Let us review the status of this Blog:
~ During the Rieger-Kanfer "period" an edict was issued from on high at 111 Eighth Avenue continuing on to the current address that no one at The Jewish Federations of North America f/k/a UJC was permitted to read UJThee and Me. (This was to apparently exclude the then President and CEO, who had been an "avid reader.") I thank the "leaders" who attempted to censor the professional staff for making this Blog the daily most widely read within the four walls of the organization -- and in the D.C. and Sherman Oaks offices. My thanks to each of you who risked some form of retribution by even reading what I've written and, even more so, those of you who have written and called me in confidence with your insights, encouragement, corrections and observations. We will continue.
~ We have chronicled the failures of the past ("what we have here is a failure to communicate" among other failures) and our hopes for the future "under new management." Last year, when one federation leader, among others, told the then Chair of the Executive, now the "new" Board Chair, that he learned most of what he knew of UJC's activities in the Posts of this Blog, Kathy replied, with good sarcasm and real humor: "...then you must be completely misinformed." We'll try to do better, Kathy. We promise.
~ Over the past weeks many of those who have sent Comments to the Posts, in anonymity or by name, have offered some important insights and critical thinking (not the Anonymous mailer [who really isn't very anonymous at all] who offers nothing but personal insults, most of which I have rejected). I have brought some of these Comments directly to the attention of UJC's new professional and lay leaders because I want them to succeed to the same extent, and more, than their predecessors failed us...and themselves.
~ In a TIME Magazine cover story -- Why Main Street Hates Wall Street -- the writers offered a characterization that would fit squarely with the prior leadership: "Too many people (were) acting in an arrogant, clueless and tone-deaf way." That leadership, now in our collective rear-view mirror, paid no price for their actions which now encumber The Jewish Federations of North America; the price was paid and is being paid by the federations, our donors and the new leadership "team" and by those who were the consequential victims -- long-time employees terminated, dedicated professionals terminated, lay and professional leaders from the federations pushed out for nothing more than raising questions.
Those who constructively criticize this Blog -- please continue. Those who criticize this Blog by misconstruing it to their own ends -- remember my motto comes from Bill Parcells and is, therefore, a football adage equally applicable to this Blog: "You are what the record says you are."
We look to the new present and to the future with confidence that the new lay and professional leaders of The Jewish Federations of North America will seize the day. May the day soon arrive when I have no more about which to write.
Rwexler
Friday, November 27, 2009
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
MENDEL KAPLAN, z'l
A great leader passed away last week -- not just a great leader, a great philanthropist, a great Zionist. a mensch. As the Jewish Agency's Chairs described him: "Mendel was a giant among men, an innovative industrialist who used his wealth for the betterment of his fellow Jews, countrymen and the State of Israel. At the young age of 73, Mendel was taken from his family and all of us who loved and respected him.
Mendel not only talked the talk -- and he could, with devastating wit and insight, truly do the talking -- he walked the walk as so few have. He made aliyah and maintained homes in South Africa, Jerusalem and Caesaria. He made his mark everywhere he went. With Max Fisher, z'l, he leaves behind not only a great record of achievement but a beautiful family dedicated as well to the creative survival of our People.
Mendel did not suffer fools gladly...or at all. I remember our public and private debates over what Mendel perceived as the Jewish communities of the United States failures to support JAFI. But, as my friend Bruce Arbit also remembered, Mendel was always willing to engage, to listen and always was appreciative of those who dedicated themselves to the Zionist dream and to the building of a strong Israel.
If there was a way to spice up debate at a JAFI Executive or Board Meeting, Mendel, with a remark or a brief speech could always find that path. He provoked us, he urged us on and he led by the example of his own life and his love of family and Israel and the Jewish People. All of us who knew Mendel were strengthened by his strengths, infused with his enthusiasm and love. He will be missed by all of us who crossed his path.
May Jill and his family be blessed by their memories of Mendel, as are we all.
Rwexler
Mendel not only talked the talk -- and he could, with devastating wit and insight, truly do the talking -- he walked the walk as so few have. He made aliyah and maintained homes in South Africa, Jerusalem and Caesaria. He made his mark everywhere he went. With Max Fisher, z'l, he leaves behind not only a great record of achievement but a beautiful family dedicated as well to the creative survival of our People.
Mendel did not suffer fools gladly...or at all. I remember our public and private debates over what Mendel perceived as the Jewish communities of the United States failures to support JAFI. But, as my friend Bruce Arbit also remembered, Mendel was always willing to engage, to listen and always was appreciative of those who dedicated themselves to the Zionist dream and to the building of a strong Israel.
