The Leadership Difference - Jewish Theological … LEADERSHIP DIFFERENCE 5 Covenantal and...

C E L E B R A T I N G 2 0 Y E A R S O F THE DAVIDSON SCHOOL

The Leadership Difference: Thoughts on Leadership from Staff and Alumni

A Publication of the Leadership Commons

The Leadership Commons at The Davidson School cultivates talented thinkers, doers, and visionaries from all corners of Jewish education, preparing them to inspire and guide the Jewish world.

We view the emerging Jewish future with hope and confidence. Now is the time for all of us to shape that future together for the common good.

Contents

Preface by Chancellor Arnold M. Eisen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

A Note from the Davidson Foundation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Covenantal and Educational Leadership by Dr. Bill Robinson, Dean . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Heart, Mind, and Being: Effective Educational Leadership through Trust, Emphatic Listening, Criticism, and the Making of Meaning by Rabbi Dov Lerea . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Tumbling Toward Leadership by Dori Frumin Kirshner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Core Leadership by Rabbi Yossi Kastan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

Why I Am Betting on Distributive Leadership by Rina Zerykier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Effective Leadership: Building a Place Where Failure, Honesty, Fun, and Creativity Can Thrive by Rabbi Eliav Bock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

The Icing on the Cake of Effective Leadership: Passion and Joy by Jill Madsen, EdD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

The Leadership Difference in Heneni: Answering the Call, Present in the Moment, and Going Above and Beyond by Rabbi Brad Horwitz . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

Leadership, Presence, and Authenticity by Dr. Susie Tanchel. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

The Three Ls of Torah Inspired Leadership by Lianne Heller . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

Modes of Leadership: Actions, Perceptions, and Calculations by Dr. Walter Herzberg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

Embracing the Leadership Difference of a New Executive by Dr. Ray Levi. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

Building Leadership and the Field of Jewish Early Childhood Education from the Inside Out by Lyndall Miller . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

What I Learned about Leadership from Prince and Mort Mandel by Mark S. Young . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

Thank You . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

THE LEADERSHIP DIFFERENCE

1

Preface

All the leadership literature that I have read, and the conversations I have conducted over the years with leaders in a variety of fields,

confirms that the prerequisite of true leadership is personal integrity. If people do not know where you stand, they cannot stand with you. And if leadership involves transformation, as it must these days, it is all the more important that leader and community both have confidence that the needed changes will assure continuity with the path to which all are committed, rather than chart a new path to an entirely new destination.

Leadership as Judaism understands the term therefore assumes community and covenant.

Jewish leaders do not fly solo, and certainly do not answer only to themselves. They serve, and only therefore can lead; they know that all of us are part of a people, a story, that existed long before we came into the world and will exist long after we depart it. The survival and thriving of the Jewish people—a far-flung network of local communities—is the purpose guiding any Jewish leader. We have never survived or thrived by aiming at mere survival. We are a “kingdom of priests,” a “holy nation,” impelled to serve the world and God. It takes determination, creativity, and no small measure of faith to believe in the Jewish future and to work to guarantee it. Face-to-face community, those with whom we share the cycle of the year and the cycle of life, are the means and motivation of that effort.

I’ve always been fond of the midrash that notes that God walked “with Noah,” but told Abraham to walk before God. Leaders and communities alike require individuals who will not only follow a leader or walk beside him or her but take initiative, move ahead, take things they have been taught and run with them in ways the leader perhaps could not have imagined. Leadership is communal partnership and conversation in service of a covenant that we know to be one of our lives’ most precious gifts.

THE JEWISH THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY

2

William Davidson was a man who cherished his family and his Jewish heritage above all else. From these two priorities flowed his lifelong practice of charitable giving to

benefit future generations.

His decision to endow The Jewish Theological Seminary’s Graduate School of Jewish Education in 1994 reflected all he held dear. He believed that the future of the Jewish people—families and children of all denominations for generations to come—was dependent upon the quality, commitment, and reach of its Jewish educators.

His donations doubled student enrollment, initiated both a continuing education program and a research center on Jewish education, and funded scholarships for deserving students. A man of action and commitment, he lived by the directive from Pirkei Avot: “You are not obligated to complete the work, but neither are you free to desist from it.” He preferred to say, “Just start.”

Mr. Davidson invested in the future of American Jewry when he invested in The Davidson School, the first class graduating in May of 1997. His receipt of an honorary doctor of humane letters from JTS a year earlier was a treasured tribute. In 2016, Karen W. Davidson, his widow and a member of the board of directors of the William Davidson Foundation, was awarded an honorary doctor of humane letters from JTS. At the William Davidson Foundation, advancing pluralistic Jewish education continues to be a central priority.

With immense pride in and heartfelt gratitude to Chancellor Arnold Eisen and the faculty, students, and alumni of the William Davidson Graduate School of Jewish Education, the William Davidson Foundation congratulates you on the school’s 20th anniversary.


3


4


5

Covenantal and Educational LeadershipBy Dr. Bill Robinson

LEADERSHIP TOWARD COVENANTAL COMMUNITY

The promise of leadership has always been to bring

us from where we are to where we desire to be. This desiring is not of our momentary wants, but rather an “ought”—a place we know we should be (but are not yet). In taking on leadership

or joining with leaders (followership), we commit ourselves to work together to bring into being the place that we seek and is promised.

So, as Jews and North Americans, inheritors of an ancient tradition and the modern enlightenment, what is the end toward which we lead?

Martin Buber’s writings represent a decisive and fertile coming together of Jewish thought and enlightenment philosophy. As both an engaged Jew and a philosopher of modernity, Buber asserts that what we should all be seeking is community, in contrast to that which we have often found, collectivity.

For who in all these massed, mingled, marching collectivities still perceives what that is for which he supposes he is striving—what community is? They have all surrendered to its counterpart. Collectivity is not a binding but a bundling together: individuals packed together, armed and equipped in common, with only as much life from man to man as will inflame the marching step. But community, growing community (which is all we have known so far) is the being no longer

side by side but with one another of a multitude of persons. And this multitude, though it also moves toward one goal, yet experiences everywhere a turning to, a dynamic facing of, the other, a flowing from I to Thou.

In community, we voluntarily come together to be present to one another and to care for one another. Through community, we seek transcendent meaning and purpose in our lives, hoping that what we do matters beyond us and will outlast us. And thus, we work to heal the world in which our community lives, though not in ways that sacrifice community. For, as Buber also says, the goal of community is community.

In contrast, the ends that collectivities seek are external to the relations among those seeking and, as such, render those internal relations (and thus those people) as means to the supposedly greater end. We descend, in Buber’s language, into relations of “I-it,” sacrificing community for some external end. In contrast, in community, the ends we seek are the ethical relations that define how we act with one another as members of a community. In community, the being there for one another is a value in and of itself.

In the ancient language of the Jewish people, Buber’s concept of community is that of a covenantal community—people who voluntarily commit to being there for one another and the world they inhabit together, grounded in a wrestling with the transcendent. By calling for covenantal communities (and not just communities), we ensure that we don’t mistakenly start thinking that any grouping of people is a community; in Buber’s understanding of these important words, most groupings are collectivities.


6

Moreover, we make explicit that which is implicit in Buber, namely the covenantal promise that eventually we will live in a world redeemed, where we are all there for one another.

Last, covenantal community is not just our inherited purpose. It is profoundly suited to the needs of our times. As many keen observers of our world have remarked, the complexity of the challenges facing us require that we work collaboratively to address them. Thus, leaders need their followers to be empowered to co-lead with them. We need everyone’s energy and wisdom.

Second, as many others before me have noticed, the pace of change today is too fast to put our faith in multiyear strategic plans, where leaders have inscribed into stone the concrete ends we seek, along with the actions their followers must take to realize those ends. Instead, we must be more flexible, learning and changing course as we go. Most importantly, we must work incrementally, building resilient achievements that model our ultimate goals and become the building blocks for future change. These building blocks are covenantal communities, as others have also noted. In particular, see the work of “How We Gather.” We must still think systemically and connect globally, but we need to work on building local communities where the value of our efforts can be immediately felt and inspire further commitment.

COVENANTAL COMMUNITIES AND EDUCATION

All congregations share an aspirational vision of covenantal community, though most are not (yet) covenantal communities. Moreover, this aspiration is not just for congregations; schools, community centers, agencies of educational change, and educational start-ups can and should aspire to become covenantal communities. These organizations often work to provide engaging services to paying consumers, instill given knowledge in learners, and raise funding to do this work—all worthwhile ends,

which are external to building community. Yet, if the work itself and the “community” of the organization—meaning the relationships among those engaged in the work—are viewed primarily as a means to those external ends, having no intrinsic value in itself, then we are re-creating collectivities and not community. We can’t avoid certain “I-it” ways of working, but good leadership moves us continually toward covenantal community.

Let’s look at the day school, as an example. Traditionally, we have tended to view day schools as vehicles that instill a set of knowledge and skills into students. Yet, this has been changing; we are reconceiving day schools as spaces for nurturing ethical, empowered, and purpose-driven Jewish persons in the world. To do this, schools create educative experiences that engage students in wrestling with the best ways (as Jewish humans) to be ethical in the here and now of their school community. Through that immersive and reflective experience they feel the profundity of and learn how best to live in covenantal community so that later in life they will desire to belong to a covenantal community through which they can fully embrace a Jewishly ethical life.

This is what John Dewey hoped for in creating his lab school, where students learned through collaborative experimentation and reflection. Learning how to bake apple pie, for example, involved heading out to the apple orchard and then back into the kitchen, where together the students experimented with ways to create a good dish. There were no teacher-provided recipes, and the goal of the learning was as much the ability of the students to investigate and work together as it was to produce a tasty pie. In this educative, democratic environment, Dewey was fostering democratic citizens. As he wrote, “the goal of democracy is democracy” (achieved in part through the experience of the school).

To use another example, this from Jewish education: the goal of havruta study is (better) havruta study. Through havruta, as a matter of course, students do attain a lot of knowledge about Judaism; but foremost,


7

they learn the values and skills of being good havruta partners. The Rabbis themselves debated in the Talmud which is more important—which is the true end—study or practice? They answered: “Study (of Torah) is greater, for it leads to (correct) practice.”

I have asserted that learning communities should aspire to become covenantal communities. Yet, the obverse is even truer; covenantal communities are always learning communities. Community members are always learning—through reflecting upon practice and engaging in a dialogue with Jewish wisdom—how to better be there for one another. Leadership of these communities must continually seek to understand the actual experiences of their followers so that they can guide their learning and together they can become better at forming covenantal communities. Thus, community leadership needs to be trained as progressive, experiential educators. And, educational leaders must be trained in building covenantal community.

