Alban Weekly from The Duke Divinity School in Durham, North Carolina, United States "PRACTICAL WISDOM FOR LEADING CONGREGATIONS: Beginning Your Board's Leadership Together" for Monday, 23 January 2017
Nathan Kirkpatrick: Beginning Your Board’s Leadership Together
Beginning your board's leadership togetherBEFORE GETTING DOWN TO BUSINESS, INVEST TIME IN BOARD DEVELOPMENTAt the beginning of any new leadership role, you find that there is an existing to-do list. There are pre-existing challenges to be addressed, crises to be managed, opportunities to be pursued. For the new leader, there are both internal and external pressures to get "the work" underway, to show and feel forward momentum on the priorities that made you seek a leadership role in the first place.
This is equally true for the collective leadership of a church board. In every congregation I've ever worked with, the new board begins their year of service with a demanding agenda from the first day. There are staffing questions to be cared for, budget matters that need attention, facility issues that simply cannot wait; on top of these, there is the actual ministry of the congregation that needs to be reviewed and, in some cases, renewed or reimagined. The agenda for the first board meeting can be dauntingly full even before the board is seated.
Consider this a plea to press pause on that agenda -- not indefinitely but more than momentarily - to care for the other vital work that must happen at the beginning of the board's work together. Invest some time in intentionally forming the board as a group of leaders and disciples. Doing so lays a foundation that can pay dividends later in the year when questions get more complicated, stakes get higher, and disagreements may get more intense.
The first priority for any new group at the beginning of its work together is that they get to know one another. This sounds obvious, and yet, I am surprised by the number of church boards that are still largely strangers to one another months into their work together. Senior leaders, specifically the rector and the wardens, can help facilitate this meeting process by publicly acknowledging the fact that board members may be familiar faces to one another but unknown to each other, representing different preferred services and different ministries within the life of the congregation, and then, by helping people get to know one another. For this work, I have found the oft-employed icebreaker the least imaginative and least helpful way of getting to know each other.
Getting to know one another, as I am envisioning it here, depends on getting to know what one another values. This is the place of real human connection; this is the well that you will want to return to later on when the going gets rough. One way to do this in your first gathering is to ask each member to introduce themselves and to say what brought them to the congregation in the first place and what made them stay. Stories about finding welcome for personal conviction and room for lingering questions, about the reputation of children's ministries, about the beauty of music programs or the pageantry of the worship all begin to build camaraderie among the new board members as folks realize that what I value about this congregation is similar to what you value about it - or, perhaps even better, we build a list of things we value about this congregation that is so extensive that our work can begin with a celebration of who we are.
The second priority for a new leadership group is to help people learn their role. A colleague of mine used to say that people want to know what it looks like when they are doing their work “correctly.” Some of your board members will be old hat at the work and responsibility of this ministry, but as we have an increasing number of people in our pews who were not raised in the church, the church board can seem like a mysterious body with secret handshakes and unknown customs. Those who are new can use some help understanding the balance of speaking for self yet serving on behalf of the entire congregation. Rather than leaving it to chance (or worse still, to the most misanthropic of your incumbent board members mentoring the new folks into bad behavior), as senior leaders, take some time to talk about what this particular ministry looks like when it is alive, thriving, and effective.
The third priority in forming a board at the beginning of its work together is to define common expectations. I often hear clergy and lay leaders complain about board members that they have decided are underperforming or misbehaving. My question in reply is always, “what did you tell them before they were elected?” If expectations are unclear, then we cannot fault the person who is not living up to our imagined but unstated expectations. Early on, define how you will be together. If attendance at board meetings is presumed, which I cannot imagine that it wouldn’t be, then state that explicitly. If the expectation of board members is that they will make a pledge to the church’s budget, state that clearly, as well. Beyond those two examples also consider what the expectations are for board member behavior – how will we treat each other? How will we disagree? How will we make decisions? Clarity around these matters is just as important as clarity around attendance.
One final note, one gift that the board’s senior lay leadership can give is to describe how this service is a way that each person on the board answers Christ’s call to discipleship. Sharing in responsibility for the welfare of the church, which is another way of saying stewarding the life of the congregation, is an act of faith. In the hail of revenue and expense statements, insurance reviews, denominational funding requests, and mediation of staff conflict, it can feel otherwise, but the reason we serve on a board is because Jesus says, “follow me,” and we answered “wherever you lead.” To that end, early on, it is important that we talk about and demonstrate how these years of service can be a spiritually-enriching experience, how they can nurture (or refresh) a life of prayer, how they can awaken hope and confirm faith, how they can incline our hearts to love God and our neighbor in new and deeper ways. Why else would we do this?
Before the pre-existing agenda takes hold of our time and imagination, I plead with you to invest in the gift of one another. Get to know each other. Help people learn their role. Define mutual expectations. And keep before us the persistent and transforming call of God to serve. Then, let’s get to work.
This article was originally published by and has been adapted from “The Vestry Papers” published by The Episcopal Church Foundation.
IDEAS THAT IMPACT: BOARD DEVELOPMENT
Faith & Leadership
CHRISTIAN LEADERSHIP, MANAGEMENT, LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT
Laura E. Everett: Low-budget leadership development
Bigstock/johnsroad7
How do you develop leaders in your organization without funding? The executive director of the Massachusetts Council of Churches offers 10 ideas for leadership development on a shoestring.
Editor’s note: This reflection is part of a series on leadership development.
Jesus says, “Where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.” In my experience, those of us who lead Christian institutions say we treasure leadership development, but we don’t set aside funds or time for this work. Perhaps our heart is set on leadership development, but our treasure is yet to follow.
I find myself in this position at the Massachusetts Council of Churches. Currently, we have no budget line item for leadership development. Maybe one day we will shift our financial resources, but the institution I inherited had not put funds behind these efforts.
In the meantime, we are trying low-budget leadership development, improvising how, when and where we develop the people who make this organization work. (I comfort myself with the thought that Jesus and the disciples didn’t have a line item for leadership development either, but somehow they made do.)
I know I’m not alone with the dilemma, so I thought I’d share the ways in which we are attempting cheap and scrappy leadership development. How do you form committee members, board leaders and staff for leadership without any funding?
Here are some ideas:
1. Beg (from anyone and everyone)
If you can’t host your own leadership training, invite yourself to other organizations’ events. Take advantage of neighboring colleges and nonprofits. Regional denominational and ecumenical institutions are poised to offer more robust leadership development than an individual congregation. If another denomination in your area is holding an intriguing leadership development opportunity, take advantage of your ecumenical relations and ask to attend.
2. Borrow (from other fields)
The vice president of our board is a successful lawyer who runs a local firm. When I asked him how he retains young employees, he said talented first-year associates stay if they are given “meaningful work” in their first year and are not limited to shadowing senior lawyers. By discussing the leadership development practices of a law firm, I was able to see more accurately that my own institution has had a de facto probationary period for new board members before they are allowed to do meaningful work. We now intend to bring in new board leaders with specific, meaningful projects in mind and not simply redshirt them for a year.
3. Steal (from colleagues)
Once a year, I meet for a retreat with the directors of councils of churches from around the country. This is a great place to pick up good ideas and learn about mistakes to avoid. My colleague at the Wisconsin Council of Churches, for example, shared with the group that he holds an annual lunch for his past board presidents. I brought this idea back from our retreat, and our executive team loved it. Historically, we have rotated our presidents off the board and then done a mediocre job of keeping a relationship with them -- the leaders who were most involved in the work. This June we held our first ex-presidents’ lunch in Massachusetts. Our turnout was great, and it generated a lot of goodwill for little money. We are already planning one for next year. Now I will circle back to my Wisconsin counterpart to tell him what we learned and thank him.
4. Read
Reading is one obvious low-budget way to learn. More specifically, read something on leadership development with other people so you can discuss and practice what you read in community.
5. If you don’t have money, spend time
MCC doesn’t have funds for leadership development, but we do have a curious provision in the personnel policies that offers “study leave.” When a local college held a daylong series of lectures about leadership at Vatican II, I decided to seize the opportunity as a “staff study day” for some continuing education. The lectures gave my colleagues and me a common experience to discuss as we reflected on our own work. Even if you don’t have time set aside by personnel policies, aim to create times for intentional study and leadership formation.
6. Find or create a group to learn in community
In person and online, intentional groups of colleagues provide the context for meaningful growth and change. The ELCA bishop in New England, for example, has created a Facebook group for his pastors called “Try Something New in New England.” Pastors are encouraged to experiment and “tell your stories -- good, bad, and ugly.” Similarly, but in person, three pastors in a rural setting in our state recognized their need for social media education. They got together on Tuesday afternoons and watched online videos. It wasn’t fancy or particularly high-tech, but they were learning together and had colleagues to hold them accountable to their aspirations for growth and change.
7. Expand your definition of leadership development
We’ve found fruitfulness in expanding the areas where we can develop leadership. For example, we are cultivating more church leaders to think strategically about stories we can pitch to the local media. We aim to develop media-savvy church leaders as part of our commitment to the vibrant, ecumenical church. So when I prepare to pitch a story, I post to Facebook about what I’m thinking and invite people to help me refine the idea. This draws in new ideas, creates a stronger pitch and demonstrates publicly what constitutes a newsworthy event. My long-term goal is to equip local pastors to make these pitches themselves.
8. Don’t try to be the expert in everything
As a generalist running a small organization, I’ve learned to look to colleagues with more particular skills. I have a board president with tons of experience who has a very clear sense of what is staff work and what is board work. I look to her for these distinctions. I have a colleague who is exceedingly wise about staffing models. I look to him for wisdom about our restructured staff plan. I no longer feel I have to be the expert in everything.
9. Take advantage of opportunities to let others lead
A nearby seminary wanted to partner with us to host a visiting scholar for a community event. Unfortunately, this was scheduled at a time when I was to be on retreat. Instead of passing on the opportunity, we are experimenting to see what it’s like to host an event without me. My lack of availability on this day is inviting some greater leadership out of others.
