1. SEVENTH DAY ADVENTIST GOVERNANCE SYSTEM POLICY DEVELOPMENT AND POLICY INTERPRETATION CHURCH GOVERNANCE SEMINAR PRESENTED BY M GWALA

2. PART FOUR

3. DEFINITION FOR POLICY A POLICY IS A FORMAL STATEMENT OF VALUE OR INTENT THAT PROVIDES A BASIS FOR CONSISTENT DECISION MAKING AND RESOURCE ALLOCATION. IT DESCRIBES PRINCIPLES, REQUIREMENTS AND LIMITATIONS.

4. DEFINITION FOR POLICY CONT’D – IT IS CHARACTERIZED BY:- WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE AND HOW SHOULD IT BE DONE UNDER PREVAILING CIRCUMSTANCES. – IT ESTABLISHES:- RIGHTS REQUIREMENTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES

5. POLICY BASIC CRITERIA A POLICY MUST MEET TWO BASIC CRITERIA:- FIRSTLY IT SHOULD CLEARLY COMMUNICATE WHAT IS EXPECTED OF A MEMBER ALONG WITH THE INTENT AND PURPOSE BEHIND THE EXPECTATIONS. SECONDLY, IT SHOULD BE ABLE TO WITHSTAND LEGAL SCRUTINY AND ADEQUATELY DEFEND THE ORGANIZATION’S RIGHTS IN CASE OF LITIGATION.

6. IS THERE A NEED FOR A POLICY? THE PURPOSE OF POLICY IN AN ORGANIZATION:- IS TO PROVIDE A FRAMEWORK FOR MAKING SOUND DECISIONS, TO ENSURE THAT THE ORGANIZATION IS ADMINISTERED CONSISTENTLY AND THAT MEMBERS ARE TREATED FAIRLY.

7. IS THERE A NEED FOR A POLICY? CONT’D THE PURPOSE OF POLICY IN AN ORGANIZATION CONTINUED:- TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE CHURCH AND THE LAND, TO ESTABLISH A CULTURE IN THE ORGANIZATION AND TO DIRECT AND OR CHANGE BEHAVIOUR.

8. THE PROCESS OF POLICY DEVELOPMENT IDENTIFY THE ISSUE OR PROBLEM TO BE ADDRESSED – POLICIES ARE DEVELOPED TO ADDRESS REAL LIFE ISSUES AFFECTING MEMBERS AT CHURCH. ASSESS WHETHER EXISTING POLICY IS SUFFICIENT TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE OR PROBLEM.

9. THE PROCESS OF POLICY DEVELOPMENT – THE FOLLOWING CHECKS ARE CRITICAL IN ASSESSING THE SUFFICIENCY OF A POLICY TO ADDRESS CURRENT ISSUES; CHECK WHETHER OR NOT EXISTING POLICY ADDRESSES THE ISSUE, CHECK WHETHER OR NOT EXISTING POLICY LEAVES GAPS WHEN THE ISSUE IS ADDRESSED AND CHECK WHETHER OR NOT EXISTING POLICY STILL MEETS GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

10. THE PROCESS OF POLICY DEVELOPMENT CONT’D DECIDE IF A NEW POLICY IS NEEDED. THE PREVAILING SITUATION DICTATES AS TO WHETHER OR NOT A NEW POLICY IS NEEDED. IDENTIFY THE BENEFITS THAT WOULD BE BROUGHT ABOUT BY A NEW POLICY. IN OTHER WORDS SPELL OUT THE BENEFITS THAT WOULD BE BROUGHT ABOUT BY A NEW POLICY, AND ALSO LOOK OBJECTIVELY AT THE IMPLICATIONS OF THE NEW POLICY TO THE ORGANIZATION.

11. THE PROCESS OF POLICY DEVELOPMENT CONT’D CONSULT WITH THE APPROPRIATE LINE MANAGEMENT. – WHEN CRAFTING A NEW POLICY IT IS ALWAYS NECESSARY TO CONSULT WITH THE APPROPRIATE LINE MANAGEMENT FOR OPERATIONAL REASONS.

