10 Comments

1. Kerry Olitzky  •  Feb 5, 2010 @12:56 pm

   I think that mission statements are important if they really guide and reflect the mission of the institution. What I worry about is the time that is spent crafting a statement that takes away from the time to put your “feet on the ground” and really do something. Too often, I have found that so much energy is put into writing a mission statement that people forget that the real works starts when that process is concluded.

2. Neal Loevinger  •  Feb 6, 2010 @7:07 pm

   Ah, Reb Hayim, a timely and important topic. I would add only one point: congregations that have experienced decline and/or conflict (or conflict arising out of the decline, even more so) may be afraid of defining a mission or a vision lest somebody disagree with it and leave. This is especially, in my experience, when congregational budgets are overdependent on regular dues- if a few families leave because they end up realizing that the mission or vision isn’t for them, well, then, in the short run that means firing somebody or something equally drastic.

   Now, you know and I know that over the medium and long run, the congregation will be much healthier with a well-defined sense of mission, but to a board paralyzed by demographic or financial fear, it’s hard to convince them that there’s any mission but not declining more, in the very short run.

   Wisdom about how to overcome the fear of short-term conflict in order to build long-term vision is something I don’t have enough of.

3. Larry Kaufman  •  Feb 7, 2010 @8:19 am

   I’ve always been comfortable with the idea that the mission of the synagogue is to serve as a house of (Jewish) study, (Jewish) worship, and (Jewish) coming together, in the interest of perfecting the work of creation.

   I agree with Rabbi Olitzky that the time spent creating the mission statement not only delays starting the real work, but add that delaying the real work is not the effect but the cause. We don’t know how to attack our real problems, so let’s develop a mission statement, and we won’t have to worry about the real work for a while.

   Some congregations — but not very many — are in a legitimate position to narrow down their missions. In my own community, metropolitan Chicago, there are some three dozen Reform congregations. One has a clear mission to serve the GLBT community; one to serve the hearing-impaired; one to preserve and protect Classical Reform, and one identifies as Reform while maintaining residues of a humanist heritage. A fifth, positioned as an adult congregation, recently closed its doors. All the rest, for better or for worse, have no clearly defined niche other than geography, and strive to be all things to all people.

   But anyone interested in discussing mission statements should start by reading Rabbi Lawrence Kushner’s The Tent-Peg Business: http://urj.org/worship/worshipwithjoy/letuslearn/s17tentpeg/

4. Jordan Goodman  •  Feb 7, 2010 @9:48 am

   Shalom All,

   Rabbi Kerry has provided the analog to what I said about assessment tools:
   the best one’s are those that actually catalyze intentional change in the status quo.

   Without the commitment to actually follow through with new action, why bother?

   Biv’racha,
   Jordan

5. Jordan Goodman  •  Feb 7, 2010 @9:17 pm

   Shalom All,

   Rabbi Larry wrote: “I agree with Rabbi Olitzky that the time spent creating the mission statement not only delays starting the real work, but add that delaying the real work is not the effect but the cause.”

   And just what is the “real work?” If it’s nothing more than assuring the survival
   of a Jewish life cycle event factory and a place for a guilt fix for those who may want/need an occasional worship service, why bother?

   The 2600-3000 year old wisdom of Mishlei 29:18, “B’ein hazon yipara’ ‘am; In the absence of vision, people will be unrestrained,” is sadly all too evident in non-orthodox congregations today.

   Rabbi Neal wrote: “Wisdom about how to overcome the fear of short-term conflict in order to build long-term vision is something I don’t have enough of.”

   Once again vision is the answer. The only way to deal with fear driven decision making is for leadership to paint “a passion producing picture of a preferred future” (thanks to Pastor Bill Hybels of Willow Creek Community Church for this definition of vision). Without a better looking future there is no reason to even consider giving up the staus quo.

   And the rabbi is primarily responsible for this vision casting as (s)he is the congregation’s primary meaning maker, teacher of Judaism and influencer. It all must start from the bimah.

   Biv’racha,
   Jordan

6. David Harris  •  Feb 7, 2010 @9:55 pm

   This is a phenomenal question to pose to synagogues. Something that I believe is critical to crafting a mission statement is the strategic planning process.

   When I was in graduate school not too long ago, I remember my home synagogue was undergoing a strategic planning process. I was still a new grad student at the time, and I even got to go to a meeting once while home on break. Thinking strategically is so critical in communal life and as a newer professional in the Jewish non-profit sector I wonder just how much of a process congregations enter into.

   We live in increasingly fast times, the foray into new media (see: Facebook, Twitter) is allowing people to connect at alarmingly fast rates, and the gap of young adult involvement in synagogue life also (likely) weighs on congregational leaders minds. If congregations are not engaging in strategic planning to deal with pressing (and constantly evolving) issues, then how can they effectively craft a mission statement?

   My rabbi from home always used to tell me that if an organization was moving (with ideas, not being stagnant) there was always opportunity for growth. Sometimes missions get crafted, and they really work, and sometimes, they really are missing something. You just can’t do it without a legitimate thought process.

   Of course, once you have the plan done, then there is that whole implementation issue, which Rabbi Olitzky alluded to. So when the title of the post says Mission: Impossible or Possible, I’d lean towards Possible, with a hint of “it could take a while”.