10. Volunteer elsewhere
I’ve got an Episcopal colleague who runs the most productive meetings. I’ve also watched her cultivate impressive leadership out of younger colleagues. I want to learn to lead like her. So when the opportunity came up to serve on a board with her, I jumped at the chance. It’s an expense of my limited time, but I want to learn how she leads -- and how another organization runs. Find a good board that looks like the board you’d like to have and offer to serve on it.
These are some of the things that have worked for us at the MCC.
Do you have tips of your own to share with other Christian leaders? Post them on Faith & Leadership’s Facebook page(link is external).
Read more from Laura Everett »
Faith & Leadership
In the Army, every senior officer is expected to train people two levels below and to know the mindset of those two levels above, says a retired general and Catholic lay leader.
To outsiders, the Army may look like a rigid hierarchy in which orders flow down from the top to unthinking subordinates who bow down and obey, says retired Army Lt. Gen. James Dubik.
But that is not the case.
“We have a set of nested leadership responsibilities that are multifunctional and not just a hierarchy,” says Dubik, now a consultant for and board member of the National Leadership Roundtable on Church Management.
“Every commander is also a teacher, so your job as a senior leader is to develop your subordinates,” he said.
Generally, every senior officer is responsible for training people two levels below and, in turn, knowing the mindset of those two levels above. As a result, leaders at every level understand the broader goals and mission beyond their own positions and are thus empowered to act creatively within that understanding.
“This is a coherent set of leaders who as a body are moving the organization forward, moving a mission forward,” Dubik said.
Dubik spent 40 years in the military. In his final command before retiring in 2008, he oversaw the training of Iraqi security forces.
He spoke with Faith & Leadership about the Army’s approach to leadership development. The video clip is an excerpt from the following edited transcript.
Q: How does the Army develop leaders?
Three approaches occur simultaneously: institutional, organizational and personal.
Institutionally, we have a well-structured, transparent and clear approach: select, train and promote.
You select a person for promotion, you train the person before he or she gets promoted, and then you promote the person and put him or her in the job.
This is a progressive set of educational experiences, whether you’re a sergeant or an officer.
Before you’re a sergeant, for example, you go to basic leadership school. When you get your first stripe after sergeant, you go to basic noncommissioned officer school. You get your second stripe; you go to advanced. You get your third stripe, and so on.
This system recognizes that as a person grows in responsibility, as their role and the scope of their job gets larger, the institution has an obligation to prepare that person for the duties that he or she is expected to execute.
The same thing happens with officers -- lieutenants, captains, majors, every one of us. Before you get promoted, you go to a school.
We also have specialty schools for technical specialties and command operations. Before I commanded, for example, at the company level, which is 150 people, I went to a company commander preparation course.
It wasn’t long, a couple of weeks, but it was specifically designed to help me think through the kinds of issues that I would face as a company commander. Again, the same thing at each level.
Although it happens occasionally, we don’t want to put anybody in a job they are not prepared for. So with “select, train and promote,” we do the best we can to prepare them.
Q: And the organizational side of leadership development?
Regarding the organizational approach, every commander is also a teacher, so your job as a senior leader is to develop your subordinates.
Our general rule is you develop subordinates two levels below you. So, for example, if I am a lieutenant colonel -- a commander of a battalion of 500 people -- part of my job is to train my majors, who are one level down, and my subordinate commanders, captains. And the major’s job is to develop captains and the lieutenants two levels down, who are generally entry-level leadership positions.
It’s engrained that we expect our senior commanders to help develop people two levels down, and this occurs in day-to-day operations.
If I’m a lieutenant colonel circulating in the battlefield and I see a captain doing something that captains shouldn’t be doing, my job is to teach that person, “Hey, that’s not really a captain’s job.”
You do that always on the side, always in the right way if at all possible.
It also happens in meetings. Meetings are teaching opportunities, if you use them correctly. It also happens in social events. The commander is expected to have social events to bond the unit, to help develop a sense of camaraderie in an organization.
There are also formal trainings. What the Army does is train. If it’s not a war, it’s training. So training is a way to challenge leaders to develop certain skills.
As a company commander, you analyze which skills people are very good at and which skills they aren’t good at and then set the conditions in your training to help you develop the skills that they are not good at.
Q: And the third approach, the personal?
In the Army, each of us is also responsible for our own development.
The Army expects everyone to read beyond their current position, to do some historical study of people who had similar positions above them, so that the onus is not just on the institution, not just on your commander and your organization; it’s also on you.
We’re responsible for our continued development intellectually and physically. Our profession is a tough profession, so you have to maintain some sense of physical fitness.
Q: Regarding that second approach, the organizational, you’re basically saying that leadership development practices are inherently built into the Army’s organizational structure, its hierarchy. Give us an example of what you’re talking about and how you’ve used this approach in developing leaders.
I’ll use myself in Iraq. Two levels up from me was the secretary of defense and the president. I had to execute what I did in Iraq consistent with their intent.
I didn’t talk to these guys often, but I read a lot of what they wrote. I listened to their speeches and their testimonies so that I would have a sense of the direction they were going.
Two levels below me were a set of colonels who were training the Iraqi army, the police, the navy, developing the ministerial systems and the minister of defense.
They had to understand the direction I wanted to go so that in their day-to-day activities they could use their initiative and creativity in a way that was consistent with the overall direction.
The hierarchy is not just so that orders can flow down and subordinates can bow down. This is a coherent set of leaders who as a body are moving the organization forward, moving a mission forward. The set of leaders are also psychologically tied. In battle, things don’t always go well, and when a subordinate knows that he or she is tied up and down in a nested set of people who care for them, then the difficulties of battle start to be bearable.
Externally, the chain of command looks like a hierarchy where the general at the top says, “Everyone must X today,” and the order goes all the way down to thousands of soldiers Xing all over the place. But that’s not the case at all; we have a set of nested leadership responsibilities that are multifunctional and not just a hierarchy.
Q: So if I’m a lieutenant, it’s not enough that I know what I’m supposed to do as a lieutenant. I’m supposed to know also what the captain is thinking. I’m supposed to know what the major is thinking.
Right. Exactly.
Q: And the beauty of this becomes that I’m not trapped in my lieutenant role. By knowing the thinking of those one and two levels up, it frees me up and actually makes for a decentralized command.
The challenge in our profession is to understand that in war you must accomplish two things.
You must allow your subordinates maximum flexibility, because opportunities and challenges arise at the point of battle that cannot be foreseen.
If the subordinate waits to report up and wait for instructions, the opportunity will have gone away and the challenge will only have grown. So you want decisions to be made at the lowest possible level.
The other side of the coin, though, is that a subordinate can desynchronize a large operation by acting in an errant way, in a way inconsistent with the overall direction of the organization.
You have these dueling challenges as a commander: use your creativity, but don’t screw the big plan up.
The way that we tried to balance those two seemingly opposite realities is what we call “commander’s intent,” so that I explain my intent such that people two levels below know what I want to accomplish.
What’s the purpose of this operation? What effect are we trying to have on the enemy? What are the parameters in which I am to operate, the things that I can and cannot do? What are the things that I must do?
That creates a dynamic where the subordinate can use his or her creativity within that intent. It increases the probability that the subordinate will act and decide quickly to take advantage of opportunities and overcome obstacles before they become large, without desynchronizing the larger operation.
That’s the dynamic you want to set up. When you have this “commander’s intent” nested properly up and down the chain of command, you increase the probability of success astronomically.
The onus, though, is on the senior commander. If I’m a colonel, I can’t assume that my lieutenant colonels and captains know my intent or how to act within it.
Part of the training and leader development that occurs is about building an understanding of that intent. I help them. I set up training exercises where they’re not in communication so they must decide and act within my intent, and then we have a discussion afterwards about what went well and what didn’t go well and why did you make that decision -- that wasn’t my intent.
That helps establish the nested understanding that you need.
Q: In the giving of orders, the exercise of command, how much authority comes from the rank and how much from the person who’s in the position?
They’re equal.
We’re a deferential hierarchy, so there is deference and respect to the rank. But we’re also an organization of human beings, and it’s probably not surprising that some people wear their rank better than others. It’s the combination, in the final analysis, that works.
Look, American soldiers are really great Americans, but they’re still Americans, and Americans are really good at not doing something they think is really stupid.
So if an American soldier gets an incredibly stupid order, they’re going to say, “Yes, sir. Roger that,” and then it will never happen. Because something happened -- we couldn’t get this; we couldn’t get that. Some legitimate reason will pop up.
The fact that you issue an order as a senior officer is interesting, and may be compelling, if the order makes sense.
There is this positional authority that exists at every rank, and the higher you go, the more your position is respected -- but less important.
As a three-star in Iraq, I reported to General [David] Petraeus and the secretary of defense above him and had working for me 13 general officers and flag officers of a variety of nations, each of whom was a seasoned professional with more than 30 years’ experience.
So you lead that group in an entirely different way -- a much more participative, collegial, discursive leadership style -- than you might in the situation where you have a battalion commander with 24 years’ experience over people with five and less.
As you grow in rank and responsibility, the type of leadership -- the way you get people to align around the common goal of the organization and move forward -- changes and becomes much less positional and much more personal.
Q: Lieutenants are in the unusual position of commanding people, especially sergeants, who have far more seniority than they do, which is in some ways similar to the situation young pastors often find themselves in. How do you teach leadership in that situation?
A lieutenant is in charge of 20 to 40 people and has subordinate leaders who are sergeants. There are no other officers in the lieutenant’s organization. So a 21-year-old lieutenant finds himself responsible for a set of sergeants who are far more experienced.
When I was a first lieutenant in the 82nd Airborne Division, my platoon sergeant had four tours in Vietnam and two of my squad leaders had tours in Vietnam. I did not. I came right out of Gannon College with my philosophy degree and my paratrooper wings and showed up as their leader.
So the first thing that a lieutenant has to understand is that you don’t have to know everything and you don’t have to make every decision yourself. Generally, it’s the platoon sergeant who teaches the lieutenant this. I know my platoon sergeant taught me.
