Thread: blue-skying buy-in for love-share Board: Purgatory / Ship of Fools.


To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=2;t=020378

Posted by Zappa (# 8433) on :
 
This wonderful article exposes all that is bullshit in corporate speech. As best I can in recent decades ( [Roll Eyes] ) I have attempted to eschew this stuff in church circles. I suspect in many ways one of the subtexts to my recent bad ecclesiastical experiences was that the executives of my branch of Anglican Inc. saw my not always subtle refusal to embrace their penchant for gobbledygook in either corporate speak or liturgy as my being subversive or at least petulant. Perhaps it was. I have a deep-seated sense that ecclesiastical nothing-speak is precisely anti-gospel, for the good news we are called to speak is not a vacuous non-word but the world chaning pronouncements "to us a child is born," "he is not here, he is risen," "tear diown the mighty" et al.

Which is why I've decided to put this here rather then Heaven. What nothing-speak are we hearing in our religious meetings, words that are or risk becoming studies in immobility, substitutes for action and proclamation? What blither is hog-tying, knee-capping our mission, what is it supposed to mean, what might we say and do to recreate and energize anew that meaning in this era of vacuum-utterance? How might our speech create and be a counterculture amidst speechlessness?

Feel free to blue-sky amongst yourselves until it's time for the rubber to hit the road when we finish looking under the bonnet from the mezzanine, then we can share the love and bite the bullet of corporate go-forward. [Disappointed]
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
[Eek!]

As a (hopefully) refreshing antidote to all this bullshit, a recently-appointed Lay Minister asked our Bishop what his (the Bishop's) vision was for a proposed Fresh Expression of church in a 'new, exciting, vibrant, lively, and inspirational' residential/retail etc. etc. development in Our Place's parish.

The Bishop's reply?

'Find the place a soul'.

IJ
 
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :
 
Can’t we just use missional imagination while we do Church and be Church? Anoint the brethren with charismatic conviction and enable the Body of Christ to disciple every seeker.

Shall we just pray about it?

Can I get an Amen?
 
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :
 
Good link in OP.

I am reminded of the 40 millions spent on "Lean Management" (look it up, it is far too annoying to link to) in health systems in this province, where people "walk the gemba" become "agile", and get all "kaizen" and other bits of car manufacturing Japanese-derived pseudo-profound bullshit.
 
Posted by Cathscats (# 17827) on :
 
I hate "Blue sky thinking" but even worse is "Thinking outside the box" which a local college uses repeatedly, each time as though she had just coined the phrase.

But the real pits is "One size does not fit all." Last time I attended the Church of Scotland's General Assembly, which was 2 years ago, every major report, and some minor ones, included this "truth." It is a truth, but what incenses me is that the very people who put it into reports then proceed to expect us to act as though one size does fit all, and what is good for inner city Glasgow is also good for the rural Highlands. I am just realising how long I could rant about this, so I will stop.

I love the idea of discovering a place's soul. But don't let that become a catch phrase as well!
 
Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on :
 
But don't you realise we're all on the same journey, although (obviously) our experiences of that journey may be different, they'll all have equal validity. Our goal must always be to assist in not just teaching but in facilitating the learning of our co-travellers in an attitude of mutual respect and empathy so that we can all be enabled to grow to our full potential [Projectile]
 
Posted by simontoad (# 18096) on :
 
Gidday mate; hit the frog and toad; how they hanging?; ya gotta commit; put your best foot forward;

I enjoy poking fun at corporate talk, but recognise that different forms exist in many places, such as the Australian suburban cricket club.

Hang on hang on, I might have a point, but I'm quite tired, so I might also just be being a contrarian. Unable to tell at this point. EVIDENCE: unable to think of an alternative to 'be being'. Beddie byes.
 
Posted by mark_in_manchester (# 15978) on :
 
I'm not sure if I'm sad that church-speak has moved on from the weird KJV-hybrids I used to hear in CU circles in the late 80s, to aping general-purpose management bullshit.

