The Shotgun or The Sniper Rifle

by Midnight Freemason Contributor

WB Adam Thayer

In today’s Masonic world, I find that most lodges treat new candidate recruitment and admission in one of two ways: as a shotgun, or as a sniper rifle. I admit, it’s a dangerous analogy to make, given that gun ownership is currently such a hot button issue, however a careful examination will prove that it is both prudent and fitting.

On one side, you have lodges who view recruitment as a shotgun blast; let’s bring in as many candidates as possible, in the hopes that one or two of them will stick. This type of lodge generally performs their degrees in one day (the so-called “Blue Lightning” classes), bringing in many men at once, and turning them loose at the end of the day as Freemasons. In the best of these lodges, there are mentors assigned to each man, so that they can continue to learn from the experience, and in the end still will make good Masons.

On the other side, you have lodges who view recruitment as a sniper rifle; they very carefully choose who they will admit, spending time selecting only those they deem worthy based on a set of ever-changing standards. Often, you will find that they only bring in one or two new members a year, and although those new members will stick around, their growth is not high enough to offset the attrition they are experiencing due to their aging membership.

I belong to two lodges in my home state; one of each type. In the larger lodge, the attitude is to bring in as many new men per year as possible, without resorting to one-days, accepting the loss of many of those men as inevitable, and hoping to retain a few good ones. While we do assign mentors to these men, the main purpose is to teach them the catechism, as our lodge requires the traditional “long form” prove-up between degrees. When we retain a man, he generally turns into an amazing brother, who will climb through the advancing line of leadership, and the lodge becomes better for it. It also provides us plenty of practice for degrees, and as a result we consistently have one of the better degree teams in the state.

Having said that, there are issues to this approach. Officer burn-out is common. Many men who would have been great brothers are lost due to (what they perceive as) our lack of interest in them as individuals. For those lodges that do participate in the one-day degrees, we find that the percentage of those who are retained is even lower; many find themselves disappointed that there was not more to the experience, and simply never come back.

In the smaller of my two lodges, the attitude is very different; we’re a close-knit community of friends, and are reluctant to let new men join until we’ve met with them multiple times, done a thorough vetting process, and verified that they’re a “good fit” for our lodge. The men we bring in almost invariably stay for life, and even if they’ve moved away they maintain a dual membership with our lodge, and we generally are all close friends.

While this sounds perfect, please note there are issues here as well. Our lodge is fighting to maintain our current membership levels. Our rate of attrition is growing annually, and while the replacement members are generally younger, a time will come when we don’t have enough members left to maintain the lodge. Due to our low membership numbers, our funding is significantly more limited, and the much needed repairs that our building faces have to be much more carefully planned and executed.

Both styles have some great advantages, and both come with unique issues. I’ve heard from many brothers that after ten years in the Craft, how you came in makes no difference in the level of education and involvement you find from these brothers, and I believe this to be true. One of my dearest brothers was the “victim” of a Blue Lightning class, and continues to be active in Masonry many, many years later.

There must be a happy middle ground somewhere; where we bring in a reasonable number of new members, enough to show positive growth across the fraternity, but bring in only those who will be active and involved, and who will give back for all that we have given them.

This is the point where a very smart, traditional author will offer the solution he has been carefully leading you to. Unfortunately, I don’t have the answer. Believe me, if I did, I would sell the secret to every lodge in the world, and retire early, knowing I had done something great for the craft.

If there is an answer, I think it must come from blending the best of both methodologies, while removing those parts that detract from the overall goal. For lodges that take a shotgun approach, consider slowing down a bit, being more selective in who you choose, and forcing your candidates to receive their degrees the “hard” way. For those lodges who are taking more of a sniper rifle approach, consider opening up to more new members, take a few more risks with your candidates, and you may be happily surprised by both the quality and quantity of new men you receive.

Sometimes, simple awareness of a problem is enough to help you on the path to fix it, and in that I am in hopes that this short article will help your lodge to identify how they view candidates, and more importantly, what steps they can take to improve the functioning of your lodge.

~AT

Bro. Adam Thayer is the Junior Warden of Lancaster Lodge No 54 in Lincoln (NE) and the Worshipful Master of Oliver Lodge No. 38 in Seward (NE). He’s an active member of the Scottish Rite, and Knight Master of the Lincoln Valley Knights of Saint Andrew. Adam serves on the Education Committee of the Grand Lodge of Nebraska. You can contact him at adam.thayer@gmail.com

Investigations

by Midnight Freemason Contributor

RWB Michael H. Shirley

Jurisdictions may vary in the way they do this, but when a man petitions a lodge for degrees, that lodge is required to investigate him, in order to determine whether he is fit to be made a Mason. Some lodges conduct their investigations with due diligence. Others, to put it kindly, do not. I sometimes hear my Brethren lamenting this state of affairs, and harking back to the days when “they used to do it better.”

