"...EITHER GET BEHIND THE CHAIRPERSON OR GET OFF THE BOARD"

In a recent article in The Forward -- Infighting, turnover buffet the Joint Distribution Committee...-- on the continuing, perhaps growing, balagan at the top levels of the Joint we wrote about in our Post Whither JDC?, a minority of Board members appear to be continuing a battle they already lost when Mark Sisisky was elected the organization's new President. I'll leave this imbroglio to others suggesting only that all Board members and the new President engage in the introspection demanded of us at Yom Kippur.

Instead, I want to reflect on the demand by one Joint Board Member as demanded, according to a transcript of a contentious Board meeting: "Mark is the president, you either get behind him, or you get off the board." I have heard the same demand made of me back when I served of the JFNA Executive, and my objections to a given action were made at a meeting in private. These are not a demand for achdut; these are nothing less than a demand that a non-profit Board member: never dissent. This is not prescriptive for democracy; it is the precursor to autocracy.

Organizations have choices of what they want to be -- but one of those choices should never be to demand total obeisance to those in power. What should be...always...is total obeisance to the organization, its values, its purposes. And that obeisance demands expression, even dissent, when the emperor has no clothes. 

Friends, achdut is not a matter that can be demanded; it can only be created through open debate. It can't be imposed. And, when and where attempts are made to impose unity; those fail. They failed at JFNA, they failed at the Conference of Presidents and they will fail at JDC. 

Any Board Chair/President who demands that the organization's Board act in lockstep with him/her on all matters, in doing so has planted the seeds of organizational collapse. If good faith "dissenters" are forced into some form of ostracism; soon Boards become dysfunctional and institutions die. Non-profit leadership demands a certain amount of flexibility; an understanding that "I am not always right" -- a willingness to seriously consider dissenting views. 

So, to that JDC Board member, whose demand frames the title of this Post, I'd suggest a possible corollary: If you cannot tolerate good faith dissent, you should resign.

Rwexler

WHERE DOES ONE PLACE THEIR TRUST?

When Eric Fingerhut began his service as JFNA's new CEO and President, he was joining an organization of strangers to him. Certainly, for better or worse, he received guidance from the lay leaders who played the most significant role in his hiring. And, no doubt, he brought some mid-level professionals with him from Hillel as JFNA's budget reflected a small FTE increase in the Office of the President. And, naturally, Fingerhut spent his first months getting the JFNA "lay of the land" from its most senior professionals. 

And, Eric not being a rookie in Jewish organizational life, a strong and respectedf professional of reputed good judgment, of whom one would have expected that after the "break in period," we would have seen significant changes at the very top of the JFNA organization chart.

But...no. In the face of the pandemic, JFNA announced that it had down-sized by 37 persons, most of them mid-level professionals -- you know, as in almost every non-profit, those who are doing the work in the trenches. And the long-serving SVP Marketing and Communications left as well (and, relatively promptly, replaced). Pre-pandemic, Fingerhut announced that, in addition to his role as CEO/President he would serve as the head of FRD, after that position was vacated -- and, inasmuch as JFNA no longer appears to engage in FRD, once its primary fundtion and the one most demanded by the communities, this should not unduly burden him.

And, what is JFNA left with -- at the least, its two most senior professionals: its Executive Vice-President and its SVP Global Operations and Director General JFNA Israel. Now, to be honest I don't know much about what either of these prfessional leaders do but I'm pretty sure that whatever they may do includes: protecting and supporting each other; identifying other JFNA professionals who have been or will be sacrificed to the economic fall-out of the pandemic but not them; and, of course, kissing up to the CEO (a pattern they established early on with Eric's predecessor for whom the delivery of a constant supply of Diet Cokes was a high point of service) and to every lay leader whom they associate with JFNA power. 

And, whatever their roles really are these two drink very, very well from the Jewish money spigot. Yes $409,000 to the EVP; $347,000 to the SVP Global Ops. If the CEO was trying to identify additional  savings, he need have looked no further. But he did not. WHY NOT? I have no doubt that over the years, these two senior professionals have looked to a small groiup of lay leaders to succor their support. And, if not otherwise successful, this twosome proved the benefits of that support. And those lay leaders, recirculated through the JFNA leadership ranks as if they had demonstrated success in their prior roles, became reliant on these pros for information, and for mutual support -- effectively rewarding the pros' loyalty to them confusing that personal loyalty with loyalty to the organization.

