HARSH TRUTHS

I am constantly impressed with most -- not all, most -- of your Comments, any one of which could readily be the subject matter of a Post. Recently, one of you, anonymously, wrote the following with regard to the pitiable JFNA-Israel:

"> Israel advocacy should be located in the New York office - not in Jerusalem.
> Advocacy for Israel should be directed to the Federations and donors, not to the Knesset and Israeli politicians.
> The Israel office should be a small, minimally staffed back office support operation.
> JFNA should stop trying to be a direct service provider in Israel. There is no need, no core competency, no added value and certainly no efficiency in continuing to attempt to compete with our partners under the guise of "global operations."
Everyone knows all of this this but will anyone be willing to make the required changes?
Is there a leader in the house?"

In this Comment, the author could have been referencing back to one of the formative documents of merger -- a Report from the then Newco's "Israel Task Force," under the Chairmanship of Marvin Lender, written by Detroit's CEO Bob Aronson. 20 years old now, those recommendations, including those quoted above, as relevant now as then if not more so. 

After all, JFNA-Israel in its current iteration is a failure; has failed time and again; for the last decade, there is not one success to which the Silverman-Caspi "team" can point that would suggest that what JFNA has in place works. In fact, JFNA-Israel is JFNA in microcosm. A model of dysfunction; a black hole into which you, federations, have dumped millions for which the return on investment has been an overstuffed office filled with professionals who are either ill-supervised or undirected with the inevitable lack of results.

Jerry Silverman still has a job; it's half the job he was hired to perform while he's paid as if he were actually a powerful CEO. Becky Caspi still has a job, as much a reflection on Silverman and his consigliere, Mark Gurvis, as it is on her. Everybody still has jobs. They can’t do those jobs, but they still have them. Why? Why isn’t Richard Sandler pissed off? Doesn't he want to do his job? (Someone, who shall be nameless, wrote me last week to observe: "This wouldn't be happening if Richard Sandler were still alive." But, did he lose interest -- at least since he became Board Chair?) After his first year in office came to an end, I told Richard he was risking the same fate as his predecessor -- allowing the waste of his Terms as Board Chair through inaction. And, yet, before Michael Siegal left office, over the objections of his woeful CEO ("If the Global Planning Table doesn't succeed, it will mean the end of JFNA") and the objections of Michael's predecessor, he directed the termination of the GPT. 

Sandler could still snatch some form of victory from the jaws of defeat by doing what he must know needs be done; or he faces the reality of three wasted years.

Is there a leader in the house?

Rhetorical question.

Rwexler