Dear Erica,
Today marks President Obama’s first 100 days in office. Do you think that 100 days is a measure of anything significant? Do we have any such concept within the Jewish world?
On the Hill
Dear On the Hill (at least you’re not Over the Hill),
That’s a fascinating question and one that deserves an introspective answer. This demarcation emerged during FDR’s presidency at a time when the pundits and the public first felt entitled to weigh in on whether or not the president was moving in the direction of his party and his goals. But is a 100 days enough time or the right amount of time to gauge a person’s leadership? Obama himself said in a Times interview in January that this mark of time is artificial:"The first hundred days is going to be important, but it’s probably going to be the first thousand days that makes the difference." On the one hand, it would be easy to say that’s just creating protective cover. You can tell in the first months a lot about the way that a leader communicates, his or her level of transparency and the way in which they use advisors and outside resources of wisdom and advice. But what you can’t tell is the long-term impact of new laws or how complex change is or how much history is wrapped in any decision that generates obstacles to future changes. There is no concept of a hundred days within Jewish tradition. Arguably, we take the long view on everything. After all, what’s a hundred years in the Jewish calendar? Small change. And that brings me to my last point. President Obama’s first hundred days coincides with Israel’s 61st Independence Day. We may be fewer than a hundred years old from a statehood perspective but we’re thousands of years old as a central project of the Jewish people. Now that’s a lot of time, and the country’s accomplishments required and require a lot of leadership. But that’s for another conversation.
Friday, May 1, 2009
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Wrong Person for the Job
Dear Erica,
We are getting to that time of year when we being to think about the leadership of our organizations for next year. Everyone is in the nominating mode in my social service agency and I’m feeling a little stuck. The person they have nominated for vice president (who will one day be president) is, in my mind, totally the wrong person for the job. I am even thinking of leaving the board if he is picked. They are just about to ask him. What recourse do I have?
Losing Patience in Potomac
Dear Patience (or Impatience),
People get nominated for board positions for all kinds of reasons. Sometimes we nominate people because they have talent, institutional memory, commitment or guts. Sometimes we nominate people who have the financial capacity to make a difference in an organization. All of these are valid reasons. I can totally appreciate your concern, and I think it’s important to act fast if you can’t understand why this person has been chosen. I would begin with speaking in confidence (and hopefully in person) to your board president and to a professional. Don’t only talk. Listen. You may not know the person in question as well as they do. Inquire. Find out what they were thinking so you don’t have to ask, “What were they thinking?”
If your issues still hold, then share them in a friendly and constructive way and talk about how these considerations can be addressed. If you really do not feel comfortable then it is your right to opt off the board. You may, however, be a nice guy and give this person a chance to shine or stumble before making up your mind. We humans can be a little too quick to form first impressions that we can’t or aren’t mentally willing to shake. But remember this important piece of advice: if you stay, your job on a board is to be supportive, not divisive. Don’t be the one to tell others that you didn’t agree to his nomination. You can share that now before an election but once a decision is formed, you need to be part of a cohesive team to the public you serve. Partisanship can profoundly hurt institutions that we care about and love.
We are getting to that time of year when we being to think about the leadership of our organizations for next year. Everyone is in the nominating mode in my social service agency and I’m feeling a little stuck. The person they have nominated for vice president (who will one day be president) is, in my mind, totally the wrong person for the job. I am even thinking of leaving the board if he is picked. They are just about to ask him. What recourse do I have?
Losing Patience in Potomac
Dear Patience (or Impatience),
People get nominated for board positions for all kinds of reasons. Sometimes we nominate people because they have talent, institutional memory, commitment or guts. Sometimes we nominate people who have the financial capacity to make a difference in an organization. All of these are valid reasons. I can totally appreciate your concern, and I think it’s important to act fast if you can’t understand why this person has been chosen. I would begin with speaking in confidence (and hopefully in person) to your board president and to a professional. Don’t only talk. Listen. You may not know the person in question as well as they do. Inquire. Find out what they were thinking so you don’t have to ask, “What were they thinking?”