If there was a way to spice up debate at a JAFI Executive or Board Meeting, Mendel, with a remark or a brief speech could always find that path. He provoked us, he urged us on and he led by the example of his own life and his love of family and Israel and the Jewish People. All of us who knew Mendel were strengthened by his strengths, infused with his enthusiasm and love. He will be missed by all of us who crossed his path.
May Jill and his family be blessed by their memories of Mendel, as are we all.
Rwexler
Sunday, November 22, 2009
MYTHIC FRD AND TRANSPARENCY
The UJA-Federation of New York announced that its October 2009 Greenberg Event was the most successful fund-raising event in its history raising $43 million in pledges. And, don't take this the wrong way, that is a major achievement worthy of accolades under any circumstance -- but, especially this year. However, the $43 million in pledges was identical to the mount announced last year -- no more, no less.
Whether it is fund raising achievement or attendance at GA's, or at federation events, we are a People who seem taken with hyperbole. This caused me to think back to a different time. Before his tragic and sudden death, our incredible Chicago Campaign Director, Joel Shinsky, z'l, and I would drive into downtown Chicago together every day. I used to get the monthly UJA city-by-city campaign data. One Large City federation used to amaze me with their monthly announcements of card-by-card increases -- 18%-20% weren't unusual. I used to harass Joel -- "How could _________ be doing so well and we are showing a paltry 8% increase?" Between puffs on his ever-present cigarette, Joel would dismiss me with a "Wait until the end of the year." "But," I would brilliantly rejoin. "Just wait," Joel would say, biting into his morning doughnut. And, the year-end would come, Chicago would be up 8% and __________ would announce a flat campaign (and later we would learn that "flat" meant "down"). "Any questions?" Joel would ask me. "No," I would whisper back.
What does all of this suggest? To me, transparency, truth-telling. Is there a manual some where that dictates that our system must hide or embellish the facts? I doubt it, but some continue to behave that way. Remember "the truth will set you free."
Rwexler
Whether it is fund raising achievement or attendance at GA's, or at federation events, we are a People who seem taken with hyperbole. This caused me to think back to a different time. Before his tragic and sudden death, our incredible Chicago Campaign Director, Joel Shinsky, z'l, and I would drive into downtown Chicago together every day. I used to get the monthly UJA city-by-city campaign data. One Large City federation used to amaze me with their monthly announcements of card-by-card increases -- 18%-20% weren't unusual. I used to harass Joel -- "How could _________ be doing so well and we are showing a paltry 8% increase?" Between puffs on his ever-present cigarette, Joel would dismiss me with a "Wait until the end of the year." "But," I would brilliantly rejoin. "Just wait," Joel would say, biting into his morning doughnut. And, the year-end would come, Chicago would be up 8% and __________ would announce a flat campaign (and later we would learn that "flat" meant "down"). "Any questions?" Joel would ask me. "No," I would whisper back.
What does all of this suggest? To me, transparency, truth-telling. Is there a manual some where that dictates that our system must hide or embellish the facts? I doubt it, but some continue to behave that way. Remember "the truth will set you free."
Rwexler
Friday, November 20, 2009
FORGET THE FACTS
Sometimes a reporter, sometimes a critical columnist, Caroline Glick is always an Obama hater. If the facts don't fit her anger, she ignores them as she did in a vicious attack on Obama in something called Jewish World Review (November 13, 2009). After accusing Obama of forcing Prime Minister Netanyahu to enter the White House under cover of darkness from an anonymous van and barring the "regular" photo op for the PM with the President, she went off as follows
"Obama's hostility was evident as well during his meeting with fifty Jewish leaders at the White House this week.
In an obvious bid to split American Jewry away from Israel, Obama refused to discuss Israel or Iran with the concerned American Jewish leaders. As far as Obama was concerned, all they deserved from him was a primer on the brilliance of his economic policies and the worthiness of his plan to socialize the American healthcare industry. His foreign policy is none of their business.
Obama's meeting with American Jewish leaders was supposed to be a consolation prize for American Jews after Obama cancelled his first public address to American Jews since taking office. The White House claimed that he cancelled the speech because his visit to the Fort Hood memorial service made it impossible for him to attend. But then the conference was a three-day affair. The organizers would probably have been happy to reschedule.
Instead, as Iran races to the nuclear finish line, America's Jewish leaders were forced to sit through White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel's kitschy Borscht Belt schmooze about his bar mitzvah."
Having spoken with several federation leaders who were present, none of Glick's allegations...none...appear to be true. I have every confidence that had American Jewish leaders been told that they could not discuss Israel with the President, they would have politely declined the meeting. The problem, of course, is that none of these leaders has discussed with their leadership what were the subjects discussed with the President (and prior to that meeting with his key aides); leaving Glick an open field to offer speculation as fact. Do we ever learn?