At the time, I really didn't like the way people used KJV vocab and word order to make their prayers (or theological pronouncements) carry more weight with the group. I feel the same urge to talk plainly now, in the presence of Dilbert-speakers. But something in me is also wistful about the way those earnest kids from small Calvinistic fellowships used to speak.
 
Posted by Zappa (# 8433) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
But don't you realise we're all on the same journey, although (obviously) our experiences of that journey may be different, they'll all have equal validity. Our goal must always be to assist in not just teaching but in facilitating the learning of our co-travellers in an attitude of mutual respect and empathy so that we can all be enabled to grow to our full potential [Projectile]

Oh my.

But we may need to open the kimono on that one, break down the silos before we drink the Kool-Aid of corporate go-forward.

Yeah, alright, I'm heading into heaven territory there, but in all seriousness the problem seems to be that in speaking as L'organist and I have we are achieving precisely nothing but avoidance and self-satisfaction, surely the opposite of the way of the Cross?
 
Posted by Dal Segno (# 14673) on :
 
Hmmm, church has always had its share of bullshit phrases. Like having a "time of worship" followed by a "time of prayer": what does "time of" add to either of those? Or people who are doing things "for a season" - why use this odd phrase and why only in church?

OTOH, we do want to avoid cliche and management speak so that we are free to proactively leverage our corporate synergy going forward*.

-DS

* i.e. do stuff, together, in the future

[ 24. November 2017, 06:09: Message edited by: Dal Segno ]
 
Posted by M. (# 3291) on :
 
Sorry, tangent, as nothing to do with church, but a work committee. We had someone come to talk to us about a 'roadmap' or some such that the committee were not only not interested in but actually quite against.

All through the presentation, we were told we were on a journey. When it clearly wasn't getting anywhere, the presenter, in one last attempt, said, 'look, we're on a journey. We've all managed to get on the same train. We've all got seats on the train. They may not quite be the seats we want, but we all have seats on the train'

Whereupon someone piped up, 'and do we all have coffee?'

Collapse of stout party.

M.
 
Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on :
 
Simple rules:-
1. Can you précis this into ordinary language?

2. If so, is it worth saying?
a. If it is, say it in ordinary language - it has more force that way.
b. If it isn't don't say it.

3. If the answer to 1. is No, then,
a. It's bulls**t, and
b. Don't say it.

4. Work from a presumption that any slogan that starts with a present participle is bulls**t.


In church circles avoid using, 'missional', 'creative', 'intentional' and any versions of most words with an extra 'ity' stuck on the end of them.

There is one possible exception to this. If you are truly in the country of the bulls**tters, you may find you have to throw in a few phrases from their language to be able to speak to them.
 
Posted by Snags (# 15351) on :
 
I fear this comment should be on the "unpopular opinions" thread, but in for a penny ...

... my problem with this is that some of the phrases are, or have become, a convenient and helpful shorthand. The metaphor/analogy they invoke is concise, and conveys a particular meaning effectively.

However, the majority of it is, indeed, unmitigated horseshit and indicative of someone who is long on words and short on ever actually doing anything.
 
Posted by Paul. (# 37) on :
 
Enoch your rules might eliminate a lot of corporate style jargon but they'd also throw out a lot of doctrine. I can't put the Trinity into "ordinary language" can you?
 
Posted by Moo (# 107) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Paul.:
I can't put the Trinity into "ordinary language" can you?

I can't put it into any kind of language.

Moo
 
Posted by mark_in_manchester (# 15978) on :
 
Snags said

quote:
... my problem with this is that some of the phrases are, or have become, a convenient and helpful shorthand. The metaphor/analogy they invoke is concise, and conveys a particular meaning effectively.
I was in a meeting the other day where the presenter (whose role is to encourage industry-academic partnerships) was enthusing about an active group with real partnerships, tangible projects and measurable outcomes, whose activities 'are not just powerpoint'.

It struck me as interesting that here was man from the corporate world who had coined a usage where the very mechanism of much corporate self-expression has become a euphemistic metaphor for bullshit.

Wow, like meta, man.
 


© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0