AN EDUCATIONAL APPROACH TO COVENANTAL LEADERSHIP

Now, how do we approach the task of educational leadership for covenantal community? The educational, business, and political literature is filled with recipes for successful leadership. Yet, most do not concern themselves with the ends toward which leaders lead, assuming incorrectly that the leadership skills and strategies that work to increase profits or lead armies (that is, leadership for collectivities) are easily transferable to any end one seeks. But, in seeking to lead toward covenantal community, leaders need to relate to followers in ways that empower them and are ethically valued in and of themselves. This is not the case with most leadership recipes.

For instance, leaders who inscribe their vision in stone and prescribe correct practices disempower their followers and foster “I-it” relationships with and among them. Actual community involves the community determining for itself the ways in which

they want to be there for one another and the world in which they live. Through the process of building covenantal community, leadership is engaged in the paradoxical process of undercutting its own authority in order to empower its followers to co-lead.

By contrast, leaders working toward covenantal community can only begin by offering a vague image of the desired place they seek. The vision of community only becomes clear as the community itself gets better at being a covenantal community. Thus, they can’t with any certainty declare beforehand that these are the correct practices that will define our future community; rather, the correct practices are discovered through study, experimentation, and reflection. Additionally, they can learn from and adapt the discoveries (or rediscoveries) of others seeking the same. Nevertheless, a clear vision only comes at the end, as the vision increasingly emerges in the practice of the community.

In the following, I sketch out a paradigm for thinking about the educative and empowering path of covenantal leadership. Obviously, given the restraints of space, it seeks to be more inspirational than inclusive and more thought-provoking than technically useful.

Borrowing the overall framework from Peter Senge and Otto Scharmer’s Theory U (and from others as noted below), I offer a five-step process that is designed to be continually repeatable as one goes deeper and deeper with their community toward the goal of becoming a covenantal community. As a mnemonic, these complex steps are offered through focusing on five key words: Declare, Remember, Presence, Belong, and Resign.

De-Clare

Leadership begins by declaring a vague, value-laden vision for their community. For instance, the values of gemilut hasadim, heneni, tikkun olam, and torah lishma can provide inspiration and initial guidance. Yet, what these values look like in the practice of the


8

community and especially what a community that holds to these values will look like in the end cannot be known at the beginning with any certainty.

Thus, leadership cannot chart a clear path toward the end. To the contrary, leaders need to begin by clare-ing (clearing) from their minds and the minds of their followers that they actually know all the steps needed to realize the vision. They don’t. We must become humble in the face of the enormity and complexity of our vocation. We must keep our minds open and become constant learners. As one of our alumni, Eliav Bock, asserts in his piece “Effective Leadership: Building a Place Where Failure, Honesty, Fun, and Creativity Can Thrive,” failure (when we learn from it) is not something to avoid; rather we should celebrate it. Fostering covenantal community will require years of trying and learning from our efforts.

Understanding community building as an educative process (even if you are not in a school) allows us to seek guidance from what takes place in social constructivist education. In these educational environments, in any one class in a single hour the number of quick decisions a teacher must make is enormous. To take one simple example, consider the student trying to solve a problem at the blackboard but not arriving at the “correct” answer. How do I, as the teacher/leader, lead that student toward the “correct” answer while seeking to honor, understand, and further foster the particular thinking process that the student has been using? How do I encourage and guide other students in engaging with that student at the blackboard in ways that “correct” the learning while also generating good learning relationships? How do I make all this visible to the students (and my co-teachers/leaders) so they can reflect upon their own ways of learning and their being in an evolving community of learners? To play with the old adage: it’s not rocket science; teaching (and leading) is a lot harder.

Re-Member

Leadership needs to remember the past that has brought them to today. This gives them an

appreciation for those shoulders upon whom they stand, along with being able to see the web of connections that allows them to continue the work in the present. It also begins to offer leadership an initial appreciation of how the history flows into the future. We can call this “progressive systems-thinking,” being able to see oneself as part of a system that is continuously evolving, and to begin to understand how one can work from within the specific place one inhabits in the system.

Second, by understanding where we came from and where we want to go, we define ourselves as members in a group that has been acting through history. Alisdair MacIntyre is a scholar of ethical thinking and virtuous behavior. Following Aristotle, he asserts that ethics can only be understood within the cultural narratives that we have shared as a people. Thus, as Jews seeking to build community, the values that inspire our vision and the judgments about how to live these values everyday can only be rightly understood and discussed through the text-based stories that we have been telling ourselves for generations. (As American Jews, our narratives are also American in origin.) Thus, in seeking to build future community, we also re-affirm our commitment to being Jews and to being a link in the millennia-long journey of the Jewish people.

Pre-Sence

Leadership needs to learn how to be present—to listen deeply to those around themselves in order to understand where their followers are coming from and how they may all move forward in concert.

Leadership also needs to become fully aware of the world around them as it is moving to become something else. As Senge and Scharmer and their colleagues share in the book Presence:

In effect, presencing constitutes a third type of seeing, beyond seeing external reality and beyond even seeing from within the living whole. It is seeing from within the source from which the future whole is emerging, peering back at the


9

present from the future. In these moments, we can feel linked to our highest future possibility and destiny. In these moments, the source of intention switches from the past to a future that depends on us.

Covenantal leaders need to be able to sense this emerging future (and offer a coherent articulation of what is happening), where can be found the seeds of covenantal community that need to be nurtured.

In the concept of emergence lies a belief in the redemptive promise of the future. To quote from the transcendentalist Unitarian minister Theodore Parker, who inspired Martin Luther King, Jr.: “I do not pretend to understand the moral universe; the arc is a long one, my eye reaches but little ways; I cannot calculate the curve and complete the figure by the experience of sight; I can divine it by conscience. And from what I see I am sure it bends toward justice.”

We view the universe as desiring to come to that place of justice and covenantal community (as the space through which greater justice enters the world). Yet, it is not only that through community we can redeem the world. The ancient, promised, universal redemption of the Jewish people envisions a world rooted in covenantal community—a true and full being there for one another.

In this perspective beats a faith that the universe itself desires to move toward a transcendent and ultimate end, which we can barely glimpse. Yet, we try to hear its call, and in responding to its call by building the world we sense it desires, our glimpse can become a vibrant, unfolding vision. As another one of the alumni authors, Brad Horwitz, writes in his piece “The Leadership Difference in Heneni: Answering the Call, Present in the Moment, and Going Above and Beyond,”

heneni (here I am) requires leaders to be responsive to those they lead and to the transcendent purpose that seeks to emerge in the world. Opening one’s heart to both those with whom we journey and to the divine is the two-fold tension of heneni.

Be-Long

Leadership then needs to join the community with that emerging future, to feel that they belong to a future world that is struggling to emerge. Leaders are servants of the continual creation, not the creator. In this, leaders do need to be creative in designing ways to bring forth that emerging future. Yet, leaders need to recognize that they can’t birth anything they want into the world; their role is to be servants of the emerging future.

Stewarding the future demands of us that we creatively design innovative approaches that both respond to where people are at today and call forth from them a desire for community. While the ways of engaging may be new, the desire for community, while perhaps buried deep, is as old as the Jewish people. Leaders call it forth in people, not so much as a certain future but as a long-ing for some barely recalled paradise that once we had tasted.

Max Horkheimer was one of the founders of the Frankfurt School and critical theory, which sought to maintain hope in the possibility of an emancipated world grounded in practical reasoning as opposed to instrumental reasoning (what we are calling here “community,” as opposed to “I-it” relations). Horkheimer distinguished between two religious impulses: religions of certainty and religions of longing. In the former, we are certain of our knowledge of correct religious practice: the way we should all act in the future redeemed world. By contrast, in religions of longing, we are only guided by a longing for an almost forgotten past that is also a promised future, whose precise shape and arrival remain tantalizing uncertain.

Re-sign

Ultimately, leaders need to resign their leadership, through a continual process of tzimtzum (withdrawal). The authority of leaders over the direction of the emergent community is necessary for inspiration and guidance in the beginning and for a good while along the way. Yet, continued dominance and control prevents that which the leader promises. They need


10

to learn how to let go in order to let the desired future come into being, for at the heart of that desired future is the community leading itself—taking mutual responsibility for their relations with one another, with the transcendent, and with the world in which they live. Alumna Dori Frumin Kirshner echoes this in her piece “Tumbling Toward Leadership,” where she advocates that, “Community nurtures the leadership potential of each of its members, listening and learning as they evolve from inclusion followers to true inclusion leaders.”

With all leadership, the followers’ belief in the vision (and their continued willingness to participate in its realization) is intertwined with their belief in the leader’s ability to move them from where they are to where they desire to be. Thus, diminishing belief in the leader’s authority risks undercutting belief in the vision and the community’s ability to realize it.

As the postmodern philosopher Paul Ricoeur has insightfully noted, there is always a gap between leaders’ claims as to why others should follow them and their followers’ belief in that claim. This gap of belief is overcome symbolically by the presenting signs of success as the result of the leaders’ actions. Thus, covenantal leaders will offer signs that the community is becoming better at being there for one another, as well as signs that the community is taking on leadership together, both due to the leaders’ efforts. The paradoxical nature of covenantal leadership is that the signs of the leaders’ success (which affirm the leaders’ authority) are also signs of giving over leadership to the community.

Ron Heifetz and Marty Linsky offer a distinction between authority and leadership, in which true leaders undercut their authority in order to more successfully lead. They can do this, for example, by subverting expectations of who determines what the community will do. For instance, imagine the teacher suddenly asking the students to decide how the class should learn the material that day, or a rabbi turning to the congregants before a service and asking them to decide how the congregation should pray today. As

one can easily imagine, this can become disconcerting and frightening to those that follow, confounding their understanding of the roles of leader and follower, as they are called upon to step up themselves as co-leaders.

As covenantal leaders engage in the slow and often anguished (for both leader and followers) process of relinquishing their authority, they need to offer signs of their emerging, shared success toward creating actual covenantal community. Otherwise, faith in the leader, in the vision, and in the community flounders. These signs seek to buttress the followers’ belief in both the promise and in their own ability to take on leadership. These signs of covenantal leadership often signify the community’s empowerment and shared leadership. They are also signs that the community is exerting its will and is open toward receiving and building an uncertain but promised covenantal future.

LAST NOTE

Alumnus Dov Lerea, in his piece “Heart, Mind, and Being: Effective Educational Leadership through Trust, Emphatic Listening, Criticism, and the Making of Meaning,” pithily summarizes much of what was expressed above: “All learning environments require someone [the teacher leader] to nourish the cultural value of making a personal connection to the material learned, so that the ‘material’ becomes experiential, affecting the interplay between one’s heart, mind, and being.” As he notes, this echoes in our traditional liturgy where we are asked to “love the Eternal our God with all our heart, with all our soul, and with all our will.” Covenantal leaders as educational leaders aspire to move themselves and the whole community toward having increasingly open minds, open hearts, and open wills—mutually open to one another, to the world emerging around them, and to the call of the

transcendent.

