Perhaps one of you can explain to the rest of us what has happened at the American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee over the past few years? How has one of our system's most vital Overseas partners come to this:
- After a Search JDC hires a young law dean with no evident background or experience in Jewish life as its CEO only to watch this fish out of water flounder...at an unbelievable level of compensation ($850,000/year!!) He proved to be neither manager nor fund raiser. It took only a few months to convince many in JDC lay leadership that he had to go;
- In a further deterioration, this on the lay side, a JDC Nominating Committee decided to support for President a lay leader from Virginia whose meagre Jewish organization background and lack of non-profit governance experience (and, no doubt, other substantive matters) gave rise to a contested election for the first time in the Joint's history. The institutional nominee, a gregarious business leader, prevailed -- how's that working out?
- As if to prove his critics correct, the newly installed President, apparently unhappy with the direction taken by the JDC CEO Search Committee -- which had been dutifully vetting candidates for months -- decided, process be damned, and unilaterally attempted first to add multiple new members to the Search Committee and, then, apparently frustrated with his own interference, unilaterally discharged the existing Search Committee appointing a successor Committee to succeed it. Some would argue this was all ok; after all, this interference was permitted by JDC's By-Laws. Yet, as anyone with Jewish organizational leadership experience knows, some discretion and building consensus are far better tools than "I can do it because the By-Laws say I can."
- Caught up in the chaos and controversy was a long-term JDC senior professional who had garnered major support for the CEO position but was derided (and supported) in the press (in particular in a poorly sourced article in The Jerusalem Post). Ultimately, this excellent candidate withdrew from consideration.
I had the privilege, growing out of my service as National Chair of the United Jewish Appeal, to interact with a succession of incredible lay and professional leaders of JDC -- Ambassador Milton Wolf, z'l, Jonathan Kolker, Alan Jaffe on a through line to Stan Rabin with CEOs of incredible commitment, creativity and leadership, among them, Ralph Goldman, z'l, Michael Schneider and Steve Schwager. I was privileged to join with these leaders in advocacy for the Joint's communal allocations.
Back then, the Joint was a true "secret weapon" for good; but, long ago, the "secret" was out. JDC's work, in the Soviet Union and then in the FSU, throughout the Diaspora and in Israel, inspired and continues to inspire generations of donors with its life-saving work. But, somehow and somewhere, the Joint appears to have lost its way in the deep hole of organizational politics -- a CEO Search that yielded a bad choice followed by a divisive Nominating process that appears to have produced a lay leader focused on the powers of the office rather than the sacred purposes of the organization.
In the past months alone, JDC, with an interim CEO, has lost its preeminent Israel-based fund-raiser, faces a loss of a number of Board members growing out of the fiasco of the election and the Search, and, now, the leading contender for the CEO position has withdrawn her name.
This is not the JDC with which I or you grew up; what it will be remains to be seen.
Rwexler
Posts
4 comments:
Well stated although leaving out one important fact. Much of this was done by the Board President to orchestrate the hiring of the “candidate” with much of the staff against it. Additionally, many major funders including Federations have been troubled by this horrendous givernance and the self interest driven leadership at the top.
Robert
Has it occurred to you that the Jerusalem Post article is false? That the narrative painted is entirely incorrect and more than a little out of context?
That perhaps there are a very large number of very good and strong reasons for disbanding a search committee? And that, as with every organization, those reasons should and need not be aired in public? Or, that the internal candidate mentioned - and unfortunately derided - was never unduly pushed by any of leadership?
That this entire story is just the continuation of a fight for power by a very small cadre of board members upset (obviously very upset) by their loss of power through the quite normal process of succession? That this small group orchestrated a competitive election slightly over a year ago, which could only result in disharmony and bad press, but could achieve no change as their candidate was roundly defeated by a large margin as detailed elsewhere.
And that this same small group of individuals, continues to harbor so much animus about their loss of power that they would sooner damage one of the most important humanitarian organizations in the Jewish World, and defame a loyal and competent staff member, than just abide by the normal passing of leadership?
To your prior commentator, there are no “horrendous governance” issues evidenced, just the horrendous self-interest of a very tiny few who would deliberately try to harm a great organization that is very important to the Jewish People. Their egos are clearly more important than the reputation of a staffer or the needs of hundreds of thousands of clientele.
But, the original article begs the question of why the Jerusalem Post would traffic in gossip and innuendo worse than a supermarket tabloid and not source a single individual, let alone any of the current staff or leadership (save one very unhappy ex-President), yet have its editor defend the shoddy journalism and the attendant defamation of a staff member (see the twitter fight with the editor of eJewishPhilanthropy). Who does Yaakov Katz really work for is the better question?
Robert, rather than accepting the Post article, you might have also reached out to the staff and leadership to determine if there is a scintilla of truth in any of this, save that some would like to destroy an organization we truly can not afford to lose now. Perhaps you should out those individuals and ask them to leave the organized community?
Mark, good of you to defend governancd malpractice reflected in the JDC Search Committee balagan that gave rise to my column in the first instance. If you wish to correct a record that reflects a JDC "process" that, in the first instance attempted to stack an on-going responsible Search process with a set of new members followed by the ordered dissolution of the Search Committee with ther appointment of a new one.
Next time you choose to write, use your name and I will use mine
Robert a/k/a Richard
Richard, Obviously your Post struck a nerve with those in power at JDC. It is ironic, in the worst way, that your Anonymous correspondent accuses some JDC Board minority of efforts to “destroy an organization we can truly not afford to lose,” but sees nothing wrong with airing his/her grievances in a particularly offensive and aggressive manner. There are, as always, two sides to this story — but neither side in this meshugas believes that only they are acting in good faith. This kind of internecine warfare destroys organizations but, apparently, no one c@res about that other than there lip service while tearing each other down.
Post a Comment