In the spirit of cutting to the chase, here are the nine statements our authors deem “lies:”

And here, in turn, are the two half-truths I will proceed to tell about this book:

The authors have fascinating positive insights, but the list of “lies” obscures them.

Half-Truth #1: These “lies” are actually true.

As I indicate by labeling this a half-truth, I don’t entirely mean this assertion. Some of the lies are true, but some of the lies really are lies.

It really is the case, for example, that “the best plan” (lie #2) isn’t enough to win. In a fast-paced world, plans specific enough to deserve the label are outdated by the time the ink is dry. As Buckingham & Goodall write, “We aren’t planning for the future, we’re planning for the near-term past.” Their replacement for planning — systems of intelligence that liberate information and empower teams to act on it in real time — is a straightforwardly better approach and an eminently actionable insight. 

Similarly, the authors are extremely persuasive that lie #4, “The best people are well-rounded,” is legitimately balderdash. They make a magnificent case that the best people, in all sorts of domains, are “spiky” — wildly strong in their strengths, and often mediocre to lacking in other areas. Leaders would be wise not to expect everyone to even try to excel at everything, and try rather to lean into everyone’s strengths and build a team of people doing what needs to be done by spending most (if not all) of their time activating and developing their strengths.

But in many other cases, the purported “lies” are, even granting the authors’ arguments, simply true, and can only be spun as lies by interpreting them in a strawmannish manner.

For one example, take lie #5, “People need feedback.”Is that a lie? Well, that depends, of course, on what you mean by “feedback,” and the authors make sure to explain that they mean it in a non-obvious, specific, and skewed way. When they get into the details, it emerges that what they’re talking about is negative feedback, whereas “Positive attention… is thirty times more powerful than negative attention in creating high performance on a team… ” It’s great to learn — and the authors quite convincingly show — the importance of positive feedback. But that’s not, in any way, an argument against “feedback” per se, just a cri de coeur about what kind is best.

For another example, take #10, “Leadership is a thing.” Buckingham & Goodall frame the existence of leadership as their target, but its existence isn’t what they attack. Instead, they attack leadership’s scarcity and difficulty to teach. “The fact that we lionize those who have this special ability; the fact that we spend so much time looking for it and trying to get more of it; and the fact that is plays such a prominent role in how we think about our organizations: these point not to its ubiquity but to its scarcity — and this scarcity, in turn, belies the supposed ease with which we’re all meant to be able to get better at it.” In my copy of the book, I underlined “the supposed ease with which we’re all meant to be able to get better at it” and scrawled in the margin, “Who ever promised you that?” 

Buckingham & Goodall go on to explain that the greatest leaders, like all high achievers, exhibit many and varied mixes of strengths and weaknesses, reflecting many different ways of effectively leading, and they conclude that the only way to apprehend or define leadership is the following: “a leader is someone who has followers, plain and simple. The only determinant of whether anyone is leading is whether anyone else is following.” That’s a perfectly valid and useful observation. It is also a definition of leadership — a statement about what leadership is, as a thing. They’ve proven their supposed “lie” to be true. They apparently don’t even believe that leadership is not “a thing,” they just think it’s a thing about which many people have misconceptions. And those misconceptions, along with the authors’ prescribed alternatives, may be (and are!) quite valuable to explore — it just makes the frame of debunking a “lie” about the very existence of leadership a bit distracting and off-putting, at least to this reader.

And that brings us to my second half-truth.

Half-Truth #2: The authors have fascinating positive insights, but the list of “lies” obscures them.

Is it odd that I have framed my review of this book in the form of two half-truths instead of a more straightforward evaluation of what I think the authors get right and wrong? Does this format run afoul, even, of Leading Edge’s usual tone of positivity? 

Good. Because that’s my point. By framing everything as being about confronting lies, this book half-buries the many incredibly good and positive ideas you can find in this book. 

Here are just a few of the ideas I personally found most valuable:

On engagement: In chapter 1, “People Care Which Company They Work For,” the authors share some well-validated metrics that predict sustained team performance (hint: they match up amazingly well with Leading Edge’s definition of employee engagement).

