Contact
Subscribe


Remixing in Your Synagogue

Jul 5, 2010
Funding Your Dreams, Strategies for Change
Unique, break-through inventions are very difficult to achieve. Most innovations are not completely “innovative.” Rather, they build upon and incorporate prior efforts, while adding some new features. In a recent article in Fast Company Magazine by Farhad Manjoo, entitled The Invincible Apple, the author notes that Apple’s claim about making revolutionary projects is somewhat overstated. Manjoo writes,

To use a musical analogy, Apple’s specialty is the remix. It curates the best ideas bubbling up around the tech world and makes them its own. It’s also a great fixer, improving on everything that’s wrong with other similar products on the shelves.

Think of some the great big Jewish programs that seem to have burst upon the scene: Taglit-Birthright Israel, PJ Library, Moishe House and most recently, Hebrew Charter Schools. The quote above about “remix” can just as easily apply to these initiatives. Taking young adults to Israel, parents reading books to children, young adults who share something in common living together and acting on their values, charter schools—none of these are completely unique. But, they are conceptually brilliant because they are simple, powerful, elegant and well-executed. (Full disclosure: I have work and continue to consult for some of the philanthropists behind these ideas.)
Now, consider some of the work that your congregation does: adult learning, youth work, prayer. Without new resources, is there some area of congregational life that lends itself to a “remix?” Have a discussion with your staff and volunteer leaders, and see what emerges. Remember—“big ideas” can start with a series of small changes that don’t involve new funding! Please share your thinking with readers of Tools for Shuls. I’m eager to hear from you.
Thank you,
Rabbi Hayim Herring
Courtesy of Apple

Courtesy of Apple

Unique, break-through inventions are very difficult to achieve. Most innovations are not completely “innovative.” Rather, they build upon and incorporate prior efforts, while adding some new features. In a recent article in Fast Company Magazine by Farhad Manjoo, entitled The Invincible Apple, the author notes that Apple’s claim about making revolutionary projects is somewhat overstated. Manjoo writes,

“To use a musical analogy, Apple’s specialty is the remix. It curates the best ideas bubbling up around the tech world and makes them its own. It’s also a great fixer, improving on everything that’s wrong with other similar products on the shelves.”

Think of some the great big Jewish programs that seem to have burst upon the scene: Taglit-Birthright Israel, The PJ Library, Moishe House and most recently, Hebrew Charter Schools. The quote above about “remix” can just as easily apply to these initiatives. Taking young adults to Israel, parents reading books to children, young adults who share something in common living together and acting on their values, charter schools—none of these are completely unique. But, they are conceptually brilliant because they are simple, powerful, elegant and well-executed. (Full disclosure: I have worked and continue to consult for some of the philanthropists behind these ideas.)

Now, consider some of the work that your congregation does: adult learning, youth work, prayer. Without new resources, is there some area of congregational life that lends itself to a “remix?” Have a discussion with your staff and volunteer leaders, and see what emerges. Remember—“big ideas” can start with a series of small changes that don’t involve new funding! Please share your thinking with readers of Tools for Shuls. I’m eager to hear from you.

Thank you,

Rabbi Hayim Herring

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • E-mail this story to a friend!
  • Print this article!
10 Comments
Tags , , , , , , , , ,

10 Comments

  1. Maril  •  Jul 5, 2010 @1:33 pm

    What a timely post from Rabbi Herring. I am not a Rabbi or even a person who shares the breadth of knowledge from some who have posted on this site. I speak for myself, and perhaps, for other spiritually connected Jewish women and men who look toward their Synagogue and Rabbi, for greater spiritual connectedness to Judiasm.
    My Synagogue is currently experiencing turmoil, confusion, and quite franlkly, a sadness due to recent events that resulted in our beloved Rabbi’s tenduring his resignation. One needs to be open to the ideas of “remixing” in order for innovative ideas to occur. And, a Synagogue with lay Leadership who can’t or don’t want to see the value in “remixing” will be a Synagogue lacking the vision to sustain its future and current congregants.
    As Rabbi Herring points out, ‘ “big ideas” can start with a series of small changes that don’t involve new funding!’ It is my hope and prayer that my Synagogue and other Congregations see the wisdom in “remixing” and embrace it with openminded and optomistic Leadership who are willing to explore new resources with a committment to understanding the necessity for innovative changes for recruiting and retaining members, while recognizing and welcoming all congregants’ valuable ideas and input.

  2. Larry Kaufman  •  Jul 6, 2010 @10:44 am

    Regarding the remix — a reminder to rabbis that there is a time to lead and a time to be led. Most likely the remix will occur only where there are empowered laity and rabbinic tzim-tzum. We want our clergy to be visionary and more knowledgeable than we are about the Jewish world at the macro level — but part of the job of lay leadership is to interpret the micro level that is the congregation/community.

    As I have said before, whether or not I have said it in this forum, the two deadliest statements in synagogue life are
    1. We can’t do that, we’ve never done it before.
    2. We can’t do that, we did it 20 years ago and it didn’t work.
    To these, I now add a third:
    3. We can’t do that, our congregation only likes (fill in the blank).

    This past week, our rabbi retired and the Senior Associate presided over her first Shabbat service as Senior Rabbi. She brought one innovation to the service, and it went over like the proverbial lead balloon. (In typing the foregoing, I realize the connection between the heaviness of lead and the heaviness of leadership.) I hope that she persists with her new idea for long enough to give it a chance at acceptance. This particular chiddush was hardly a remix — but it was an assertion that it’s a new era, we are in this together, and that trying out new ideas is basic to entering the new era.