When I issued an instruction that would be not so good -- which I did as a lieutenant; all lieutenants do -- he would pull me off to the side and say, “Lieutenant, that really wasn’t the right thing to say. You ought to go back and change it this way.”
He would then create the conditions that if I did as he suggested, he would tell the sergeants, “See, this guy is smart. We can teach him. He can learn. He’ll be good.”
Whereas if a lieutenant just gives him the stiff-arm -- “I’m the officer here; you’re not. Just do what I say” -- it sets up a really bad dynamic.
Generally, the lieutenant learns one way or the other, either through positive reinforcement or negative reinforcement. But the better lieutenants are the ones who listen and understand that it’s OK to learn from others.
When a sergeant comes to the lieutenant and says, “Here’s my experience; here’s what I think we ought to do,” the sergeant isn’t stealing authority from the lieutenant.
It’s not like you have this bag of authority and someone cut a hole in it and is draining it.
This is a person who is trying to increase your authority by teaching you as a lieutenant that it’s not the bar on your shoulder but it’s this other aspect of leadership -- your proficiency, your ability to make sense, to listen, to adapt and learn. So sergeants play a very critical role in leadership training of officers.
Q: I wonder who the “sergeants” are in congregations or in denominations who can help play this role for young pastors starting out.
I wouldn’t want to overstretch the analogy, but the issue lieutenants face is responsibility for an organization under conditions where that person doesn’t understand how the organization runs yet completely, nor does he or she have full understanding of the people in that organization.
So the real issue for me becomes a learning issue.
Am I so arrogant that I’m not going to learn from other people, even from my subordinates? Am I so arrogant that even though I know what I don’t know, I’m not going to go find a person that does know and then use their knowledge?
If that’s the kind of person I am, leadership is not going to be easy for me, and followership will go down, not up.
There’s a contract between leaders, an implicit contract, where I acknowledge you as a leader. I will follow you as a leader and you will take care of me in the process. You will make the best decisions with the best set of information available as possible. There’s this mutuality.
When I took over my first platoon -- no, my second platoon -- I went in and I took over in an official ceremony and went to meet my sergeants. And one guy, Sgt. Mark Archer, was sitting in the back at a corner, and he was like, “Hmm,” and I went up to him afterwards.
I said, “Mark” --- or, “Sgt. Archer, what’s the problem?” I know him as Mark now, because we’re still friends. This was from 1974. So, “Sgt. Archer, what’s the problem?”
He says, “Well, I’m just looking at you and making up my mind whether I’m going to risk my life for you.”
Well, that kind of puts a sharp point on it right then and there, and it’s that kind of expectation that followers have of their leaders.
“I’ll follow you, buddy. But I want to follow you more out of interest. I want to follow you because I have some confidence in your ability.”
Read more from James Dubik »
The Synagogue Leadership Agenda: Redesigning Boards to Unleash Congregational Energy
The synagogue leadership agenda: Redesigning boards to unleash congregational energy
As a lay leader in synagogues, Robert Leventhal had an idealistic vision that synagogues could be transformational places. His experiences, however, had been disappointing. Using what is known as "action research," he tested out a number of different theories about why. Here's what he learned. My clients know I was a business executive before I was a congregational consultant, so when I arrive at a synagogue to teach a workshop it is not uncommon for the treasurer to corner me in the hall and say, “Thank God you’re here. I’ve been trying to convince this group that the synagogue needs to be run like a business, and I know you understand how important business is.” Later, in the workshop, this same treasurer often appears crestfallen when I announce that the synagogue is not, in fact, a business. However, I quickly offer a clarification that relieves that disappointment. “The synagogue is not a business,” I say, “but it is in great need of the skills and tools that many business leaders have. It is in great need of leadership and management. It is in great need of financial planning, operational procedures, human resource development, and marketing. It must work with these tools in the context of the congregation’s tradition to create a unique synagogue leadership agenda. Synagogues may not have the time, skills, or resources to do exhaustive strategic planning, but they will find it helpful to develop some basic strategic working ideas.”
The way I help synagogues to do this developed out of my own experiences in both lay leadership and family business. As a lay leader, I had an idealistic vision that synagogues could be very transformational. My own experiences, however, had been disappointing. Using what is known as “action research,” I tested out a number of different theories about why. I learned a great deal from my experimentation—much of it coming as a surprise.
Synagogues, I came to discover, are substantially less equipped to vision than we were in my family’s business. For all of our conflicts, we were usually on the same page. We knew each other and our history. We had shared incentives to do well. When I began to look at the synagogue, however, I realized that people in this setting often did not share the same history. They were not on the same page. For instance, interviews with groups of congregational leaders revealed that few of their congregations were doing any ongoing leadership development. Even fewer were doing visioning and planning. As a practical matter, some congregations would not have the time or energy for extensive planning. They would be able to manage a program of no more than two or three sessions. Others would be at a critical stage where they needed to invest 12 to 18 months in building a consensus about the future. They would need a process that could hold a visioning group together through the extensive planning steps.
These and other insights gained through my work with synagogues over the last four years ultimately led to the development of the following 12 “guiding principles,” which provide the foundation for a book I am writing called The Synagogue Leadership Agenda.
Guiding Principles: The Synagogue Leadership Agenda
1. Leaders can develop shared meaning about their changing synagogue environment. A number of trends, factors, and forces are affecting Jewish life in general and synagogue life in particular, so an awareness of these trends—as well as the challenges and opportunities they represent—is essential for effective synagogue leadership.
When the Israelites were planning to enter the land of Canaan, Moses was instructed to send spies to “see what the land is, whether the land is rich or poor” (Num. 13:18-20). There is a lesson here: leaders must be aware of the “lay of the land.” In Bowling Alone, Harvard sociologist Robert Putnum describes the current social landscape. He traces the decline of many once popular social institutions, from the bowling league to the PTA. We see this same decline in the Jewish community, which has changed dramatically in the last 50 years. In 1970 the intermarriage rate was about 17 percent. By 2000 it had risen to close to 49 percent, according to the Jewish Population Survey from that year. In the 1950s and 1960s, affiliation was at about 50 percent; today it is at about 40 percent overall, and the percentages fall into the 20s in the new Sunbelt areas of California and Florida.
Jewish life has been affected in other ways as well. In many Jewish families, both spouses are working longer hours on the job and under greater pressures. Job security is a significant concern for many of these couples because the loss of one of their incomes can place the family at risk. In addition, because Jewish families value education, they often must compete with others for homes in desirable school districts. This inflates the cost of homes and raises the percentage of family income devoted to housing costs. The cost of full Jewish “citizenship” (day schools, Jewish camps, synagogue memberships, JCC memberships, etc.) adds to Jewish families’ stress. Family discretionary time has eroded and traditional volunteerism has been impacted. There is a greater array of consumer choices for leisure time, but less time is available.
These are the well-known forces that synagogue leaders discuss in my workshops. What is rarely mentioned, however, is that the Jewish community has been extraordinarily successful. Jewish immigrants came to America for economic opportunity and political freedom. They have achieved both. Jews have prospered and gained respected positions in government, the professions, and business, and anti-Semitism has substantially declined in the 60 years since World War II.
While Jewish leaders are concerned about intermarriage, one of the reasons it is so prevalent is that non-Jews are far more accepting of Jews than they once were. Some Jews may look with nostalgia at the old pre-emancipation Jewish world of the 18th century. That was a time when Jews were more frequently on the same page, but, on the other hand, they had never been allowed to freely choose what page they wanted to be on. Today, Jews have greater access to resources of Western knowledge and commerce than they ever have before, but must relearn the skills of Jewish community building.
In recent years, Jewish knowledge has expanded exponentially. Few cities are without significant adult study opportunities, and anyone with an Internet connection can quickly access a host of Jewish Web sites offering everything from commentaries on the week’s Torah portion to essays on Jewish communal issues.
Regardless of whether a trend is positive or negative (“rich or poor”), it needs to be understood and managed. Even strengths like the Internet create challenges: How do we use this tool? How do we leverage it? How do we avoid some of the negative side effects associated with it—its impersonality and intemperate e-mail, for instance? In times of change, managing the environment takes work.
2. Synagogues can better understand the talents, interests, and needs of members. Synagogue leaders consistently tell me that they do not have a method for identifying the skills, talents, and interests of their members, nor to make appropriate leadership opportunities available to them. These assertions are supported by the findings of a 2004 Brandeis University study on the congregations of Westchester, New York, and have been echoed in other studies of volunteerism. A 2003 Urban Institute survey of volunteer management capacity among charities and congregations found that more than 40 percent of those who were no longer volunteering had withdrawn their efforts because of poor experiences they had had as volunteers. Not only has there been a decline in association, but those who have tried to “make the connection” have often been disappointed. In the Urban Institute study, volunteers reported that their volunteer tasks were often poorly designed and were inadequately supervised or supported. In addition, volunteers with little discretionary time often found the work did not meet their expectations.
The Jewish Federation in Baltimore did extensive interviews with prospective leaders between the ages of 25 and 35. The following is a composite portrait of the members’ discussions:1
How do you develop leaders in your organization without funding? The executive director of the Massachusetts Council of Churches offers 10 ideas for leadership development on a shoestring.
Editor’s note: This reflection is part of a series on leadership development.
Jesus says, “Where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.” In my experience, those of us who lead Christian institutions say we treasure leadership development, but we don’t set aside funds or time for this work. Perhaps our heart is set on leadership development, but our treasure is yet to follow.
I find myself in this position at the Massachusetts Council of Churches. Currently, we have no budget line item for leadership development. Maybe one day we will shift our financial resources, but the institution I inherited had not put funds behind these efforts.
In the meantime, we are trying low-budget leadership development, improvising how, when and where we develop the people who make this organization work. (I comfort myself with the thought that Jesus and the disciples didn’t have a line item for leadership development either, but somehow they made do.)
I know I’m not alone with the dilemma, so I thought I’d share the ways in which we are attempting cheap and scrappy leadership development. How do you form committee members, board leaders and staff for leadership without any funding?