If your issues still hold, then share them in a friendly and constructive way and talk about how these considerations can be addressed. If you really do not feel comfortable then it is your right to opt off the board. You may, however, be a nice guy and give this person a chance to shine or stumble before making up your mind. We humans can be a little too quick to form first impressions that we can’t or aren’t mentally willing to shake. But remember this important piece of advice: if you stay, your job on a board is to be supportive, not divisive. Don’t be the one to tell others that you didn’t agree to his nomination. You can share that now before an election but once a decision is formed, you need to be part of a cohesive team to the public you serve. Partisanship can profoundly hurt institutions that we care about and love.
Thursday, April 2, 2009
Moses
Dear Erica,
I recently heard that only 20% of the Jews left Egypt. What kind of leader was Moses if he couldn’t convince the majority of slaves to leave when they had the chance.
Sincerely,
Still in Goshen
Dear Goshen,
It’s true that according to the rabbis of the Talmud, 80% of people who were given the chance to leave Egypt didn’t. It certainly begs the question of what leaders have to do to persuade people to follow. In fact, some commentators believe that the plagues in Egypt were as much for the Israelites as they were for the Egyptians. Jews themselves needed “proof” that redemption was on the way. Without that, they weren’t willing to take the risk of leaving. Leaders can’t be blamed for the poor decisions that followers make when they decide to opt out. We have to take accountability for our own actions, especially when we fail to see opportunity knocking loudly.
I recently heard that only 20% of the Jews left Egypt. What kind of leader was Moses if he couldn’t convince the majority of slaves to leave when they had the chance.
Sincerely,
Still in Goshen
Dear Goshen,
It’s true that according to the rabbis of the Talmud, 80% of people who were given the chance to leave Egypt didn’t. It certainly begs the question of what leaders have to do to persuade people to follow. In fact, some commentators believe that the plagues in Egypt were as much for the Israelites as they were for the Egyptians. Jews themselves needed “proof” that redemption was on the way. Without that, they weren’t willing to take the risk of leaving. Leaders can’t be blamed for the poor decisions that followers make when they decide to opt out. We have to take accountability for our own actions, especially when we fail to see opportunity knocking loudly.
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Helicopter Parents in the Classroom
Dear Erica,
I am at my wit’s end!
I am a teacher and have always seen my job in the classroom as a leader. I have the responsibilities of managing a group of people and bringing them together around ideas, and I also have vision of where I want to take them to, as a class and also as individuals. I take my work very seriously and have been teaching for over fifteen years. In those years, I have seen a lot of changes in education. The biggest for me is how vocal parents are today in questioning teachers’ expertise and knowledge, something I would never have done when my children were young. I believe that we are all partners in the growth of a child but that we each play different and complementary roles.
A number of parents I deal with regularly are rude and aggressive. I wonder where civility is, and I also don’t know how long I can last in this job. I feel like I am being quickly moved from my position as leader to one as a follower, where my competency is questioned too much of the time.
Civil in Silver Spring
Dear Civil,
I feel your pain.
Leaders should always have their competencies questioned. Too much blind acceptance can lead us down a miserable leadership path. But there’s another issue at heart here. It has to do with language, boundaries and respect. Civility is foundational in communities of caring and learning. Without basic respect that is expressed in the use of civil language, the classroom ceases to be a safe place. While classrooms must be safe spaces for children (and their parents), they also have to be safe spaces for teachers. When we fail to make them places where relationships are primary, then we can’t wonder why talented people leave the field. We’re reading about this more and more in the papers. Helicopter parents need to fly elsewhere sometimes so that their children can stand up on their own two feet, as we had to. The moment teachers cease to be leaders, they also cease to be teachers in the truest sense.
I am at my wit’s end!