Now, Caroline Glick may be brilliant. She grew up, some years later than I, in my old neighborhood of Hyde Park, which she describes in her bio as ultra-liberal(true), anti-Israel (false) and, of all things, "anti-American" (unbelievable). She described her alma mater, Columbia University, as "Beir Zeit on the Hudson." She pals around with Michelle Malkin. She is an Israeli. She is apparently an expert on all things. Just has some apparent trouble with the facts. and is rabid in her criticism of our President. Her screed, including the Obama-haters references to Reverend Wright, et al., is Sarah Palin on steroids.
While no more is needed, on 19 November, Glick outdid herself, supporting the mendacity of Beck, Hannity, Limbaugh and others in their unreasoned rabble-rousing against anything and all Obama by attacking the ADL's report on the growing anti-semitism that these hooligans have helped to rouse and attacking the small number of Hillels which have influenced their campuses against Israeli policies. Maybe Ms. Glick ought to return to Chicago (and other venues as well) where the Jewish campus movement has been strong, even brave, in confronting the anti-Israel, anti-Semitic attacks of Arabists and some Jews alike. But, that would get in the face of her narrative, wouldn't it?
Relying on Caroline Glick as an authority on how American Jewry is being treated by this Administration would be wrong.
Rwexler
"Obama's hostility was evident as well during his meeting with fifty Jewish leaders at the White House this week.
In an obvious bid to split American Jewry away from Israel, Obama refused to discuss Israel or Iran with the concerned American Jewish leaders. As far as Obama was concerned, all they deserved from him was a primer on the brilliance of his economic policies and the worthiness of his plan to socialize the American healthcare industry. His foreign policy is none of their business.
Obama's meeting with American Jewish leaders was supposed to be a consolation prize for American Jews after Obama cancelled his first public address to American Jews since taking office. The White House claimed that he cancelled the speech because his visit to the Fort Hood memorial service made it impossible for him to attend. But then the conference was a three-day affair. The organizers would probably have been happy to reschedule.
Instead, as Iran races to the nuclear finish line, America's Jewish leaders were forced to sit through White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel's kitschy Borscht Belt schmooze about his bar mitzvah."
Having spoken with several federation leaders who were present, none of Glick's allegations...none...appear to be true. I have every confidence that had American Jewish leaders been told that they could not discuss Israel with the President, they would have politely declined the meeting. The problem, of course, is that none of these leaders has discussed with their leadership what were the subjects discussed with the President (and prior to that meeting with his key aides); leaving Glick an open field to offer speculation as fact. Do we ever learn?
Now, Caroline Glick may be brilliant. She grew up, some years later than I, in my old neighborhood of Hyde Park, which she describes in her bio as ultra-liberal(true), anti-Israel (false) and, of all things, "anti-American" (unbelievable). She described her alma mater, Columbia University, as "Beir Zeit on the Hudson." She pals around with Michelle Malkin. She is an Israeli. She is apparently an expert on all things. Just has some apparent trouble with the facts. and is rabid in her criticism of our President. Her screed, including the Obama-haters references to Reverend Wright, et al., is Sarah Palin on steroids.
While no more is needed, on 19 November, Glick outdid herself, supporting the mendacity of Beck, Hannity, Limbaugh and others in their unreasoned rabble-rousing against anything and all Obama by attacking the ADL's report on the growing anti-semitism that these hooligans have helped to rouse and attacking the small number of Hillels which have influenced their campuses against Israeli policies. Maybe Ms. Glick ought to return to Chicago (and other venues as well) where the Jewish campus movement has been strong, even brave, in confronting the anti-Israel, anti-Semitic attacks of Arabists and some Jews alike. But, that would get in the face of her narrative, wouldn't it?
Relying on Caroline Glick as an authority on how American Jewry is being treated by this Administration would be wrong.
Rwexler
Thursday, November 19, 2009
BUZZ KILL...AND, WORSE
Well, it sure didn't take long for the spirit of the collective and the good will generated by the GA to be doused by a single letter from the JDC to The Jewish Federations of North America. About a nano-second, actually. For on Thursday, November 12, less than two days after the GA closed, Irv Smokler, the Joint's Chair, advised Kathy Manning that JDC would not be bound by the agreement it had reached with JAFI on the allocations "split" only weeks earlier.
This writer is on the Board of the Jewish Agency but, as my friends at the Joint know, the work of JDC has been an inspiration for me and has enabled me, coupled with the work of the Jewish Agency, hopefully to inspire others. But the substance of the JDC letter and its timing, and an almost simultaneous Op-Ed written by its CEO, Steve Schwager in The Jerusalem Post, and a clearly planted article in The Forward and another in the JTA, are matters that bring no honor and, worse, suggest a JDC-inspired communications strategy the effect of which, if not stopped now, threatens the system that JDC once helped to create and once helped to sustain.