    And to introduce another cliche’ — the future is not about what we can do, but we can think of doing.

  3. Rabbi Neal Loevinger  •  Jul 6, 2010 @7:48 pm

    Rav Hayim, thought-provoking post as always. Yet the last paragraph belies a hidden truth of the first part of the post – in Talmudic terms, there’s a contradiction between the reisha and the seifa. Birthright, PJ Library, Moishe House and Charter Schools all have one important thing in common- they provide a service to Jews that somebody else is helping to fund. In each case, the cost to the participants is nothing or heavily subsidized, which is why the “remixing” with “no additional funding” exhortation at the end doesn’t to me follow from holding up those four projects as examples of what a typical synagogue can do.

    The typical synagogue serves itself- that is, the membership provides resources for the congregation’s programming serving the membership. In the four organizations above, somebody else- philanthropists or taxpayers in the US or Israel- are paying for the program, at least partially.

    That’s a great thing, and it doesn’t take any praise away from these organizations. I’m just saying that the example may not apply to a typical suburban or small-city synagogue. I love your exhortation to remix, and I’d love to hear stories of shuls that have done it while subsidizing their own risk.

  4. hherring  •  Jul 7, 2010 @12:40 pm

    Thank you all for responding. One comment to my colleague R. Loevinger, who is a serious thinker about synagogue life. The first and second parts actually don’t contradict one another, although I should have used examples from within synagogue life. So here are some examples. When STAR pioneered its Synaplex Initiative, it was a remix of how Shabbat was celebrated, not a totally new innovation. Study, prayer and meeting for social and religious purposes-beit tefilah, beit midrash and beit kenesset-congregations already do these activities. We helped to create a framework (Synaplex) in which they could be brought together on Shabbat, and each congregation did it in a way that was authentic to its culture. Or marketing. Synagogues have been marketing programs and services for a long time, even if they didn’t call it “marketing.” But many have shifted budgets to include more contemporary methods, like social media. They have remixed the activity of marketing. Thanks for helping me to clarify what I mean. Hayim

  5. Rabbi Neal Loevinger  •  Jul 11, 2010 @2:17 pm

    Hi again Rav Hayim- thanks for your clarification. Please note: I totally agree that some of the most profound things that are needed in synagogue life are not “new” in any meaningful sense; for example, welcoming newcomers and putting in place systems for contacting the sick and bereaved used to be just “hachnasat orchim” and “bikkur holim.”

    However, I think there’s still an interesting distinction between the synaplex model and the Birthright model, inasmuch as a self-supporting community may have less risk tolerance for remixing, but philanthropist, who doesn’t have to worry about “turning off members” is somewhat freer to experiment.

    That’s why programs like the ones you mention , and synaplex itself, which gave grants to synagogues, are so important: they subsidize the risk taking and allow models to be developed which more risk – averse local boards can then adopt.

  6. Lisa Colton  •  Jul 12, 2010 @2:35 pm

    One of Apple’s recent big wins has been putting the whole PC in your pocket, and making it mobile, so it is integrated into every aspect of your life. I don’t think the analogy of synagogue life and Judaism is such a far leap. While in the past, the synagogue has been the place where all the Jews come to be Jewish, a possible remix is that it’s the supporter and empowerer of vibrant Jewish lives where ever your feet may be. Sometimes that will be in the synagogue building, and sometimes not. If programming and successes are to happen outside of the synagogue walls (like the Shabbat Connection program at my synagogue which I’ve mentioned here before), synagogue leadership (professional and lay) will need to let go of the assumption that more tushes in the seats is the goal. But vibrant Jewish life, family, home and community are markers of success. The first step towards successful remixing of programs is to know what our goals are, and how we are measuring it. Great post — thanks!

  7. hherring  •  Jul 12, 2010 @10:43 pm

    Lisa: thanks for extending my analogy further. The idea of making the synagogue mobile recalls the forerunner of the synagogue, the tabernacle (mishkan), which was a mobile structure that was embedded into the Israelite Camp! More to ponder….Hayim

  8. hherring  •  Jul 12, 2010 @10:52 pm

    Rabbi Neal–point well-taken about the risks of experimenting in a community in which you have an ongoing relationship. And at the beginning of Synaplex, STAR gave grants so that it could carefully work with the first couple of pilot cohorts. It was R&D (research and development) funding. From that, we were able to create a model in which we gave no grant funding, and the overwhelming majority of synaplex congregations were not funded by STAR. Which again brings us back to the remix idea of shabbat behind Synaplex.

    One other thought about risk–at what point do we say that yes, even with the risk, we’re going to take some chances because we know what the result of not taking any are? These are personal questions, but worth raising.

    Keep writing- these are challenging times that need your challenging questions. Hayim

  9. Larry Kaufman  •  Jul 14, 2010 @6:43 pm

    This topic is also the subject of a blog on ChicagoNow — http://www.chicagonow.com/blogs/non-profit-chicago/ — and I posted a comment there referring to this article.

    Regarding risk — yes, there’s always the possibility that a hiddush may fail, but if it does, what’s the real loss? Most of the new things we do in synagogues, like the old things, are built out of sweat equity invested by volunteers and staff. So if something fails, all we have to do is pick ourselves up and try something else. The impediment is when we are grasshoppers in our own eyes.

  10. hherring  •  Jul 15, 2010 @10:09 pm

    Larry: thanks for bringing this blog to our attention. It’s a very useful, concrete defintion of “innovation,” a word which can lose its meaning because it’s used so casually.

Leave a Reply

Allowed tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>