Here are some ideas:
1. Beg (from anyone and everyone)
If you can’t host your own leadership training, invite yourself to other organizations’ events. Take advantage of neighboring colleges and nonprofits. Regional denominational and ecumenical institutions are poised to offer more robust leadership development than an individual congregation. If another denomination in your area is holding an intriguing leadership development opportunity, take advantage of your ecumenical relations and ask to attend.
2. Borrow (from other fields)
The vice president of our board is a successful lawyer who runs a local firm. When I asked him how he retains young employees, he said talented first-year associates stay if they are given “meaningful work” in their first year and are not limited to shadowing senior lawyers. By discussing the leadership development practices of a law firm, I was able to see more accurately that my own institution has had a de facto probationary period for new board members before they are allowed to do meaningful work. We now intend to bring in new board leaders with specific, meaningful projects in mind and not simply redshirt them for a year.
3. Steal (from colleagues)
Once a year, I meet for a retreat with the directors of councils of churches from around the country. This is a great place to pick up good ideas and learn about mistakes to avoid. My colleague at the Wisconsin Council of Churches, for example, shared with the group that he holds an annual lunch for his past board presidents. I brought this idea back from our retreat, and our executive team loved it. Historically, we have rotated our presidents off the board and then done a mediocre job of keeping a relationship with them -- the leaders who were most involved in the work. This June we held our first ex-presidents’ lunch in Massachusetts. Our turnout was great, and it generated a lot of goodwill for little money. We are already planning one for next year. Now I will circle back to my Wisconsin counterpart to tell him what we learned and thank him.
4. Read
Reading is one obvious low-budget way to learn. More specifically, read something on leadership development with other people so you can discuss and practice what you read in community.
5. If you don’t have money, spend time
MCC doesn’t have funds for leadership development, but we do have a curious provision in the personnel policies that offers “study leave.” When a local college held a daylong series of lectures about leadership at Vatican II, I decided to seize the opportunity as a “staff study day” for some continuing education. The lectures gave my colleagues and me a common experience to discuss as we reflected on our own work. Even if you don’t have time set aside by personnel policies, aim to create times for intentional study and leadership formation.
6. Find or create a group to learn in community
In person and online, intentional groups of colleagues provide the context for meaningful growth and change. The ELCA bishop in New England, for example, has created a Facebook group for his pastors called “Try Something New in New England.” Pastors are encouraged to experiment and “tell your stories -- good, bad, and ugly.” Similarly, but in person, three pastors in a rural setting in our state recognized their need for social media education. They got together on Tuesday afternoons and watched online videos. It wasn’t fancy or particularly high-tech, but they were learning together and had colleagues to hold them accountable to their aspirations for growth and change.
7. Expand your definition of leadership development
We’ve found fruitfulness in expanding the areas where we can develop leadership. For example, we are cultivating more church leaders to think strategically about stories we can pitch to the local media. We aim to develop media-savvy church leaders as part of our commitment to the vibrant, ecumenical church. So when I prepare to pitch a story, I post to Facebook about what I’m thinking and invite people to help me refine the idea. This draws in new ideas, creates a stronger pitch and demonstrates publicly what constitutes a newsworthy event. My long-term goal is to equip local pastors to make these pitches themselves.
8. Don’t try to be the expert in everything
As a generalist running a small organization, I’ve learned to look to colleagues with more particular skills. I have a board president with tons of experience who has a very clear sense of what is staff work and what is board work. I look to her for these distinctions. I have a colleague who is exceedingly wise about staffing models. I look to him for wisdom about our restructured staff plan. I no longer feel I have to be the expert in everything.
9. Take advantage of opportunities to let others lead
A nearby seminary wanted to partner with us to host a visiting scholar for a community event. Unfortunately, this was scheduled at a time when I was to be on retreat. Instead of passing on the opportunity, we are experimenting to see what it’s like to host an event without me. My lack of availability on this day is inviting some greater leadership out of others.
10. Volunteer elsewhere
I’ve got an Episcopal colleague who runs the most productive meetings. I’ve also watched her cultivate impressive leadership out of younger colleagues. I want to learn to lead like her. So when the opportunity came up to serve on a board with her, I jumped at the chance. It’s an expense of my limited time, but I want to learn how she leads -- and how another organization runs. Find a good board that looks like the board you’d like to have and offer to serve on it.
These are some of the things that have worked for us at the MCC.
Do you have tips of your own to share with other Christian leaders? Post them on Faith & Leadership’s Facebook page(link is external).
Read more from Laura Everett »
Faith & Leadership
MANAGEMENT, TEAM MANAGEMENT, LAITY
James Dubik: Your job is to develop people
James Dubik: Your job is to develop peopleIn the Army, every senior officer is expected to train people two levels below and to know the mindset of those two levels above, says a retired general and Catholic lay leader.
But that is not the case.
“We have a set of nested leadership responsibilities that are multifunctional and not just a hierarchy,” says Dubik, now a consultant for and board member of the National Leadership Roundtable on Church Management.
“Every commander is also a teacher, so your job as a senior leader is to develop your subordinates,” he said.
Generally, every senior officer is responsible for training people two levels below and, in turn, knowing the mindset of those two levels above. As a result, leaders at every level understand the broader goals and mission beyond their own positions and are thus empowered to act creatively within that understanding.
“This is a coherent set of leaders who as a body are moving the organization forward, moving a mission forward,” Dubik said.
Dubik spent 40 years in the military. In his final command before retiring in 2008, he oversaw the training of Iraqi security forces.
He spoke with Faith & Leadership about the Army’s approach to leadership development. The video clip is an excerpt from the following edited transcript.
Q: How does the Army develop leaders?
Three approaches occur simultaneously: institutional, organizational and personal.
Institutionally, we have a well-structured, transparent and clear approach: select, train and promote.
You select a person for promotion, you train the person before he or she gets promoted, and then you promote the person and put him or her in the job.
This is a progressive set of educational experiences, whether you’re a sergeant or an officer.
Before you’re a sergeant, for example, you go to basic leadership school. When you get your first stripe after sergeant, you go to basic noncommissioned officer school. You get your second stripe; you go to advanced. You get your third stripe, and so on.
This system recognizes that as a person grows in responsibility, as their role and the scope of their job gets larger, the institution has an obligation to prepare that person for the duties that he or she is expected to execute.
The same thing happens with officers -- lieutenants, captains, majors, every one of us. Before you get promoted, you go to a school.
We also have specialty schools for technical specialties and command operations. Before I commanded, for example, at the company level, which is 150 people, I went to a company commander preparation course.
It wasn’t long, a couple of weeks, but it was specifically designed to help me think through the kinds of issues that I would face as a company commander. Again, the same thing at each level.
Although it happens occasionally, we don’t want to put anybody in a job they are not prepared for. So with “select, train and promote,” we do the best we can to prepare them.
Q: And the organizational side of leadership development?
Regarding the organizational approach, every commander is also a teacher, so your job as a senior leader is to develop your subordinates.
Our general rule is you develop subordinates two levels below you. So, for example, if I am a lieutenant colonel -- a commander of a battalion of 500 people -- part of my job is to train my majors, who are one level down, and my subordinate commanders, captains. And the major’s job is to develop captains and the lieutenants two levels down, who are generally entry-level leadership positions.
It’s engrained that we expect our senior commanders to help develop people two levels down, and this occurs in day-to-day operations.
If I’m a lieutenant colonel circulating in the battlefield and I see a captain doing something that captains shouldn’t be doing, my job is to teach that person, “Hey, that’s not really a captain’s job.”
You do that always on the side, always in the right way if at all possible.
It also happens in meetings. Meetings are teaching opportunities, if you use them correctly. It also happens in social events. The commander is expected to have social events to bond the unit, to help develop a sense of camaraderie in an organization.
There are also formal trainings. What the Army does is train. If it’s not a war, it’s training. So training is a way to challenge leaders to develop certain skills.
As a company commander, you analyze which skills people are very good at and which skills they aren’t good at and then set the conditions in your training to help you develop the skills that they are not good at.
Q: And the third approach, the personal?
In the Army, each of us is also responsible for our own development.
The Army expects everyone to read beyond their current position, to do some historical study of people who had similar positions above them, so that the onus is not just on the institution, not just on your commander and your organization; it’s also on you.
We’re responsible for our continued development intellectually and physically. Our profession is a tough profession, so you have to maintain some sense of physical fitness.
Q: Regarding that second approach, the organizational, you’re basically saying that leadership development practices are inherently built into the Army’s organizational structure, its hierarchy. Give us an example of what you’re talking about and how you’ve used this approach in developing leaders.
I’ll use myself in Iraq. Two levels up from me was the secretary of defense and the president. I had to execute what I did in Iraq consistent with their intent.
I didn’t talk to these guys often, but I read a lot of what they wrote. I listened to their speeches and their testimonies so that I would have a sense of the direction they were going.
Two levels below me were a set of colonels who were training the Iraqi army, the police, the navy, developing the ministerial systems and the minister of defense.
They had to understand the direction I wanted to go so that in their day-to-day activities they could use their initiative and creativity in a way that was consistent with the overall direction.
The hierarchy is not just so that orders can flow down and subordinates can bow down. This is a coherent set of leaders who as a body are moving the organization forward, moving a mission forward. The set of leaders are also psychologically tied. In battle, things don’t always go well, and when a subordinate knows that he or she is tied up and down in a nested set of people who care for them, then the difficulties of battle start to be bearable.
Externally, the chain of command looks like a hierarchy where the general at the top says, “Everyone must X today,” and the order goes all the way down to thousands of soldiers Xing all over the place. But that’s not the case at all; we have a set of nested leadership responsibilities that are multifunctional and not just a hierarchy.
Q: So if I’m a lieutenant, it’s not enough that I know what I’m supposed to do as a lieutenant. I’m supposed to know also what the captain is thinking. I’m supposed to know what the major is thinking.
Right. Exactly.
Q: And the beauty of this becomes that I’m not trapped in my lieutenant role. By knowing the thinking of those one and two levels up, it frees me up and actually makes for a decentralized command.
