This is not a political post. But political governance, how things work in Washington, D.C., sometimes sheds some light on how things work in Salt Lake City. The COB is a lot like the White House. First, let’s talk about Elon Musk. He has been at Trump’s side for a few weeks now, included on calls to foreign leaders and appointed by Trump to head the Department of Governmental Efficiency, along with another rich guy, Vivek Ramaswamy. Who elected these guys?
First, let’s clarify that the “Department of Governmental Efficiency” is not a real governmental entity. Most MAGAnuts don’t realize this. It’s fake government, created by Trump to make Elon and Vivek feel important. It’s a clever move, actually. Being appointed to a fake government post does not, of course, require the advice and consent of the Senate. This raises an interesting line of inquiry. Bear with me.
First, there are Senators and Representatives (in the House) who are elected. By us voters. Next election, we can vote them out if we want.
Second, most Cabinet members and department heads are appointed by the President but require approval by the Senate by way of its advice and consent power expressly granted in the US Constitution, Article II, Section 2. This applies to a variety of officials who serve just below the senior appointments as well, and of course Supreme Court Justices. We don’t directly elect these people, but the advice and consent power makes it fairly likely that such appointees are fairly competent for the position and not otherwise unfit for the job (see: Matt Gaetz).
Third, thousands of mid-level managers and staff positions are simply hired by senior managers with various departments and agencies. No election, no review and approval by the Senate. This is also true for lots of people close to the President, with considerable influence and power. They are simply appointed by the President, with no review or approval and subject to removal only by the President (if they don’t resign on their own, a disturbingly regular thing in a Trump administration). The Chief of Staff, for example, a powerful position in most administrations, is simply appointed by the President. Then there are informal advisors who the President trusts and relies on, like (apparently) Elon Musk, even if they have no governmental position (ignoring the phony DOGE arrangement for Musk). How about the First Lady? Influence? Yes. Elected? Well, at least when you vote you know who she is and that she will be living in the White House with access to the President.
So, to review: Who elected John Curtis, the incoming Senator for the State of Utah? Utah’s voters did. Who elected John Roberts, the Chief Justice of the United States? No one, but the President who appointed him and the Senators who approved him were all elected. Who elected Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy? No one. Trump, who has sort of appointed them, was elected, but with no review or approval. But at least we know who these guys are. We know their names and might, through diligent inquiry, be able to learn where they work (assuming the DOGE actually has offices and DOGE appointees do any work) and read reports or new releases they issue.
Now let’s talk about the Church. No one is elected, but at the senior level of General Authority, at least we know who the people are and what their office is (Apostle, Seventy, Presiding Bishop). The same for the Presidencies of the auxiliaries. The annual sustainings that are done sometimes sometimes seem a bit contrived when compared to a meaningful election, but they do provide some transparency to the membership. When a new apostle is selected and takes office, we all know about it.
What about the people actually running the Church, not just doing the day-to-day tasks but also running various departments and initiatives? Do you even know who they are? Here’s a question for you: Have you ever seen an org chart for the Church? Who runs the Missionary Department or the Temple Department or the Curriculum Department? I know two or three apostles have oversight for such departments (kind of like the Board oversees a corporation) but who is the managing director (equivalent to a CEO)? Sometimes a name and a title appear in a press release or a news story, but it is sporadic. We, the membership, do not get to see the LDS org chart and we don’t get to know who is actually running the Church. Who are these guys and how is it they are running the Church? is the LDS equivalent to asking Who elected these guys? for a lot of powerful appointed positions in the White House.
Very few Mormons even realize they have no idea who is running the Church. GA’s get all the attention and give Conference talks, but they are largely ceremonial positions. Being an apostle and 25 cents gets you a cup of coffee. But, you say, they make a lot of important decisions! Yes, but only by way of appointment to this or that committee. The Council on the Disposition of the Tithes (how the money is spent, very important), for example, composed of the First Presidency, the Twelve, and the Presiding Bishopric. Bad example, maybe, because it is sort of a committee of the whole. Take the Commissioner of Church Education, Clark Gilbert. His ceremonial office is Seventy. His managerial office is Commissioner of Church Education, which is what he actually *does* within the LDS Church organization. Which apostles supervise him? I don’t know offhand. Who does he supervise and what offices are below him, say over curriculum or hiring or facilities or so on? I don’t know. Few there are who do know. We don’t really know how the Church (as an organization, an institution) is really run or who is running it.
There is another Who elected these guys? group that has some influence in the Church: relatives of senior General Authorities. Partly they may share opinions and suggestions with the GA in the family, but as important is the information flow. Senior leaders live in a bubble, whether they realize it or not. The “yes man” culture that surrounds them makes it hard for actual facts to get through. I’ll bet you’ve had a brief visit or encounter with a GA or two in your time. If he shakes your hand and asks, “How are you doing today?” I’ll bet you don’t reply with “give women in the Church some real responsibility, sir!” Letters from members that get through to them are easily dismissed as carping by disaffected troublemakers.