Dr. Bill Robinson is dean of the William Davidson Graduate School of Jewish Education of The Jewish Theological Seminary.


11


12


13

Heart, Mind, and Being: Effective Educational Leadership through Trust, Emphatic Listening, Criticism, and the Making of MeaningBy Rabbi Dov Lerea

When asked to describe what “effective

leadership” means to me and what it “looks like” in my work, I become dissatisfied. I would like to reframe this question with its original formulation still pertinent: “What does

effective educating mean to me and what does it look like in my work?”

Now this is an interesting and challenging question, since my work involves such wonderfully different dimensions. As both the dean and mashgiach ruchani (spiritual mentor) at Yeshivat Chovevei Torah Rabbinical School, I hold multiple senior-level positions involving direct teaching and administrative responsibility: introducing, developing, and employing models of reflective practice with faculty; generating and engaging administrative processes for articulating handbook policies; establishing schedules and calendars; coordinating admissions protocols; reviewing pedagogic practices of staff; evaluating student growth and development; and helping ground the institution’s persona within orthodoxy.

I meet regularly with all students one-on-one as mashgiach, while as dean, I direct the academic review of students together with all collaborating faculty.

These various roles require that I cultivate working relationships with many people who play different roles in the school in a wide variety of positions. I have to constantly figure out, sometimes from minute to minute, which tone, language, framing, questions,

challenges, consequences, or rationale a given set of circumstances with particular players might require.

These relationships, with their multifarious layers of goals, participants, contexts, and characters, all require foundations of trust. First, effective leadership and effective educating require establishing, cultivating, and nourishing trust with students and colleagues, peers, and superiors. Without trust, little can be accomplished. Once working in a trustworthy relationship, minds can change, positions can be articulated, conflicts can be resolved, consequences can be enforced, circumstances can be framed for their meanings and halakhic implications, and common ground can be explored.

Establishing this trust, I find, requires good listening skills. Listening actively and carefully, reflecting my students’ thoughts and ideas back to them in ways that convey my appreciation and accurate understanding of their intentions, continuously shows itself to be a more powerful pedagogic skill than responding immediately with more words. This holds true working with colleagues as well. Active, empathic listening is an invaluable skill.

I also find that students and colleagues appreciate constructive criticism. Rabbinical students want to feel they are learning Torah and the textual, reflective, and pastoral skills necessary to become the most effective rabbis possible. Colleagues want to feel that we are collaborating on projects of importance, with vision and strategic intelligence. This, of course, requires the trust and empathic listening discussed earlier. People need to know that I have listened to them carefully, that I have understood their meanings


14

and concerns, that my response will demonstrate an appreciation of their perspective and experience in context.

In order to offer criticism, though, I find that I must demonstrate my ability to receive criticism, and even to name it before anyone else. This equalizes the playing field, so to speak. These moments invite students into a conversation in which they can feel safe to build upon what I might have said, or to modify my own remarks, or even to defend a position or a decision that I have already started to question myself. Such openings, then, affect the culture of the entire beit midrash. For example, when I offer a sicha and want us to consider looking inwards to develop a particular character trait as a matter of religious growth—such as bitachon (trust), or emunah (faith), or yosher (integrity)—nothing invites students to respond openly and personally like sharing reflections about moments in my life when I learned some lesson, fell short of expected behaviors, or felt a certain way and have now reconsidered my perspective.

In a professional school like Yeshivat Chovevei Torah, which combines a traditional beit midrash as a yeshiva with a graduate-level curriculum to train rabbis, an educational priority I value is the insistence upon thinking aloud carefully and slowly, in a space that is safe for people to make mistakes so that everyone engages in learning Torah for personal meaning. Meaning-making, therefore, is an additional leadership goal. I have come to believe that all learning environments require someone to nourish the cultural value of making a personal connection to the material learned, so that the “material” becomes experiential, affecting the interplay between one’s heart, mind, and being.

This brings me to my final point. “Heart, mind, and being” echoes the central motif of Keri’at Shema, “with all one’s mind (levavekha), with all one’s soul (life) and with all one’s m’odekha (‘potential,’ ‘means,’ or ‘resources’).” Ultimately, what this implies to me is that Jewish education must inspire to action. Educating to enable and empower students to think out loud, explore their beliefs, and build trusting

relationships in the context of learning Torah—in my students’ case, forming a rabbinic life—must ultimately move them to action. This includes many different kinds of action: commitments to Torah learning with enhanced regularity and depth, acquisition of skills for teaching, working with college students, delivering divrei Torah effectively, or officiating at weddings, funerals, and other life cycle events. It includes commitments to social action in a horrifically fragmented world filled with alienation, anger, and violence. It means volunteering in the neighborhood, working with shut-ins and elders, interfaith work, and habitat work in disaster zones. It includes writing and publishing as thought leaders, reaching people who require a source of faith, hope, optimism, coping, and meaning—all of the most important aspects of life that religious traditions can offer. If all of the skills and learning acquired in a rabbinical school do not inspire to action and remain merely theoretical, then the education has not served its most important purpose.

The Latin etymology of the word “educate” comes from educere, meaning “to lead outward.” I understand this to mean that all educators are leaders, tasked with the opportunities and responsibilities for figuring out how to inspire students and facilitate the processes through which they move outward into the worlds they come to occupy, bringing the skills they will need in their endeavors with them. The word chinukh (education) has a different sense; chanukat hamizbeakh implies usage, as in “breaking in the altar through using it in preparation for doing what one is supposed to do.” That conveys the sense of learning by doing, through experience.

These two aspects of educational work—leading outward into action and applying learned skills experientially—are conveyed by the two words we use to describe ourselves: “education” and “chinukh.” Together, they support the different domains of educational work in which I humbly am privileged to engage every day—the theoretical work of exploring texts or rituals or religious ideas, the active and daring work of learning through conversations in trusting relationships that allow criticism, and the experiential work of engaging others in heart, mind, and being.


15

Rabbi Dov Lerea is the dean and mashgiach ruchani (spiritual mentor) at Yeshivat Chovevei Torah in New York City. Rabbi Lerea received his doctorate in Jewish Education from the William Davidson Graduate School of Jewish Education of The Jewish Theological Seminary.


16

Tumbling Toward LeadershipBy Dori Frumin Kirshner

Leadership can feel like a heavy word. Images

of us and them may come to mind; we may think of Moses speaking to the people of Israel from the top of a mountain, a cantor chanting from the pulpit, or a school principal

convening a staff meeting. There is, however, an inherent danger in this notion of us and them, or simply an image of one person at the top as the leader with no community responsibility other than to blindly follow. It implies a lack of symbiosis and a stagnation of roles. Might true leadership be just the opposite? I was thinking about this recently in perhaps an atypical environment for leadership development, a children’s gym.

As a parent, one of my most gratifying experiences is watching my children cultivate a new interest. Everything is brand new to them, and it fascinates me to see what catches their attention and why they pursue certain avenues and activities and avoid others. My son, Elias, decided to take up tumbling, so we found ourselves in a children’s gym where he and his peers could move through various physical activities. The children were allowed the opportunity to experiment in a safe space to experience both failure and success.

Elias, at first afraid and unsure, observed his peers taking risks. He wasn’t alone. Though they worked as a group, as a community, each individual child’s experience was unique as he/she tested his/her own limits in a place where an adult was always present and where there were soft mats to break a fall. Elias realized that though he might feel like he was flying through space, he was ultimately tethered to something—and someone—who would provide the support he needed. I watched him morph from the

follower who was hesitant and scared to the leader whom others watched. He then was in a position to foster his peers’ strength and bravery.

The leadership and support around my son inspired his own risk-taking, and then he began inspiring others. The community provided a safe space for others to become leaders and became an ongoing source for these leaders to support and learn from each other. Isn’t that the essence of leadership?

I bring this lens to my role as executive director of Matan, a non-profit organization that aims to make Jewish education accessible to all learners regardless of ability. I may be seen as a “leader” in Jewish special education and inclusion. However, our mission and philosophy is to empower others to lead. We aim to avoid the us/them mentality that is especially detrimental when we talk about disabilities. Indeed, our community is only complete when we recognize the gifts of every individual. Matan’s contribution is to create and nurture a community of empowered and passionate leaders willing to tumble.

Our Leadership Institutes and other national training opportunities ensure that those on the front lines of Jewish education are armed with the knowledge, skill-sets and resources required for systemic change in Jewish education programs nationwide vis-à-vis inclusion. Most significantly, we are nurturing advocates and leaders. For far too long an “us/them” framework for Jewish inclusion efforts has rested on the shoulders of a few dedicated professionals and the parents of children with special needs. Through training and more importantly through building leadership while in a community, educators are able to think deeply about inclusion, gain confidence with their peers in how to make change, and translate that into success in their own institutions. All members of the Matan community can then see themselves as change agents, playing a crucial role in changing the


17

fabric of Jewish life when it comes to the inclusion of individuals with special needs.

Are these new leaders and advocates now experts in the field of Jewish inclusion, special needs, and disabilities? More so than before perhaps, but the Matan community remains a place to discuss challenges and successes with colleagues from around the country. In fact, participants in Matan’s trainings report that the most powerful aspect is being able to learn from each other—not just the inclusion experts or internationally renowned speakers with whom we work, but their own colleagues. Community nurtures the leadership potential of each of its members, listening, and learning as they evolve from inclusion followers to true inclusion leaders.

Through this balance of individual and community leadership, we empower educators to create a shared organizational vision for inclusion, to experiment and make it their own, and carve out their own path. We ask them to “tumble,” sometimes achieving success, other times wrestling with failure, but always having a soft mat, a tether to Matan, and their newfound network of colleagues from which to draw support.

Leadership is one’s ability to guide, inspire, and “move the needle,” while conveying both in deed and in word that it’s okay not to have all the answers. Leaders who are developed and nurtured through community are constantly nurtured, always making room for others to foster their skills and strengths, and thus are able to help make a difference on the most pressing issues and cause in our field. Care to tumble?

Dori Frumin Kirshner is the executive director of MATAN, which significantly impacts the field of Jewish special needs education by training current and future leaders in a multitude of settings. Dori holds an MA in Education from The Jewish Theological Seminary and a BA in Sociology and Judaic Studies from Emory University.


18

Core LeadershipBy Rabbi Yossi Kastan

We often hear about the need to develop Jewish

leaders. I have, however, never heard of a desire to cultivate future Jewish managers or even seen an advertisement for such a position. Of course, we all know the inherent differences

between management and leadership. We’ve read the literature and seen the TED Talks. In fact, they have become a cliché to describe different types of executives and their exclusive functions. Still, when it comes to our positions as heads of schools and CEOs of communal organizations, why do so many of us often feel that we are “managing” rather than “leading?”

