We had hoped to take a real break, but we are frustrated. We are so far down the Totem Pole, we don't believe we're even on it; or, to be more politically correct, we are so far down the UJC Table of Organization that we're not treated like we're even on it. Even so, shouldn't we and everyone else at 111 know what's going on? How often can we get the message that we "have to get with the team" but never told what the game is?
The word is that UJC's Board and meetings in California Sunday and Monday were excellent, but we don't have a clue as to what the topics were, how the discussions went. Except for office talk, we don't know what's on tap. Wouldn't it be great for that "teamwork," if our professional leaders -- it doesn't have to be Howard Rieger -- would gather us in the Conference Rooms and go over the Agenda, what was discussed, what our roles are going to be, etc. It strikes us that that's how to create a sense of "teamwork." But that's not the way it's gone here.
Don't everybody get angry. It's just a suggestion. Help make UJC a great place to work.
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
We're Back...briefly
We have returned only to cite you to another Blog that has been brought to our attention:
http//ujtheeandme.blogspot.com/
It's "different"
http//ujtheeandme.blogspot.com/
It's "different"
Saturday, January 26, 2008
Shavua Tov
It's time to take a breath. With insightful Comments from so many of you and with the intervention of the Large City Executives (having nothing to do with this Blog) and with some concerned Federation Chairs set to examine together the current state of UJC (a decision reached before the advent of this Blog) and with the attention of so many, we will maintain the Disunited Jewish Communities Blog-site for your Comments and insights while we observe whether or not UJC leaders can really change. We will continue to be sustained by hope -- the "myth" as our colleague "Jon" described it shall remain our dream.
But, we will be watching and working within UJC with a focus on whether this leadership can itself change. When this Blog is publicly characterized by them as being "replete with errors" (trust that we may be bad Spell Checkers but we are excellent Fact Checkers) and not only the Posts dismissed but your Comments as well, with extensive time spent on tracking us down -- with these "facts" in hand, it's our cynicism about this leadership's ability to look at itself and change that is rewarded, not our hopes for introspection and change. And, if change at the top of UJC doesn't take place, and soon, we will fill this Post with our observations once again. Some of the topics we have teed up:
Shavua tov and l'hitraot,
The Boys/Girls of UJC
But, we will be watching and working within UJC with a focus on whether this leadership can itself change. When this Blog is publicly characterized by them as being "replete with errors" (trust that we may be bad Spell Checkers but we are excellent Fact Checkers) and not only the Posts dismissed but your Comments as well, with extensive time spent on tracking us down -- with these "facts" in hand, it's our cynicism about this leadership's ability to look at itself and change that is rewarded, not our hopes for introspection and change. And, if change at the top of UJC doesn't take place, and soon, we will fill this Post with our observations once again. Some of the topics we have teed up:
- Abuse of Power 1 -- The Boca Bond Issue
- Abuse of Power 2 -- Blowing Off a Mega-Donor/ The Internet Campaign that Wasn't
- The Megalomania of the "Big Idea"
- Where Have All the Leaders Gone...and Why
- No Task Ever Finished
You who have taken the time to write us with your insights and support have given us hope that the dream of an organization that can inspire our communities to the highest achievement can be realized; and that we can recapture the passion that brought us into Jewish communal life in the first place. Please help us.
Now we're going to kick back, plug in our headsets and listen to some tracks of The Stooges, and work on our spelling.
Shavua tov and l'hitraot,
The Boys/Girls of UJC
Friday, January 25, 2008
The Good Old Bad Old Days
Let's end a contentious week with a little nostalgia.
Several Comments this week with regard to the halcyon days of yore -- the years of the UJA -- a couple dissing UJA and UJA lay and professional leaders almost in rage and others questioning what was it really like, inspired us to examine what we see and ask ourselves that very question: "what was it like"? In Tateh's Comment earlier today she related a former Federation exec's memories:
"....he said that in the old days UJA provided speakers and outside
solicitors, gave a good brand name for the campaign (UJA), ran good
missions and a young leadership cabinet...and about once a year sent
someone to berate the allocations committee.....(whom) nobody listened
to..."
