47 - Between Recession and Recovery

Between Recession and Recovery
By Carnegie Samuel Calian

CHURCH leadership today is caught between the forces of recession and recovery. Pastors are sympathetic to the unemployed in their parishes and communities; at the same time, decision-makers in management argue for greater economizing in the interests of future expansion. Caught between these conflicting forces, most clergy are frankly confused which way to respond.

Corporate management feels the church's involvement on behalf of workers, the unemployed, and the poor is uninformed; yet pastors cannot be indifferent when parishioners are hurting in their midst. The church after all is in the business of compassion. Misdirected compassion, however, can be detrimental for the very persons pastors are seeking to help. How then is the church to express its concern and care in a complex world? Fairness and justice are at best approximations of the kingdom of God as envisioned by most pastors and churches.

I

Everyone is well aware that we live in a world of trade-offs. We often fail to acknowledge that fact until a crisis appears. When a crisis looms, both business and church leadership must re-examine the cost of their positions. Certain trade-offs may be necessary when survival is at stake for any organization.

There is always a struggle over each trade-off affecting human lives. This anguish over the choice is often unseen; but inevitably the results may seem "cold" and unfeeling to the majority. What actually happens is that business leadership often fails to communicate the pain of the struggle, while at the same time responding defensively to church activism as naive. Church leadership, in turn, views business as callous. Neither perception is accurate. Each harbors a simplistic impression of the other. The anger and the confusion arising on either side accuse the other of over-simplifying their response to economic problems affecting human lives, such as current concerns over dislocation and unemployment.

This became clear to me recently when a troubled chief executive of a major business corporation called in frustration and said, "Why are clergy organizing unemployed workers and saying such bad things about

Carnegie Samuel Calian is President and Professor of Theology, Pittsburgh Theological Seminary. A graduate of Occidental College and Princeton Theological Seminary, he took his doctorate at the University of Basel. The author of several volumes on church and ministry, he has also written the widely circulated book on business ethics, The Gospel According to the Wall Street Journal (1975).

48 - Between Recession and Recovery

my company? Don't they know the terrible suffering involved in our decisions? Why won't pastors listen? Why do they see management as the enemy? I'm a devout church-goer and a Christian. I resent what's being said and done by clergy. I'm really angry!" This chief executive needs to remind himself that every action has a reaction. All acts reflect our self-interest, perceived and actual. What is fact is often difficult to separate from fiction. The data at hand are usually incomplete, and our perceptions often unfounded. For example, in the case of the angry executive, his company was perceived as creating unemployment by investing the organization's resources outside the community. The actual situation was far more complicated than that.

Industrial managers today are unable to maintain all the jobs previously supported by their companies. We are living in a period of transition stimulated in part by high technology, robotics, and increased global competition. John Naisbitt's book Megatrends makes that amply clear. Companies are simply unable to turn the clock back to the "good old days." This is difficult to accept when management decisions are weakening the workers' position. Fewer jobs, while buying overseas products, is difficult for any unemployed person to understand. Management has the burden to explain its position; unfortunately, this explanation often comes too late, and tends to be less than candid with employees. Top management expects workers to sacrifice and re-tool their attitudes, without management apparently showing sufficient empathy, support, and sacrifice themselves.

For a company to explain difficult trade-offs calls for a much different kind of dialogue from the traditional negotiating table approach structured for advocacy roles by both labor and management. What is needed is a new "third party" approach-someone respected by both sides and thus able to initiate the patient process of unpacking the complexity of the situation and confronting the inevitable trade-offs ahead. The third party serves the role of "educator" and "pastor" for all sides, helping each to listen to the other's feelings and prevent stereotypical reactions. If there are more possibilities and solutions than what facts suggest, these will also surface through the creative and resourceful guidance of a third party whose primary interest is a resolution of differences for the mutual welfare of all concerned within the community.

What I'm suggesting is that such a third party needs to be sought and introduced early into the decision-making process, if the listening skills are to have an opportunity to be effective. The traditional role of "mediator" or "referee" at the negotiating table will become increasingly passé . Trained third-party individuals, I believe, will be the wave of the future.