For over a decade, the JDC's efforts to feed hungry Jews, to provide them with basic needs -- shelter, drugs -- have been heroic. And the federations have stepped forward to fund these needs -- inadequately and on a declining basis to be sure. And during this time, until the financial catastrophe that affected everyone, the Joint grew its endowment which stands today at...what, exactly? And if that endowment is for a "rainy day," how can the Joint argue that we are inundated, but fail to use all of the resources at its command and in its total control to meet the needs it has identified in the midst of the storm. But the Joint has a different strategy in mind.
Sure, JDC should receive more in allocations; so, of course, must JAFI. Now, JDC's leaders appear to ask, in writing, for a reinstitution of the infamous failed ONAD process (in a different guise, of course) in place of the terms to which they had just agreed. (I think that's what a request that JFNA "develop a needs-based allocations system" means.) Just how did the prior process help the Joint or the federations? The answer is simple: it didn't, it hurt everyone, and a new process mirroring the prior one will have the same negative impact. It is past time for JAFI and JDC to join together in a common effort, coordinated by The Jewish Federations of North America, to help federations raise more money and to advocate for the vital, underfunded needs they represent.
Steve Schwager, in his Op-Ed, Guess who did not come to the party?, makes a strong and compelling argument. He wrote: "WHAT ELSE worries us? The UJA -- the grandfather of today's newly created JFNA -- was formed in the wake of Kristallnacht...precisely 71 years ago. Numerous speakers at the GA last week made references to this historic event that catapulted American Jewish philanthropy into a superpower world army (sic), bringing rescue and relief to every Jew. UJA was always a relentless and indefatigable advocate of Jewish needs in Israel and overseas. Seventy-one years later, will we abdicate this moral commitment under the pressure of domestic issues and needs? Can we -- the more secure 80% of the Jewish people -- cut off the neediest 20% of our brethren? Since when has a hungry Jew anywhere become an 'overseas issue' marked as less urgent compared to local needs?" That is the Steve Schwager I was proud to partner with in visits to our communities on behalf of our national system, the Joint and Jewish Agency. That is the call to The Jewish Federations of North America to assert its proper...its moral...role to lead our system and to join hands with JAFI and JDC...not tomorrow, but now.
At the GA just concluded, we heard our new Board Chair and CEO commit themselves and us to a reinvigorated, resuscitated partnership with JAFI and JDC -- a recognition that the collective is what ennobles our federation system. And, with clear forethought, two days later, leaders of one of those partners, not liking the deal they had made just weeks (or was it just days) earlier, pulled the rug out from under not just JAFI, but the federations and The Jewish Federations of North America. After five years of a leadership who either neglected the partners -- JDC and JAFI -- or deprecated their work and value, the new JFNA leaders -- Manning, Gelman, Silverman -- appeared prepared to work in a robust partnership with them. Now what?
Why, at a time that JDC and JAFI appeared to be working closer than ever before, when a direct approach by either or both organizations to the federations separately plants the seeds of systemic disintegration, when new national leadership has already demonstrated a renewed commitment to the historic partnership on which our system was built, would the Joint's leaders, so many of whom I know and deeply respect, and who understand all of this, threaten this emerging unity? Is it that at the GA just passed. Joint leaders saw the federations poised to embrace not only Natan Sharansky but his agenda for JAFI and they simply overreacted, or is it something else?
Why now, you might ask? In fact, you should.
Rwexler
This writer is on the Board of the Jewish Agency but, as my friends at the Joint know, the work of JDC has been an inspiration for me and has enabled me, coupled with the work of the Jewish Agency, hopefully to inspire others. But the substance of the JDC letter and its timing, and an almost simultaneous Op-Ed written by its CEO, Steve Schwager in The Jerusalem Post, and a clearly planted article in The Forward and another in the JTA, are matters that bring no honor and, worse, suggest a JDC-inspired communications strategy the effect of which, if not stopped now, threatens the system that JDC once helped to create and once helped to sustain.
For over a decade, the JDC's efforts to feed hungry Jews, to provide them with basic needs -- shelter, drugs -- have been heroic. And the federations have stepped forward to fund these needs -- inadequately and on a declining basis to be sure. And during this time, until the financial catastrophe that affected everyone, the Joint grew its endowment which stands today at...what, exactly? And if that endowment is for a "rainy day," how can the Joint argue that we are inundated, but fail to use all of the resources at its command and in its total control to meet the needs it has identified in the midst of the storm. But the Joint has a different strategy in mind.