The challenge in our profession is to understand that in war you must accomplish two things.
You must allow your subordinates maximum flexibility, because opportunities and challenges arise at the point of battle that cannot be foreseen.
If the subordinate waits to report up and wait for instructions, the opportunity will have gone away and the challenge will only have grown. So you want decisions to be made at the lowest possible level.
The other side of the coin, though, is that a subordinate can desynchronize a large operation by acting in an errant way, in a way inconsistent with the overall direction of the organization.
You have these dueling challenges as a commander: use your creativity, but don’t screw the big plan up.
The way that we tried to balance those two seemingly opposite realities is what we call “commander’s intent,” so that I explain my intent such that people two levels below know what I want to accomplish.
What’s the purpose of this operation? What effect are we trying to have on the enemy? What are the parameters in which I am to operate, the things that I can and cannot do? What are the things that I must do?
That creates a dynamic where the subordinate can use his or her creativity within that intent. It increases the probability that the subordinate will act and decide quickly to take advantage of opportunities and overcome obstacles before they become large, without desynchronizing the larger operation.
That’s the dynamic you want to set up. When you have this “commander’s intent” nested properly up and down the chain of command, you increase the probability of success astronomically.
The onus, though, is on the senior commander. If I’m a colonel, I can’t assume that my lieutenant colonels and captains know my intent or how to act within it.
Part of the training and leader development that occurs is about building an understanding of that intent. I help them. I set up training exercises where they’re not in communication so they must decide and act within my intent, and then we have a discussion afterwards about what went well and what didn’t go well and why did you make that decision -- that wasn’t my intent.
That helps establish the nested understanding that you need.
Q: In the giving of orders, the exercise of command, how much authority comes from the rank and how much from the person who’s in the position?
They’re equal.
We’re a deferential hierarchy, so there is deference and respect to the rank. But we’re also an organization of human beings, and it’s probably not surprising that some people wear their rank better than others. It’s the combination, in the final analysis, that works.
Look, American soldiers are really great Americans, but they’re still Americans, and Americans are really good at not doing something they think is really stupid.
So if an American soldier gets an incredibly stupid order, they’re going to say, “Yes, sir. Roger that,” and then it will never happen. Because something happened -- we couldn’t get this; we couldn’t get that. Some legitimate reason will pop up.
The fact that you issue an order as a senior officer is interesting, and may be compelling, if the order makes sense.
There is this positional authority that exists at every rank, and the higher you go, the more your position is respected -- but less important.
As a three-star in Iraq, I reported to General [David] Petraeus and the secretary of defense above him and had working for me 13 general officers and flag officers of a variety of nations, each of whom was a seasoned professional with more than 30 years’ experience.
So you lead that group in an entirely different way -- a much more participative, collegial, discursive leadership style -- than you might in the situation where you have a battalion commander with 24 years’ experience over people with five and less.
As you grow in rank and responsibility, the type of leadership -- the way you get people to align around the common goal of the organization and move forward -- changes and becomes much less positional and much more personal.
Q: Lieutenants are in the unusual position of commanding people, especially sergeants, who have far more seniority than they do, which is in some ways similar to the situation young pastors often find themselves in. How do you teach leadership in that situation?
A lieutenant is in charge of 20 to 40 people and has subordinate leaders who are sergeants. There are no other officers in the lieutenant’s organization. So a 21-year-old lieutenant finds himself responsible for a set of sergeants who are far more experienced.
When I was a first lieutenant in the 82nd Airborne Division, my platoon sergeant had four tours in Vietnam and two of my squad leaders had tours in Vietnam. I did not. I came right out of Gannon College with my philosophy degree and my paratrooper wings and showed up as their leader.
So the first thing that a lieutenant has to understand is that you don’t have to know everything and you don’t have to make every decision yourself. Generally, it’s the platoon sergeant who teaches the lieutenant this. I know my platoon sergeant taught me.
When I issued an instruction that would be not so good -- which I did as a lieutenant; all lieutenants do -- he would pull me off to the side and say, “Lieutenant, that really wasn’t the right thing to say. You ought to go back and change it this way.”
He would then create the conditions that if I did as he suggested, he would tell the sergeants, “See, this guy is smart. We can teach him. He can learn. He’ll be good.”
Whereas if a lieutenant just gives him the stiff-arm -- “I’m the officer here; you’re not. Just do what I say” -- it sets up a really bad dynamic.
Generally, the lieutenant learns one way or the other, either through positive reinforcement or negative reinforcement. But the better lieutenants are the ones who listen and understand that it’s OK to learn from others.
When a sergeant comes to the lieutenant and says, “Here’s my experience; here’s what I think we ought to do,” the sergeant isn’t stealing authority from the lieutenant.
It’s not like you have this bag of authority and someone cut a hole in it and is draining it.
This is a person who is trying to increase your authority by teaching you as a lieutenant that it’s not the bar on your shoulder but it’s this other aspect of leadership -- your proficiency, your ability to make sense, to listen, to adapt and learn. So sergeants play a very critical role in leadership training of officers.
Q: I wonder who the “sergeants” are in congregations or in denominations who can help play this role for young pastors starting out.
I wouldn’t want to overstretch the analogy, but the issue lieutenants face is responsibility for an organization under conditions where that person doesn’t understand how the organization runs yet completely, nor does he or she have full understanding of the people in that organization.
So the real issue for me becomes a learning issue.
Am I so arrogant that I’m not going to learn from other people, even from my subordinates? Am I so arrogant that even though I know what I don’t know, I’m not going to go find a person that does know and then use their knowledge?
If that’s the kind of person I am, leadership is not going to be easy for me, and followership will go down, not up.
There’s a contract between leaders, an implicit contract, where I acknowledge you as a leader. I will follow you as a leader and you will take care of me in the process. You will make the best decisions with the best set of information available as possible. There’s this mutuality.
When I took over my first platoon -- no, my second platoon -- I went in and I took over in an official ceremony and went to meet my sergeants. And one guy, Sgt. Mark Archer, was sitting in the back at a corner, and he was like, “Hmm,” and I went up to him afterwards.
I said, “Mark” --- or, “Sgt. Archer, what’s the problem?” I know him as Mark now, because we’re still friends. This was from 1974. So, “Sgt. Archer, what’s the problem?”
He says, “Well, I’m just looking at you and making up my mind whether I’m going to risk my life for you.”
Well, that kind of puts a sharp point on it right then and there, and it’s that kind of expectation that followers have of their leaders.
“I’ll follow you, buddy. But I want to follow you more out of interest. I want to follow you because I have some confidence in your ability.”
Read more from James Dubik »
The Synagogue Leadership Agenda: Redesigning Boards to Unleash Congregational Energy
The synagogue leadership agenda: Redesigning boards to unleash congregational energy
As a lay leader in synagogues, Robert Leventhal had an idealistic vision that synagogues could be transformational places. His experiences, however, had been disappointing. Using what is known as "action research," he tested out a number of different theories about why. Here's what he learned. My clients know I was a business executive before I was a congregational consultant, so when I arrive at a synagogue to teach a workshop it is not uncommon for the treasurer to corner me in the hall and say, “Thank God you’re here. I’ve been trying to convince this group that the synagogue needs to be run like a business, and I know you understand how important business is.” Later, in the workshop, this same treasurer often appears crestfallen when I announce that the synagogue is not, in fact, a business. However, I quickly offer a clarification that relieves that disappointment. “The synagogue is not a business,” I say, “but it is in great need of the skills and tools that many business leaders have. It is in great need of leadership and management. It is in great need of financial planning, operational procedures, human resource development, and marketing. It must work with these tools in the context of the congregation’s tradition to create a unique synagogue leadership agenda. Synagogues may not have the time, skills, or resources to do exhaustive strategic planning, but they will find it helpful to develop some basic strategic working ideas.”
The way I help synagogues to do this developed out of my own experiences in both lay leadership and family business. As a lay leader, I had an idealistic vision that synagogues could be very transformational. My own experiences, however, had been disappointing. Using what is known as “action research,” I tested out a number of different theories about why. I learned a great deal from my experimentation—much of it coming as a surprise.
Synagogues, I came to discover, are substantially less equipped to vision than we were in my family’s business. For all of our conflicts, we were usually on the same page. We knew each other and our history. We had shared incentives to do well. When I began to look at the synagogue, however, I realized that people in this setting often did not share the same history. They were not on the same page. For instance, interviews with groups of congregational leaders revealed that few of their congregations were doing any ongoing leadership development. Even fewer were doing visioning and planning. As a practical matter, some congregations would not have the time or energy for extensive planning. They would be able to manage a program of no more than two or three sessions. Others would be at a critical stage where they needed to invest 12 to 18 months in building a consensus about the future. They would need a process that could hold a visioning group together through the extensive planning steps.
These and other insights gained through my work with synagogues over the last four years ultimately led to the development of the following 12 “guiding principles,” which provide the foundation for a book I am writing called The Synagogue Leadership Agenda.
Guiding Principles: The Synagogue Leadership Agenda
1. Leaders can develop shared meaning about their changing synagogue environment. A number of trends, factors, and forces are affecting Jewish life in general and synagogue life in particular, so an awareness of these trends—as well as the challenges and opportunities they represent—is essential for effective synagogue leadership.
When the Israelites were planning to enter the land of Canaan, Moses was instructed to send spies to “see what the land is, whether the land is rich or poor” (Num. 13:18-20). There is a lesson here: leaders must be aware of the “lay of the land.” In Bowling Alone, Harvard sociologist Robert Putnum describes the current social landscape. He traces the decline of many once popular social institutions, from the bowling league to the PTA. We see this same decline in the Jewish community, which has changed dramatically in the last 50 years. In 1970 the intermarriage rate was about 17 percent. By 2000 it had risen to close to 49 percent, according to the Jewish Population Survey from that year. In the 1950s and 1960s, affiliation was at about 50 percent; today it is at about 40 percent overall, and the percentages fall into the 20s in the new Sunbelt areas of California and Florida.