On the importance of the smaller team experience within organizations: “Experience varies more within a company than between companies… When people choose not to work somewhere, the somewhere isn’t a company, it’s a team.”

On the downsides of goals: “The very best salespeople hit their quota months before the end of the year, whereupon… they start to delay the closing of their deals so that they can ‘bank’ them and ensure that they begin the next year with a head start. Sales goals actually degrade the performance of top salespeople”.

On strengths: “The single most powerful predictor of a team’s productivity… is each team member’s sense that ‘I have the chance to use my strengths every day at work.’”

On rating: “Although we are not reliable raters of others, people can reliably rate their own experience.”

These are just a smattering of the many quotes I have marked with little book flags in my copy of this book. With so many beautiful flowers to share, did the authors really need to package them in thorns? Indeed, at the very end of the book, they go ahead and frame what they wanted to say in positive form, as nine truths:

People can reliably rate their own experience.

I would like to think (without knowing the truth) that this positive list is what the authors originally brought to their agent or publisher, and that perhaps it was someone on the publishing end of things who convinced them to reframe the whole thing as being about lies, because conflict sells.

Look, I’m a communications professional, so I get it; it’s hard to get attention. If you’re reading this post, you probably don’t pick strawberries or mine coal for a living — you’re probably a knowledge worker, and in knowledge work, attention is the coin of the realm. Sometimes it’s tempting to do whatever it takes to get that next hit of attention; to exaggerate or sensationalize, just a bit, so that people will pay attention to the good idea you’ve got.

Yet, I aver, there are more and less honest, and more and less distracting, ways to send up a signal flare. I tend to think people and organizations would do well to keep our attention-grabbing language well aligned with the most reasonable readings of the realities we’re talking about.

A full truth: This is a good book, and worth reading.

My critique, such as it is, is about the framing of this book — the title, the chapter titles, and a little more verbal scaffolding around the edges. But don’t let that put you off. Inside the frame, this picture rewards examination. Nine Lies About Work is a valuable read for managers, leaders, talent professionals, and anyone else in the People Business. 

As the book itself would recommend, we as readers should focus less on its shortcomings and more on its very real strengths.

There are some big lies — distortions, faulty assumptions, wrong thinking — that we encounter every time we show up for work. Authors Marcus Buckingham and Ashley Goodall name nine of them, and in this review of their book, "Nine Lies About Work: A Freethinking Leader's Guide to the Real World," Leading Edge's Seth Chalmer (Vice President, Communications) digs into the half-truths and highlights the strengths that matter most for anyone in the people business.

Reading Edge: Two Half-Truths About “Nine Lies About Work”

Book reviews on leadership, talent, and culture.

Books

The crisis we’re ignoring: Who’s caring for the people who hold up the Jewish world?

The Jewish world can’t run on empty. Barry Finestone, President & CEO of Jim Joseph Foundation and Leading Edge Board Member (non-voting), warns: if we don’t replenish the people powering Jewish life, there won’t be anyone left to rebuild what’s next. He calls on philanthropy and lay leaders to: (1) add staff during crisis peaks, (2) protect actual rest, (3) show gratitude, (4) train leaders, and (5) build lifelines across institutions.

R&R: Rest Is a Strategy: What We Learned from BREAKWEEK

WorkLife: With economic tides shifting, how HR can help employees climb, not quit

Business Insider: 'Quiet cracking' is the latest buzzword to hit the workplace

MIT SMR (video): Why Managers Struggle to Delegate

WorkLife: Is your overly complicated application process driving away your hottest talent prospects?

CNBC: The 9 to 5 schedule is 'really archaic,' HR expert says: Employees are 'tired of being told what to do'

HBR: How New CEOs Can Build a Strong Alliance with Their Board Chair

BoardSource: Beginner’s Guide to Nonprofit Board Service - Part 1 | Part 2

NonProfitPRO: 3 Tips to Help Every Nonprofit Unlock the Full Potential of Its Board

Here's what the Leading Edge team is learning about culture, executives, and boards this month.

What We're Learning | August 2025

The best of what the Leading Edge team is learning about culture, executives, and boards.

