Shock of shocks -- in December Andrew Tarsy announced his resignation from ADL as director of the New England regional office, its best known regional office. I'll spare you the full rendition of the sad story of how ADL's arrogance got the best of it (only to have its lunch handed to it by a few unknown and unbelievably po'd Armenians). Suffice to say that Tarsy decided to take a stand, was fired for doing so only to be reinstated and then, a few weeks ago, announcing his departure.
Whether Tarsy's departure is voluntary or not matters little. Let's face it -- his ADL career was basically over and it seems he knew it. Sure he might have had (and probably still has) some support from the ADL New England regional board. But overall, Tarsy had little hope of hanging on (and to give him credit, it's doubtful he wanted to merely hang on) once things died down. No way the anti-national rebels among the NE board would have the staying power to maintain the conflict with Abe. (It remains to be seen how a successor will be chosen and the NE board unified within itself and with the national.)
The NE region of ADL is know for its disdain at best and antipathy at worst toward ADL chief Abe Foxman. Remember Lenny Zakim z"l? That was their heyday and their achievements were perceived as independent of (and maybe in spite of) Abe and the national office. Many on the NE board take indiscreet pride in their disaffection for Abe and are dismissive of the authority of the national office. More about the ADL and the cult of Abe in a future post.
Back to Tarsy. Rare indeed have been sightings of senior professionals/lay leaders who have put their own skin on the line to stand for principle. And Tarsy did it with a very human touch, with appreciation for the magnitude of his actions, and with lots of class. He made a difference in the debate and in ADL's position on the Armenian issue. It is too sad that he paid a personal price for it. We can only hope that employers appreciate the virtues of Tarsy's character and note that he lives his values.
We wish him well.
Monday, January 21, 2008
Saturday, January 19, 2008
Tobin's Folly
I don't know Gary Tobin personally. I usually find myself in agreement with what he has to say. But his latest volley directed at the organized Jewish world, "Jewish Organizations Shut Out From Philanthropists Largest Gifts," misfires.
The title of Tobin's study is needlessly provocative. It also comes off a bit harsh leaving the impression that Tobin found a particular enjoyment in smacking Jewish groups. There's already enough resistance in the system to acknowledging ineffectiveness -- so it's counterproductive to create issues that take our eye off the ball and can be used by the establishment to change the subject from substance to personality. If the establishment has one area of expertise, it's how to circle the wagons and spin bad news to focus on the messenger instead of the message. So Gary -- do us all a favor and spare the gratuitous baloney.
In this case, though, the message is off base. Jewish donors are hardly conspiring to "shut out" Jewish philanthropies from large gifts. There's plenty of funds going to Jewish groups. And it's not as if Jewish donors are trying to make a point -- "I'll give $100 million to the university and one million to the federation. That'll show those Jewish organizations." Besides, if you look at denominationally-directed philanthropy in the U.S., I'm guessing the organized Jewish world stacks up pretty well. There is no religious, ethnic or cultural group that is as successful and as organized as the Jewish community.
I'm one who does not see much in the Jewish world deserving of mega gifts. By deserve I mean that the intrinsic value of most Jewish philanthropy to making a better world, while significant, simply cannot compete with stem cell research and the like. They're largely in different leagues -- and that's ok.
For example, does anyone really think that a new wing for the JCC is of a higher societal value than a new wing to the cancer research center? Take nothing away from the JCC (I'll address the role of the JCC in the emerging Jewish community of the 21st century in a future post). I'm sure a new wing is important. But is it mega gift important? I guess it depends on what is considered a mega gift. Will the new wing get $1 million? Maybe $5 million? But that's not in the mega gift range that Tobin is discussing.
Besides, when you're talking about mega donors you're usually also talking about mega egos -- which means mega recognition. There are but a few cities where Jewish agencies can come even close to providing broad community recognition and competing with other groups offering mega impact philanthropic initiatives. I mean, it's not too hard to figure out that almost any donor would prefer to have the local symphony hall named after them over the local JFS lunchroom. Jewish donors know they can create their Jewish legacy for less than a mega gift. And they know that their Jewish legacy and the attached recognition have a limited scope -- I don't mean that as a negative, it's just what it is.
So for my two cents, Tobin is comparing the incomparable and by doing makes a "straw man" argument. There's a lot wrong in Jewish philanthropy and the system it supports. Tobin's mega gift tangent isn't one of them.
The title of Tobin's study is needlessly provocative. It also comes off a bit harsh leaving the impression that Tobin found a particular enjoyment in smacking Jewish groups. There's already enough resistance in the system to acknowledging ineffectiveness -- so it's counterproductive to create issues that take our eye off the ball and can be used by the establishment to change the subject from substance to personality. If the establishment has one area of expertise, it's how to circle the wagons and spin bad news to focus on the messenger instead of the message. So Gary -- do us all a favor and spare the gratuitous baloney.
In this case, though, the message is off base. Jewish donors are hardly conspiring to "shut out" Jewish philanthropies from large gifts. There's plenty of funds going to Jewish groups. And it's not as if Jewish donors are trying to make a point -- "I'll give $100 million to the university and one million to the federation. That'll show those Jewish organizations." Besides, if you look at denominationally-directed philanthropy in the U.S., I'm guessing the organized Jewish world stacks up pretty well. There is no religious, ethnic or cultural group that is as successful and as organized as the Jewish community.
I'm one who does not see much in the Jewish world deserving of mega gifts. By deserve I mean that the intrinsic value of most Jewish philanthropy to making a better world, while significant, simply cannot compete with stem cell research and the like. They're largely in different leagues -- and that's ok.