We understand that to be a pretty good summary if one also adds: created the Lion of Judah Endowment, the Campaign Chairs/Directors Mission; the Voyage of Discovery and every Special Campaign. We know much of this from history because so few of the old UJA leaders walk our halls any more -- Arlene Kaufman, Rani Garfinkle, Rich Wexler, Mark Wilf, Joel Alperson, Jane Sherman and maybe a few others whom we can count on the fingers of our two hands. Many have moved on to lead other organizations and chair their federations. And the professional staff has become denuded of those who once toiled at UJA.
We have heard that UJA was a "self-perpetuating oligarchy" but we have also heard that these were leaders who "cared," gave to their capacity and beyond and, in their demands on others to meet their own giving standards, created jealousies, some of which have so lasted to these days that we have received bizarre Posts from a few who can't get beyond those days that ended 8 years ago. We have been told that UJA Budget meetings lasted two days over which lay and professional leaders battled over priorities in a respectful (and sometimes not so respectful) give and take focused on how best to use donors' money in the best interests of the Jewish People. Today, we know, the UJC Budget meeting lasts maybe four hours including lunch with no "battles" tolerated..
One thing we know first-hand is that these leaders -- these men and women -- were nuts!! They would see each other in the halls at 111 (when more of them walked those halls) and suddenly they would be hugging and kissing, reminiscing in laughter. They actually loved each other -- a love that grew from sharing a common passion and a common cause...and some leaders outside UJA or on its fringes resented the love and passion that those crazy folks shared.
Sounds idyllic? Maybe because it ended eight years ago, and culturally at 111 Eighth Avenue we bear no relationship to those "UJA years," it's more mythic than real to us. Today we're owned by the federations who, but for a few, seem to have little interest in how their resources are being spent and no interest in the joyless space we occupy. If they cared, UJC could and would be so different.
Could that culture of passionate expression that was UJA be revived? We think so -- really restructure UJC; divide responsibilities between Campaign/ Community Building (Annual and Supplemental) and Allocations/Program/Washington/UJC Israel; restore the National Campaign Chair to her/his rightful role (as contemplated in the merger that created UJC) as a co-equal to the Chair of the Board (but responsible only for fund raising), elevate the Campaign Cabinet to Vice-Chairs status and raise the profile of the CEO/Campaign-Capacity Building sufficiently to attract once again the best and brightest to the position -- for starters.
And, find lay Chairs like a Marvin Lender, a Shoshana Cardin, a Charles Goodman, a Carole Solomon, a David Hermelin, z'l, to take us there with a chief professional partner who emulate Stanley Horowitz, Steve Nasatir, Bob Aronson, Steve Hoffman or John Ruskay. Then, see how we do!!!
Shabbat shalom
Several Comments this week with regard to the halcyon days of yore -- the years of the UJA -- a couple dissing UJA and UJA lay and professional leaders almost in rage and others questioning what was it really like, inspired us to examine what we see and ask ourselves that very question: "what was it like"? In Tateh's Comment earlier today she related a former Federation exec's memories:
"....he said that in the old days UJA provided speakers and outside
solicitors, gave a good brand name for the campaign (UJA), ran good
missions and a young leadership cabinet...and about once a year sent
someone to berate the allocations committee.....(whom) nobody listened
to..."
We understand that to be a pretty good summary if one also adds: created the Lion of Judah Endowment, the Campaign Chairs/Directors Mission; the Voyage of Discovery and every Special Campaign. We know much of this from history because so few of the old UJA leaders walk our halls any more -- Arlene Kaufman, Rani Garfinkle, Rich Wexler, Mark Wilf, Joel Alperson, Jane Sherman and maybe a few others whom we can count on the fingers of our two hands. Many have moved on to lead other organizations and chair their federations. And the professional staff has become denuded of those who once toiled at UJA.