Sure, JDC should receive more in allocations; so, of course, must JAFI. Now, JDC's leaders appear to ask, in writing, for a reinstitution of the infamous failed ONAD process (in a different guise, of course) in place of the terms to which they had just agreed. (I think that's what a request that JFNA "develop a needs-based allocations system" means.) Just how did the prior process help the Joint or the federations? The answer is simple: it didn't, it hurt everyone, and a new process mirroring the prior one will have the same negative impact. It is past time for JAFI and JDC to join together in a common effort, coordinated by The Jewish Federations of North America, to help federations raise more money and to advocate for the vital, underfunded needs they represent.
Steve Schwager, in his Op-Ed, Guess who did not come to the party?, makes a strong and compelling argument. He wrote: "WHAT ELSE worries us? The UJA -- the grandfather of today's newly created JFNA -- was formed in the wake of Kristallnacht...precisely 71 years ago. Numerous speakers at the GA last week made references to this historic event that catapulted American Jewish philanthropy into a superpower world army (sic), bringing rescue and relief to every Jew. UJA was always a relentless and indefatigable advocate of Jewish needs in Israel and overseas. Seventy-one years later, will we abdicate this moral commitment under the pressure of domestic issues and needs? Can we -- the more secure 80% of the Jewish people -- cut off the neediest 20% of our brethren? Since when has a hungry Jew anywhere become an 'overseas issue' marked as less urgent compared to local needs?" That is the Steve Schwager I was proud to partner with in visits to our communities on behalf of our national system, the Joint and Jewish Agency. That is the call to The Jewish Federations of North America to assert its proper...its moral...role to lead our system and to join hands with JAFI and JDC...not tomorrow, but now.
At the GA just concluded, we heard our new Board Chair and CEO commit themselves and us to a reinvigorated, resuscitated partnership with JAFI and JDC -- a recognition that the collective is what ennobles our federation system. And, with clear forethought, two days later, leaders of one of those partners, not liking the deal they had made just weeks (or was it just days) earlier, pulled the rug out from under not just JAFI, but the federations and The Jewish Federations of North America. After five years of a leadership who either neglected the partners -- JDC and JAFI -- or deprecated their work and value, the new JFNA leaders -- Manning, Gelman, Silverman -- appeared prepared to work in a robust partnership with them. Now what?
Why, at a time that JDC and JAFI appeared to be working closer than ever before, when a direct approach by either or both organizations to the federations separately plants the seeds of systemic disintegration, when new national leadership has already demonstrated a renewed commitment to the historic partnership on which our system was built, would the Joint's leaders, so many of whom I know and deeply respect, and who understand all of this, threaten this emerging unity? Is it that at the GA just passed. Joint leaders saw the federations poised to embrace not only Natan Sharansky but his agenda for JAFI and they simply overreacted, or is it something else?
Why now, you might ask? In fact, you should.
Rwexler
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
STUFF
~ After watching all of the GA Plenary speeches on the Web a second time -- and they were, in the main, uniformly excellent -- putting politics aside, if that's possible in this era of partisanship and, let's face it, outright hate in some quarters, the absolute best speech by far was Rahm Emanuel's. It was "Jewish;" and it captured the essence of our work with humor of all things -- this from a guy who had no real relationship with our community in all the years he lived here in Chicago. He spoke of the "(values) central to our faith and experience" and thanked us for our "...advocacy for those most in need" wherever they may live. He was gracious and self-deprecating. Good stuff. From a surprising source.
~ So, a regular reader wrote: "After reading the fawning adoration of Jerry Silverman in your Blog and in the article in the JTA, Silverman looking golden, and in eJewishphilanthropy.com, I don't have to eat anything with sugar in it for weeks. Don't you realize that anyone would look better in light of what went on, or didn't, over the prior half decade?" My answer: "Yes."
~ I continue to wonder what the public and private role is of the National Campaign Chair. I saw Michael Lebovitz co-introduce the Sapir (is it time to [a] retire that award now that Chicago has won it five straight years; and [b] change the name?) Award but so many others of lesser positions be given greater exposure and honor at the podium. If the National Chair's role is to be elevated, as it should be, my suggestion (made on these pages before): get rid of the still- born and truly superfluous Center for Jewish Philanthropy and consolidate all FRD under the National Campaign Chair -- for starters.
~ I know the visit to the White House for a GA meeting with the President and key staff was last minute but...could there be some thought given at the highest levels of The Jewish Federations of North America to inviting high level donors to such gatherings? I mean having senior JFNA staff there is a nice "gift" and having some federation CEOs there may be good hasbara for the JFNA, but what about using such events as a catalyst to fund raising? Were there some institutional memory, it might help. Hello??!!