From HR matters to financial issues, we face hundreds of decisions per week, day, and hour. To keep our organizations moving, we often make snap judgments that we believe are the best in the moment. As good managers, we even take the time to think through the organizational, political, and financial implications before each resolution.

But, even when we become incredibly efficient decision makers, how many of us consider the implication to our Jewish heart and soul before making a choice? If we are being completely honest, do we go home at night feeling like the organization is running us? (From a superficial standpoint, if your preplanned schedule and list of priorities are consistently hijacked by the crisis-du-jour, and if lunch and exercise become a luxury, then your organization might be running you.)

I would suggest that the issues that weigh most heavily on us are those that really challenge the integrity of the institution: a major donor believes a program should be designed contrary to best practices; a parent wants an exception made;

a staff member operates in ways that compromise the mission of the organization. They weigh on us because as Jewish leaders, we consider the missions of our institutions our personal missions. When we feel compelled to make decisions that compromise our beliefs, we don’t simply see these as institutional challenges, but as personal indictments. We try to “manage” political or financial pressures, and appease those who demand. Appeasing, however, becomes a slippery slope where we lose our own direction. This process allows others’ needs, wants, and behaviors to hijack our own sense of self and remind us that our organizations are running us.

CORE LEADERSHIP EXERCISE

Many have said that the best way to navigate the Jewish field is to have a shrewd mind and thick skin in the office and to be your true self when you get home. But this approach asks us to be managers by day and leaders by night. Our organizations and communities need us to lead. Now. Always. Leadership comes to life when we come alive throughout the process.

Fitness trainers remind us that to get physically stronger, we must strengthen our core. A strong, stable core helps us produce and transfer force through the rest of our bodies and all its dynamic movements. Let’s use core exercise as a metaphor for our work. Every challenge, every demand, every issue can help us get stronger. But if we define strength as a shrewd mind and thick skin, then we are missing a tremendous opportunity to strengthen our “core,” to reflect on who we are inside, to consider what we stand for, and to emerge as a more stable values-based leader.

Core Leadership Exercise, designed to move us from manager roles, has three distinct phases: Reflecting, Validating, Courage-ing. (I know that “courage-ing” is not a word. For our purposes, let’s pretend.)


19

Reflecting: This first phase helps us understand the real issue hiding below the surface. Consider:

What triggers bring me to this space?

What targets are these triggers hitting inside of me?

Validating: Calibrate your own self within the stress at hand by asking:

When these triggers come up, I find myself operating from a place of _____.

Ideally, I want to operate from a place of _____.

The response to number one reveals the place from which you feel externally compelled to operate. In considering number two, you can understand what you want to bring to your role. If you feel forced to operate from a very different place, you are experiencing a spiritual form of identity theft.

Courage-ing is the act of becoming fully transparent, openly and clearly advertising your belief systems. How many people in your organization and community know what you stand for (beyond the initial interview/search committee)? How many constituents have repeatedly heard your values? Dan Rockwell of Leadership Freak writes: “You become what you repeat. Repetition is consistency. Consistency is predictability. Predictability is reliability. Reliability creates opportunity.”

FROM CORE EXERCISE TO LEADERSHIP PRESENCE

Transparency involves so much more than listing the steps in our decision-making process. Transparency, in its purest form, is exposing our souls to the communities that have entrusted us with their mission. (Hence, the connection to courage-ing!) Transparency is the act of allowing others to see who we are on the inside and get a deep understanding of what we stand for. Doing so

will allow us to more comfortably make decisions within that belief system, to hold ourselves (and have others hold us) accountable to those values, and to inspire and rally our teams around those core beliefs. Our communities don’t expect everyone to agree with every decision we make, but they would hope that we are acting consistently with our consistently articulated beliefs.

When this seems really intimidating, let’s remember: We have not been hired simply for a job. We are the leaders and keepers of a mission. If our boards and search committees have done their due diligence, then they have most likely found someone whose personal values are the best match for the institution and community. They have appointed someone to bring the leadership presence the community deeply needs to thrive. It is urgent that we make decisions consistent with the leader they all met going in.

If we can become genuinely transparent, we can create our unique leadership presence. This is a spiritual presence, one where people know our beliefs and values and recognize that they reflect those of our institutions. This allows stakeholders to hold each other accountable to values that move the entire organization forward. We can then play a role to inspire and galvanize around the unique spiritual energy that emanates from the “core” of the Jewish leader. When achieved, this is a highly spiritual experience, one that transcends our physical presence. After all, we can’t always be in the room. Hopefully, we are out, finally grabbing that well-deserved lunch.

Rabbi Yossi Kastan is head of school at Brauser Maimonides Academy in Hollywood, Florida. He is an alumnus of the Day School Leadership Training Institute (DSLTI) of the William Davidson Graduate School of Jewish Education of The Jewish Theological Seminary.


20

Why I Am Betting on Distributive LeadershipBy Rina Zerykier

As I write this, it’s Erev Sukkot and my kids are

hanging flowers and homemade crafts in the sukkah without me. Instead, I’m sitting at my desk, working. The classic school leadership complaint is about the 24/6 workload, and

the consistent refrain is, “Such is the life of a school leader.”

Here’s the classic model: We work to the bone. Only do what we can. Fear the new. Don’t take on new initiatives or special programs. We get stuck in the day-to-day management—hiring, interviewing, observing, and planning programs.

As the founding principal of a new and rapidly growing high school, I have been offered sage advice by many. “You need an assistant principal!” they counseled. Knowing that I did need something, I spent time exploring different leadership models. If I wanted to eat, sleep, and perhaps see my husband and kids—getting the new model right was critical.

As Jewish educators, we are inspired to change the world. While our schools are not driven by shareholder profits, we have a lot to learn from corporate management and the business world.

I noticed that many schools have associate or assistant principal (AP) positions, but feared that hiring an AP was both expensive and merely a “Band-Aid” for the problem. The responsibilities were too big for one or even two people to manage effectively. I needed to get out of the thicket defining day-to-day management and into fresh air to plan the big-picture strategic goals for our school. I needed to lead by letting go. I needed to lead through effective collaboration. I made a list of all the big projects that I was coordinating. From instructional leadership

and professional development, curriculum mapping and design, teacher accountability and management, teacher recruitment and support, school systems and schedules, student activities and event planning, technology advancement, cultivating school culture, admissions and recruitment, building design, budget planning, and more—it’s no wonder I wasn’t getting any sleep!

I needed a team, but as a start-up high school, I could hardly justify an expensive administrative team. I needed to collaborate. I had to empower others to take ownership and leadership. This fit perfectly within our school mission of empowering young women to become their best selves. What better way to model that than by empowering our new faculty to lead? I mapped our future leadership team. Every teacher who was hired was tapped for their talent and skill set. I consistently asked our star teachers, “In a perfect world, what would be your dream job?” It’s amazing what they answered. Our math teacher was tapped to handle systems, scheduling, teacher management, and human resources. An old colleague and thought partner on curriculum development took on professional development and instructional leadership. Our new engineering teacher was offered a position in Ed Tech leadership.

We are creating an incredibly flat and collaborative leadership model. We are bringing different people together who are already on our team to create something special, something fresh, and a system that might someday allow me to also see my family and get some rest! This is still new. It’s October. Yet, here’s why I’m excited about this model of distribution and collaborative leadership:

Empowered people are invested. Research shows that opportunity and positive work culture, especially with millennials, significantly influence job satisfaction and commitment.


21

True collaboration. Genuine teamwork involves multiple and diverse talents working together toward a shared goal. If everyone worked together on something they were passionate about—how incredible would that be? One plus one can be exponentially more than two (i.e., this new whole is greater than the sum of its parts).

Better bang for your buck. This model allows schools to afford high-quality teachers and specialists. We are essentially distributing administrative roles and salaries, enabling our small, start-up high school to hire more full-time invested faculty and staff.

An investment for the future. The more people who understand the big picture and school culture and can take on leadership roles, the stronger our foundation will be for future growth. There may come a time when some of these leaders will need to take on their leadership roles full-time. In that case, our school will be ready for their growth, and they will have been trained, in-house, for these positions.

Growth mindset culture. With a leadership team that is invested in the positive culture and future of the school, there are multiple people who can mentor, support, and create a warm academic environment. It is my hope that new teachers will similarly seek opportunities for new projects and growth.

This system is far from simple and comes laden with challenges. Here are some that we are working to overcome:

1. Too many cooks. With everyone eager to participate, it was very easy to have many collaborators and no leaders. I quickly learned that all projects need one person to own, lead, and hold accountability.

2. Letting go is hard. I so often hear the little voice in the back of my head that tells me that if I just do it myself, I can do it faster and better. It’s not true. There are only so many hours in the day. The “I can do it better” model leads to martyrdom and details slipping through the cracks. As Sheryl Sandberg’s refrain goes, “Done is better than perfect!” There is no better feeling than when

someone else runs a spectacular project, and, with time, proper coaching, and management, they often surpass even my expectations!

3. Teachers are busy with teaching and are not always available for administrative responsibilities. It is hard to get around this other than with advance planning, patience, and backup plans. Yet I have found that the adage of asking “busy people to do more things” is often true, and if they are inspired to perform their new tasks, they begin to find balancing priorities plausible.

4. Redesigning the communication tree. Parents feel connected to me personally and see me as the face of the school. They quickly circumvent our systems and reach out directly to me. I am torn between wanting to quickly reassure and connect with parents and protecting my time and the system. This is ultimately part of my work to let go when and where I can.

I often look back and wonder if the assistant principal model might have been much simpler to manage. But then I stop, reflect, and realize that the skill-based, role-defined model is the best investment for our school’s long-term growth and staff health. This is also the first Hol Hamoed in three years that I will spend with my kids.

Mrs. Rina Zerykier is the founding high school principal of Shulamith School for Girls in Cedarhurst, New York. She is a graduate of the Day School Leadership Training Institute (DSLTI) at the William Davidson Graduate School of Jewish Education of The Jewish Theological Seminary.


22

Effective Leadership: Building a Place Where Failure, Honesty, Fun, and Creativity Can ThriveBy Rabbi Eliav Bock

Some say leaders are made. Others believe that leaders

are born. I believe that leaders are nurtured and developed from a young age in spaces where failure, honesty, fun, and creativity can thrive.

When I look back on my childhood, my most formative experiences were during my years in the Boy Scouts and attending Boy Scout camp from age 12–14. During this time I learned how to make emergency shelters using only wood and bark, swam a mile for the first time, and spent a night sleeping under the stars as part of the Order of the Arrow ordeal ceremony. While I was never going to become the next Michael Phelps or the next mountain man, these experiences taught me the importance of taking initiative, setting goals, and overcoming fears.