12. THE PROCESS OF POLICY DEVELOPMENT CONT’D WRITE THE NEW POLICY – HOW TO WORD A POLICY STATEMENT WHEN CRAFTING A POLICY STATEMENT ALWAYS BEAR IN MIND THAT A POLICY IS NOT A LAW AND SHOULD NOT BE WRITTEN IN LEGALESE. A POLICY STATEMENT SHOULD BE EASY TO UNDERSTAND CONSIDERING THAT YOU ARE WRITING FOR A DIVERSE AUDIENCE.

13. RULES OF WRITING A POLICY RULE 1: : KEEP IT SIMPLE. RULE 2: : SELECT WORDS CAREFULLY. RULE 3: USE FEWER WORDS. RULE 4: KEEP IT GENERAL BUT CLEAR. RULE 5: KEEP IT HELPFUL.

14. RULES FOR POLICY INTERPRETATION THE LITERAL RULE THIS RULE REQUIRES THE INTERPRETER TO INTERPRET THE POLICY BASED ON THE WRITTEN WORDS OF THE POLICY. THE GENERAL ARGUMENT UNDER THIS RULE IS THAT A POLICY MEANS EXACTLY WHAT IT SAYS AND SHOULD BE INTERPRETED AND APPLIED EXACTLY AS IT READS.

15. RULES FOR POLICY INTERPRETATION CONT’D THE RULE OF CONTEXT ACCORDING TO THIS RULE, A POLICY SHOULD BE READ AND INTERPRETED IN THE SPIRIT AND CONTEXT IN WHICH IT WAS MADE. IN OTHER WORDS THE INTERPRETER SHOULD ENDEAVOUR TO SEE THE POLICY THROUGH THE EYES AND SPIRIT OF THOSE WHO WROTE IT.

16. RULES FOR POLICY INTERPRETATION CONT’D THE RULE OF INTERPRETING AMBIGUITY (CONTRA PROFERENTUM) ACCORDING TO THIS RULE A POLICY IS AMBIGUOUS WHEN IT IS SUSCEPTIBLE TO MORE THAN ONE REASONABLE INTERPRETATION. IN OTHER WORDS THIS RULE SAYS THAT WHEN THE MEANING OF THE POLICY OR TERM IS AMBIGUOUS THE INTERPRETATION SHOULD BE IN FAVOUR OF THE MEMBER AND NOT THE POLICY MAKER AND IMPLEMENTER.

17. RULES FOR POLICY INTERPRETATION CONT’D RULE OF LOGIC THIS RULE POSITS THAT INTERPRETATION IS LOGICAL THINKING AND THEREFORE REASON MUST BE USED IN INTERPRETING POLICY. POLICY MUST BE INTERPRETED BY APPLYING THE LAWS OF LANGUAGE AND GRAMMATICAL ANALYSIS.

18. RULES FOR POLICY INTERPRETATION CONT’D THE RULE OF PRECEDENT THIS RULE REQUIRES THE INTERPRETER TO CHECK HOW THE SAME POLICY IS APPLIED IN OTHER ORGANIZATIONS. THE INTERPRETER IS EXPECTED, UNDER THIS RULE, TO CONSULT WITH SISTER ORGANIZATIONS TO FIND OUT HOW THEY APPLY THE POLICY IN QUESTION AND NOT TO RE INVENT THE WHEEL.

19. RULES FOR POLICY INTERPRETATION CONT’D THE RULE OF INFERENCE IN THE LAW OF EVIDENCE, INFERENCE IS DEFINED AS A FACT REASONABLY IMPLIED FROM ANOTHER FACT. THIS RULE INFORMS POLICY INTERPRETERS THAT WHATEVER IS INFERRED TO BY THEIR POLICIES, ALTHOUGH NOT EXPRESSLY STATED, IS HOWEVER EQUALLY BINDING.

20. RULES FOR POLICY INTERPRETATION CONT’D THE RULE OF PROPORTIONALITY PROPORTIONALITY IS REQUIRED AND EXPECTED BETWEEN PUNISHMENT AND OFFENCE. IT IS A VIOLATION OF THIS RULE TO IMPOSE A PENALTY THAT IS DISPROPORTIONATE IN SEVERITY TO THE MISCHIEF THAT IT IS INTENDED TO CURE.

21. END OF PART FOUR