In 1910, Brother Albert W. Ashley, Most Worshipful Grand Master of Ancient Free and Accepted Masons of the State of Illinois, was moved to include a section on investigations in his report to the Grand Lodge. Entitled “Greater Care Needed,” it read as follows:

Information has come to me from various sources that in many lodges there is great carelessness in investigating the character of petitioners for the degrees. In the inordinate desire for a large membership unfit men are received. In localities where there is a shifting population this is particularly true.

In the oil region complaint is made that candidates have been accepted and the degrees conferred upon those who were mere transients and whose residence is in another state. Others were accepted and the degrees conferred upon who [sic] were morally unfit to he made Masons, and whose occupations violated the law of the state. Such violations of law must inevitably lead to disaster and discipline.

Attention is here called to this evil that Masters and others may take due notice and govern themselves accordingly.

Lax investigations, it seems, are not a new problem, which isn’t surprising. If history teaches us anything, it’s that human beings weren’t nobler in the past, or smarter, or harder working. They were subject to the same failures of character as we are. They just wore different clothes.

~MHS

R.W.B. Michael H. Shirley serves the Grand Lodge of Illinois, A.F. & A.M, as Leadership Development Chairman and Assistant Area Deputy Grand Master of the Eastern Area. A Certified Lodge Instructor, he is a Past Master and Life Member of Tuscola Lodge No. 332 and a plural member of Island City Lodge No. 330, F & AM, in Minocqua, Wisconsin. He currently serves the Valley of Danville, AASR, as Most Wise Master of the George E. Burow Chapter of Rose Croix; he is also a member of the Illinois Lodge of Research, the York Rite, Eastern Illinois Council No. 356 Allied Masonic Degrees, Eastern Star, Illini High Twelve, and the Tall Cedars of Lebanon. The author of several articles on British history, he teaches at Eastern Illinois University.You can contact him at: m.h.shirley@gmail.com

Leadership Civility

by Midnight Freemason Guest Contributor

Bro. David A. McCuistion, PM, 32º, KCCH

Are you fully satisfied with the growing uncivil culture magnified through movies, TV programs and society in general?

How does it affect your leadership, more specifically your "serving the needs of society”, which your behaviors broadcasts to those with whom you interact each and every day.

I am proposing that everyone resolve to be more civil not only in their leadership, but also in their everyday lives and personal interactions with everyone – 24/7, 365 days a year. 

For years human nature dictated behavior in treating others with respect, with ethical correctness, and with interactions grounded in the Golden Rule - "Doing unto others as you would like others to do unto you." Our esteemed President George Washington, at age sixteen, created 110 Rules of Civility and Decent Behavior in Company and Conversation, which he based on a set of rules composed by French Jesuits in 1595.

The entertainment media seems to be on a quest to erode that standard with publicly abusive foul language, public sexual conduct that belongs in private, and disrespectful behaviors toward others as if nature gave them the right to do so. All purportedly a God-given right under the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, as if it is the natural behavior to exhibit.

For this reason Civility Projects are springing up nationwide attempting to return civility to society - personally and professionally. Hence, the very nature of Servant Leadership is the most logical leadership philosophy to be followed, again personally and professionally.

Speak Your Peace, Rutgers University, Alverno College, and the Oshkosh Civility Project are a few examples of entities who have initiated actions to return civility to society. In addition, P. M. Forni's book "Choosing Civility" expounds on 25 way to improve civility in human interactions.

Speak your Peace Civility Project suggests 9 Rules of Civility as core behaviors in dealing with others in a civil manner.  Below are a few examples for leaders to follow to promote civility and improve their leadership relationship with others.

1. Pay Attention/Listen.  Listen intently when others are speaking. Inhibit the "inner voice" from interrupting with comments such as "The problem is.......", or "We've always done it this way" in an attempt to stop the flow of ideas and suggestions. Listen for the "intent" and “will” of what is being said. Look for non-verbal communications and maintain eye-to-eye contact with the person with whom you are speaking. Lastly, listen to understand.

2. Be Inclusive.  Civility knows no ethnicity, no level of leadership, no forum, no religion, no sexual preference, no generation, and no bounds. Being inclusive includes everyone. It is about leading and serving for the betterment of mankind.

3. No Gossiping. Gossiping is one of the most hurtful behaviors and accomplishes nothing. Most times it is negative and idle words, that is divisive and destructive. In some cases, it is also racist.  All of which, quite possible, only lowers esteem.

4. Be Respectful. First of all, remember, respect has nothing to do with liking or disliking someone. Everyone deserves a certain level of respect; we all expect to be respected for who we are and what we have accomplished. A point I always make with my students is that, contrary to the common comment of “respect is earned,” how much more or less respect one garners depends on individual behavior, respect toward others, and the common decency, i.e. civility, extended toward others. Civility is “Respectful Behavior”, Respect is “Honorable Behavior.”