What We're Learning

Developing strong leadership skills is vital for navigating the challenges and opportunities that come with guiding nonprofit organizations. In today’s shifting landscape, Jewish nonprofit leaders are grappling with a range of pressing issues and the need to adapt to a rapidly changing environment. To effectively address these challenges, leaders must cultivate competencies in strategic vision, communication, and adaptability. By strengthening these leadership skills, Jewish nonprofit executives can guide their organizations to fulfill their missions, support their communities, and create a lasting, positive impact.

With this in mind, Leading Edge is excited to announce the launch of the sixth cohort of Leading Executives. This transformative program brings together a diverse group of executive leaders from Jewish nonprofit organizations across North America, each poised to deepen their leadership abilities in profound ways. Throughout the program, running from August to early 2026, participants will have the opportunity to sharpen their leadership skills, engage in personalized growth experiences, and collaborate with fellow cohort members.

The following leaders will participate in the sixth cohort of Leading Executives:

Research by Leading Edge consistently shows that the connections leaders make with their peers within the Jewish nonprofit sector are invaluable. Leading Executives is designed to foster these meaningful connections, giving participants the chance to collaborate, share experiences, and grow together in a supportive environment. As recent participants have shared, the program helped them gain clarity in their leadership roles, improved their conflict resolution abilities, and strengthened their communication skills.

By the end of this cohort, the participants will be equipped with the tools, resources, and a lasting network that will empower them to lead their organizations with confidence and vision.

Are you interested in future cohorts of Leading Executives, or do you know someone who should be? Don’t miss information about future cohorts when it becomes available; sign up for the interest list for Leading Executives here and for Leading Edge’s newsletter at leadingedge.org/contact-us/.

Meet the Jewish nonprofit leaders in the next cohort of Leading Edge’s acclaimed executive leadership development program.

Leading Edge announces sixth “Leading Executives” cohort

Executives

This summer, we're shining a light on alumni of Leading Executives. Designed for the senior-most leaders of their organizations, Leading Executives offers a transformative experience rooted in dynamic learning, personalized feedback, and peer support. Participants gain tools to lead more effectively, build self-awareness, and navigate the complexities of leadership with greater clarity, confidence, and resilience.


Meet Alon Friedman, Founding Director at ENTER: The Jewish Peoplehood Alliance. Alon brings insight, humor, and candor to his leadership in the Jewish nonprofit sector. In this spotlight, he shares what it takes to lead through change, how his experience with Leading Executives reshaped his perspective, and the importance of both agility and authenticity in today’s leadership landscape.


Alumni Spotlight conversations may be edited and condensed.


What do you think are the most critical leadership qualities needed to navigate the unique challenges and opportunities within Jewish nonprofit organizations right now?

Finger on the pulse, agility, and a spine. Our reality changes so quickly; yesterday's extreme is today's norm. As leaders, first and foremost, we have to know how to stay connected and read the changes so that we can identify the new needs those changes bring. But, we also need agility. Flexibility of the mind that will allow us to adjust our language, rephrase our message, and re-package what we deliver. But with agility, holding a solid spine is critical, so that we don't lose contact with our organization's vision and our meta-goals. If we're too flexible (whether for the sake of satisfying our constituency or aligning with the criteria of a potential donor), we may forsake our mission, spread too thin, or simply under-deliver.


What inspired you to step into a leadership role in the Jewish nonprofit sector?

Other than the big bucks that is? :) The answer is the role models I observed while making my first strides as a junior in the field. Dazzling speakers, inspiring donors, and dozens of seasoned professionals who genuinely loved their job because they felt that they were making a change. I wanted to be like them.

How do you see the future of Jewish nonprofit leadership evolving? How has your Leading Edge program experience influenced your perspective on this?

My participation in Leading Executives (LX2) came after a good few years of executive work absent professional training. Other than some new lingo, new tools, and new tips that training programs usually provide, LX2 made me realize that my challenges were not exclusively mine, that my problems have names, that my experience is a huge asset, and that when putting all things together, I'm actually doing a pretty good job. We were presented with a rare opportunity to put our real issues on the table, and to dissect them with a team of people who were close enough to understand where we come from, but also far enough to not be confined by our own biased point of view. This was priceless.


