A "friend of the Blog" sent me an "article" written by a "young Jewish professional" and a former professional at United Jewish Communities for whom my friend has the highest regard. It is an insightful reflection on the federations' "brand." I hope you find it as interesting as did I:
Playboy Enterprises & Jewish Federations of North America
"Playboy Enterprises and the Jewish Federation of North America are more alike than you care to believe…
This morning I read an article on MSN Money making the case for Playboy Enterprises to sell themselves and to put Hugh Hefner out to pasture. What I found intriguing was that analysts covering the company actually price the assets of the company higher than the price point of the stock. Why is this? The Playboy brand.
Playboy represents the unique combination of sex and “class”. No one else has that, and perhaps with new owners and a new face to the company, Playboy can become the industry leader again.
This got me to thinking about some similarities that Playboy shares with Federation. Both institutions have deep roots that go back to when our parents and grandparents were children. In fact, whether you care to admit it or not, some fathers had their personal collection buried in the back of their closets. It was “our fathers’ magazine”. With the easy access to pornography today, with images and video readily accessible, Playboy has had a hard time turning a profit, when everything is available free of charge and on the viewer’s terms.
Federation also has an incredible brand, and is perceived to be the paradigm of Jewish giving to my parent’s and grandparent’s generation. The question begs why I should be involved with a seemingly static institution when I can find philanthropic opportunities that are truly customized to my interests and available resources?
I know that the Federation is the backbone of so many social, educational and humanitarian services in Jewish communities across the U.S. but I hope Silverman, who is rebranding the national entity as the Jewish Federations of North America (formerly United Jewish Communities) is prepared to recommend drastic changes that will change the face of Jewish philanthropy in the United States.
Playboy and Jewish Federations have lost their subscribers. Both have an incredible brand and can make changes that will put them at the forefront of their industries. Should I buy stock in Playboy? Federation?"
__________
I know that we will cast our vote for "Federation." What will we do to make our vote matter? The mantle of lay leadership passes very soon; the system has already put in place a new professional leader who is proving to be the quick study necessary to turn this ship away from the shoals. We don't need old wine in old bottles or even new wine in old bottles (with a new brand, of course) but we do need an understanding and appreciation that there is value in the old vintages and we can grow some great new wine on the old vines. Go for it!! Carpe diem and all that.
Rwexler
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
6 comments:
Richard, thanks for posting my article. The original can be found at http://www.jonahhalper.com/?p=161.
To the Anonymous who just loves to attack Jerry Silverman no basis. Write your own Blog -- title it "I Hate Jerry" and have a good life. I will not publish your stuff here.
I wait for the day that Jerry Silverman and Kathy Manning invite people like you, Rich as well as Richie Pearlstone, Marvin Lender, Corky Goodman and Shoshana Cardin back "into the tent"; maybe as an Advisory Cabinet or somesuch... This madness with "branding" has set aside not just continuity of purpose but the magnificent continuum of national leadership that had the history, wisdom and foresight to at least try not to let those who insisted on the creation of UJC, take what was truly extraordinary and make it ordinary. It's been my observation since being on the "inside" from 94-99, that leadership's great failure of the time was to think that the bored and tired Large City Execs (good heavens, MOST of them are STILL in place)had the answer in their "Study".
When JDC was founded ninety something years ago, when the events of 1939 seared our consciousness, in '67 and '73, when the gates of the Soviet Union opened in the early 90's, no one asked "what is our brand?". They, we, asked "what is to be done?". And that chevrah is the Federation brand.
Friends,
The emphasis lately on "brand" (with congratulatory messages evn appearing in the press) over program is very much the triumph of form over substance. I find it hard to believe that anyone would be fooled.
Thanks to those of you who have commented.
A brand is a result of successful product placement but not necc. with a quality product. With no quality product, there would never be a brand to create AND SUSTAIN. Ask anyone under 50 years of age what a "pet rock" is...it had its 15 minutes and now it's gone.
A successful brand is therefore by definition something that represents substance and is sustainable (ie. kleenex), and if a company or org with a good brand has lost its way, the brand will erode just as quickly (or faster)than its creation.
Post a Comment