We have heard that UJA was a "self-perpetuating oligarchy" but we have also heard that these were leaders who "cared," gave to their capacity and beyond and, in their demands on others to meet their own giving standards, created jealousies, some of which have so lasted to these days that we have received bizarre Posts from a few who can't get beyond those days that ended 8 years ago. We have been told that UJA Budget meetings lasted two days over which lay and professional leaders battled over priorities in a respectful (and sometimes not so respectful) give and take focused on how best to use donors' money in the best interests of the Jewish People. Today, we know, the UJC Budget meeting lasts maybe four hours including lunch with no "battles" tolerated..
One thing we know first-hand is that these leaders -- these men and women -- were nuts!! They would see each other in the halls at 111 (when more of them walked those halls) and suddenly they would be hugging and kissing, reminiscing in laughter. They actually loved each other -- a love that grew from sharing a common passion and a common cause...and some leaders outside UJA or on its fringes resented the love and passion that those crazy folks shared.
Sounds idyllic? Maybe because it ended eight years ago, and culturally at 111 Eighth Avenue we bear no relationship to those "UJA years," it's more mythic than real to us. Today we're owned by the federations who, but for a few, seem to have little interest in how their resources are being spent and no interest in the joyless space we occupy. If they cared, UJC could and would be so different.
Could that culture of passionate expression that was UJA be revived? We think so -- really restructure UJC; divide responsibilities between Campaign/ Community Building (Annual and Supplemental) and Allocations/Program/Washington/UJC Israel; restore the National Campaign Chair to her/his rightful role (as contemplated in the merger that created UJC) as a co-equal to the Chair of the Board (but responsible only for fund raising), elevate the Campaign Cabinet to Vice-Chairs status and raise the profile of the CEO/Campaign-Capacity Building sufficiently to attract once again the best and brightest to the position -- for starters.
And, find lay Chairs like a Marvin Lender, a Shoshana Cardin, a Charles Goodman, a Carole Solomon, a David Hermelin, z'l, to take us there with a chief professional partner who emulate Stanley Horowitz, Steve Nasatir, Bob Aronson, Steve Hoffman or John Ruskay. Then, see how we do!!!
Shabbat shalom
Thursday, January 24, 2008
"Trainwreck"
When UJC was created, to satisfy the interests of federations and the merging organizations, the new entity was subjected, if that is the right word, with a Board of 133 members. As we at 111 have come to learn, when authority is so minutely divided, particularly in an organization so disengaged from its owners over the past three years, a power void is created. Thus, the chief professional and chief volunteer officers easily accreted power to themselves. Every leader, professionally and lay, who has looked carefully at UJC's performance relative to its cost has had to reach the same conclusion -- governance reform is a critical threshold mechanism to create an environment where change can be implement and a nimble, responsive organization created in its stead.
Further, where "the only good ideas are ours," an organization where challenge to any idea of UJC's leaders is discouraged with language such as: "are you on my team or not" -- the language of the bully -- it is a place where only the owners can demand change. Recently we read, in a different context, of a work environment where professionals could respectfully challenge, offer opposing views and push back: "If you had an opinion about (a subject), (the CEO) made it clear it was your job, your duty, to argue, yell, scream, whatever."
We here know that papers describing two potential "special campaigns" that have been transmitted to the UJC Board for its discussion next Monday, have not been fully thought through, fail to contemplate the implications upon the federation Annual Campaigns (particularly in these fragile economic times), and have not been fully discussed with the UJC staff. Yet, the Board is meeting, so out the door these went -- filled with great ideas, fraught with gaps in logic, timing and the potential conflict with the AC. If anyone at UJC pushed back, urged these "plans" be held for more input, greater discussion, the suggestion would be "you're not a team player."
We need governance reform; we need it immediately.
Further, where "the only good ideas are ours," an organization where challenge to any idea of UJC's leaders is discouraged with language such as: "are you on my team or not" -- the language of the bully -- it is a place where only the owners can demand change. Recently we read, in a different context, of a work environment where professionals could respectfully challenge, offer opposing views and push back: "If you had an opinion about (a subject), (the CEO) made it clear it was your job, your duty, to argue, yell, scream, whatever."