Rwexler
~ So, a regular reader wrote: "After reading the fawning adoration of Jerry Silverman in your Blog and in the article in the JTA, Silverman looking golden, and in eJewishphilanthropy.com, I don't have to eat anything with sugar in it for weeks. Don't you realize that anyone would look better in light of what went on, or didn't, over the prior half decade?" My answer: "Yes."
~ I continue to wonder what the public and private role is of the National Campaign Chair. I saw Michael Lebovitz co-introduce the Sapir (is it time to [a] retire that award now that Chicago has won it five straight years; and [b] change the name?) Award but so many others of lesser positions be given greater exposure and honor at the podium. If the National Chair's role is to be elevated, as it should be, my suggestion (made on these pages before): get rid of the still- born and truly superfluous Center for Jewish Philanthropy and consolidate all FRD under the National Campaign Chair -- for starters.
~ I know the visit to the White House for a GA meeting with the President and key staff was last minute but...could there be some thought given at the highest levels of The Jewish Federations of North America to inviting high level donors to such gatherings? I mean having senior JFNA staff there is a nice "gift" and having some federation CEOs there may be good hasbara for the JFNA, but what about using such events as a catalyst to fund raising? Were there some institutional memory, it might help. Hello??!!
Rwexler
Monday, November 16, 2009
PASSIVE OBSERVATION
Should we just remain passive observers when that which we created, that which we contribute to, fails to serve the interests of its owners? This is, of course, a rhetorical question. The results of passive observation these past five years are crystal clear. The antidote is insistence by the owners -- be they the owners of federation or The Jewish Federations of North America -- on active engagement...NOW. There are, as always in Jewish life, precedents.
First and foremost, there was, before my time, the emergence, within the Council of Jewish Federations, of those who became known as the "Young Turks." These then young leaders, most of whom were graduates of the UJA Young Leadership Cabinet, demanded a seat at the leadership table. The establishment blanched in horror -- and gave them seats. Those young leaders became the leaders of their federations and the national organization. Today, we have no perceptible group of "Young Turks." We have men and women who have stood up for principle, but too few...too few. We have more of a "get along to go along" generations of passive observers. These are men and women, not only fully capable of demanding a seat at the table but those who have already earned those seats. But, unlike their predecessors, the potential "Young Turks" of 2010 believe in (a) a leadership gentility -- if we don't rock your boat today, you won't rock our boat tomorrow and (b) letting the few others do the heavy lifting.
I fear for any organization where those who aspire to leadership actually articulate that "this (and it makes no difference what "this" is) isn't worth fighting for" and when challenged as to "what would be worth fighting for" respond with a shrug. Trust me, a good fight over matters of principle is energizing and can actually bring an organization together; because when the argument is resolved, after healthy, respectful debate, the organization will coalesce behind the decision and move forward...yachad.
Try it; you may like it.
Rwexler
First and foremost, there was, before my time, the emergence, within the Council of Jewish Federations, of those who became known as the "Young Turks." These then young leaders, most of whom were graduates of the UJA Young Leadership Cabinet, demanded a seat at the leadership table. The establishment blanched in horror -- and gave them seats. Those young leaders became the leaders of their federations and the national organization. Today, we have no perceptible group of "Young Turks." We have men and women who have stood up for principle, but too few...too few. We have more of a "get along to go along" generations of passive observers. These are men and women, not only fully capable of demanding a seat at the table but those who have already earned those seats. But, unlike their predecessors, the potential "Young Turks" of 2010 believe in (a) a leadership gentility -- if we don't rock your boat today, you won't rock our boat tomorrow and (b) letting the few others do the heavy lifting.
I fear for any organization where those who aspire to leadership actually articulate that "this (and it makes no difference what "this" is) isn't worth fighting for" and when challenged as to "what would be worth fighting for" respond with a shrug. Trust me, a good fight over matters of principle is energizing and can actually bring an organization together; because when the argument is resolved, after healthy, respectful debate, the organization will coalesce behind the decision and move forward...yachad.
Try it; you may like it.
Rwexler
"NO GOATS NO GLORY" (CD BY THE GOATS)
So...they're sitting at a Conference of Presidents meeting when a murmur echoes through the room. "What's up?" folks ask. It turns out that 52 goats had disappeared...disappeared...from the Youth Aliyah Village of Ben Yakir. "Oy vey." With all the issues confronting the Jewish People...this is about goats...goats!!
Unanimity -- "we must help the kids at Ben Yakir." Almost spontaneously, almost, the Jewish Agency began an important FRD effort on the spot. $120 per goat. The response was immediate -- an outpouring of funds to rescue and protect goats for the Youth Village of Ben Yakir. So far, 120 "new" goats will be acquired, a fence built and a security system installed -- probably satellite reconnaissance included. Think about it -- 52 goats disapper, 120 goats purchased-- this is a real successful FRD effort. If you build the product, they will come...or something like that.