Jewish life has been affected in other ways as well. In many Jewish families, both spouses are working longer hours on the job and under greater pressures. Job security is a significant concern for many of these couples because the loss of one of their incomes can place the family at risk. In addition, because Jewish families value education, they often must compete with others for homes in desirable school districts. This inflates the cost of homes and raises the percentage of family income devoted to housing costs. The cost of full Jewish “citizenship” (day schools, Jewish camps, synagogue memberships, JCC memberships, etc.) adds to Jewish families’ stress. Family discretionary time has eroded and traditional volunteerism has been impacted. There is a greater array of consumer choices for leisure time, but less time is available.
These are the well-known forces that synagogue leaders discuss in my workshops. What is rarely mentioned, however, is that the Jewish community has been extraordinarily successful. Jewish immigrants came to America for economic opportunity and political freedom. They have achieved both. Jews have prospered and gained respected positions in government, the professions, and business, and anti-Semitism has substantially declined in the 60 years since World War II.
While Jewish leaders are concerned about intermarriage, one of the reasons it is so prevalent is that non-Jews are far more accepting of Jews than they once were. Some Jews may look with nostalgia at the old pre-emancipation Jewish world of the 18th century. That was a time when Jews were more frequently on the same page, but, on the other hand, they had never been allowed to freely choose what page they wanted to be on. Today, Jews have greater access to resources of Western knowledge and commerce than they ever have before, but must relearn the skills of Jewish community building.
In recent years, Jewish knowledge has expanded exponentially. Few cities are without significant adult study opportunities, and anyone with an Internet connection can quickly access a host of Jewish Web sites offering everything from commentaries on the week’s Torah portion to essays on Jewish communal issues.
Regardless of whether a trend is positive or negative (“rich or poor”), it needs to be understood and managed. Even strengths like the Internet create challenges: How do we use this tool? How do we leverage it? How do we avoid some of the negative side effects associated with it—its impersonality and intemperate e-mail, for instance? In times of change, managing the environment takes work.
2. Synagogues can better understand the talents, interests, and needs of members. Synagogue leaders consistently tell me that they do not have a method for identifying the skills, talents, and interests of their members, nor to make appropriate leadership opportunities available to them. These assertions are supported by the findings of a 2004 Brandeis University study on the congregations of Westchester, New York, and have been echoed in other studies of volunteerism. A 2003 Urban Institute survey of volunteer management capacity among charities and congregations found that more than 40 percent of those who were no longer volunteering had withdrawn their efforts because of poor experiences they had had as volunteers. Not only has there been a decline in association, but those who have tried to “make the connection” have often been disappointed. In the Urban Institute study, volunteers reported that their volunteer tasks were often poorly designed and were inadequately supervised or supported. In addition, volunteers with little discretionary time often found the work did not meet their expectations.
The Jewish Federation in Baltimore did extensive interviews with prospective leaders between the ages of 25 and 35. The following is a composite portrait of the members’ discussions:1
Interviewer: Would you consider volunteering with the federation?
Prospect: I don’t really have the time.
Interviewer: Would you consider making time for this?
Prospect: I might if the work was really important.
Interviewer: What would it mean for the work to be important?
Prospect: I would want to know that this work will make a difference. I would also want to know that the work would be a good match for my talents.
Interviewer: What else would make you consider volunteering?
Prospect: I want to have staff support so that I can be confident that the project will be a success. On the other hand, I don’t want the staff person to try to control everything. I’d want to have some autonomy.
As a former leader, my first instinct upon hearing this demanding agenda was to mutter (rather grumpily), “Is that all they want?” But if we utilize our active listening skills—and a little patience—we can gain some insights about these potential volunteers. And by listening to their thoughts we can better manage their conflicting desires, such as the need for both support and autonomy, or the desire to do important work while not spending a great deal of time on it.
3. A focus on the future can increase hope and motivation for leaders. Most planning processes identify strengths and weaknesses. They look at the gap between the leader’s expectations and congregational performance. Most congregations that agree to embark on planning feel some pressing need to invest the time and money to do so. Rob Weinberg, director of the Experiment in Congregational Education, one of several pioneering synagogue transformation projects, has discovered that the elements that create a “readiness for change” are dissatisfaction with the present, a vision of the future, a belief that change is possible, and practical first steps.
I believe a positive vision of the future is instrumental in increasing the belief that change is possible. The belief that change is possible reinforces and energizes the ability to vision. For this reason, when leaders are overly focused on “gaps and deficits,” congregational planning will be weakened. Most congregational leaderships excel in certain areas (sermons, social action, facility, board, etc.). Part of the art of planning is to review the congregational landscape and to bring these various strengths into focus and inspire hope. The biblical spies who were sent to do reconnaissance of the promised land of Canaan were encouraged to “take pains to bring back some of the fruit of the land” (Num. 13:17). God knew that leaders needed to promise a sweet future to help sustain the people’s hopes.
4. Synagogue leaders can be more strategic by doing leadership tasks. Alban Institute research has shown that most clergy and lay leaders are tactical and managerial rather than strategic or transformational thinkers. Although strategic skills are not common, they are critical in times of change, according to leadership expert and Harvard professor John Kotter. Strategic planning skills help leaders overcome their internal focus, learn from the changing environment, and manage the inefficiencies of the synagogue organization.
A successful planning model must simplify the process enough to ensure that the volunteer organization can be success-ful with strategic work. (Remember our volunteer prospects’ desire to be certain their projects would succeed).
While it is clear that strategic thinking is important today, the history of strategic and long-range planning in congregations is mixed. It is not uncommon for congregations to do facility planning with a fundraising consultant in preparation for a capital campaign. In this case, planning is tied to a very concrete goal. But when congregations face size transitions, changes in demographics, cultural changes, increased diversity, or generational changes, they are less likely to see these as planning opportunities. Elite and relatively small leadership groups have sometimes gone through reflection and written plans only to find that their plans are never implemented. Sometimes this is because of the way in which the plans were written; a new synagogue visioning and planning process must be able to translate abstract ideas about values and strategic goals into specific actions that can be tracked and implemented.
Judaism argues that we get major insights about God, holiness, and righteousness by “doing” things. At Mount Sinai, the Jewish people answer God’s challenge by saying “All that the Lord spoke we will do and we will hear [understand]” (Exodus 24:7). We comprehend the abstract by doing the concrete—observing mitzvot (commandments). One of the ways leaders can attain such qualities as credibility, integrity, authenticity, and foresight is by “doing leadership tasks.” When leaders look at their environments, convene important conversations with volunteers, and encourage them to think about the future, these individuals begin to shift to a strategic leadership mind-set.
5. Consultants and facilitators can help increase the perceived value of volunteerism. Consultants and facilitators can be helpful (okay, I’m a little biased) in creating a sense of urgency by identifying areas of concern. They can help maintain momentum and energy by helping planning leaders imagine a promising future. They can also overcome the disruption in the process when certain events take center stage, or when leadership changes leave the board with a short-term deficit of energy.
In my work with synagogues I may have a group of 50 planners working for a minimum of 25 volunteer hours over a 12- to 15-month initial planning process. In such situations I have found it helpful to build a model of the cost of their effort. If we figure an average cost of $50 per hour, we are talking about a personal investment of about $1,250 per volunteer, or more than $62,500 in collective volunteer time. What is going to make such a significant contribution worthwhile to the volunteers involved in the effort? As we learned earlier, volunteers want to make a difference, do important work, and use some of their higher-order professional skills. When synagogues use facilitators to help institute effective volunteer processes, they can increase volunteer satisfaction in leadership work and increase expectations for volunteer effectiveness.
6. Teamwork is an essential synagogue skill. Contemporary organizational experts emphasize the importance of building more effective teams. The Center for Creative Leadership called teamwork “the most frequently valued managerial competence,” and, according to John Seely Brown, head of Xerox’s Research Park, “If you ask successful people, they will tell you that they learned the most from and with each other.”3
Synagogues have diverse members, so their leadership needs to reflect this diversity. Members can learn from each other if their talents are meshed with a worthwhile mission and team-building processes. Teamwork reduces the barriers to volunteer effectiveness.
7. Synagogue change requires a guiding coalition to ensure a “critical mass” for action. One of the problems with strategic planning efforts by long-range planning groups is that they may create a document that has little “buy in.” In an era of declining volunteerism, planning efforts need to create new energy and momentum. If only eight people go into the board room and “knock the plan out,” who will implement it? How will this work engage new leadership prospects? The top complaints of core leaders are “we cannot engage new leaders” and “we feel burned out.” How does the work of a small elite planning group change that dynamic? Effective leadership development and change management will involve a wide
array of current and potential leadership to build a critical mass for change.
8. Leadership approaches need to be experiential to engage and value the adult learner. How do adults learn something new? It helps if they enter a learning process that is well-structured, with a clear overview of the work ahead. Adults are energized, according to Malcolm S. Knowles, author of The Adult Learner, when they are able to apply their life experiences and professional expertise to their new congregational work. Leaders need to assure adult learners that their experience will be valued.
Successful leadership development processes involve the creation of small groups where individuals can bounce ideas off each other and gain an appreciation for one another’s contributions. These processes create spaces for volunteers to be heard and help them learn to hear others better.
9. Jewish values can inspire new leaders. When boards are too tactical they often fail to define and communicate the board’s essential mission, values, and strategies. They may fail to get the clergy and other staff involved in designing a synagogue leadership agenda. It is popular today to remind board members that their tactical managerial efforts are sacred work because they serve a sacred purpose. Unfortunately, if the board’s culture and processes look like any other secular task, the idea of the management of the sacred can look…well…quite secular. A five-minute dvar Torah (text commentary), however well-intended, does not transform board workers into a dynamic leadership community. The whole design of the board’s work needs to be reviewed.
Hildy Gottlieb, president of Help4Nonprofits & Tribes, writes in her online article “10 ‘Stop’ Signs on the Road to Board Recruitment”4 that too many boards try to get out of trouble by recruiting new members. She argues that organizations need to have a good product before they can promote it. When boards lack a vision, shared values, and goals, it’s hard to convince prospects that sitting on the board is a great—let alone sacred—volunteer opportunity.