More's the pity, friends.

G'mar tov.

Rwexler

A HAPPY AND HEALTHY NEW YEAR

 To all of you and your loved ones, a shana tova u'metukah. 

Rwexler

WAS THIS A JOKE?

 Speaking of a lack of focus...

While the media were focused on whether PM Netanyahu had “condoned” a UAE deal for F-35s as the “price” for recognition of Israel and a “peace deal,” the Jewish Agency and its “partners” at Keren Ha’Yesod announced a major venture with the 1000 person Jewish community of the Emirates...yes, you read that correctly — 1,000 Emirati Jews will have the benefit of a “partnership” with JAFI/KH. https://www.jns.org/jewish-agency-and-keren-hayesod-to-begin-activities-education-in-uae/

And if you think that this is nothing more than a JA publicity stunt — shame on you. After all, the Jewish Agency is in the midst of a financial crisis so deep that its emergency funding of communities suffering the financial pain of the COVID-19 pandemic had to be supported with a jewelry store-sponsored telethon;  and its communal support from the federations and KH are in an historic collapse. (Yes, that’s the same KH which has retained its 20% ownership of JAFI without any obligation to financial support for the Agency’s core budget which has now “adopted” the Jews of the UAE.)

And, not to be outdone, and never wanting to miss another shiny object, it was announced that JFNA would be joining JA and KH in this effort, whatever it may be, with the Jewish leaders of that 1,000 person community of the Emirates. G-d knows that JFNA’s bloated staff in Jerusalem has the capacity to take this — whatever it may be — on.

I have a suggestion for the Chief Rabbi of the Jewish Council of the UAE, Yehuda Sarna: thank JA, KH and JFNA profusely and then seek out Yael Eckstein, the leader of the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews. The IFCJ’s support comes with financial commitments and expertise. Something new and different for the New Year.

Then, apparently President Trump stuck a deal for "peace" (yet to be defined) between Israel and Bahrain; the deal celebrated on the White House lawn with the Emirates "deal" (yet to be defined, as well). Bahrain's Jewish community has 30 members. 

In celebration of the deals, JFNA CEO Eric Fingerhut reported that he flew directly from the White House ceremony to the Emirates' capitol to celebrate Rosh Ha'Shana with the Jewish community there. (Not sure whether the 1,000 Jews of the UAE have just one synagogue but, as the joke tells us, probably more.) Hope that Eric doesn't have to quarantine for weeks there; he probably has work to do at 25 Broadway or nearby.

Rwexler

MORE STUFF

 1. The JFNA Version of FRD. You may recall that after the departure of the JFNA FRD SVP, Eric Fingerhut announced that he would serve, in additioin to his other CEO responsibilities, as some kind of interim. professional leader of JFNA's financial resource development effort. Then, presumably in consultation with the JFNA National Campaign Chair, JFNA down-sized its FRD Community Consultation effort and, lately, best I can tell (and someone correct me if I'm wrong), JFNA has gone out of the FRD business -- at the worst possible time. (I think the National Campaign Chair still travels to communities to speak and inspire, but FRD...no.) 

But it was still surprising to read the "excited" announcement that thanks to the generosity of "seven national foundations," which granted "an $18 millon match to the Federation system, which can be matched on a 1:2 basis, creating a $54 million increase for our frontline servoce agencies and programs serving primarily Jewish community members." (No, I don't know what that means either.) This will forever be known as the Human Services Relief Matching Fund.

So, the matching funds have already been commited by the foundations; there is no indication in Chair Wilf's and CEO Fingerhut's announcement that JFNA will be doing any more fundraising -- having done none to this point anyway. Therefor it did come as a surprise that the Matching Fund will be chaired by the National Campaign Chair. 

I still remember the halcyon days of yore when the National Campaign Chair as his/her first responsibility was to actually raise money -- I know that was "so Oughts." I bet Mark Wilf remembers those days as well. They are no longer.

2. Maybe There Should Be a Training Program. Many, probably all of us, have Chaired meetings over our leadership years. Hopefully, we all learned from the best of leaders and passed what we learned on to those who followed us -- always either informally or by example. In all of my leadership roles, I always treqasured the opportunity to share.

