work of the Bridgespan consulting group, at great expense, filtered through a lay-professional JFNA/Federation team.
Here is the powerpoint supporting a set of "emerging recommendations." It's a must read:
https://cdn.fedweb.org/fed-42/2/JFNA%20Strategic%20Review_Report%20%26%20Recommendations.pdf
It is impossible for me not to observe that these findings and many of the recommendations in The Bridgespan Group report have appeared many times on the many pages of this Blog....and were offered at no cost. But, never mind!!
In Bridgespan's presentation to the Board, it noted that in the feedback from federations there was an "...an alarming level of dissatisfaction with JFNA" today. Hmmm. So, the recommendation, right out of the box is the launch of a "NextGen Initiative" that presumes that this JFNA, in the existing structure...this JFNA which federations neither trust nor respect, will raise a yet to be determined millions over Dues to support an undefined effort.
Further, while TBG recognized that "[S]uccess will require a fundamental culture change" federations to JFNA and JFNA to the federations, the Consultant's Recommendation for that "change" relates strictly/solely to the sharing of data and communications. Not enough...not nearly enough...and, certainly, TBG knows it.
To the Consultant's credit, TBG appeared to recognize that Dues issues relate directly to benefits received by the communities from JFNA.
All of the Recommendations have merit; yet, JFNA has demonstrated, over the past decade (if not longer) --
- JFNA has been unable to deliver positive results
- JFNA has been unable to deliver excellence
- JFNA has failed to develop and compensate the best and brightest
And, yet, TBG is persuaded -- in a frank denial of reality -- that JFNA can accomplish the Recommendations. And, it may do so without first being changed itself.
Here's my own first Recommendation: hire a new CEO and do it today, even if that person is an Interim CEO.
Rwexler
* Throughout these Posts I have mistakenly identified TBG as a tire company. My apologies.
* Throughout these Posts I have mistakenly identified TBG as a tire company. My apologies.
Posts
14 comments:
I didn't make it to the meeting but find it unbelievable that this high level committee and our professional staff would even allow such an empty and shallow set of "recommendations" to ever be presented in public.
Weren't they embarrassed to say that this is the result of the funds that they have invested - our funds - in this Bridgespan process. Anybody interested in buying the Brooklyn Bridge?
Your recommendation is a lot less expensive and a lot better that anything that I could see in the joke of a presentation that Bridgespan produced.
I wonder if "BridgeSpan" ever identified that the river it spanned was the East River and that in fact this was the Brooklyn Bridge that was being "Spanned".
Leave it to JFNA to hire a consulting company with no experience with a complex Jewish organization, overpay to educate them and then kvell at a set of crap wrapped in jargon like "Dashboards." Thanks for allowing us to read this thing, this travesty. #dreck
Anon at 4:17 makes a ridiculously short-sighted and foolish comment. Even a fleeting knowledge of Bridgespan’s client list—Jewish and others—should be enough to dispel this nonsense. Pitiful.
The Bridgespan Group has a long list of clients set forth on its website, literally 100s of them. Among them may be 10 Jewish organizations and one (the Atlanta Jewish Federation) Jewish federation. PerhapsAnon. 5:56 would wish to inform us of transferable experiences as he/she see them.
Anon 5:56 back again, thanks. To say that Bridgespan has no experience with complex Jewish organizations is ridiculous. And to think that we as a system have nothing to learn from their experience with non-Jewish large national organizations is, honestly, hubristic and foolish. You don’t need me to tell you of transferable experiences. You need nationally and internationally recognized expert consultations. You know, like Bridgespan. Don’t let your anger at JFNA drag possible problem-solvers into the muck with false and inane comments.
Nobody has to drag Bridgespan “problem solvers” into the muck. They did it just fine all by themselves.
Inane does not even cover this engagement.
1) What self respecting consulting firm would take an engagement with the involvement of the departing and failed CEO during the middle of a search process. So much for fees vs professionalism.
2) The recomendations display their total inability to bring value in this assignment. They are literally childish and inane.
Whoever said dreck, hit this crap right on the head.
For both incoming CEO's and consultants a key to success is to always cultivate an anthropological imagination, a studied understanding of an organization's culture and its field from the inside out. For better or worse, the Federation system has a history, culture and rhythm not easily grasped by business schooled generalists without a great deal of deep background prep. Whether this consultation ever rose to this level of engagement is for those closer to the matter to say and requires evidence well beyond the fairly boiler plate power point presented.
That's a ridiculous response. "What self respecting consulting firm would take an engagement with the involvement of the departing and failed CEO during the middle of a search process?" So what are you suggesting? Do nothing? Is the sum total of JFNA's work expressed solely in the role of the CEO and halted for a year by his departure? Don't be ridiculous. This was a massive undertaking, with input from many people.
To say that the "recommendations display their total inability to bring value in this assignment" just proves that Anon7:17 hasn't read them and/or doesn't understand how large complex organizations work. Recommendations are just that--recommendations. Disingenuous faux expectations show childish inanity.
Ok, friends, while I'm sure all of us have enjoyed the dialogue between those of you who find the Bridgespan/JFNA consultancy worth little and someone from TBG and/or JFNA in total defensive mode enough is enough.
Can you possibly repost the link? Either the file is no longer there, or the link is broken. Thank you..
Seems JFNA made the report private. Pretty naive if they think there aren't plenty of people who already have it.
That's what JFNA does -- when they expose themselves to any criticism for a Report, Minutes or a document, theu either make the thing unavailable, claim it's confidential or otherwise just hide it from view. By their actions, the JFNA leaders believe that they are not subject to the rules applicable to public charities. These actions are contemptible of course.
Post a Comment