How has something you learned in the Leading Edge program helped make a real difference at your organization? Share an example.

Due to its nature of group conversations and teamwork, the program pushed me to "air out" lots of thoughts and assumptions that up until then were mostly rolling inside my head. The experience that the program "imposed" on me — of speaking my thoughts — made me realize that things look and sound different when they exit from our mind onto the public sphere. It's a tool I took home with me, and today, many of my cards are constantly on the table.

What’s one practical leadership tip you would share with a new Jewish nonprofit leader stepping into their role?

With both your board above and staff below — share what you DON'T know as generously as you share what you DO know. 

What’s one piece of advice you would offer to someone who is considering joining a Leading Edge leadership program?

Go. It carries a real potential to shed light on some old blind spots we all carry around. And worst case scenario — you'll eat well and get a break from your regular echo-chamber...

Meet Alon Friedman, Founding Director at ENTER: The Jewish Peoplehood Alliance. Alon brings insight, humor, and candor to his leadership in the Jewish nonprofit sector. In this spotlight, he shares what it takes to lead through change, how his experience with Leading Executives reshaped his perspective, and the importance of both agility and authenticity in today’s leadership landscape.

Leading Edge Alumni Spotlight, Alon Friedman

Meet some of the dynamic leaders engaging with Leading Edge and transforming the community.

Alumni

Through these spotlights, we’re celebrating the leaders who have completed the program and continue to shape the Jewish nonprofit sector in powerful ways. Their stories reflect the deep impact of the program — not just on individual leaders, but on the organizations and communities they serve.


Meet SooJi Min-Maranda, Executive Director at ALEPH: Alliance for Jewish Renewal. She is an alum of the CEO Onboarding program, the predecessor to Leading Executives. Sooji brings a deep commitment to justice, inclusion, and community to her leadership in the Jewish nonprofit sector. In this spotlight, she shares how leading in this space allows her to fully live her values and how her experience with Leading Edge helped her strengthen the relationships and support systems essential to bold, values-driven leadership.


I had been running secular nonprofits for about eight years when I decided to make the move to the Jewish nonprofit sector. This is because as an adult convert to Judaism with a non-Jewish partner, I soon realized that it is extremely difficult to be Jewish alone. When I discovered that there is a parallel nonprofit universe in the Jewish sector, I realized that I could live my faith and values proudly and boldly and still do what I enjoy most, which is helping individuals and communities thrive through servant leadership.

Jewish organizations need to focus on creating an environment where all who identify as Jews can thrive, feel secure, and safe. This is particularly crucial given the current climate of polarization, rising antisemitism, and growing threats to pluralism in the United States. However, our response shouldn't be to isolate ourselves. Instead, we need to embody and actively promote core Jewish values, especially those that emphasize the sanctity of all life and the imperative to heal the world. It's vital that we share the beauty and joy of Judaism with the broader world, fostering understanding and connection. Moreover, we must build partnerships with other marginalized communities, recognizing that our struggles and futures are interconnected. This involves working on overcoming our fears to engage more openly with the world around us. The future of Jewish organizations lies not just in preservation, but in active engagement and alliance-building towards a more just world.

How have your Leading Edge cohort connections helped you build stronger professional relationships and collaborations within the sector?

The Leading Edge community is invaluable to me on two levels. First, it's a network of peers navigating similar adaptive and technical challenges in our turbulent sector. This shared experience creates a powerful support system. Second, Leading Edge itself serves as a trusted, independent resource that nurtures and guides our sector. It's not just an organization or a program; it's a community of people committed to strengthening Jewish nonprofit leadership. For me, Leading Edge embodies both peer support and professional guidance, making it an essential part of my leadership journey.

Say what you need! And say it again and again. Don’t be afraid to ask for what you truly need to thrive.

Meet SooJi Min-Maranda, Executive Director at ALEPH: Alliance for Jewish Renewal. She is an alum of the CEO Onboarding program, the predecessor to Leading Executives.