But siblings and children of GAs have both access and the ability to share candid feedback. I’m not saying that all do, but I’m sure there are conversations where a son or daughter tells a GA what is *really* going on in their stake or ward. The lessons are dull and repetitive. Missionary baptisms are rare. Attendance continues to fall. Whatever bad news they don’t want to hear and that often gets filtered out before reaching them. The good news is that such information can, by way of close relatives, get to GAs. The bad news is that close relatives might have their own agenda to push, with zero visibility or transparency by the membership or even by other senior leaders.
What do you think?
- Have you ever seen an actual LDS org chart? How did you get access? Any surprises on it?
- Have you even had a conversation with some random LDS person, then realized they make important decisions within the LDS management structure? But it’s for a department you never heard of in a position you are not familiar with?
- Have you ever known or had a conversation with a relative of a GA and had some surprises about what they know and/or what influence they have with the GA?
Wheat & Tares 
Never seen a chart. But just from conversations over the years, I know the bureaucracy is large and complex. Did you know that there is a department that focuses on installing the video technology in temples for the endowment? A neighbor has been bounced all over the world doing that, and from his description, the number of employees is large. The curriculum department used to be a huge tangle of writing committees creating manuals just two decades ago. But the committees have disappeared… and so did yearly manuals for the RS and Melchizedek Priesthood quorums. Now each conference we sit and pray that there will be enough talks that can be turned into viable lessons. I’ve always wondered what the Aaronic priesthood or YM’s Committee did. Before Scouting died, they just relied on Scouting. After Scouting was gone, they did… what? Sharon Eubank was/still is a church employee before serving in the General RS Presidency. She has seen both sides of the bureaucratic divide between called/ordained leadership and institutional bureaucrat. I wonder how much the two sides actually mingle? Are there hired bureaucrats that wield considerable power that rivals even ordained leaders?
“The bureaucracy is expanding to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy.” – Oscar Wilde [also a Civ game quote].
I was hoping there would be pivotal female secretaries personally – but who knows.
There might be a chart on somebody’s wall, like a mission president with all his missionaries, companions, areas, and callings, but this chart would be much bigger. Just as there is no transparency with tithing, there is no transparency with leadership, mission, vision, or implementation. There’s no discussion up or down the ladder, at least that is heard.
Old Man: my ex-wife’s uncle used to work in that video department and installed equipment worldwide. He also got me some killer deals on surplus electronic equipment, which I used to record my band. I didn’t put the whole corporate thing together in my mind then but now…..
The sad thing is that it appears both in the church and in our country, you are born into it. If not, and you happen to make it, then you are a usurper, like Clinton or Obama or even Harris in our country. In the church, you never know because you never got the calling, at least not beyond the bishop or maybe stake president, which is middlemen callings anyway. Knowing otherwise takes a lot more genealogical research into family roots, which, if you’re not in the family, is harder to do.
Managing directors of departments are generally Googlable. But I don’t know what all of the departments are.
I don’t believe there is an organization chart that actually applies to reality on a general authority level because I know from experience that there isn’t an organization chart that actually applies to reality on a ward level. It’s always amusing when the new bishopric doesn’t bother to release you before they call the new organist. I had been in the calling for 7 years and had requested subs over and over because I couldn’t always be there. When they called the new organist, I asked her which weeks the ward music chair had assigned her to play. She said the bishopric had told her she was playing every week. I said that would be jolly, but it would be nice if they would release me first. Then the bishopric called me in to tell me I was being prideful and that I had never been called to be organist: in his mind I was just filling in. I let him know I was called before he moved into the ward; but that doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.
They don’t follow the organization charts any way. For instance the music chair is supposed to over see all the music in the ward. In reality they do nothing and are given nothing to do and if they try to advise the Primary President on Primary music, or advise the bishop on sacrament music, or suggest to the bishopric that who can play the organ or piano and who would make a good choir leader, they are mostly ignored. This situation is even worse if you are a stake music chair, and a woman. If you try to follow they handbook and and counsel with bishops about the music in your ward, I promise you will get a call from the stake president telling you that isn’t your job, even if the handbook says it is.
Hopefully this isn’t the case in every unit. Leadership roulette mean bishops and SPs who have all the power get to decide if music leaders are respected or ignored.
In my opinion being called to a position in which you are given no duties, when you are never even consulted about your opinion before the person in charge makes all the decisions, is insulting and demeaning.
No organization chart that is ignored is of any relevance.