In 2009 I had the opportunity to start a summer camp for Jewish children (while still completing my MA at The Davidson School), one that would inspire young people to become the next generation of leaders. I turned to the lessons I learned as a Boy Scout to craft the vision for what is now Camp Ramah in the Rockies. I hoped to create a place young people could come and experience many of the values present in the Boy Scouts combined with so many of the Jewish core values I had learned over the years at Camp Ramah and JTS.

But there was a key element that might not have been present as much in the Boy Scouts or even in more formal academic settings that I wanted to make central to a new community inspiring leaders for the 21st century. And that element was failure. Yes, I

wanted to make sure that everyone from campers to counselors to the highest level of staff members knew how to fail and that failure was usually the first step to succeeding.

And this is why we decided to focus our efforts on creating an outdoor adventure camp. Campers and staff who come to Ramah in the Rockies know that it is impossible to get it right 100 percent of the time, or even 95 percent. If we are getting straight As then we are not pushing ourselves hard enough. We strive for excellence, but know that “good enough” is sometimes best.

When our campers return from a climbing trip, they are scarred with bruises from their slips on the rock slab (only to be caught by the safety ropes/harnesses). Bikers return from attempting ever more challenging trails, knowing that at some point they will fall, scrape themselves, and get back on to try again. Bandages, cuts, and bruises are worn with pride. Even in our non-physical programming, be it our meals or evening activities, we push our staff to try new ideas, knowing that some will work wonderfully and others will fall flat.

So what does it take to create such an environment, assuming that not everyone has access to magnificent mountains and inspiring natural surroundings?

Here are four recommendations that I suggest are replicable in almost any environment:

1. Create a relatively flat organizational structure where every person is mission-aligned. Yes, you need a director, and yes, you need someone to wash dishes or to take out the trash, but make sure that every person has the


23

opportunity to create change and feel that they have a voice in the organization. If an employee who has been there for two weeks wants to try something new, then let her. What is the worst that can happen? Someone tries something new that advances the mission in a way you did not expect? Or perhaps someone has even more dedication to the organization because she was given the chance to take initiative.

2. Create a place where complaining is not allowed. At Ramah in the Rockies, any senior staff member will listen to a complaint once, but the next time the same person/people come with a similar complaint the answer is always: “What do you want to do to fix it?” Assuming the answer is mission-aligned, then the next line is, “Please go make it happen.”

3. Create a place where failure is celebrated and be open about failures. No one likes to mess up, but we all need to make mistakes. I have said some regrettable things to staff and parents over the years. I have created some abysmal programs (as well as some pretty awesome ones). And I am open with my staff about these. When a staff member makes a mistake, I often ask them what they learned from it and what they might do differently next time. End of story. No need to harp on it; usually we are our own worst critics

4. Have fun. Many camp people of my generation grew up singing songs by the Indigo Girls around the campfire. A quote by Indigo Girls member Emily Saliers that still rings true is: “You have to laugh at yourself, because you’d cry your eyes out if you didn’t.” A community that creates impactful leaders should be imbued with a sense of fun and purpose where we laugh with each other and only we alone laugh at ourselves.

Camp is often seen as a microcosm for the real world. We all want our children, our teachers, and our leaders to aspire to be even more effective and to create an even better community. To constantly create the environment that allows children, teens, and young adults become effective leaders requires these places where we can fail, be honest, be creative, and have fun.

Rabbi Eliav Bock is the director of Camp Ramah in the Rockies. Eliav received his rabbinical ordination from The Rabbinical School and his MA in Jewish Education from the William Davidson Graduate School of Jewish Education of The Jewish Theological Seminary.


24

The Icing on the Cake of Effective Leadership: Passion and JoyBy Jill Madsen, EdD

Monday morning, I arrive in the office by 7:00 a.m.

By 9:00 a.m. I pause to reflect. In just two hours I have:

Reviewed the calendar of upcoming Facebook posts in an effort to boost social media

presence;

Reached out to two potential corporate sponsors about our upcoming Jewish Food Festival;

Printed pledge cards for a special campaign we are launching;

Reconciled the past week’s bank account to monitor cash flow;

Emailed various committee and board members regarding new policy connected to security;

Responded to a couple of community event invitations; and

Replied to 47 emails.

Wow. Time to go home now?

Nope. Not yet. My day as the CEO of the Jewish Federation of Durham Chapel Hill is just beginning.

You might read this laundry list of tasks and think effective leadership simply means effective management and the juggling of multiple responsibilities and checking off these to-dos. If you asked me 20 years ago I would have agreed. I would have focused on the specific traits or skills an effective leader needs to possess: responsibility, flexibility, patience, self-confidence, and determination, someone who communicates well, solves problems, serves as a role model, inspires and motivates others around them, and creates a shared vision and pathway for implementation.

All this I still believe to be true, and as I’ve worked in various leadership capacities, I’ve been fine-tuning these skills within myself, committed to being the best leader I could be. Recently though, after transitioning into my current role, my perspective changed. I realized my definition of an effective leader was missing the icing on the cake.

After spending my whole life in Minneapolis, my partner and I decided we were done with winter and ready for a change. Then the big question came, “What do I want to do?” Based on my previous work experience and educational background, I knew I could explore many different paths. I quickly came to the realization that I would not move across the country unless it was for something that would bring me joy and tap into my professional passions.

And so, in planning for the future, I searched my past. When we made the decision to move, I was working at a job and place I loved, the Sabes Jewish Community Center in Minneapolis. I had spent my whole life at that JCC. I attended preschool and camp and learned


25

to swim there as a child. During high school, I spent Wednesday nights there with BBYO. I was a camp counselor and then teacher in their Early Childhood Center during college. After 10 years in the work force and finishing my doctoral degree, I found myself back there.

There was not a day that went by that I was not using all of the skills and traits of an effective leader listed above. And there was not a day that didn’t have ups and downs. In reflection, I realized that I had had icing each day, as the passion and joy I had for the work motivated me through all obstacles. Without this ingredient, I am certain I would not have stayed as long as I did nor would I have been as effective as I know I was. I realized a core focus of my job search would need to be on finding a new place and purpose that I cared about in this manner. Luckily I found this in Durham Chapel Hill.

Effective leaders do need a number of skills and traits

to find success in their work. To be effective fully, the added element of passion and joy for the work is what makes a leader really soar. It serves as the hidden motivator when budgets are tight and days are long. The guiding light when projects don’t go the way you had hoped. It fuels your fire when the number of items on your to-do list outnumbers the hours in a day.

It’s 9:01 a.m. on Monday, and with the icing of passion and joy on my effective leadership cake, I plunge forward with a smile on my face, hoping to connect, engage, make change, and inspire.

Jill Madsen is the chief executive officer of the Jewish Federation of Durham and Chapel Hill. Jill is an alumna of the Jewish Experiential Leadership Institute (JELI), a partnership program of the William Davidson Graduate School of Jewish Education of The Jewish Theological Seminary and the Jewish Community Center Association.


26

The Leadership Difference in Heneni: Answering the Call, Present in the Moment, and Going Above and BeyondBy Rabbi Brad Horwitz

When God calls out to Abraham during

the akeidah, Abraham says “Heneni.” When God calls to Moses at the burning bush, Moses says “Heneni.” In fact when God calls out to several of our Jewish ancestors and

prophets, the first and immediate response is often “Heneni” (Here I am). These past leaders of the Jewish people did not have technological aids like email, phone, text, and fax to communicate, but yet, when God called, they responded fully in a timely and instantaneous way, willing to listen and serve.

To me the concept of Heneni is critical to effective leadership. The first step is simply answering the call for assistance. But to me Heneni means much more; it is about being present in the moment, fully dedicating oneself to the person or matter at hand, with singular focus and zero distraction. When we are truly present for other people, they feel valued and strong relationships are formed. We develop partners in our holy work to serve the Jewish community.

One aspect of this Heneni concept that often gets overlooked is the notion of responding to other people in a timely manner. I would like to believe that some of my success as a leader over the past 10 years as the director of Jewish Engagement and Adult Programs at the St. Louis Jewish Community Center is a reflection of timely follow-through with my colleagues, students, participants, and community. As a leader, I try to respond to people’s needs, questions,

and thoughts in a way that makes them feel like they are created b’tzelem elohim (in God’s image), with thoughtful, substantial responses so it’s clear I’m not rushing the encounter with quick answers that may suggest I am not fully engaged.

Yes, this means giving other people undivided attention when in their physical presence during meetings, at programs and events, in the classroom, or sitting in my office. However, no less important is what we do as leaders when people are not physically in our midst. This means returning phone calls and emails within 24 hours (Shabbat and holidays excluded, of course; we are commanded to and need our rest), even if we don’t have the answer yet to someone’s question or a solution to their problem. It means adhering to deadlines in our work and being proactively transparent if we struggle to meet them. Most importantly it means exceeding people’s expectations by delivering on promises and work early, whenever possible.

Timeliness in communication is not something that gets a lot of attention because it may be overstating the obvious. Yet we all know and experience firsthand that many people are not good at follow through and some may take days or weeks to respond to emails or phone messages. When people are slow to respond or forget to respond, it is hard to trust and depend on these folks. As leaders, if we want to develop relationships and rapport with our community so that they rally around our visions and missions, it is critical that we become experts at timely, thoughtful, and substantive communication and follow through.


27

I often reflect on the fact that current technology enhances our ability to communicate with people near and far, but these tools do not guarantee anything. It is our responsibility as Jewish educators and leaders to take advantage of these tools—but at the same time, not be distracted by them, hiding behind our phones, tablets, and laptops. Whether it be God or anyone else, the next time someone calls, texts, or sends an email, let us all say, “Heneni,” and let us respond in a timely way that thoroughly communicates our commitment to the deeper meaning of also being fully present.

Rabbi Brad Horwitz is director of Jewish Engagement and Adult Programs at the St. Louis JCC. He received his rabbinic ordination from The Rabbinical School and MA in Jewish Education from the William Davidson Graduate School of Jewish Education of The Jewish Theological Seminary. He is also an alumnus of the Day School Leadership Training Institute (DSLTI) at The Davidson School.


28

Leadership, Presence, and AuthenticityBy Dr. Susie Tanchel

Toward the end of Sefer Bereishit, after many years

of hiding his real identity and overcome by emotion, Joseph finally outs himself. At this critical moment, he is finally able to be both fully present and to embody his authentic

self. It is a deeply personal and very powerful moment. Authenticity in our leadership roles is personal. It depends on knowing our authentic self and being honest and reflective. And if we are honest in our professional capacity, who we are cannot be separated from what we are seeking to accomplish.

There are naturally many occasions when my professional role and personal self are completely aligned: giving a speech, teaching a class, leading a session for our teachers, and sitting at a board meeting, to name a few. What these areas have in common is that I’m at ease, confident, and knowledgeable. I know whether I want to inspire or to inform others, and I have a clear sense of the goals of the conversation.

