Financial stability: Noted often, we all know its a key issue. Financial resources to support the goals. Organization: Formal structure, committees, stafng, decision making process, policies. Practice & Lineage: Programs, teachings, connection with the lineage, teachers. Physical Structures / Suitable UC: Facilities for Urban Center, SCOL; acquisition and maintenance. Alan suggested collapsing the topics down to 4 categories: teaching/preserving the richness of the practice/lineage; organizational structure of the sangha (includes formal structure, committees, stafng, decision making process, communications); acquiring and maintaining physical structures; nancial resources to support the goals. Peter: Nice to have fewer categories, but it means more subcategories - e.g., UC (facilities). Re: succession (organizational); communication - value of having a visual communications break out group to get an integrated approach on this. Concern re the organizational chunk being too big, over inclusive. Bill: Key is how this unfolds over time, as a basis for seeing our direction. Look at assumption of a strategic direction for the UC. Jeff: Caution re following DRZCs model too much - they were further ahead in the process, so just ne tuning. Were still deciding how we want to grow - for the bigger stuff we need to own that a particular direction is where we want. E.g., we really are going for a new UC vs maybe we will sometime. Architects call this approach fast tracking - designing and building at the same time. There are things we have a tacit agreement on, a vague understanding - need to make it explicit. Anthony: We need to decide up front if were going for a new UC, since that affects the whole timeline, resources, etc. - wholl decide this and when? SPC Meeting 1/16/12 - Notes - approved



[4]

Dora: Other issues may be important but not named as needing attention in the responses and may not need whole sangha to address - e.g., program, teachers and teaching, OK. Except for succession - that part of the plan could best be drafted by a small group, not need whole sanghas input for this. The plan vis a vis the Mission and Vision, LTR: We need to relate all these things (issues, goals, strategies, etc. - see lexicon from awhile back) to the mission and vision. Jeff: This is a strategic plan not an operational one - e.g., whats the strategic aspect of the nancial pot. What were doing will affect everything at KCC. Key cultural /programmatic point: KCC needs to be about deepening peoples practice so that theyre inspired to do LR and support a LR center. We need to shift KCCs focus so folks see the central issue is LTR and sustaining it. This relates to succession includes nurturing inspirational experienced practitioners. Thus a its big concern re lack of responses noted re SCOL and LTR - if not enough people interested in LTR we need to address this. ------------NEXT STEPS: Michael: Inspired by the SWOT we all did, feeling safe about the process already, almost perfunctory to look at the timeline and assess the pieces, given the energy, effort and sincerity already shown. Galen: Appreciation for the SPCs discussion depth, effort. Michael: Concern - we did build a re, but now, this is traditionally where we dont keep it going. A way to push fuel on the re is to announce the OYR. We could decide tonight- whether we will isnt clear. Can we condently say well get the plan done by Dec. this year - actually do all these things, with the people in this room? So that someone could give us the money for the retreat and know itll happen. Coming to that certainty, along with the retreat dates, that would put a huge heap of fuel on the re. Its important to get it going. We need to look at the steps on a ip chart, the critical path, at the next meeting. Not spend a month analyzing it. Vs. tendency to keep extending the timeline. When we nish drafting the strategic plan, three months after that we can start the OYR. Therell be ongoing implementation of the plan during long retreat. So the people not going into retreat also have their part to do, during the retreat. It comes down to that point when the OYR starts, the plan is getting implemented - both things are really important, one at SCOL the other here. We each need to look at the proposal, the steps, that end in December, land decide if we can do this thing by then - is there any big thing here that stands in the way? If not, can we commit to doing it? Get really serious about it. Also remember that whatever we set as a deadline, itll take longer. Can you vow to make this happen? Need to follow up with others in the sangha offering to help - e.g., Savanch, Nancy ?"Boros. Maintaining momentum, nurturing our resources is critical. HOMEWORK - Get specic, realistic about what each of us can really do, not just in theory, how much time each can put into this? E.g., how many hours will you commit to: planning the leadership retreat; preparing a topic for a small group on goals, strategies - e.g., the UC; writing up what you heard at those meetings; writing proposed options for a meeting to consider; organizing an issue meeting; making charts, handouts, bulletin board displays; and how many all day Saturdays? --------------------------Posted by Bonnie McLean for the SPC SPC Meeting 1/16/12 - Notes - approved



[5]