I was first introduced to the bureaucratic challenges in the dual role of SP and legal counsel when representing the church on a temple project many years ago. The senior leadership was acutely aware of the challenges on the project and wanted open and honest input and feedback from the department heads. But, the bureaucrats often reported what they thought the senior leadership wanted to hear.
I’m not going to share details publicly. From my experience, I think most senior leaders have an active BS meter and see through the puffery. Not all. One senior leader told me, “Don’t ever forget there is a difference between the anointed and the appointed.” and, “Don’t confuse doctrine, policy, practice, and style.” They push back against those that tell them what they think they want to here.
My wife and I were with a member of the 12 and were driving him to the airport may years ago. My wife asked for his counsel for us. He told my wife to learn Spanish. Then he told me, “If you ever serve as a mission president and you have a missionary with a problem, don’t call the missionary department and ask them what to do. They are bound by policy. They don’t have keys and you will have them. So you get the inspiration and decide what to do, then call the MD and tell them what you are going to do, if you want. You do that and everything will work out.” Twenty years later we were called as mission leaders. And that advice rang in my ears with the first belated confession. It was a young recent convert, from a tiny branch. I knew we would lose him if he went home. I fought with the MD. They demanded I send him home. I refused. He stayed, 18 months later he was my AP, humble, loving, and the example of everything a follower of Christ should be. I wish every MP would receive that same advice.
Ultimately, I do think most leaders and employees are good people trying to do their best, but just like all of us are subject to pride, ambition, and the desire for recognition. All vices that the Savior tells us we need to overcome. Some of us to a better job in that battle than others.
Dave B., great post, and thanks. A little clarification, if I may. You wrote in the OP: “Third, thousands of mid-level managers and staff positions are simply hired by senior managers with various departments and agencies. No election, no review and approval by the Senate.” True, but there is a catch: Congress must create and authorize these positions. That’s this issue with Jack Smith, when the federal judge threw out the Trump classified documents case. She said, and correctly I think, that there was no law authorizing his appointment, if he was an inferior officer, and he certainly wasn’t appointed with the Senate’s confirmation. The law makes a distinction between employees and officers, and officers come in those who are confirmed by the Senate and whose appointments are authorized by Congress. Yes, the Secretary or other senior managers make these appointments, but at least Congress has created the position and authorized the Secretary to have an appointment process. That legislative go-ahead is what Jack Smith apparently lacked.
A lot of the GA 70s sit on various committees and head various departments, but I’ve never seen a list or a chart. The bureaucracy is utterly opaque. dlcroc58, thanks for your story. I appreciate the advice made to the MP by the apostle. I saw in one example as bishop where my ecclesiastical weight on a relatively minor matter carried more weight than the full-time head of church physical facilities department in my part of the world. I said no, he said yes, and I won. The MPs hold the keys over the full-time missionaries, not the SLC staff (including the GAs) in the missionary department, and I’ve seen that those holding keys can win over the staff if they’re willing to be firm. Great advice for the MP to make the decision and then inform the missionary department if necessary. I bet they don’t teach that to new mission presidents in their orientation, and they should. The staff support those who are called to lead. Leaders who can’t lead and who rely too much on the staff may be good managers, but they are probably not good leaders.
I know people who have worked in the Church Office Building. The Church has a lot of staff and a lot of administration. The 26-story COB houses departments like the Missionary Department, Temple Department, Physical Facilities, Legal, Accounting, and Cartography (they have a department of cartographers who create all the maps used for ward and stake boundaries, mission boundaries, temple districts and etc.) Also a Philanthropies Department for those who want to name the Church in their will as a beneficiary or otherwise give a big gift. There’s also a Travel Department and a Communications Department. The Church employs people to create digital media.
I googled and found a staff list for the AEC Department which stands for the Architects, Engineers, and Construction. The only women on the list are identified as admin assistants. Every project manager and engineer is a man. Hope that doesn’t surprise anyone. https://aec.churchofjesuschrist.org/staff/
The highest ranking authorities have their offices in the Church Administration Building. The First Presidency’s offices are on the first floor. The Twelve are on floors 2-4, each with a corner office. Admin staff gets the middle of the floor. The Presidency of the Seventy is also in the Admin Bldg. https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/church/news/see-inside-church-administration-buiding-now-in-its-centennial-year?lang=eng
The Church Office Building doesn’t have a directory online. There’s one number for the church operator. A staff directory would give us info about the Church admin structure.
I knew a woman who worked in the secretarial pool for the First Presidency. I know a woman who worked in the Humanitarian Department helping to resettle refugees. I know a man who worked in Physical Facilities – did you know they have a schedule of maintenance and upkeep? Like, they knew how long doors last, so doors get replaced before they entirely break down. I knew another man who worked in the Welfare Department helping administer the Bishop Central Storehouses around the country. And I know the wives of a couple guys who do IT support for the Church.