No more questions about priorities...please!! Just don't be surprised when you call a leader in the community for her or his 2010 gift to the annual campaign and hear: "Oh, I made my gift; bought a goat for Ben Yakir."
Ha Gadya-aaah, had gadya.
Rwexler
Friday, November 13, 2009
REFLECTIONS
Many of your Comments, both to this Blog and in e-mails to me, on my mention of Lester Rosenberg's return home after six months of rehab where he continues his therapy, have reflected on his generosity of spirit, his friendship, his leadership, his menschekeit. These Comments, in turn, have caused me to examine, once again, the singular quality of leadership that Lester has embodied throughout his life and that must be found within every person aspiring to a leadership role. I have examined this quality before -- you must love people and that love must be evident in everything you do. Lester has it.
I was reflecting on this singular criterion at a Board meeting of the Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago last week. In the years since I Chaired that Board a succession of great men and women have led our community: Maynard Wishner, Art Brown, z'l, Eddie Fox, Joel Stone, Barbara Hochberg, z'l, Bob Schrayer, z'l, Manny Steinfeld, Fred Bondy, Lester Rosenberg, Midge Perlman Shafton, Harvey Barnett and David Sherman. Each of them a terrific leader, experienced in all aspects of federation life, each unique but each sharing that quality of love for People and Community that has propelled our federation forward in partnership through 30 years and counting with the pre-eminent Steve Nasatir and the great, great professional staff he has created and who are our friends and partners. You want "heroes," you want "best practices," you want role models, you want vital, robust, vibrant communities? You start with lay and professional leaders like these.
I have observed, to my sorrow, so many who aspire to leadership because they "deserve it" but because their aspirations are sadly lacking the love for people that must be part and parcel of leadership, they soon find that while they can relate to some because of their drive, their ambition, their preparation, the "magic" that will motivate others just isn't there. What have these leaders done? They formed a claque that applauded their actions, they closed the door to others. They not only bowled alone; they ate alone. Lester's love of people, his love for life, his ability to extend his arms to embrace all those with whom he came into contact, exemplified that love. I can assure you that that love continues.
Ambition for its own sake, in the end is self-defeating. Without love for people, that ambition may produce titles but will ultimately be without satisfaction. Our new leaders understand this.
Rwexler
I was reflecting on this singular criterion at a Board meeting of the Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago last week. In the years since I Chaired that Board a succession of great men and women have led our community: Maynard Wishner, Art Brown, z'l, Eddie Fox, Joel Stone, Barbara Hochberg, z'l, Bob Schrayer, z'l, Manny Steinfeld, Fred Bondy, Lester Rosenberg, Midge Perlman Shafton, Harvey Barnett and David Sherman. Each of them a terrific leader, experienced in all aspects of federation life, each unique but each sharing that quality of love for People and Community that has propelled our federation forward in partnership through 30 years and counting with the pre-eminent Steve Nasatir and the great, great professional staff he has created and who are our friends and partners. You want "heroes," you want "best practices," you want role models, you want vital, robust, vibrant communities? You start with lay and professional leaders like these.
I have observed, to my sorrow, so many who aspire to leadership because they "deserve it" but because their aspirations are sadly lacking the love for people that must be part and parcel of leadership, they soon find that while they can relate to some because of their drive, their ambition, their preparation, the "magic" that will motivate others just isn't there. What have these leaders done? They formed a claque that applauded their actions, they closed the door to others. They not only bowled alone; they ate alone. Lester's love of people, his love for life, his ability to extend his arms to embrace all those with whom he came into contact, exemplified that love. I can assure you that that love continues.
Ambition for its own sake, in the end is self-defeating. Without love for people, that ambition may produce titles but will ultimately be without satisfaction. Our new leaders understand this.
Rwexler
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
JOE -- A BRIEF RETROSPECTIVE
Joe Kanfer's three years as Chair of what was UJC have ended, not with a bang but a whimper -- actually with what I understand was a beautiful serenade from his successor. Over $100 million of our donors' dollars, of federation allocations spent on his watch...on just what, exactly? Someone other than I will have to recite the accomplishments of the past three years; they are not self-evident. Joe, to his credit, persisted to the end -- a final speech at the GA Opening Plenary. His dreams for the future of The Jewish Federations of North America, a mishmash of programs either already in place in so many ways in so many federations ("volunteerism") of which Joe remains singularly unaware, or plans rejected by the federations. Joe's message resonated with the mantra "I believe it is possible" and we agree. But Kanfer's vision of where The Jewish Federations of North America should go is far different than the sorry place he has taken it.