Despite this truth, being an authentic head is not always the same as being authentically myself. Given the seemingly unending demands for a head of school’s attention, I cannot always be present in the way I want to be. Sometimes I cannot delve into a matter the way I would like to or express the empathy I know is required or even show up at an event because I choose to be present elsewhere. Making the best possible choices necessitates that I know my authentic self and am honest about the needs of my organization. I know being present is key for a leader, and I have to accept that I can’t always do it as I wish I could. Thus self-acceptance of my limitations and forgiveness for where I fall short is critically

important, as is accepting that others will not always be pleased with me.

Moreover, if as leaders we are serving our mission and our various constituencies, then authenticity and presence are in service of these higher goals. Therefore, ironically, authenticity and presence are frequently not about me, they are about inspiration and modeling. I must be asking myself, “What effect do I want my presence to have? Do your people trust what they see and feel about me?” My actions must be consistent over time, so that I can build trust.

Recently one of our teachers passed away. She was one of the lights of our school. The moment was profoundly sad for the school and for me personally because I had a long history with her family. I wanted to be present for my community in their sorrow and authentic to my own grief. I had to strike the right balance: showing enough emotion both to be authentic and to give others permission to show their grief, but without overwhelming them or making it about me. This moment was not about me.

A couple of years ago at our annual fundraiser, being the shy person I am, I yearned to choose a wall I could lean on, quietly watching others chatting away. But as the head of school, that was not an option. This moment was not about me. Not being authentic is not the same as being false or inauthentic. It simply means that there are many occasions where responsibility trumps authenticity.

Moreover, sometimes being authentic, saying or doing what is true for me, would undermine my endpoint. Rather, I must ask, “Who is the person I want the others to experience me as?” I must remember that those I am speaking with will likely remember how I made them feel more than the specific words I


29

share. Since I believe that empathy and intention are critical to presence, I need to ask: “Can I go into more conversations seeking to understand? Can I start from a stance of learning and patience even with the demanding teacher who seeks my attention frequently?”

It’s hard work to recognize that responsibility to others and to my position may trump full authenticity. Like Joseph, I must find the balance and the appropriate moment to be revealing. Authenticity and presence are about how I show up as a leader, but in the final analysis it is not about me. Leadership presence is about how others will feel. This means I need to grapple with my own stumbling blocks and recognize that sharing my authentic self must be tempered with my responsibility to be the head of school my community needs me to be. It’s an ongoing process of self-discovery, growth, and reflection.

Dr. Susie Tanchel is the head of school at JCDS, Boston’s Jewish Community Day School. She is an alumna of the Day School Leadership Training Institute (DSLTI) of the William Davidson Graduate School of Jewish Education of The Jewish Theological Seminary.


30

The Three Ls of Torah Inspired LeadershipBy Lianne Heller

Any leader working to create a unified vision for

their organization, one that follows a clear mission and works collaboratively with a single-minded team to achieve success, faces many challenges. There are books, YouTube

videos, courses, professional coaches, and a multitude of people clamoring to tell leaders how best to achieve this feat. And yet, so many fail. However, when leaders get it right, the rewards go far beyond the tangible results. The satisfaction of a team working in sync, producing a high-quality product by collaboration, is sublime.

I have had a number of leadership roles in my professional life but I have only been strategic and intentional about my leadership practices in the past several years. I owe this important shift to the Jewish Early Childhood Education Leadership Institute, which taught me to tap into my Torah knowledge to inform my leadership style.

Using a “leading from a Jewish or ‘Torah Inspired’ perspective” approach, I have experienced profound effects of successful, collaborative leadership. Successes have been big, such as shifting the culture and attitude of our school toward effective communication, and they have involved such equally essential but small issues as asking a maintenance worker to mop the classroom floors.


31

Supporting the many tactics leaders might employ, I find three foundational shorashim (roots) that will result in highly effective leadership. Each one of them is based on a Jewish principle. I call them the three Ls of leadership: listen, learn, and love.

LISTEN

In the prayer Shema Yisra’el, we are commanded to hear, listen, obey, pay attention, heed, and understand—all by that single word, Shema. According to our sources, true listening encompasses all of these behaviors. I have learned that I listen best when I stop the clamor in my own head, silence my self-talk and preconceived notions, and suspend my own inclinations. I can be attuned to another’s words and actions, and note nuance and subtlety with clarity.

This true, active, engaged listening enables one to focus deeply on the speaker so that all the signals communicated, both with and without intention, can be processed. Listening does not only happen through the ears. A multisensory experience, it is the process of collecting, analyzing, and processing data to be used to formulate new relationships, connections, and ideas. It is the beginning of learning.

LEARN

Learning must be instinctual and constant. Learning stems from curiosity, which leads to the relentless search for answers. In order to learn, one must be willing to take risks, ask questions, and sometimes show one’s ignorance. Arrogance and pride do not have a place in true learning, or in leadership for that matter. In Pirkei Avot, we learn: “Who is wise? He who learns from all people.” Leaders learn from the maintenance worker (who, it turns out, thought he was saving money by using an old and broken mop), teachers, bookkeepers, accountants, children—everyone. For leaders to learn, they need to suspend judgment, find the beauty and value in other people, practice engaged listening, and learn from them.

LOVE

Judaism espouses Betzelem Elokim; people are made in God’s image. We are taught to love God, and to love our fellow person. When we have listened acutely to someone, we are often given the gift of finding that spark of perfection, of holiness in him or her. Hold that invaluable treasure close, and in the most difficult of times, take it out and gaze upon it with love and admiration. When we love our coworkers, employees, and teams, we create a safe environment in which risk-taking, creative thinking, and motivation to excel become the mainstay of our organization.

With the daily practice of all three Ls, one’s effective leadership will deepen exponentially, creating an environment of true collaboration in which each individual will have the opportunity to shine to their fullest potential.

As the leader of a growing special educational program offering services to a vulnerable population in the Jewish community of the Greater Washington DC area, the three Ls have been critical to mobilizing and motivating my team. We provide high-quality programs that benefit our K–12 students with diverse learning styles and our community’s general-education children, who are afforded the opportunity to learn the importance of including others and treating all with respect and dignity. Our vital missions can only be accomplished by a collaborative team of professionals whose effectiveness is fostered and nurtured by the daily practice of the three Ls of leadership, based upon Jewish-inspired roots to listen, learn, and love.

Lianne Heller is the director of Sulam, a special education Jewish day school for the inclusion of Jewish students with a wide range of learning styles. Lianne is a graduate of the Jewish Early Childhood Education Leadership Institute, a program run in partnership by the William Davidson Graduate School of Jewish Education of The Jewish Theological Seminary and the Hebrew Union College–Jewish Institute of Religion.


32

Modes of Leadership: Actions, Perceptions, and CalculationsBy Dr. Walter Herzberg

Styles of leadership are varied and subtle, offering

different paradigms for our consideration. Careful readings of familiar biblical texts offer insights about leadership choice and invite us to consider the intentions of key players.

Genesis 37 provides a rich opportunity for reflecting on these issues. Jacob favors his son Joseph and gives him a special garment, setting Joseph apart from his brothers. To exacerbate matters, Joseph shares his dreams of grandeur that indicate that his brothers, and father and mother, will bow down to him one day. Soon thereafter, Jacob sends Joseph to check on the well-being of his brothers. When the brothers see Joseph approaching from a distance, they conspire to kill him, saying: “Let us slay him, and cast him into one of the pits, and we will say: An evil beast has devoured him; and [then] we shall see what will become of his dreams” (Gen. 37:20).

Then, in a mode of leadership that could be interpreted from many different angles, brother Reuven attempts to save Joseph:

Genesis 21: “And Reuven heard it, and [tried] to deliver him out of their hand; and he said1: ‘We shall not take his life.’”

Genesis 22: “And Reuven said to them: ‘Don’t you shed blood; throw him into this pit that is in

the wilderness, but lay no hand upon him’—that he might deliver him out of their hand, to restore him to his father.”

Notice: Reuven is speaking in both verses 21 and 22 with no intervening response on the part of his brothers. Nevertheless, the Torah repeats the introductory statement vayomer (he said) as he continues speaking.2 Let us explore in more depth.

IDENTIFYING THE TEXTUAL PROBLEM(S)

We have just noticed a common literary phenomenon in the Torah I call the vayomer/vayomer phenomenon3 where a character continues speaking while an additional and seemingly superfluous vayomer is inserted.4 Noticing the phenomenon is the first step. Understanding why it occurs is the next and more challenging issue. Both traditional Jewish commentators and contemporary translators/commentators are aware of this phenomenon, but do not agree about its function.5 We must also pay attention to the following ancillary textual questions that play an important role in the commentators’ various interpretations. Their attention to and interpretation of these textual details and anomalies form the bases of their interpretations:

1. In verse 21, attention to grammar piques our interest: Reuven speaks using the first person plural “we,” in “We shall not take his life,” while

1 All boldface formatting in quotations has been added by writer for emphasis.2 The NJPS translation actually addresses the problem by translating the second vayomer, not as “Reuven said,” but rather, “Reuven went on.”3 The term “iterated quotation formula” is used at times in academic literature.4 Other examples of the phenomenon: Gen. 15:1–5; Gen. 16: 9–11; Exod. 1:15–16; Num. 32:1–5.5 Among them, Ibn Ezra (12th century), Radak (12th/13th centuries), Abarbanel (15th/16th centuries), Alshikh (16th century), Or Hahayyim (18th century), Malbim (19th century), U. Cassuto (20th century), Nechama Leibowitz (20th century), Robert Alter (contemporary).


33

using the second person plural “you” in “Don’t you shed blood” in verse 22.

2. The first occurrence of vayomer (verse 22) stands alone with no object, simply “He said.” The second occurrence is followed by the indirect object: “Reuven said to them.”6

Based on these examples, what leadership models are we learning from Reuven and what are the greatest takeaways in understanding leadership in Jewish education?

MODELS OF LEADERSHIP: SOLUTIONS TO THE TEXTUAL PROBLEM(S) THROUGH THE EYES OF COMMENTATORS

1. Netziv’s Reuven

Ha’amek Davar (Naftali Tzvi Yehudah Berlin, The Netziv, 1817–1893, Volozhin, Belarus) proposes the following scenario7 based on his attention to the textual details:

The verse [21] does not state “he said to them” as it does in the following verse—because at first Reuven spoke in a very loud voice, speaking to himself [as if to say], “There is absolutely no way we are going to take his life.”

And once the brothers realized they could not oppose Reuven’s feelings and opinion, he continued to speak to them softly [this time], and explained to them why he reacted so strongly.

For the Netziv, the vayomer/vayomer phenomenon indicates that a silent pause occurred between the two statements of Reuven. After Reuven’s forcefully spoken opposition (“We shall not take his life”) to the idea of killing Joseph, he waited for his words to take effect. “And once the brothers realized” they could not oppose Reuven, he calmly explained the rationale for his feelings.

