Rabbis' Voice Articles

 

Resources, identity and process. When there’s conflict in an organization, whether a synagogue, a nation or a family, so often, the conflict revolves around these three things: resources, identity and process. 

 

For example, let’s imagine there was interest in building a mikvah in our new building. (It’s a very expensive item to build and maintain, and not on the table right now, so it’s a good example!) If the discussion was happening around resources, the questions would be, “Do we have the money to build and maintain it, and if not, can we raise the necessary dollars, and if we can, will that take fundraising away from some other priority?” 

 

If the only conversation was around this question of resources though, we’d be missing an important part of the discussion, because the use of our resources is an expression of our values and priorities. 

 

How is having a mikvah (or not having a mikvah) an expression of Kol Rinah’s identity and values? How would having a mikvah help us pursue our mission and goals? One could argue that creating a mikvah in an egalitarian Jewish space would be an important expression of our values, and a way of saying who we are. That question of identity could change the priority of this project, and make us say that it’s the most important thing we could fundraise for now, and perhaps is even worth going into debt for. (I’m not suggesting this but am just using it as a thought experiment for now.) 

 

Let’s say though the conversation about building a mikvah was only being had by a small part of one committee, and not by all the committees that might be relevant, including Facilities, Capital Campaign/Development, Ritual, and Membership/Engagement, and ultimately the board. Would that be the kind of process that would lead to a good decision? Once any decision was made, whether just on the basis of the resources, or even including the questions of values and identity, if the process for making the decision, which might involve disagreement, also known as conflict, could raise as many problems as the decision itself. 

 

On the other hand, a really healthy process might include all the stakeholders--not only committees and the board, but also other interested congregants and even community voices from outside the congregation. A robust process would deal with the issue not only as one of resources, but also the ways it relates to our identity, values and mission. This kind of process would be more likely to create an outcome that reflects the values and identity of the organization while also being responsible about resources and their prioritization. 

 

May we have a strong focus on process, allowing us to consider and reconsider our identity and values, and how they are expressed through our allocation of resources!