II

Every community has someone respected and trusted by all sides and who, in turn, can value all persons. It could, of course, be a clergyperson,

49 - Between Recession and Recovery

but not necessarily. A layperson may be even more suitable. The third party will be someone all the parties can accept, and who knows how to listen creatively. A believable third-party resource can in a realistic and caring manner help all to face the inevitable trade-offs and work for the most humane solution. Unfortunately today, there seems to be no effective utilization of third parties. Persons of good will, including the clergy, are placed in a reactionary position following a disheartening management decision, leaving a trail of anger and disappointment within the community. Such conditions are not constructive to creative resolutions. The temptation for labor or management is to find quick fixes which may prove to be disastrous for the community in retrospect.

The state of employment or unemployment within a community will always have direct impact on the quality of life. To-enhance the quality of life for all ought to be the goal of responsible leadership in every community. Short-term solutions to long-term problems will never be satisfactory, regardless as to how "politic" it may be at the moment. The public and private sectors of society must be creatively engaged together; we need to see the emergence of a working coalition of management, labor, church, education, and government in joint problem-solving on behalf of the whole community. A five-way partnership is essential.

Every situation is further complicated by the political factors within human organizations. How to bring insight and hope to these complex situations is really an art that we apparently have not been practicing very well. Church leadership in particular finds itself trapped between victimized workers and frustrated decision-makers, between those suffering from continuing recession and those calling for new technology.

Recently we held a seminar at Pittsburgh Theological Seminary on the pain of unemployment. Many people from labor and management came to express their hurts and concerns, and to seek answers. The seminar was impressed with the fact that unemployment today is not limited to blue-collar workers. In fact the designations "blue collar" and "white collar" are really no longer meaningful according to the Labor Department. When you are unemployed, you are unemployed! The question of one's identity, as well as putting bread on the table, is at stake for every unemployed person.

Take the supervisor of a plant who finds herself unemployed overnight, but who loves to work. She is fifty-five years of age, too young to retire, and not wealthy enough to do it even if she wanted to. She is too proud to go to her pastor to discuss the situation. Or in another case, look at the business executive who knows he is vulnerable and could be in the unemployment ranks overnight. This business person may not have immediate financial worries, but his self-esteem has been crushed. Some churches have formed committees to assist the unemployed, as well as to establish food pantries. However, churches are discovering that many persons are too proud to admit they need help.

The church must not only be involved in helping dislocated persons,

50 - Between Recession and Recovery

but also in assisting management faced with the question of business survival. Trade-offs could ease the pain of unemployment. My strong feeling is that the church needs to be brought early into the process of management decision-making before battle lines between employers and labor leaders are formed. Clergy can be trained through education and experience to become effective "third party" leaders in activating the moral imagination and options within a community.

III

Church leadership, not afraid to face conflict situations and angry voices, can challenge status quo approaches in times of recession and recovery. What our seminaries require today is a faculty chair in leadership, not administration. We have too many administrators and too few leaders in the church. Perhaps we need to take our clue from the recently established professorial chair in leadership at the Harvard Business School made possible by a gift from the Matsushita Electric Industrial Company. It is noteworthy that a Japanese corporation had the insight to offer such a chair to a prestigious American university. Where is the vision for similar initiative on behalf of theological seminaries?

Trained third-party leadership, as I envision it, can assist those engaged in decision-making to: (1) identify and separate primary from secondary issues; (2) focus concentration on primary issues without getting sidetracked on emotional sentiments; (3) stimulate the moral imagination of everyone involved toward what is negotiable among the possible scenarios; (4) develop a strategic plan of action based upon a broad level of support.

Sacrifice and hurt may be unavoidable, but they can be greatly reduced when there is shared ownership in the decision-making process. A consensus among persons with common vision overcomes narrowly perceived interests and promotes the pioneering spirit in keeping with our nation's founders.