2. Malbim’s Reuven

The Malbim (Meir Leibush ben Yehiel Michel Weiser, 1809–1879, Russia) explicitly articulates our question8: “The text states ‘he said / he said to them’; why two times?” Like the Netziv, Malbim interprets the silence of the text, yet his understanding of the silence is different from the Netziv’s. For him it‘s the brothers’ lack of response to Reuven’s repeated attempts to convince them not to harm Joseph:

At first Reuven wanted to save Joseph completely, in a manner that the brothers would not even touch Joseph. That’s what vayatzileihu (he saved him) means—that he tried to save him completely.

But when the brothers did not listen, he said, “Let us not take his life”—at the very least don’t kill him; some other punishment would be sufficient.

But when they did not listen to this either, he said to them, at the very least “Don’t spill blood” because you can kill him indirectly by throwing him into this pit where he’ll die of hunger. . . . The Torah, however, lets us know that Reuven’s true intent was to “save him from their hands.”

Although both the Netziv and the Malbim interpret the silent space between the two occurrences of “he said,” the nature of that space is very different. For the Netziv, the silence represents Reuven calmly waiting for his strongly worded warning to take effect. For the Malbim it represents the brothers ignoring Reuven’s attempts to convince them to allow Joseph to remain unharmed.

Implications of These Perspectives

Proactive or Reactive Leadership

Based on these interpretations, different models of leadership emerge. The Netziv’s Reuven is portrayed as a strong leader that doesn’t tolerate dissent while

6 In other words the verses are not parallel: verse 22 states that Reuven spoke “to them,” while verse 21 simply states that “he spoke,” omitting “to them.” Note also that verse 21 mentions that “he spoke,” while verse 21 states “Reuven spoke.”7 He often provides interpretations by filling in details that, in a sense, serve as stage directions. See his comment on Exod. 32:19, second entry.8 Malbim prefaces his comments with a list of questions, thereby following in the footsteps of Abarbanel whom the Malbim considered among the greatest of the commentators.


34

insisting that the brothers not kill Joseph. The Malbim’s Reuven, on the other hand, is portrayed as weak, diminishing his demand each time the brothers do not respond. The Netziv’s Reuven is proactive; the Malbim’s Reuven is reactive. But that’s only at first glance.

Compromising/Negotiating

Upon a more deliberate examination, the Malbim’s Reuven appears to be the consummate diplomat, not despairing or resigning himself to failure, but rather persevering by continuing to negotiate. He also proposes a compromise solution: yes, throw Joseph in the pit, but don’t lay a hand upon him yourselves.

What is especially illuminating is how we may perceive the intentions of those in leadership positions. It is important for us to go beyond our initial responses. Note that the Torah portrays a situation, yet the commentators’ perceptions of Reuven’s motivations and intentions vary. Not only was Malbim’s understanding of Reuven’s motivations different from the Netziv’s, we offered two possible interpretations of Malbim’s explanation of Reuven’s intentions.

So, too, in real life situations we may perceive a leader’s intentions differently from our colleagues.

2. Alshikh’s Reuven

Finally, let’s examine one more model of leadership based on the comment of the Alshikh (Moshe Alshikh, Torat Moshe, 1508–1593, Turkey, Safed), who presents a Reuven who does not respond impulsively in the moment. Alshikh’s Reuven rather carefully reviews the situation and considers his options before speaking to his brothers. Like the Netziv, he bases his interpretation on the movement from first person plural in verse 21 (“We should not kill him”) to second person plural in verse 22 (“Don’t you spill blood”), and the indirect object “to them,” which occurs in verse 22 after “he said” but not after “he said” in verse 21.

Now what did [Reuven] do so they would listen to

his words? He pretended that he was one of them wishing to do him [Joseph] harm . . . That’s why he said “We shall not deal him a deadly blow,” as if to say I am with you, just that it wouldn’t be appropriate that we go so far as to kill him. But he didn’t really mean it, but rather [said it] so they wouldn’t think that he was doing it because of his love of Joseph.

Once they began to be appeased, he then revealed his [true] opinion and said: “Don’t you spill blood”—meaning I never intended to spill blood, just you alone, and to you I am saying “Don’t do what you’re intending.” He, therefore, did not say, “We shall not spill blood. And furthermore, my suggestion to throw him into the pit, [does] not [mean] that I am joining you, heaven forbid, but rather that you do it yourselves.” And that’s why he said, “[You] throw him in the pit.”

And therefore, this verse, once again, states “Reuven said” even though Reuven is still speaking. And that’s also the reason for the superfluous “to them.” All because his [Reuven’s] first words were not his true intentions; while his true words [which were uttered] with all his heart were “don’t [you] spill blood” which was [directed] “to them.”

Implications of This Perspective

As Reuven becomes attuned to the realities of the situation, the concept of mindful leadership is introduced.

According to the Alshikh, Reuven offers a model of leadership that is mindful of the emotional/psychological aspects of the situation at hand. While the brothers are caught up in the moments of anger and rage and impulsively planning to kill Joseph, Reuven is cognizant of the mob mentality at play. He is aware that in those moments of intense anger, he might not be able to convince the brothers to cease with their plan to kill Joseph, and might even fan the flames of anger, exacerbating the situation.9 The brothers might even turn on Reuven.

9 As the rabbis state in the Ethics of the Fathers: do not appease your friend at the height of his anger (Avot 4:18)


35

The Alshikh asks, “What does Reuven do so that the brothers might listen to him?” He pretends to be one of them by speaking in the first person plural saying, “We shouldn’t go so far as to kill him.” In other words, Reuven implies, “I’m with you. Just let’s not go so far as to kill him.” But once some time has elapsed and the brothers begin to calm down, Reuven tells the brothers how he really feels: “Don’t you spill blood. Don’t, for a moment think that I am joining you. Don’t you spill blood . . . throw him into this pit.” Reuven’s intent, of course, as the verse concludes was to have the brothers throw Joseph in the pit so he could return later and save Joseph.

The Alshikh’s Reuven displays a model of leadership that is deliberate and meets others where they are at the moment rather than reacting hastily. It carefully takes into consideration the emotional state of others in order to achieve a positive outcome for the benefit of all parties involved, if possible.

CONCLUSION

The analysis of the vayomer/vayomer phenomenon led to an examination of three (or more) modes of leadership and an opportunity to consider for ourselves not only what our preferred styles of leadership in situations may be, but also where one of the styles might be more appropriate than the others. We were also asked to consider how a particular action may be calculated and perceived based on our motivations and that of others. The lessons from Reuven, and the interpretations from the Netziv, Malbim, and Alshikh, are important references for us as we confront dilemmas in our daily work and are called upon to exercise mindful, reflective leadership.

Dr. Walter Herzberg is assistant professor of Bible and Professional and Pastoral Skills at JTS. He guides students in the classroom and online in the reading of the Bible using a methodological approach and integrating modern, literary, close-reading techniques with the study of traditional Jewish commentary.


36

Embracing the Leadership Difference of a New ExecutiveBy Dr. Ray Levi

Two decades ago, a high school student came into

my office asking if he could do his senior project at our day school. Naturally, my immediate response was “of course.” How many 18-year-olds are contemplating a career

in Jewish education?

Recently, I spent a day shadowing this former student in his current role as a first-year head of school. I watched him energetically greet and engage students in the morning, skillfully build the confidence of parents attending a parent association meeting, guide his administrative team, and problem-solve with members of the board. One would hardly have imagined that he was new to this work, yet I knew that for the search committee in his community, choosing a head who only brought divisional leadership experience in a smaller school was a leap of faith.

I think of another head who, by all criteria, has had two very successful years in his first headship—enrollment and retention increases and new fundraising endeavors that are supporting curricular initiatives in STEM (science, technology, engineering, math) work with diverse learners, and a deeper, multi-modal Judaic Studies program. Yet, it had taken several years for him to land this position, in part because the professional leadership at his last school had only seen the young educator who had first come to them and had not shifted to integrate his many areas of growth. This difficulty in adjusting our perspectives to see an individual’s learning means that we often overlook some of our most promising new leaders—internal candidates who may lack certain experiences but who bring an understanding of the local community and the culture of the school.

As I talk with head search committees about potential candidates, experience writ large is usually articulated as the most important attribute. I certainly understand the value of quality experience. Yet I might argue that simply having served as a head or in a senior leadership position may not, in and of itself, be the most significant selection criterion. The two new heads offer alternative, powerful case studies. Why are they leading effectively? Why are their partnerships with lay leaders working? What is the difference they are making with children, faculty, and parents?

First and most significantly, the strengths of these young heads match the needs of the school. Both schools were seeking passionate and articulate educational leaders who could be the face of the schools in the community and who could guide curricular improvement. This allows lay leaders to see change in critical areas while giving the heads time to hone skills where they have more limited experience. When I spoke with a very happy first year head who had moved across country to a small school with considerable enrollment obstacles, she observed, “The school’s challenges match my interests and strengths. I enjoy focusing on them!”

In Pirkei Avot (4:13), it is written, “Uproot yourself to live in a community where Torah is studied; do not delude yourself that the Torah will come to you. Only with colleagues can your studies be fortified. Do not rely on your own understanding.” The first-year heads described here are alumni of the Day School Leadership Training Institute (DSLTI), the oldest leadership institute of the Leadership Commons at the William Davidson Graduate School of Jewish Education at JTS. In addition to having participated in an intensive program that prepares educators to be heads of school, the cohort-based focus of DSLTI offers these leaders a formal network of colleagues


37

and mentors who are sitting heads to whom they can turn for problem-solving guidance. So often, we speak of the loneliness of the headship. These leaders have been fortified by study in a professional community. Their network helps mitigate isolation and provides opportunities for deeper understanding.

All of these novice leaders are working with coaches who speak weekly with them, visit the school, and engage periodically with the board chair to gather feedback about the board’s priorities for the head. The schools have invested in the professional growth of their heads, providing support for their steep learning curves to assure that they will greatly expand their expertise.

In each of these cases, the boards considered their decision carefully, consulting in the Jewish educational field about how the lay leadership’s expectations could be realistic for first-year heads. Just as the aspiring heads looked for matches with their skill sets, the boards considered their strengths and those of other professional leaders in the schools to assure a smooth transition. In conversations with lay leaders, I have frequently heard, “DSLTI heads have a network to whom they can turn. Lay leaders don’t have that support.” It is comments like these that have inspired DSLTI and The Davidson School to develop our newest leadership institute, expressly for day school lay leaders, designed to bring them (along

with their heads) together for regional workshops and school-specific programs—providing opportunities for boards to think strategically about governance issues and build strong partnerships with their professional leaders.