5. Build Relationships. Servant Leadership is about building relationships. Therefore, being civil is especially helpful in this process. There is no room for boasting and prideful attitudes, humility is the adhesive that solidifies teamwork and seeks to repair damaged relationships. Seek to apologize, forgive and affirm success of others.

6. Use Constructive Language. Be mindful of the words you use, when you use them, and also of the words you speak through your non-verbal communications. Foul language in the middle of the ocean, out of sight and sounds of others, may serve a purpose. However, foul language in a public forum is disrespectful toward others. More specifically, foul language often times indicates an inability to properly use correct language, as well as a limited repository of words and their usage.

7. Take Responsibility. Don’t shift responsibility or place blame on other people. Hold yourself accountable, accept your own faults, speak positively, clean up your language and respect everyone. Be The Example!

These are just a few of examples Servant Leaders need to follow in their interactions with other – all the time, in every situation and regardless of the type of organization in which one belongs.

Not only is it time to restore civility in all aspects of our lives, it is essential in your servant leadership principles and practices. 

Are you doing your part? Are you always civil in the example you set for others?

I hereby resolve for 2015 and the coming years that I will “Be the Example!” in treating everyone with Civility in all my personal and leadership behaviors. How about YOU?

Keep the Quest Alive!

~DAM

Brother David McCuistion 32° KCCH is Past Master of Garfield Lodge No. 41 in La Conner, Washington, Past Grand Chaplain of the MW Grand Lodge of Washington and Past Deputy to MW G. Santy Lascano, Grand Lodge of Washington. He is also a member of Scottish Rite Orient of Washington, Valley of Everett, and a member of the York Rite Bodies of Washington. He is a member and Past Royal Patron of Tulip Chapter in Mt. Vernon, WA, a member of Madrona Chapter, OES and a member of the Masonic Society. Brother McCuistion is a Navy Junior ROTC Instructor and Program Manager in Tennessee and an author of several leadership articles for AboutLeaders.com and several groups on Linked IN, an active member of The Members Guild. He is President of Vanguard Organizational Leadership (VOL), whose Blog can be found at www.vanguardldrship.wordpress.com and President of the McCuistion (and other spellings) Family of Scots-Irish descent. He can be reached via email at davidmcc44@epbfi.com. 

Interactive Leadership

by Midnight Freemason Guest Contributor

WB. Ken Baril

Identifying and developing successful candidates for line positions within the lodge is one of the greatest challenges confronting our fraternity today. Furthermore, given the breadth of interest in the continuing goal of achieving, more pressure is being placed on Masters to identify capable Brothers, and to accelerate their development to fulfill these positions with greater responsibilities and leadership.

A Masters challenge is to ensure the capable brothers are identified and receive aggressive Masonic training in leadership skills, responsive monitoring in role attainment, and initial guidance for role performance. This is apparent. Masters will need assistance in order to add this challenge to their list of top priorities.

An organization is a relatively permanent interaction system to coordinate the placement and development of the membership from the common good of task accomplishment. To the extent that Masters assume responsibility in getting new officers to thoroughly understand their role and its relationship to organizational goals, the officers will internalize the need for role competency, task accomplishment and personal commitment.

Masters and their officers need not to be in conflict, but rather on a continuing path for growth. Our fraternity has purposes, aspirations and values. These dictate the manner in which individual capacities are developed and used for task accomplishment. Some newly appointed officers will need to develop their strengths, others to learn to use unused talents, yet others will need to acquire new approaches. In contrast to a conflict model, the values associated with changes such as these will dictate that Masters be directed toward using experiential-learning tools in exploring the capacities and expectations of Brothers being considered for line positions.

Whether the emphasis is on the tasks associated with getting things done, or on human relationships associated with interpersonal growth, the process of interactive leadership must reflect task and personal growth as simultaneous attributes of leadership excellence. This is imperative if we are to influence effectively our Brothers opportunity to grow and to develop, and just as important, use the rich resources and talents within our fraternity.

~KB

WB Ken Baril was born in New Haven, CT. and moved to the Cincinnati area in 1999. He is a three time Master of his lodge, Temple Lodge No. 16. AF & AM, 1982-1983-1995, located in Cheshire, CT. While living in Connecticut and prior to his moving to Cincinnati, Ohio, Ken has been the featured speaker at many public schools and Veterans organizations. Ken is a published author who has written a book focusing on members of the Masonic Fraternity who have been recipients of our nation’s highest award for bravery, the prestigious Medal of Honor called " The Medal of Honor - The Letter G in Valor". Ken has dedicated his time and effort to researching and developing various programs including, “The Medal of Honor Program,” “The Immortal Four Chaplains,” as well as many others. His programs are dedicated to the preservation of an important portion of American history, contributions, and sacrifices, in the defense of the United States, and to the memory of all those who have given their lives in the pursuit of that objective. He also writes articles for various Masonic publications. He served his country during the Korean War in the United States Air Force. He currently resides in Hudson, FL. with his wife, Marion.