And, Kanfer cited a crucial challenge -- "...the challenges of affordability and access to Jewish life." Here he struck a chord and had he led us for the past three years in grappling with this critical, seminal issue, what a contribution UJC:The Jewish Federations of North America might have made under his leadership. To raise this now is like Ike reminding us as he left office after eight years of the dangers of the "military-industrial complex" having done nothing about the issue during his Presidency.
Joe's legacy cannot be that which he wished for but something far, far less. There is a "new culture" -- unfortunately, it is one of secrecy, lack of transparency and lack of accountability -- a new culture which Jerry Silverman and Kathy Manning will certainly correct. It has been three years without measurable accomplishments other than a "new brand" -- one which had been an alternative rejected ten years ago, revived when the "old brand," United Jewish Communities, proved to have no traction -- and a new mark, a new logo; a new Chief Executive who offers the promise of a new era but who will have to spend critical time righting a ship that has careened far off course.
As the lay and professional leadership ranks were culled, Joe assured that there would be no institutional memory. He wanted to hear nothing that would disrupt the narrative that he and Howard Rieger were building. (And, truth be told, as we have learned, Kanfer arrogated more and more of Rieger's management responsibilities with no evident pushback from anyone, making it harder and harder to determine Rieger's real role in the emerging mess.) Myths rather than facts passed for reality; their counterfactual history was offered as a substitute for reality. Our system was not served well by this retelling.
Rather than expanding the leadership ranks, Joe drew the a "circle of trust" ever more tightly, pushing away those who pushed back at policies imposed upon them with no discussion...and sometimes doing so in a manner suggesting a lack of sensitivity...UJC became a shop closed but to a chosen few. The doors and windows will now have to be pried open...let the sun shine in.
It has been all so sad.
In The New Yorker last year, the brilliant Hendrik Hertzberg wrote of a person who "...will be remembered as a tragedy in the Aristotelian sense, in which a hero is ruined through some terrible choice(s) of his own..." To paraphrase Hertzberg's conclusion: "One can only hope that the tragedy will be his alone and not..." that of the organization he was elected to lead. Unfortunately, as Joe confused his own goals for those of what was then UJC, the tragic circumstances in which The Jewish Federations of North America finds itself are those that were created by and literally demanded by Joe, supported by a small claque. And, now it is over.
Let the sun shine, let the sun shine in, let the sun shine in once again.
Rwexler
And, Kanfer cited a crucial challenge -- "...the challenges of affordability and access to Jewish life." Here he struck a chord and had he led us for the past three years in grappling with this critical, seminal issue, what a contribution UJC:The Jewish Federations of North America might have made under his leadership. To raise this now is like Ike reminding us as he left office after eight years of the dangers of the "military-industrial complex" having done nothing about the issue during his Presidency.
Joe's legacy cannot be that which he wished for but something far, far less. There is a "new culture" -- unfortunately, it is one of secrecy, lack of transparency and lack of accountability -- a new culture which Jerry Silverman and Kathy Manning will certainly correct. It has been three years without measurable accomplishments other than a "new brand" -- one which had been an alternative rejected ten years ago, revived when the "old brand," United Jewish Communities, proved to have no traction -- and a new mark, a new logo; a new Chief Executive who offers the promise of a new era but who will have to spend critical time righting a ship that has careened far off course.
As the lay and professional leadership ranks were culled, Joe assured that there would be no institutional memory. He wanted to hear nothing that would disrupt the narrative that he and Howard Rieger were building. (And, truth be told, as we have learned, Kanfer arrogated more and more of Rieger's management responsibilities with no evident pushback from anyone, making it harder and harder to determine Rieger's real role in the emerging mess.) Myths rather than facts passed for reality; their counterfactual history was offered as a substitute for reality. Our system was not served well by this retelling.
Rather than expanding the leadership ranks, Joe drew the a "circle of trust" ever more tightly, pushing away those who pushed back at policies imposed upon them with no discussion...and sometimes doing so in a manner suggesting a lack of sensitivity...UJC became a shop closed but to a chosen few. The doors and windows will now have to be pried open...let the sun shine in.
It has been all so sad.
In The New Yorker last year, the brilliant Hendrik Hertzberg wrote of a person who "...will be remembered as a tragedy in the Aristotelian sense, in which a hero is ruined through some terrible choice(s) of his own..." To paraphrase Hertzberg's conclusion: "One can only hope that the tragedy will be his alone and not..." that of the organization he was elected to lead. Unfortunately, as Joe confused his own goals for those of what was then UJC, the tragic circumstances in which The Jewish Federations of North America finds itself are those that were created by and literally demanded by Joe, supported by a small claque. And, now it is over.
Let the sun shine, let the sun shine in, let the sun shine in once again.
Rwexler
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