The hiring of new heads of school is difficult work. In a field where there is a constant need for more candidates, I believe there are ways in which we can expand our pool by looking to internal and younger candidates. Placing one’s faith in those that have grown within the system will always be an act of courage, demonstrating the ability of boards to make a leadership difference not only for their own school but for an entire system. If we are going to attract quality talent over the next two decades, aspiring educators must see day schools as places to advance in their careers—all the way to the headship.

Together, through leadership development programs and strategic, courageous planning, we can foster opportunities for emerging leaders. Then, I believe we will find more first-year heads who can say, “The school’s challenges match my interests and strengths. I enjoy focusing on them!”

Dr. Ray Levi is the director of the Day School Leadership Training Institute (DSLTI) at the William Davidson Graduate School of Jewish Education of The Jewish Theological Seminary.


38

Building Leadership and the Field of Jewish Early Childhood Education from the Inside OutBy Lyndall Miller

“The biggest challenge in Jewish life today

is identifying and cultivating good leadership . . . Tap into your inspiration if you want to lead well.” —Dr. Misha Galperin, Reimagining Leadership in

Jewish Organizations (2012)

What inspires Jewish early childhood educators to become leaders today?

As the director of the Jewish Early Childhood Education Leadership Institute (JECELI), which is a partnership between JTS and Hebrew Union College – Jewish Institute of Religion (HUC-JIR), I have the privilege of reading the applications of those who wish to be a part of our learning community. Candidates have made the following statements about what inspires them:

• “I enjoy learning. I am very excited by new ideas and stimulating discussions, especially about education. I love the idea of learning for my own personal growth.”

• “I have dedicated myself to being a lifelong learner in the world of Jewish education. I am excited to be able to share my passion for Jewish education and Jewish living with others who feel the same.”

• “I work daily in an environment steeped in Jewish values, customs, and traditions. Now, both in my personal and professional life, I am able to appreciate Judaism and continually learn and grow.”

Inspiration does not necessarily lead to leadership, however. It is the task of the Jewish Early Childhood Education Leadership Institute to turn inspirations into actions that, in turn, inspire others.

JECELI fellows explore their motivations and their values in a Jewish context, primarily through text study, seminars, and dialogue. Experts share knowledge about adult development, and each person explores his or her evolution as human beings, professionals, and Jewish educators. Other facilitators help advance leadership skills, including managing the many challenges that can stand in the way of personal, staff, and school transformations.

To bolster confidence and leadership acumen, each JECELI fellow also works with a mentor and in a mentor group. The mentoring process supports the fellows as they turn their self-knowledge and their motivations into real initiatives within their programs. Each fellow reports on what has happened as a result of their actions based on their inspired learning. Members learn a great deal from each other’s experiences.

In fact, the intensity of the self-examination, the relationships between members of mentor groups, and the shared efforts at changing schools create the alchemy that results in both community and the development of strong leadership.

Fellows have reflected on their experiences:

“This program has strengthened my confidence and capabilities as a Jewish leader. After my JECELI experience, I will have a community that provides insight, support, and encouragement. This is a program that has helped me look at myself through a professional and spiritual lens . . . [a] lens that has


39

been enriched by providing deeper understanding and meaning to what I do each and every day.”

“My time with JECELI fellows, mentors, and instructors has expanded my professional world, deepened my leadership skills by broadening my understanding of ECE and adult learning practices, reconnected me to Jewish text, ritual, values and the land of Israel, and provided me with the opportunity to reflect on my own practices.”

One outcome of JECELI has been the Communities of Practice, formed by each of the three successive cohorts, which have emerged from the participants’ own commitment to continue their professional learning and leadership growth together. With the support of the Paradigm Project, our alumni maintain reading groups, webinars, and retreats. Each cohort has developed a brit (covenant) expressed in Jewish language that many of these participants report that they did not know about before JECELI.

Therefore, JECELI’s structure of working “from the inside out” has the potential to change the paradigm

for how Jewish early childhood educators work together to advance the field. It also demonstrates that the pursuit of effective leadership is an ongoing enterprise.

JECELI represents one model of educating for leadership. Through self-awareness, collaborating with others and taking risks to transform our contexts, we can strengthen leadership and change the field. We are not just a group of professionals; we are a committed learning community. What developments might we inspire next in Jewish early childhood education?

Lyndall Miller, MEd, MAJEd, MSEd, is the director of the Jewish Early Childhood Education Leadership Institute (JECELI), a collaborative effort between The Jewish Theological Seminary and Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion.


40

What I Learned about Leadership from Prince and Mort MandelBy Mark S. Young

“They say 2000, zero, zero, party over oops, out

of time, so tonight I’m gonna party like it’s 1999!” While the late, great Prince proclaimed wrongly (thank goodness!) that the world was going to end 17 years ago, perhaps he

accurately captured the mindset that some in Jewish community leadership roles continue to utilize when steering our communal agenda. That is, one of worry that we will be “over oops, out of time.” With this worry, perhaps we lead, be it consciously or not, from a place of fear and concern.

This idea can be a strong motivator, one perhaps necessary in the past, but today the result has been to pour financial resources into programs (but not necessarily to invest properly in the leaders and staff who are behind these programs) in hopes one is the silver bullet to secure an engaged and flourishing Jewish polity. It’s ironic, we often characterize ourselves as the ever-dying people, yet we always seem to survive. As a result of this fear, I wonder if we don’t allow ourselves to fully thrive, and therefore fail to reach our full potential.

I’d like to present a different leadership approach, one that I’ve begun to observe in many of our inspiring organizations, one devoid of fear and concern but that rests on idealism, creativity, and business-savvy. This approach has been influenced and inspired further by the unlikely combination of the death of Prince and my learning more about the philosophy of work and leadership from the successful business executive and Jewish philanthropist Mort Mandel.

The lyrics to 1999 aside, Prince was an incredible optimist with an enormous talent for vision and

the ability to execute. In reading about him after his death, I was fascinated by an article from Liz Meriwether, a writer and producer for the sitcom New Girl, who shared her experience working with Prince on an episode he helped produce and guest starred in during fall 2013.

In crafting some of the funniest and most memorable scenes in this episode, Liz spoke specifically of Prince’s leadership difference:

“It’s not enough to have extraordinary vision; you have to know how to turn that vision into something that exists in the very flawed, complicated world of human beings and money and phone calls. To do that is an endless battle, especially if what you see in your head is unimaginable to other people. Obviously he could see things and hear things that no one else could, but what amazed me was his ability to defend and cultivate that vision until it became real in everyone else’s heads, until we could all see it too.”

When I read this article, I was in the middle of reading Mort Mandel’s It’s All About Who, in which, among all of his prescriptions for effective leadership after 75 years of his own success, he doubles down on the need for a leader to “have the ability to build a (super star) team and to cover the ground that has to be covered to migrate from a plan to realization.” He talks of “intellectual firepower, values, and passion.” In addition, he writes that we should not hire or retain talent unless the answer to the question of “Should we have this person on our team?” is an enthusiastic “Yes!” Not just a “Yes, ok, they’ll do,” but hiring only those we see as superstars. Then, we must invest


41

heavily in their growth. In this way, we lead teams of those we truly believe in and provide them the compensation, resources, and support they need to make a significant difference.

Sometimes “light bulbs” go off when finding inspiration from two sources that would be unlikely to be paired together. For me, it’s Prince and Mandel: extraordinary vision and the ability to cultivate the vision until it becomes real to everyone else, and having the ability to find and retain a team of amazingly talented people that can take that extraordinary vision and develop it into a successful reality.

This is a very different “starting line,” if you will. This is not starting from the doomsday scenarios of 1999 and the ever-dying Jewish people that must be saved from anti-Semitism, assimilation, or apathy. This is a different practice than accepting the mediocrity of the present as the path of the future. This is an idealistic and exacting approach that can create opportunities and realities for Jewish life beyond our wildest dreams.

Throughout his career, Prince was wildly successful as a singer, songwriter, musician, producer, and actor. Mandel, along with his late brothers Jack and Joseph, has been wildly successful with the Premier Industrial Corporation and the Mandel Foundation, which has invested millions and resulted in tremendous positive impact for Jewish education and community building. We—individuals, organizations, and communities—could all engage in this new, promising view of leadership, one that can help us prepare and nurture a shared future of thriving Jewish learning and living, growth, and activity.

The Davidson School Leadership Commons rests upon and seeks to promote this optimistic and demanding view of leadership, and invites everyone to share their thoughts and ideas. Our leadership institutes prepare Jewish leaders with the skills of visioning, communicating, and modeling one’s vision, as well as effective staff development and engagement with Jewish texts that guide the nurturing of these skills. Through our publications, research, and conferences, we seek to give voice to diverse and extraordinary perspectives while working to create common understandings and collective action among our leaders.

We seek out those—individuals, institutions, foundations, and communitieswho believe as well in the possibilities that the future offers us and have faith in the extraordinary leaders already among us.

We are not “out of time.” Rather, the “party” is just getting started. Let’s build a Jewish leadership commons together for the health and success of our Jewish community now and for generations to come, for 2099, 2199, and beyond.

Mark S. Young is the managing director of the Leadership Commons of The William Davidson Graduate School of Jewish Education of The Jewish Theological Seminary.


42

Thank You

There are many individuals and organizations that deserve a heartfelt thank you for making this publication possible. First, we’d like to thank William Davidson (z”l) for his foresight

and commitment to Jewish education, and the William Davidson Foundation for its continued partnership in cultivating educational leadership that works together for the common good of the Jewish people. We also thank the leadership of JTS—Chancellor Arnold Eisen, JTS Board Chair Alan Levine, and Executive Vice Chancellor and Chief Operating Officer Marc Gary—for their unwavering commitment to furthering Jewish education and the innovative work of the Leadership Commons of The Davidson School.

On this occasion, we are truly grateful to Dan Brown and Rena Fraade of eJewish Philanthropy and Jeducation World, with whom we partnered during our spring 2016 Effective Leadership Series, in which many of the enclosed articles were originally published. To the editorial committee of our Gleanings publication—Beth Mayerowitz, Dr. Ray Levi, Dr. Barry Holtz, Dr. Bill Robinson, and Mark S. Young—thank you for your dedication to excellence in producing these works. Thank you to our many additional funders—including the AVI CHAI Foundation, Jim Joseph Foundation, and The Crown Family—whose generosity has enabled many of the academic and leadership programs that produced the alumni whose writings appear in this publication.

Finally, a thank you to our writers—our alumni, faculty, and staff—who engaged in the challenging and rewarding endeavor of thought leadership in order to help us fulfill the mission of our Leadership Commons, cultivating doers, thinkers, and visionaries from all corners of Jewish education to inspire and guide the emerging Jewish future.

Date post:	01-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	ngocong
View:	219 times
Download:	3 times

The Leadership Difference - Jewish Theological … LEADERSHIP DIFFERENCE 5 Covenantal and...

Documents