For example, does anyone really think that a new wing for the JCC is of a higher societal value than a new wing to the cancer research center? Take nothing away from the JCC (I'll address the role of the JCC in the emerging Jewish community of the 21st century in a future post). I'm sure a new wing is important. But is it mega gift important? I guess it depends on what is considered a mega gift. Will the new wing get $1 million? Maybe $5 million? But that's not in the mega gift range that Tobin is discussing.
Besides, when you're talking about mega donors you're usually also talking about mega egos -- which means mega recognition. There are but a few cities where Jewish agencies can come even close to providing broad community recognition and competing with other groups offering mega impact philanthropic initiatives. I mean, it's not too hard to figure out that almost any donor would prefer to have the local symphony hall named after them over the local JFS lunchroom. Jewish donors know they can create their Jewish legacy for less than a mega gift. And they know that their Jewish legacy and the attached recognition have a limited scope -- I don't mean that as a negative, it's just what it is.
So for my two cents, Tobin is comparing the incomparable and by doing makes a "straw man" argument. There's a lot wrong in Jewish philanthropy and the system it supports. Tobin's mega gift tangent isn't one of them.
Disunited Jewish Communities
It was bound to happen. UJC has been screwed up for so long it was only a matter of time before insiders took matters into their own hands -- at least as much into their hands as they could considering the bloggers have opinions but no power.
Well, they apparently have quite keen powers of observation. And the blogger(s) at DJC are saying aloud what many in the federation world already know -- UJC is a mess. And I'm not talking about the allegations of poor management directed at UJC CEO Howard Reiger and his senior team. Yeah, that sounds bad enough but it could also be sour grapes from those who are not part of the senior team (I'm trying to be fair).
Look, Mr. Reiger inherited a sick organization with a defective structure (how in the world can we expect one person to actually lead an organization when he has 150 bosses -- really the top 20 communities? Like those 20 communities could agree on anything?).
UJC is an organization that has yet to effectively operationalize the merger of its parent bodies UJA and CJF. It is an organization adrift -- that, to put it mildly, has a difficult time justifying its $40 million budget and one that is suffering from a serious case of "what's our mission-itis."
Let me start out by positing that if UJC disappeared tomorrow few in the nation's federations would miss it. Sure, some of the smaller (more like tiny) communities seem to rely more on UJC. But I bet the top 75 communities wouldn't miss a beat. Now that's not to say that an umbrella body serves no purpose. It is to say that this version of an umbrella body to the federation system serves no purpose (maybe that goes too far -- how about no purpose justifying anywhere near its budget?!).
Well, they apparently have quite keen powers of observation. And the blogger(s) at DJC are saying aloud what many in the federation world already know -- UJC is a mess. And I'm not talking about the allegations of poor management directed at UJC CEO Howard Reiger and his senior team. Yeah, that sounds bad enough but it could also be sour grapes from those who are not part of the senior team (I'm trying to be fair).
Look, Mr. Reiger inherited a sick organization with a defective structure (how in the world can we expect one person to actually lead an organization when he has 150 bosses -- really the top 20 communities? Like those 20 communities could agree on anything?).
UJC is an organization that has yet to effectively operationalize the merger of its parent bodies UJA and CJF. It is an organization adrift -- that, to put it mildly, has a difficult time justifying its $40 million budget and one that is suffering from a serious case of "what's our mission-itis."
Let me start out by positing that if UJC disappeared tomorrow few in the nation's federations would miss it. Sure, some of the smaller (more like tiny) communities seem to rely more on UJC. But I bet the top 75 communities wouldn't miss a beat. Now that's not to say that an umbrella body serves no purpose. It is to say that this version of an umbrella body to the federation system serves no purpose (maybe that goes too far -- how about no purpose justifying anywhere near its budget?!).
Welcome...and explanation
I love the United States of America, my faith, the state of Israel, the Jewish community (organized and not) and the Jewish people. At the same time, reality being what it is, there is no way to say what I have to say but through this anonymous portal. I love my job, which is a senior position within the organized Jewish world, and I have a responsibility to my family to avoid risks that threaten my capacity to provide for it.
I am aware that my credibility would be enhanced if my identity and background were revealed. Here's what I can tell you. I have been in and around the organized Jewish world for over two decades ( I have also worked outside the Jewish community). Now I work in the federation system.
Why do this blog? Well, because I want to express myself. I'd like to reflect back, to hold up a mirror in a way that only somebody inside the system could. I have no illusions of grandeur and no expectations of readership. The latter would be nice.
Finally, a shout out to the thoughtful and courageous blogger(s) at Disunited Jewish Communities. It's too bad this blogger, like me, can't speak out for fear of retribution. But it is what it is. It seems they, too, want to hold up a mirror and let people know that the emperors are naked.
I welcome your comments. I only ask, demand if necessary, that they are respectful and substantive.
I am aware that my credibility would be enhanced if my identity and background were revealed. Here's what I can tell you. I have been in and around the organized Jewish world for over two decades ( I have also worked outside the Jewish community). Now I work in the federation system.
Why do this blog? Well, because I want to express myself. I'd like to reflect back, to hold up a mirror in a way that only somebody inside the system could. I have no illusions of grandeur and no expectations of readership. The latter would be nice.
Finally, a shout out to the thoughtful and courageous blogger(s) at Disunited Jewish Communities. It's too bad this blogger, like me, can't speak out for fear of retribution. But it is what it is. It seems they, too, want to hold up a mirror and let people know that the emperors are naked.
I welcome your comments. I only ask, demand if necessary, that they are respectful and substantive.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
