Name for Priesthood Leader and Clerk Training Site

Church headquarters is putting together a web site which will host record keeping training, help, and instructions for priesthood leaders, clerks, auditors, and executive secretaries. We invite all those who are involved with record keeping to offer their suggestions for the English name for this site.

The name should be easy to remember, easy to translate into many languages, and descriptive enough to help a both new and experienced leaders and clerks know that it is the source for training, help, and instruction.

Since this sounds like support for administrative functions rather then ecclesiastical functions, I'd suggest Admin Support (admin.lds.org). I'm avoiding using the word "clerk" so as no one thinks it's just for clerks.

Since the focus is on record keeping, I would suggest Record Keeping Learning Center. I think the concept of a "Learning Center" is broad enough to encompass documentation, training, and help.

Because the scope cannot include leaders (that role is under the Priesthood Department), we are back to clerks and auditors. Some have suggested "Clerk and Technology Support."

We will pass any and all your recommendations to the product managers.

tullisda wrote:Because the scope cannot include leaders (that role is under the Priesthood Department), we are back to clerks and auditors. Some have suggested "Clerk and Technology Support."

We will pass any and all your recommendations to the product managers.

I would avoid "Support" unless it includes active help desk type functions. It would make it more confusing when talking about this site vs. local unit support.

Personally I like aebrown's suggestion of "Learning Center" whether it's "Record Keeping Learning Center" as he suggested or a hybrid "Clerk and Technology Learning Center".

tullisda wrote:Some have suggested "Clerk and Technology Support."

Um, except that's the name of this forum. Seems like it would cause confusion. Also, how would this be different then the leadership portal?

tullisda wrote:Because the scope cannot include leaders (that role is under the Priesthood Department), we are back to clerks and auditors. Some have suggested "Clerk and Technology Support."

Even though the scope may not technically include leaders, it can still be a helpful resource for leaders (and I guarantee that some leaders will find helpful information there, no matter what we call it). So I would advise against using the word "clerk" -- after all, you mentioned auditors as part of the target audience, and executive secretaries certainly will be interested in some of the content. If we use "Clerk" in the title, then some of those people may not think it applies to them.

How about Record Keeping Resource Center? This captures the intent of the site (Record Keeping) and keeps it general vs only for clerks.

I'm not sure as the non-clerks see themselves as record keepers. Perhaps Records and Reports?

My idea is 'Leader and Clerk Record-Keeping Learning Center'

1. It is inclusive, as it recognizes both groups which is the site's target audience.
2. 'Learning Center' is already translated out, as the term is used on FamilySearch, especially the nFS area which is translated into the core languages already I believe. 'Help Center' should be avoided though.
3. This idea uses only one conjunction (English language) making it more easily translatable should there be any need to add similar terms, and if there's less to translate, it will be easier for the resulting phraseology of the title in other languages to fit into a desired space on the top of the pages created for it.

If I'm not mistaken, the site is also to be support for the STS. The name needs to reflect that as well.

How about something like:

Administration & Technology Specialists Support… or

Support for Administrators & Technology Specialists (SATS)

RussellHltn wrote:If I'm not mistaken, the site is also to be support for the STS. The name needs to reflect that as well.

Well, the term "Clerk" does encompass the STS. The original post only mentioned record keeping. I know that meetinghouse technologies are also moving to LDS.org, but it's not clear to me whether there will be just one site or two different sites for technology vs. clerk stuff.

However, if it is one site that covers both topics, I think it's best to describe the topic instead of the roles, such as "Technology and Record Keeping Resource Center".

The new site will contain the following at this point:

1. Local Unit Finance Training
2. Local Unit Membership Record Training
3. Local Unit Auditing Training
4. Meetinghouse Technology Training

It will also include a link to the LDS Tech forums, FAQs, kept current by the GSC (Global Service Center), and contact info for the GSC.

I hope that helps as you consider name suggestions. Please keep them coming!