We here know that papers describing two potential "special campaigns" that have been transmitted to the UJC Board for its discussion next Monday, have not been fully thought through, fail to contemplate the implications upon the federation Annual Campaigns (particularly in these fragile economic times), and have not been fully discussed with the UJC staff. Yet, the Board is meeting, so out the door these went -- filled with great ideas, fraught with gaps in logic, timing and the potential conflict with the AC. If anyone at UJC pushed back, urged these "plans" be held for more input, greater discussion, the suggestion would be "you're not a team player."
We need governance reform; we need it immediately.
"Your Comments"....continued
We were reading your Comments with great interest and had concluded, sort of, that, perhaps, we could have the kind of give and take, the kind of dialogue, through this Post that we can't have within UJC because its top leaders won't/can't permit discussion or debate to take place. Then, along came a writer misnamed "Wise" to "rationalize" the humiliation, isolation and degradation of fine, dedicated professionals passionately committed to UJC as a "housecleaning" justified as a means to finally "rid" UJC of the invidious influence of United Jewish Appeal. It frightens us that there are those who actually believe, eight years post-merger, that these horrific "means" are justified by a fictitious "end." If you are a "leader" of UJC, "Wise," that, in and of itself, explains a great deal. We feel very sorry for you (and "umich65," you appear to be speaking in tongues).
We still hope that readers like "disappointed21," "oldjewpro," "tateh," "chai," "maya, "jon,""fotp" and others, even those who have attacked us about our perceived lack of "civility," to continue the dialogue that you have begun. (And, for a far more insightful Blog on the subject, visit http://organizedjewishworld-fotp.blogspot.com/)
More later.
We still hope that readers like "disappointed21," "oldjewpro," "tateh," "chai," "maya, "jon,""fotp" and others, even those who have attacked us about our perceived lack of "civility," to continue the dialogue that you have begun. (And, for a far more insightful Blog on the subject, visit http://organizedjewishworld-fotp.blogspot.com/)
More later.
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
Your Comments
Your bloggers appreciate all of your Comments, even from those of you who believe that all we are doing is "....(airing our) dirty linen in public" or accusing us of "personal attack(s)." We note that none of our correspondents have questioned the facts that we have reported.
We want all of our readers to be assured that were there the opportunity for open and honest give and take within UJC, this Blog would not exist. When the most senior of professionals at UJC pushed back, look at the humiliation they suffered to the point of resignation; when lay leaders have pushed back, they have been relegated to the outside looking in. The doors at UJC are closed to any criticism. We have sat in silence for too long to be cowed by those who write that we are "uncivil" and need to "move on to another agency." When any organization, and certainly UJC, is essentially run by one professional and a single lay leader, any criticism will be perceived as "personal." When we find that UJC has once again become a place -- as were CJF and UJA, as we have come to learn -- where debate and discussion are welcomed, this Blog will cease to exist.
We will continue to welcome all of your Comments. If debate isn't permitted within UJC (ask those who were summoned to New York last March, ostensibly to "discuss" the "Organizational Strategy," only to be told they could ask questions but there would be no changes), then, perhaps, as Tateh, Jon and chai suggest by their Comments, debate can take place here.
We want all of our readers to be assured that were there the opportunity for open and honest give and take within UJC, this Blog would not exist. When the most senior of professionals at UJC pushed back, look at the humiliation they suffered to the point of resignation; when lay leaders have pushed back, they have been relegated to the outside looking in. The doors at UJC are closed to any criticism. We have sat in silence for too long to be cowed by those who write that we are "uncivil" and need to "move on to another agency." When any organization, and certainly UJC, is essentially run by one professional and a single lay leader, any criticism will be perceived as "personal." When we find that UJC has once again become a place -- as were CJF and UJA, as we have come to learn -- where debate and discussion are welcomed, this Blog will cease to exist.
We will continue to welcome all of your Comments. If debate isn't permitted within UJC (ask those who were summoned to New York last March, ostensibly to "discuss" the "Organizational Strategy," only to be told they could ask questions but there would be no changes), then, perhaps, as Tateh, Jon and chai suggest by their Comments, debate can take place here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)