I am a teacher and have always seen my job in the classroom as a leader. I have the responsibilities of managing a group of people and bringing them together around ideas, and I also have vision of where I want to take them to, as a class and also as individuals. I take my work very seriously and have been teaching for over fifteen years. In those years, I have seen a lot of changes in education. The biggest for me is how vocal parents are today in questioning teachers’ expertise and knowledge, something I would never have done when my children were young. I believe that we are all partners in the growth of a child but that we each play different and complementary roles.
A number of parents I deal with regularly are rude and aggressive. I wonder where civility is, and I also don’t know how long I can last in this job. I feel like I am being quickly moved from my position as leader to one as a follower, where my competency is questioned too much of the time.
Civil in Silver Spring
Dear Civil,
I feel your pain.
Leaders should always have their competencies questioned. Too much blind acceptance can lead us down a miserable leadership path. But there’s another issue at heart here. It has to do with language, boundaries and respect. Civility is foundational in communities of caring and learning. Without basic respect that is expressed in the use of civil language, the classroom ceases to be a safe place. While classrooms must be safe spaces for children (and their parents), they also have to be safe spaces for teachers. When we fail to make them places where relationships are primary, then we can’t wonder why talented people leave the field. We’re reading about this more and more in the papers. Helicopter parents need to fly elsewhere sometimes so that their children can stand up on their own two feet, as we had to. The moment teachers cease to be leaders, they also cease to be teachers in the truest sense.
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
Persecution complex
Dear Erica,
Purim is around the corner and Passover not long after. I feel that our holidays keep telling the same story. Someone wants to kill us. We’re the underdog, but we win. And then we have a celebration and eat. As a Jewish communal professional, I am worried that the same story creates a persecution complex, and as leaders we pay the price for it. People just don’t want to join. Help.
Unmasked at the ball in Bethesda
Dear Unmasked,
You can take off your mask, and just be yourself. I couldn’t agree with you more. Our history is full of triumphs and not only hardships. We wouldn’t be here if that were not the case. It’s about time that we as a people emphasize our success and tell an alternate story to the life from the ashes narrative. We should be proud of our survival; at the same time, we run a great and often misunderstood risk when we play the sad, guilty or persecuted card again and again. It’s not a reason to join. Sometimes, it’s a reason people run in the opposite direction. What they say in fund-raising is just as true in life: “People are drawn to success, not distress.” Fortunately, we have a wonderful story of success to share. As leaders, it’s more than a good idea. It’s a responsibility.
Purim is around the corner and Passover not long after. I feel that our holidays keep telling the same story. Someone wants to kill us. We’re the underdog, but we win. And then we have a celebration and eat. As a Jewish communal professional, I am worried that the same story creates a persecution complex, and as leaders we pay the price for it. People just don’t want to join. Help.
Unmasked at the ball in Bethesda
Dear Unmasked,
You can take off your mask, and just be yourself. I couldn’t agree with you more. Our history is full of triumphs and not only hardships. We wouldn’t be here if that were not the case. It’s about time that we as a people emphasize our success and tell an alternate story to the life from the ashes narrative. We should be proud of our survival; at the same time, we run a great and often misunderstood risk when we play the sad, guilty or persecuted card again and again. It’s not a reason to join. Sometimes, it’s a reason people run in the opposite direction. What they say in fund-raising is just as true in life: “People are drawn to success, not distress.” Fortunately, we have a wonderful story of success to share. As leaders, it’s more than a good idea. It’s a responsibility.
Fear of Fundraising
Dear Erica,
I would rather do anything than ask people for money. I find that it’s the hardest part of my board commitment; I even said to the nominating committee, “I’ll do anything for this board but I’m not raising money.” At the time, they let it pass but now it's our fund-raising season and they expect all board members to do their share. I really feel uncomfortable asking friends because then it’s all awkward and if people don’t know you they don’t give you the time of day. Should I just stick my hand in the sand, and this too shall pass?