7. Larry Kaufman  •  Feb 9, 2010 @8:45 am

   While I thank Jordan Goodman for giving me smicha, I’m not a rabbi, which may (or may not) allow me to be more objective about deficiencies in mission and vision creation than if I were. But I take mild exception to the suggestion that the rabbi is the chief vision caster. The lay people who bring a rabbi to a congregation have to have some kind of vision before they know whom to bring. Obviously their vision and that of the rabbi have to be compatible and complementary, but hopefully not identical. As to it all coming from the bimah, if we are using the bimah figuratively to stand for everything the rabbi does, I can agree. But the rabbi’s ability to project and instill the vision across all the work of the congregation has to be reinforced in board and committee meetings, study groups, and in every interaction with lay leadership.

   I don’t know if my rabbi and teacher had ever read the mission statement the balebatim played with for a year — but he had a simple guidepost for endorsing any new initiative. When presented with a new program, his question was invariably Where’s the Torah?

   With regard to David Harris’s endorsement of strategic planning processes, having sat through many and facilitated many, I suggest that you will rarely emerge from onw with a vision unless somebody (and not just the rabbi) went in with one.

8. Jordan Goodman  •  Feb 9, 2010 @8:56 am

   Shalom All,

   Strategy answers the question “how?” Before you have a “how?” you need to have
   vision–the passion producing picture of the preferred future; a mission..a statement of what business you’re in so as to move toward the fulfilling the vision; and a statement of values…to know what will be the behavioral engines of all strategic/tactical action taken.

   Then and only then can one undertake formulating a strategy, i.e., answering the “how” questions. Strategy can and must evolve over time; vision, mission and values ought to be the “Torah miSinai” of a synagogue. “Of course, without the commitment to implement changes in the status quo, why bother?”

   Biv’racha,
   Jordan

9. Rabbi Hayim Herring  •  Feb 10, 2010 @2:24 pm

   Thanks to all who have made this discussion so lively! So, here are a few observations (not facts, just my own ideas, based on model practices about boards and governance):

   • Two excellent sites for non-profit organizations are Boardsource and Compasspoint. They each provide well-researched resources about board governance. And, the trend today is to move from hierarchical governance structures to flatter ones. This move enables congregations to be more responsive and inclusive. And, I equally recommend The Alban Institute’s amazing array of resources.
   • The answer to who is responsible for the vision is both rabbi and board. It doesn’t matter as much who authors the mission statement as who owns the mission statement. Each party-board and rabbi-bring equally important perspectives about congregational life. So a process which includes those perspectives makes for a jointly-owned mission.
   • As far as conflict that emerges from mission clarity, my response is—so be it. Conflict does not have to be destructive. It does produce tension, and it’s difficult as a leader to allow that tension to persist until the conflict is resolved. But if the board can be coached into a culture where people’s essential beliefs get a hearing, they will feel more invested in the congregation and the congregation will be stronger for it. To learn more about this, I highly recommend the book This House We Build, by Rabbi Terry Bookman and Dr. William Kahn (published by Alban).

   It’s these kind of conversations that makes blogging so worthwhile!

   Thank you, Rabbi Herring

10. hherring  •  Feb 12, 2010 @1:22 pm

    This post is from JORDAN GOODMAN, who had encountered technical difficulties in submitting his thoughtful comments. Thanks, Jord

    Shalom All, A synagogue and its members (not just the paid staff and the lay leadership) need to know in their hearts, the following three things with crisp crystal clarity: Why? What? and Walues, or in Yiddish: Vhy? Vos? und Values. I know, dayeinu already with the alliteration!! Why? i.e., Vision: ala Bill Hybels definition, “a passion producing picture of a preferred future.” Vision answers the question, “Why do we need this synagogue?” Vision casting is about the creation of a compelling narrative around which the folks will coalesce. People will connect emotionally when a God and community honoring vision is cast, ultimately resulting in them feeling personal ownership in/of it. Then and only then will they be ready to hear about…. What? i.e, Mission which answers the question, “What business must we be in to move intentionally toward fulfilling our vision?” If the mission statement is crafted skillfully (Peter Drucker said it should be able to fit on the back of a tee shirt), it too can draw people into connection with it and each other. With all due respect to Rabbi Hayim, quite simply, one can’t know what business one needs to be in (mission) without first creating that compelling narrative that paints the passion producing picture of the preferred future (vision). After Why? and What? comes… Walues. Values are nothing less than the guiding principles and behavioral engines for all synagogue activity. The measurable success of the megachurch is directly traceable to the clarity they and their members all ( not just their paid staff and lay leadership) have about the vision, mission and values of their respective communities. The resulting focus and unity that they have makes other churches as well as synagogues without such focus and unity appear to be struggling by comparison. “In the absence of vision the people will be unrestrained,” Mishlei 29:18. Re who’s responsible for vision casting/mission crafting: I’d agree with you (Rabbi Hayim and Larry) if I believed that the board members were sufficiently Judaically literate (yes I know I’m being judgmental). Board members may have been a generation or two ago, but I don’t think that this is the case today in most non-orthodox synagogues. A phrase in Larry’s post above, “the ‘balabatim’ who approve the budget,” reminds me of a line in “If I Were a Rich Man” where Tevya sings,”When you’re rich the really think you know.” That’s why I wrote in a previous response that vision casting and mission crafting is primarily the responsibility of the rabbi. Because of her/his unique training as well as the perceptions and expectations of most synagogues and their members, the rabbi is the synagogue’s primary teacher of Judaism, the primary meaning maker, and primary influencer. And the bimah alone has the power to reach more of the congregation more often (especially true during the High Holidays) than anything/anyone else in the synagogue. Thus the bimah is where vision, mission and values must find their primary home with the (hopefully) inspired teaching of the rabbi as the catalyst for everything that the synagogue needs and ought to be about. Biv’racha, Jordan

Leave a Reply