Once, I got interviewed on camera by the Church Audio-Visual Department to help create training materials for bishops. There were about five of us – wives of porn addicts – who were going to become part of a bishop training. It went nowhere though. The filming took place in the Conference Center.
The gossip is that the bureaucracy is creaky and unwieldy. Everything was established by revelation (so goes the belief) and so nothing can change unless someone higher up has a revelation. This slows down innovation and streamlining.
I would be very surprised if women are employed above support staff or the lower rungs of some specialized departments. I know they employ some women in the Audio-Visual Dept because my friend was a graphic designer at the Church Office Building for a while. I bet there isn’t any woman who has any authority over a man in a professional capacity. Bottom rungs only.
dlcroc58, great mission story. I know a currently serving MP that is like you. He has had lots of missionaries come in confessing sexual sins from before the mission. He weighs their repentance, and how well they are doing as a missionary. He seldom sends them home, knowing they would be lost from the Church forever if he did.
I learned that there are two full-time employees for the church whose job is replacing lightbulbs in the conference center. A very large and complex bureaucracy indeed. But think about it. The conference center needs lights that work. It has thousands and thousands of them. Many of them are incredibly hard to access and find good replacements for. And such is the US government. Very large and complex. But that complexity didn’t just come about arbitrarily or willy-nilly. It came about out of continuously arising necessities. Which makes me think that a lot of the talk about slashing departments and employees is bluster, a lot of which the incoming administration won’t actually be able to carry out. Lots and lots of government employees have complex contracts and can’t just be immediately cut. Many of them are deeply intertwined with a variety of very important projects and can’t just be replaced all of a sudden. But we’ll see. Also I find it a bit ironic that the DOGE is headed by two people. It just doesn’t seem efficient. Bombastic claims to slash $2 trillion in spending. Again, not efficient. Aren’t those who are really efficient have detailed well-thought-out plans and avoid hyperbolic promises that they couldn’t possibly deliver on?
dlcroc58, not wanting to nitpick, but I will point out that we don’t have enough information to determine whether your story re the confessing missionary is good or bad. Should we assume there was no victim involved? Because if there was, then this looks like a story about protecting the perpetrator because we might loose them otherwise, and to hell with the victim. I wouldn’t regard that as a good story. If there was no victim, then I am at a loss as to why you needed to even tell the missionary department and do battle with them.
Hedgehog good point. But it is a bit tricky. It was my practice to talk to the B/BP so I knew enough about the home situation of the missionary. I never identified the other involved party, because I didn’t want a leader going after someone. Not once did I have a home leader disagree with my approach. Repentance is a personal process and should not be forced by exposing someone. My other concern is you never know the personal philosophy you are dealing with on the other end, be it a parent of a B/BP. And frankly, in some areas of the world, particularly in countries that have a history of strong arm dictators that philosophy carries over into society, in business and other organizations, even the church. I learned of older leaders that would excommunicate or disfellowship teenagers. Fortunately, over time that style is going away. Which frankly has held the church back in some areas and is one of the reasons, among others, for high inactivity rates.
Similarly dlcroc58, we are currently seeing a great many headlines where precisely the issue I raised has been found to be a problem. I still don’t know, not being aware of the details, whether or not your call in the situation was correct.
Should I, I wonder, take the number of down votes I seem to be getting as symptomatic of a system where things are viewed continuously through a male lens, where no one asks what this might look like from a female perspective. “Who elected these GUYS?” Indeed.
I’m a rank-and-file member living outside the Morridor with zero personal connections, familial or otherwise, to GAs, area authorities or mission presidents, and I’m certainly not privvy to any of the internal machinations of the big-C Church. I imagine that is the experience for most Latter-day Saints around the world. Sure, we see the Q15 come on TV twice a year, but they aren’t real people to us, just characters on a boring TV show who know nothing of our day-to-day struggles. I was well into adulthood before I was aware of the Church having an army of full-time paid employees and a deep bureaucracy who keep the organization running. Even knowing that now, it still seems absurd, since my only tangible connection to the Church is my local ward and stake, which are run entirely by unpaid volunteers who I know personally. The opacity and disconnection of the Church bureaucracy are enough for me to question why it should exist in its current form (or at all, for that matter).
@Janey, FYI I have a good (female) friend who is the “director of presiding bishopric projects,” pretty high up (and over some male employees) in the COB structure. She came from a management consulting background, and regularly meets with the apostles. But she is a rare female in that situation.
anitawells – fascinating! Thanks for sharing. Even though it’s rare, I’m glad to hear it happens.
We don’t elect prophets, God elects them. But I do note that we all knew God would set up the world that way, and we voted to come to this world. So, in a sense we voted. I also note that voting against God is a vote for another leader, and I’m not a fan of that leader.