-Justin

I like 'Local Unit Resource Center' Or 'Local Unit Clerk Resource Center'

I'd suggest Records and Technology, or perhaps Local Unit Records and Technology (since there are records and technology for Institutes, Church Offices, etc..)

I recommend something like "Resources for Local Unit Records and Technology." Granted, it's a longer title, but it encompasses most of the site objectives (and breaks up the nouns). Alternatively, “Records and Technology Resources” might suffice.

The term resources utilizes the learning center idea mentioned (see posts 3 and 5), but doesn’t imply that the site is strictly for learning. Also, I agree that the term support should be reserved for websites with active help (see post 3). I personally don’t prefer the term center, so I left that out (see below).

I believe that referencing local units is important (see post 16), and I like describing the topics and not roles (see post 13). Since the website will include both records and technology, both references should be there. Also, I prefer the term records to record keeping because it is simpler and more encompassing.

(As a personal preference, I like reserving the word center for physical locations. I realize that some websites may use the term in their title, but I just personally prefer not to use it for website titles.)

I like some of these - but the word 'Records' is too narrow IMO if we're talking about finances / audits etc.

dannykos wrote:I like some of these - but the word 'Records' is too narrow IMO if we're talking about finances / audits etc.

I disagree. Almost every aspect of finances (except for actual money handling policies) involves record keeping. Auditing is simply verifying that records were kept and are accurate. I think both are encompassed in the term Records.

At this point, my preferred term is Local Unit Records and Technology Learning Center. It is long but the url could just be records.lds.org and references in the wiki and forums could just use Learning Center since the local unit and records and technology scope can be implied.

Although dwsmith2 is correct that resources is more more encompassing I think that learning will attract the attention of newly called and inexperienced individuals more. Once they've used it they will know that it has other resources.

And I don't have any problem with the term center. I like how it sounds (perhaps not the best of reasons for it's use though).

eblood66 wrote:Almost every aspect of finances (except for actual money handling policies) involves record keeping. Auditing is simply verifying that records were kept and are accurate. I think both are encompassed in the term Records.

I agree for the most part. It's definitely true that finances and auditing involve keeping and verifying financial records. But to my ear, "Records" doesn't encompass the financial side of things as well as "Record Keeping". Yes, it's longer, but it sounds better to me. However, I am not opposed to simply using the term "Records."

eblood66 wrote:At this point, my preferred term is Local Unit Records and Technology Learning Center. It is long but the url could just be records.lds.org and references in the wiki and forums could just use Learning Center since the local unit and records and technology scope can be implied.

I certainly agree with the emerging consensus to include "Technology" as an additional term. Technology is clearly part of the purpose of this site, but those areas of responsibility aren't communicated by ty the terms "Records" or even "Clerk" (although the STS is an assistant stake clerk).

I do think we could dispense with the phrase "Local Unit" -- to my thinking it is reasonably implied. There's hardly anywhere else we use that modifier. For example, it's the local unit directory on the Tools menu, but we just call it the Directory; same with the Calendar, Newsletter, and Lesson Schedules. So I would vote to drop "Local Unit" for two reasons: it makes the title shorter, and it gets right to the heart of the topic -- the first words would be "Records and Technology".

eblood66 wrote:Although dwsmith2 is correct that resources is more more encompassing I think that learning will attract the attention of newly called and inexperienced individuals more. Once they've used it they will know that it has other resources.

I tend to prefer Learning as well, but Resources would be fine with me. Learning is hopefully something even experienced clerks seek for (see D&C 88:118).

eblood66 wrote:And I don't have any problem with the term center. I like how it sounds (perhaps not the best of reasons for it's use though).

Agreed. It gives the feeling that there's a whole bunch of helpful stuff. I like that.

So my current proposal is: Record Keeping and Technology Learning Center (but I'm fine with Records and Technology Learning Center).

Local Unit Training Center

This would allow you to expand the scope of the site at any time without renaming it or having content seem out of place.

nbflint wrote:Local Unit Training Center

This would allow you to expand the scope of the site at any time without renaming it or having content seem out of place.