When a board has dysfunctional conflicts, poor lay staff relationships, and few policies, it is simply not ready to recruit the kind of talent it needs. Clarifying Jewish values and behavioral expectations for leaders can help reduce board conflict and inspire volunteerism.
10. Volunteer management systems can help recruit, assign, and assess talent. Some observers emphasize the importance of recruiting people with natural leadership qualities. I agree that talent matters, but the synagogue is not like corporate America. Some leadership positions will be occupied by major givers, longstanding past leaders, and loyal workers of modest ability, many of whom may lack a capacity for change.
Leaders sometimes survey their memberships to “find out what programs they want,” then initiate the most commonly mentioned ideas. To their surprise, few members respond. How can this be? What makes a program compelling? Yes, content matters, but people matter more. Megachurch leader Rick Warren has argued that he looks for leaders first and ministries second. If he has a leader, the leader will drive a ministry. He or she will find a way. This sentiment is echoed by management scholar Jim Collins, who contends that if one has the right people on the bus “it matters less if the bus has to change directions.”5
I start leadership development groups by asking participants why they have agreed to participate. They seldom site philosophical or intellectual (content) reasons. They come because someone they respect has volunteered in the past or asked them to help now. The right people asked.
The synagogue will often need to work with people who are not natural leaders. Ronald Heifetz, co-founder and director of the Center for Public Leadership at Harvard University, has argued that leaders can be developed by doing leadership tasks. Among the most important of these tasks are recruiting talented people and finding the right work for them. Sometimes, Collins says, leaders must stop trying to put a square block into a round hole. Part of creating a great team is working to make sure people have the right assignments, ones that utilize their gifts.
Finding the right assignment for volunteers is a core Jewish value. In his “Eight-Step Ladder” of Tzedekah (righteous deeds), 12th-century Jewish philosopher, scholar, and leader Maimonides offers a spiritual hierarchy of acts that move up a ladder (sulam) to the most selfless of deeds. One of the highest forms is to empower others to take care of their own needs. The Gallup Organization, which had undertaken an extensive 25-year research project involving more than 80,000 managers, reported in 1999 that their research indicated that one of the qualities of great supervisors was that they focused on supporting and developing their employees’ strengths. They made this a priority rather than always trying to “fix” employees’ weaknesses. Most adults, they found, have a limited potential to change their weaknesses. Leaders can strive to make a “good shittac” (match) between a prospect’s strengths and the volunteer work available.
11. Synagogues can be more efficient. They can learn from business and other nonprofit organizations. Susan Shevitz, associate professor and director of Brandeis University’s Hornstein Program in Jewish Communal Service, has described synagogues as pluralistic, diverse, voluntary, and loosely coupled. All of these qualities make it harder to be “on the same page.”6 Shevitz also notes that synagogues keep poor records and have few written agreements. Even when they try to get people on the same page, they often fail to record the agreements, communicate them to others, or ensure a transition of their agreements from one president to another, let alone from generation to generation.
Synagogues operate in the fast-changing world of American culture. As organizations, they must compete for the hearts and minds of their members in a world of dizzying choices and constant innovation. Facing these challenges requires an external orientation and focus, one that looks for successful practices in other organizations. Organizations with this kind of focus look to benchmark or compare their own practices with the best practices of others.
12. Leadership development programs can reinforce and integrate leadership learning. Boards often allocate training to a half-day workshop every two or three years. In these settings they learn a few new ideas and do a little planning, and there are usually some exhortations to take a fresh look at the “sacred work” of congregational governance. Though well-intended, these workshops are usually too limited to make much of an impact on the synagogue culture. Church consultant Thomas Holland argues that exhortations to improve board attitudes and performance are largely unsuccessful. What he believes works is changing what board members do.
Synagogue leadership is an ongoing challenge. New leaders must be oriented every year. Boards need to do major team building every three to five years. Even if they have an exciting vision or a charismatic period of leadership, they must keep reviewing and integrating that vision. In our tradition, Isaac follows his charismatic father Abraham (Gen. 26) and finds that he has to re-dig the wells his father dug before. In order to unleash the life-giving energy from the wells, they must be reworked. The agenda outlined in this article helps remind congregational leaders to redig those wells.
Questions for Reflection:
NOTES
1. Based on the author’s review of the focus group’s comments.
2. Daniel Goleman, Emotional Intelligence: Why It Can Matter More than IQ (New York: Bantam Books, 1995), 202.
3. Hildy Gottlieb, “10 ‘Stop’ Signs on the Road to Board Recruitment,” Help4NonProfits and Tribes, (Resolve, Inc., 2003; www.help4nonprofits.com).
4. Jim Collins, Good to Great (New York: Harper Collins, 2001).
5. Marcus Buckingham and Curt Coffman, First, Break All the Rules: What the World’s Greatest Managers Do Differently (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1999).
6. Shevitz, Susan, “An Organizational Perspective on Changing Congregational Education: What the Literature Reveals” from A Congregation of Learners, ed. Isa Aron, Sarah Lee, and Seymour Rossel (New York: UAHC Press, 1995).
Prospect: I don’t really have the time.
Interviewer: Would you consider making time for this?
Prospect: I might if the work was really important.
Interviewer: What would it mean for the work to be important?
Prospect: I would want to know that this work will make a difference. I would also want to know that the work would be a good match for my talents.
Interviewer: What else would make you consider volunteering?
Prospect: I want to have staff support so that I can be confident that the project will be a success. On the other hand, I don’t want the staff person to try to control everything. I’d want to have some autonomy.
As a former leader, my first instinct upon hearing this demanding agenda was to mutter (rather grumpily), “Is that all they want?” But if we utilize our active listening skills—and a little patience—we can gain some insights about these potential volunteers. And by listening to their thoughts we can better manage their conflicting desires, such as the need for both support and autonomy, or the desire to do important work while not spending a great deal of time on it.
3. A focus on the future can increase hope and motivation for leaders. Most planning processes identify strengths and weaknesses. They look at the gap between the leader’s expectations and congregational performance. Most congregations that agree to embark on planning feel some pressing need to invest the time and money to do so. Rob Weinberg, director of the Experiment in Congregational Education, one of several pioneering synagogue transformation projects, has discovered that the elements that create a “readiness for change” are dissatisfaction with the present, a vision of the future, a belief that change is possible, and practical first steps.
I believe a positive vision of the future is instrumental in increasing the belief that change is possible. The belief that change is possible reinforces and energizes the ability to vision. For this reason, when leaders are overly focused on “gaps and deficits,” congregational planning will be weakened. Most congregational leaderships excel in certain areas (sermons, social action, facility, board, etc.). Part of the art of planning is to review the congregational landscape and to bring these various strengths into focus and inspire hope. The biblical spies who were sent to do reconnaissance of the promised land of Canaan were encouraged to “take pains to bring back some of the fruit of the land” (Num. 13:17). God knew that leaders needed to promise a sweet future to help sustain the people’s hopes.
4. Synagogue leaders can be more strategic by doing leadership tasks. Alban Institute research has shown that most clergy and lay leaders are tactical and managerial rather than strategic or transformational thinkers. Although strategic skills are not common, they are critical in times of change, according to leadership expert and Harvard professor John Kotter. Strategic planning skills help leaders overcome their internal focus, learn from the changing environment, and manage the inefficiencies of the synagogue organization.
A successful planning model must simplify the process enough to ensure that the volunteer organization can be success-ful with strategic work. (Remember our volunteer prospects’ desire to be certain their projects would succeed).
While it is clear that strategic thinking is important today, the history of strategic and long-range planning in congregations is mixed. It is not uncommon for congregations to do facility planning with a fundraising consultant in preparation for a capital campaign. In this case, planning is tied to a very concrete goal. But when congregations face size transitions, changes in demographics, cultural changes, increased diversity, or generational changes, they are less likely to see these as planning opportunities. Elite and relatively small leadership groups have sometimes gone through reflection and written plans only to find that their plans are never implemented. Sometimes this is because of the way in which the plans were written; a new synagogue visioning and planning process must be able to translate abstract ideas about values and strategic goals into specific actions that can be tracked and implemented.
Judaism argues that we get major insights about God, holiness, and righteousness by “doing” things. At Mount Sinai, the Jewish people answer God’s challenge by saying “All that the Lord spoke we will do and we will hear [understand]” (Exodus 24:7). We comprehend the abstract by doing the concrete—observing mitzvot (commandments). One of the ways leaders can attain such qualities as credibility, integrity, authenticity, and foresight is by “doing leadership tasks.” When leaders look at their environments, convene important conversations with volunteers, and encourage them to think about the future, these individuals begin to shift to a strategic leadership mind-set.
5. Consultants and facilitators can help increase the perceived value of volunteerism. Consultants and facilitators can be helpful (okay, I’m a little biased) in creating a sense of urgency by identifying areas of concern. They can help maintain momentum and energy by helping planning leaders imagine a promising future. They can also overcome the disruption in the process when certain events take center stage, or when leadership changes leave the board with a short-term deficit of energy.
In my work with synagogues I may have a group of 50 planners working for a minimum of 25 volunteer hours over a 12- to 15-month initial planning process. In such situations I have found it helpful to build a model of the cost of their effort. If we figure an average cost of $50 per hour, we are talking about a personal investment of about $1,250 per volunteer, or more than $62,500 in collective volunteer time. What is going to make such a significant contribution worthwhile to the volunteers involved in the effort? As we learned earlier, volunteers want to make a difference, do important work, and use some of their higher-order professional skills. When synagogues use facilitators to help institute effective volunteer processes, they can increase volunteer satisfaction in leadership work and increase expectations for volunteer effectiveness.