The Ostrich of Olney
Dear Ostrich,
You may try to stick your head in the sand but it won’t work. Eventually you’ll get found out. Most people hate asking for money because they fear rejection. This may take them back to earlier days, like standing against the wall of the high school gym waiting for someone to ask you to dance. Fundraising isn’t like that. It only seems scary. And so what if people say no. You move on because every once in a while someone says yes and you feel that you have created a transaction of meaning. You helped someone give tzedaka, a higher Jewish value than giving yourself. There are many seminars and books that you can read about fund-raising that ease the process. I always bear in mind John D. Rockefeller’s simple words: “Never think you need to apologize for asking someone to give to a worthy cause.” But there’s something else to bear in mind as well. We have to make sure that our institution’s touch-point with everyone is not primarily about money but about meaning and value. What have we done for them lately that makes them want to give to us? Tell a personal story about how you’ve been inspired by your institution and the rest is a piece of cake.
I would rather do anything than ask people for money. I find that it’s the hardest part of my board commitment; I even said to the nominating committee, “I’ll do anything for this board but I’m not raising money.” At the time, they let it pass but now it's our fund-raising season and they expect all board members to do their share. I really feel uncomfortable asking friends because then it’s all awkward and if people don’t know you they don’t give you the time of day. Should I just stick my hand in the sand, and this too shall pass?
The Ostrich of Olney
Dear Ostrich,
You may try to stick your head in the sand but it won’t work. Eventually you’ll get found out. Most people hate asking for money because they fear rejection. This may take them back to earlier days, like standing against the wall of the high school gym waiting for someone to ask you to dance. Fundraising isn’t like that. It only seems scary. And so what if people say no. You move on because every once in a while someone says yes and you feel that you have created a transaction of meaning. You helped someone give tzedaka, a higher Jewish value than giving yourself. There are many seminars and books that you can read about fund-raising that ease the process. I always bear in mind John D. Rockefeller’s simple words: “Never think you need to apologize for asking someone to give to a worthy cause.” But there’s something else to bear in mind as well. We have to make sure that our institution’s touch-point with everyone is not primarily about money but about meaning and value. What have we done for them lately that makes them want to give to us? Tell a personal story about how you’ve been inspired by your institution and the rest is a piece of cake.
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Go out and fail
On Feb 9 I had the thrilling pleasure of seeing my second child graduate from CES-JDS. Of course, I paid most attention to those parts of graduation, and those speeches, that focused on how wonderful my child is, so it was surprising to find myself also enjoying a speech relevant to our JLI program. Richard H. Smith, a member of the Charles E. Smith family that has done so much for the Washington Jewish Community (and who continues as a supporter of JDS, Hebrew University, as well as University of Maryland, the National Gallery of Art and many other causes) gave what I thought was an excellent charge to the graduating class.
Smith's charge to the graduates was to go out and fail. Or, more precisely, to not fear failure. He emphasized that if you never fail it means you did not push yourself to test the maximum of your abilities, and so you in the end have achieved less than your potential. You have missed the lessons learned from a failure. Smith's deepest insight was that a major reason for our current economic mess was that so many in the business/finance world (and perhaps government, though I am not sure if he explicitly mentioned it) were unwilling to admit failure, and so chose to deceive and manipulate instead.
I think Smith gave the class, and us, a valuable message. We are a people that honor success, but we must recognize the value of failure and, most important, never sacrifice our values and integrity to escape one.
Richard
Smith's charge to the graduates was to go out and fail. Or, more precisely, to not fear failure. He emphasized that if you never fail it means you did not push yourself to test the maximum of your abilities, and so you in the end have achieved less than your potential. You have missed the lessons learned from a failure. Smith's deepest insight was that a major reason for our current economic mess was that so many in the business/finance world (and perhaps government, though I am not sure if he explicitly mentioned it) were unwilling to admit failure, and so chose to deceive and manipulate instead.
I think Smith gave the class, and us, a valuable message. We are a people that honor success, but we must recognize the value of failure and, most important, never sacrifice our values and integrity to escape one.
Richard
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)