Recently, I was to participate in a Zoom meeting of an organization I once Chaired.

Then I received the Agenda. It read like this:

• Call to Order, Welcome -- Board Chair
• Approval/Minutes -- Board Chair
• Dvar Torah -- Someone other than the Board Chair
• Direction of the Organization -- Board Chair
• CEO's Message -- the CEO
• Opportunities for Organizational Leadership -- Board Chair
• Telling the Organization's Story -- Someone other than the Board Chair
• Training Sessions -- Board Chair
• Next Steps -- Board Chair

As Mel Brooks might have said: "It's good to be the Board Chair!!" 

This organization's Chair is a good person, from a great community, and I have probably been unfair. But...maybe not.

I think that along the way some organization should convene a training session for lay leaders that would include a component on Best Practices for Running a Meeting -- How to Share. Probably won't happen and, ifr it did, no one would attend because we all know how to run a great meeting...

Don't we?

Rwexler

OUT OF STEP??

 JFNA distributed an important albeit opaque notice to its members and constituencies over the signatures of Chair Mark Wilf and the JFNA Domestic Affairs Committee Chair:

"This morning The New York Times published an ad (attached) with a letter signed by 600 Jewish organizations -- including six Federations – in support of Black Lives Matter. The ad was timed to coincide with the March on Washington which will take place both virtually and in person over the next two days.  We wanted to provide you some background information in the event you are asked for comment by stakeholders or the media. 

The sign-on letter was circulated two months ago.  Though it was clearly an open letter, there was no announced intention at the time to purchase ads in major publications.  JCPA sent the letter out to JCRCs encouraging them to sign.  We believed – and still do – that our work on these issues is better focused around the substantive, targeted efforts on which we have embarked.  That approach was set forth in this op-ed “On Racial Justice, We can All Do Better”.   

  

This year’s March on Washington is a combination of a virtual event created by the NAACP in collaboration with National Action Network, Urban League, and others set to unveil a “a bold National Black agenda” and an in person march led by the Rev. Al Sharpton's National Action Network. We are not participating in this march, but are honoring the legacy of Dr. King in other ways, including through our policy advocacy.

 

We know that each Federation has taken important steps to fight racial discrimination and support racial justice in your communities.  At JFNA, we have devoted more resources to helping all our Federations respond to the important issues raised in the aftermath of the death of George Floyd, to guaranteeing that all communities benefit from the important public programs and funding sources we support, and to working diligently to ensure that our communal institutions reflect our own Jewish diversity, including Jews of Color.  

 

Today is the 57^th anniversary of the 1963 March on Washington, where Rev. Martin L. King gave his “I Have a Dream speech” to a crowd of more than 250,000 people.  As we enter this Shabbat, in this powerful month of Elul, we prepare our souls and spirits for the High Holiday season.  Let us all pray that we may be a part of the healing process for those who still lack full access to the opportunities and protections that society has to offer."

This admonition, if that is what the letter was meant to be, requires a real ability top read between the lines -- something I and you frequently have to do when it comes to Jewish inter-agency matters. So, that's what I am engaged in here -- I assume someone(s) will corrrect me if I am wrong. And this Post is not about the substance of JCPA's decision to join in/on the Virtual March on Washington as others have already done so -- e.g., Tablet's Leil Leibovitz in his vitriolic column: The Mind-Bendingly Insane, Completely Craven, Uttely Unconscionable Redemptiomn of Al Sharpton. https:www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/al-sharpton-jonathan-greenblatt-adl)

Then, on 1 September, the ADL, one of the other organizational supporters of the March, as The Jewish Weereported:

"'We’re witnessing an increasing politicization of this violence,' Alex Friedfeld, an investigative researcher at the ADL's Center on Extremism, told JTA. 'Rather than standing together as protesters and saying we will not condone the use of violence, people are blaming the other side for what happened. Rather than condemning the cycle, they’re perpetuating it. When you view everything though the lens of almost-life-or-death struggles, committing an act of violence no longer seems as unreasonable.JCPA'S failure to coordinate with the federations' umbrella body on policy and support at this important moment isn't surprising; the public affairs body has, as has been pointed out on these pages before, operated on an agenda of its own apparently without regard to those of the communities which provide the bulk of its funding. That has to stop; or the funding should stop.'" 

Confused? I am. 