6. Teamwork is an essential synagogue skill. Contemporary organizational experts emphasize the importance of building more effective teams. The Center for Creative Leadership called teamwork “the most frequently valued managerial competence,” and, according to John Seely Brown, head of Xerox’s Research Park, “If you ask successful people, they will tell you that they learned the most from and with each other.”3
Synagogues have diverse members, so their leadership needs to reflect this diversity. Members can learn from each other if their talents are meshed with a worthwhile mission and team-building processes. Teamwork reduces the barriers to volunteer effectiveness.
7. Synagogue change requires a guiding coalition to ensure a “critical mass” for action. One of the problems with strategic planning efforts by long-range planning groups is that they may create a document that has little “buy in.” In an era of declining volunteerism, planning efforts need to create new energy and momentum. If only eight people go into the board room and “knock the plan out,” who will implement it? How will this work engage new leadership prospects? The top complaints of core leaders are “we cannot engage new leaders” and “we feel burned out.” How does the work of a small elite planning group change that dynamic? Effective leadership development and change management will involve a wide
array of current and potential leadership to build a critical mass for change.
8. Leadership approaches need to be experiential to engage and value the adult learner. How do adults learn something new? It helps if they enter a learning process that is well-structured, with a clear overview of the work ahead. Adults are energized, according to Malcolm S. Knowles, author of The Adult Learner, when they are able to apply their life experiences and professional expertise to their new congregational work. Leaders need to assure adult learners that their experience will be valued.
Successful leadership development processes involve the creation of small groups where individuals can bounce ideas off each other and gain an appreciation for one another’s contributions. These processes create spaces for volunteers to be heard and help them learn to hear others better.
9. Jewish values can inspire new leaders. When boards are too tactical they often fail to define and communicate the board’s essential mission, values, and strategies. They may fail to get the clergy and other staff involved in designing a synagogue leadership agenda. It is popular today to remind board members that their tactical managerial efforts are sacred work because they serve a sacred purpose. Unfortunately, if the board’s culture and processes look like any other secular task, the idea of the management of the sacred can look…well…quite secular. A five-minute dvar Torah (text commentary), however well-intended, does not transform board workers into a dynamic leadership community. The whole design of the board’s work needs to be reviewed.
Hildy Gottlieb, president of Help4Nonprofits & Tribes, writes in her online article “10 ‘Stop’ Signs on the Road to Board Recruitment”4 that too many boards try to get out of trouble by recruiting new members. She argues that organizations need to have a good product before they can promote it. When boards lack a vision, shared values, and goals, it’s hard to convince prospects that sitting on the board is a great—let alone sacred—volunteer opportunity.
When a board has dysfunctional conflicts, poor lay staff relationships, and few policies, it is simply not ready to recruit the kind of talent it needs. Clarifying Jewish values and behavioral expectations for leaders can help reduce board conflict and inspire volunteerism.
10. Volunteer management systems can help recruit, assign, and assess talent. Some observers emphasize the importance of recruiting people with natural leadership qualities. I agree that talent matters, but the synagogue is not like corporate America. Some leadership positions will be occupied by major givers, longstanding past leaders, and loyal workers of modest ability, many of whom may lack a capacity for change.
Leaders sometimes survey their memberships to “find out what programs they want,” then initiate the most commonly mentioned ideas. To their surprise, few members respond. How can this be? What makes a program compelling? Yes, content matters, but people matter more. Megachurch leader Rick Warren has argued that he looks for leaders first and ministries second. If he has a leader, the leader will drive a ministry. He or she will find a way. This sentiment is echoed by management scholar Jim Collins, who contends that if one has the right people on the bus “it matters less if the bus has to change directions.”5
I start leadership development groups by asking participants why they have agreed to participate. They seldom site philosophical or intellectual (content) reasons. They come because someone they respect has volunteered in the past or asked them to help now. The right people asked.
The synagogue will often need to work with people who are not natural leaders. Ronald Heifetz, co-founder and director of the Center for Public Leadership at Harvard University, has argued that leaders can be developed by doing leadership tasks. Among the most important of these tasks are recruiting talented people and finding the right work for them. Sometimes, Collins says, leaders must stop trying to put a square block into a round hole. Part of creating a great team is working to make sure people have the right assignments, ones that utilize their gifts.
Finding the right assignment for volunteers is a core Jewish value. In his “Eight-Step Ladder” of Tzedekah (righteous deeds), 12th-century Jewish philosopher, scholar, and leader Maimonides offers a spiritual hierarchy of acts that move up a ladder (sulam) to the most selfless of deeds. One of the highest forms is to empower others to take care of their own needs. The Gallup Organization, which had undertaken an extensive 25-year research project involving more than 80,000 managers, reported in 1999 that their research indicated that one of the qualities of great supervisors was that they focused on supporting and developing their employees’ strengths. They made this a priority rather than always trying to “fix” employees’ weaknesses. Most adults, they found, have a limited potential to change their weaknesses. Leaders can strive to make a “good shittac” (match) between a prospect’s strengths and the volunteer work available.
11. Synagogues can be more efficient. They can learn from business and other nonprofit organizations. Susan Shevitz, associate professor and director of Brandeis University’s Hornstein Program in Jewish Communal Service, has described synagogues as pluralistic, diverse, voluntary, and loosely coupled. All of these qualities make it harder to be “on the same page.”6 Shevitz also notes that synagogues keep poor records and have few written agreements. Even when they try to get people on the same page, they often fail to record the agreements, communicate them to others, or ensure a transition of their agreements from one president to another, let alone from generation to generation.
Synagogues operate in the fast-changing world of American culture. As organizations, they must compete for the hearts and minds of their members in a world of dizzying choices and constant innovation. Facing these challenges requires an external orientation and focus, one that looks for successful practices in other organizations. Organizations with this kind of focus look to benchmark or compare their own practices with the best practices of others.
12. Leadership development programs can reinforce and integrate leadership learning. Boards often allocate training to a half-day workshop every two or three years. In these settings they learn a few new ideas and do a little planning, and there are usually some exhortations to take a fresh look at the “sacred work” of congregational governance. Though well-intended, these workshops are usually too limited to make much of an impact on the synagogue culture. Church consultant Thomas Holland argues that exhortations to improve board attitudes and performance are largely unsuccessful. What he believes works is changing what board members do.
Synagogue leadership is an ongoing challenge. New leaders must be oriented every year. Boards need to do major team building every three to five years. Even if they have an exciting vision or a charismatic period of leadership, they must keep reviewing and integrating that vision. In our tradition, Isaac follows his charismatic father Abraham (Gen. 26) and finds that he has to re-dig the wells his father dug before. In order to unleash the life-giving energy from the wells, they must be reworked. The agenda outlined in this article helps remind congregational leaders to redig those wells.
Questions for Reflection:
- How could you increase the shared meaning about the congregation within your leadership group?
- How are you “throwing out the net” to identify new leadership prospects?
- What kinds of learning activities could you plan to help your leadership be more strategic this year?
- Who are the people with the right talent and commitment that you could recruit to help build the congregational leadership agenda?
- What resources are available to help facilitate these activities?
NOTES
1. Based on the author’s review of the focus group’s comments.
2. Daniel Goleman, Emotional Intelligence: Why It Can Matter More than IQ (New York: Bantam Books, 1995), 202.
3. Hildy Gottlieb, “10 ‘Stop’ Signs on the Road to Board Recruitment,” Help4NonProfits and Tribes, (Resolve, Inc., 2003; www.help4nonprofits.com).
4. Jim Collins, Good to Great (New York: Harper Collins, 2001).
5. Marcus Buckingham and Curt Coffman, First, Break All the Rules: What the World’s Greatest Managers Do Differently (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1999).
6. Shevitz, Susan, “An Organizational Perspective on Changing Congregational Education: What the Literature Reveals” from A Congregation of Learners, ed. Isa Aron, Sarah Lee, and Seymour Rossel (New York: UAHC Press, 1995).
LAST WEEK TO REGISTER: SOURCING INNOVATION
Chances are good that your institution needs to change in some way if it's to thrive (or even survive). You know it. You embrace the idea. But you don't know what to do, or even where to begin.Join visual anthropologist and filmmaker Marlon Hall and a community of other Christian leaders for this five-week online course (January 30 - March 1, 2017) as we move step-by-step through the process of learning from a community, which is the foundational step to engage in innovative ministry.
Sourcing Innovation will provide you with the skills to lead innovation to improve the common life. You will learn to examine your community to determine:
- Where you want to engage;
- With whom you want to engage;
- How to develop meaningful partnerships with those people; and
- What to do with what you learn.
Learn more and register »
FROM THE ALBAN LIBRARY
FROM THE ALBAN LIBRARY
Governance and Ministry: Rethinking Board Leadershipby Dan HotchkissGovernance and Ministry has proven to be an indispensable guide for leaders and clergy on how to work together to lead congregations. In this second edition, veteran congregational consultant and minister Dan Hotchkiss updates the book to reflect today's church and synagogue landscape and shares practical insights based on his work with readers of the first edition. Governance and Ministry highlights the importance of reaching the right governance model for a congregation to fulfill its mission-to achieve both the outward results and the inward quality of life to which it is called. Hotchkiss draws on governance research from business, non-profits, and churches, as well as deep experience in a variety of denominations and congregations to help readers determine the governance model that best fits their needs. The second edition has been streamlined and reorganized to better help readers think through leadership models and the process of change. The book features new material on the implications of congregation size, the process of governance change, policy choices, and the lay-clergy relationship. It also features two appendices with resources often requested by Hotchkiss's consulting clients: a style guide for policy-makers and a unified example of a board policy book.
Written with energy and humor, and offering plenty of practical examples, the second edition of this helpful resource is ideal for anyone involved in church leadership to assist in framing critical questions, creating a vision, and implementing a plan.
Learn more and order the book »
Follow us on social media:
VISIT OUR WEBSITE
Alban at Duke Divinity School
1121 West Chapel Hill Street, Suite 101
Durham, North Carolina 27701, United States
-------
VISIT OUR WEBSITE
Alban at Duke Divinity School
1121 West Chapel Hill Street, Suite 101
Durham, North Carolina 27701, United States
-------
No comments:
Post a Comment