I think the problem with that is at this point the site has to exclude ecclesiastical training. So the proposed title seems too broad given that a different department may start a site aimed at the Priesthood Leadership dealing with spiritual matters.

I could go with something like Local Unit Administrative Center. (Assuming that the department in charge of FM/PFR would be using this as well.)

Question: I'm wondering if maybe the site is too broad and perhaps should be broken up? Perhaps separate Technology from Membership/Finance. That would simplify the naming.

The "Leadership Training Library" concept may suggest something like Administrative Training Library". Their nice dashboard could be emulated with our design? This name is very simple and yet broad enough to include Auditing, Technology, Recording in Finances, Organizations, History, Materials, Seminaries and Institutes, Membership; being inclusive enough for Priesthood Leader interest, yet not supplanting Leader Training Library.

WinegarL wrote:The "Leadership Training Library" concept may suggest something like Administrative Training Library".

I like that line of thought.

WinegarL wrote:The "Leadership Training Library" concept may suggest something like Administrative Training Library". Their nice dashboard could be emulated with our design? This name is very simple and yet broad enough to include Auditing, Technology, Recording in Finances, Organizations, History, Materials, Seminaries and Institutes, Membership; being inclusive enough for Priesthood Leader interest, yet not supplanting Leader Training Library.

Training Library sounds fine to me (although I still prefer Learning Center) but personally I don't like the Administrative part. It makes me think of something involving headquarters rather than a local unit. It's true that clerks provide administrative support for the bishop and ward but I don't think of myself as an administrator. When we talk of the administrative office we are referring to the CHQ or the area office.

But maybe that's just me.

eblood66 wrote:personally I don't like the Administrative part....

But maybe that's just me.

No, it's not just you. "Administrative" is too general a term -- you can administer anything. And I agree that it also makes me think of CHQ, not the individual wards and stakes.

Why not simply, 'Training Center,' or 'Training Library'? When the user logs in the 'Training Library' would either display trainings applicable to their calling or a message that says, "There are no trainings currently available for your calling. Here are some resources you might find helpful," along with some links to the applicable content on lds.org.

As far as the site title being too broad, you fix that by organizing your trainings into categories. This approach allows you to meet the current scope of the site and makes future scope expansion a breeze. Starting with a pigeon holed site title makes future expansion more troublesome. While there may be no plans to expand the scope now it is poor system design to assume there never will be.

The word administrative describes people involved in carrying out duties and responsibilities or describes tasks required to carry out duties and responsibilities. (adjective)
An example of someone who does administrative work is a secretary.
An example of administrative work is doing filing.

I feel this definition of administrative well describes our target audience, and the functions we wish to train/perform. It also is differentiated from but not fully exclusive from leadership.

nbflint wrote:Why not simply, 'Training Center,' or 'Training Library'?

Because as others have noted, there already exists a Leadership Training Library for priesthood leaders. I like keeping the same idea and somehow distinguishing it. "Records and Technology Training Library" perhaps?

mfmohlma wrote:"Records and Technology Training Library" perhaps?

I like this. Sticking with the precedent of a 'Training Library' that has been set with the Leadership Training Library will create a sense of cohesiveness for those who will be using both libraries. 'Records and Technology' encompasses Clerks, Asst. Clerks, Executive Secretaries, and the STS.

All,

Thank you for the feedback! I will be product managing this new training app and chair a coordinating council at HQ that is overseeing this effort. I will be brining some of these names to the council for consideration. Thanks!

-Justin

Sorry to re-open this discussion, but is there a time-frame on when this training will be available? And can you confirm whether this site http://classic.lds.org/pa/display/0,178 ... -1,00.html is currently the site we should go to for official training in the meantime?

Thanks,
Jeremy

jerrobertson wrote:Sorry to re-open this discussion, but is there a time-frame on when this training will be available? And can you confirm whether this site http://classic.lds.org/pa/display/0,178 ... -1,00.html is currently the site we should go to for official training in the meantime?

The training site you linked to is the official online training site until the new site is rolled out. The only official word on the timing that I know of was in early July we were told "later this year".