If JCPA's lay and professional leaders believe that they are an organization that can exist independent of its funders, then b'hatzlacha and good-by. 

It is past time for JFNA, as the federations' representative, if not their leader, to undertake an independent review of JFNA's work, focus and purposes. It appears clear that. such a review cannot be entrusted to JCPA itself. Both the federations and JCPA should want alignment on the broad social issues and policies that confront the Jewish community; and there must be a way to achieve the alignment so that our system speaks with one voice. 

That alignment will not be achieved unless JFNA, as the representative of the primary funders of the JCPA  (as locally, in almost all instances, federations are the primary funders of local CRCs) is willing to assert itself -- something the organization has failed to do over its two decades. A letter is a start; but only a start. Now...action is needed.

Action would be a fine way to start the New Year.

Rwexler

 

INTROSPECTION

Forgive me.

I have written on this subject before responding to the question I myself had raised: what value does an organization have to its owners/members if it can only retain them as full-paying Dues members by threat of penalties? For example, take JFNA (as in the Rodney Dangerfield "take my ____ please), which has demanded Dues paid in full or in settlement of "hardships" (as determined by JFNA with no standards) threatening, inter alia, termination of donors participation from a federation even in financial hardship in the Young Leadership Cabinet, Women's Philanthropy or the General Assembly (when the last was a "threat" not of a lost benefit).

Here are the two rationales I've heard for requiring the payment of full Dues:

• "If, insert community name here, fails to pay full annual Dues, it will destroy the System." Really? How do we know? Undisclosed Dues deals have been cut with a number of federations as JFNA leaders could not take the risk of non-payment. Unlike your, e.g., Country Club which "posts" names and numbers for unpaid Dues and assessments, JFNA and its federation members have effectively conspired to keep that information secret.
• When JFNA has heard that there is a possibility that Community A will not pay or under-pay annual Dues, constituency Chairs and JFNA senior professionals call, e.g., National Women's Philanthropy or Leadership Cabinet leaders to "alert them." Then, the apparently irresistible pressure.

Oh, of course deals have been cut -- usually denied by JFNA and the impacted federation -- major cuts to Dues often long past due -- but never has JFNA examined even the possibility that the Dues Budget is disproportionate to the benefits federation receive. I share the belief that if we did not have JFNA we would have to create one -- the difference being that my belief in that truism is centered on the need to actually create JFNA anew. When was the last time the federations were convened to determine the purposes and goals that they wish JFNA to achieve? The answer: not since the merger which created the organization. Isn't 21 years long enough?

 

The extensive and expensive work of the Bridgespan Group was never designed to offer federations the opportunity to determine JFNA's directions and focus. I commend reading the Report if you can find one -- it has been determined to be "Confidential" (as I was reminded after I published small portions of the document) -- I have no doubt that Bridgespan could have conducted that research

but -- and I'm just guessing here -- JFNA's then lay and professional leaders just were far more interested in Dues formulas and excising the United Israel Appeal.

So, what would I suggest?

    1. Chair Wilf -- quietly request the retirement of all those officers who have served in more than one such role over the past decade, appointing a set of new Chairs who may have some new ideas and who have evidenced real energy;

    2. CEO Fingerhut -- take a further look at the JFNA professional roster and effect real change at the highest, rather than "mid-" levels. (Psst: it appears to this outsider that the JFNA EVP and the head of the JFNA Israel Office are joined at the hip, protecting one another. Other than that mutual aid pact: What have they accomplished in their long-term professional leadership roles?) In today's communal environment, there are great professionals whom I believe would want to work alongside the JFNA CEO;

    3. The Chair and the CEO -- appoint a true Blue Ribbon Committee of a group of Federation Chairs and CEOs representative of every City-size to conduct a deep dive into the purposes and foci of JFNA for the benefit of the federations. There needs to be a serious examination of whether it is time for JFNA to delimit its roles to those of a Trade Association (which many believe that it has already become -- an expensive one); or a more expansive set of defined roles for which federations are willing and will bind themselves to pay.

And, of course, more. Throughout a process, Federation leaders should read and then abide the advice of Rabbi Sherre Hirsch in her article in ejewishphilanthropy -- Time to Reassess What Is Essential.

Let's assure that federations finally will see value-added and a return on their investment in JFNA. What could be better than that?

Just get on with it.

Rwexler