Leading Edge Alumni Spotlight, SooJi Min-Maranda

Podcast: When Crisis is the Job – with Barry Finestone

What happens to Jewish leadership when crisis becomes the norm rather than the exception? In this episode of the Identity/Crisis podcast, Barry Finestone, President & CEO of Jim Joseph Foundation and Leading Edge Board Member (non-voting), joins Yehuda Kurtzer, President of the Shalom Hartman Institute, to explore the emotional and organizational toll of leading through upheaval and discuss what it will take to build institutions that can thrive during times of uncertainty without losing sight of their long-term goals. 

Forbes: Ending Unlimited PTO Doesn’t Solve Underlying Workforce Issues

eJP: What personalized Jewish learning contributes to the service movement

SRE: Torah of Safety, Respect, and Equity

The Chronicle: Inside the Leadership Success of a Millennial and Boomer Who Share the CEO Seat

Egon Zehnder: The CHRO Voice: Inside Human Resources Leadership

HBR: What’s the Future of Middle Management?

The Chronicle: 8 Ways Your Board Can Drive Momentum in a Capital Campaign

BoardSource: How Board Chairs Foster Board Engagement

NonProfitPRO: Create a Nonprofit Memory Book to Establish Institutional Memory

What We're Learning | July 2025

Mattering at work enhances self-esteem, strengthens self-efficacy, and leads to better performance and satisfaction. But 30% of people report feeling invisible, and 65% feel underappreciated. Research shows that mattering happens most reliably through everyday interactions — especially when leaders take time to notice others, listen for total meaning, respond with compassion, and follow up meaningfully. This article shows leaders how to apply this concept in the workplace, and includes three activities leaders can use to get started.

eJP: Reimagining Israel education: 6 recommendations for catalyzing a new era

MIT SMR: How Neuroinclusion Builds Organizational Capabilities

Allwork.Space: What Happens When Free Speech At Work Becomes Risky?

Culture Amp (Report): The Leadership Advantage: How great leaders elevate organizational performance

NYT: Opinion | I’m a LinkedIn Executive. I See the Bottom Rung of the Career Ladder Breaking.

HBR: Employee Stress Is a Business Risk—Not an HR Problem

Chronicle of Philanthropy: 6 Steps to Turbocharge Your Board Recruitment

NonProfitPRO: Boardroom Archetypes: Is Your Board a Wolf Pack?

Allwork.Space: The Bard And The Boardroom: Why Today’s Best Leaders Read More Than Metrics

What We're Learning | June 2025

‘The Surge’ continues: JFNA survey finds a third of Jews more engaged now than pre-Oct. 7

A year and a half after October 7, Jewish engagement is still elevated — but the initial spike is easing. In Jewish Federations of North America’s new survey, 31% of Jews say they’re more involved in communal life than before the attacks. Mimi Kravetz (Chief Impact and Growth Officer for JFNA, and Leading Edge Board Member) stated, “The Surge has shown staying power... but the data carries an important reminder that the Surge is not going to last forever,” noting that the community must act now to meet people’s needs.

Gallup: Global Engagement Falls for the Second Time Since 2009

HBR: When You’re Asked to Meet Impossible Goals

WorkLife: For companies to fully integrate AI, their HR leaders are going to require more training

The Chronicle of Philanthropy (podcast): Two CEOs on How to Get Boards to Help With Fundraising and More

BoardSource: 5 Phases of Strategic Planning

NPQ: Nonprofit Boards Remain Overwhelmingly White

What We're Learning | May 2025

When we kicked off the Leading Edge feedback workshop series, I found myself haunted by the ghosts of feedback trainings from jobs long past. Well-meaning, formulaic, often a little too enthusiastic about acronyms. And, more often than not, preoccupied with the mechanics of feedback — how to give it, how to receive it, how to word it just right — while sidestepping the larger forces that determine whether it actually works.

Power dynamics, for example, tend to be the quiet, uninvited guest in these conversations. Most feedback trainings focus on peer-to-peer exchanges or manager-to-direct-report scenarios, both of which are relatively easy to navigate compared to the more fraught question of how to speak candidly to someone who holds more influence than you do. And then there’s the trickier cultural factor: the unwritten rules of a workplace. What happens when an organization values transparency in theory but, in practice, still favors harmony? What about when organizational appetite for feedback exceeds our supply? 

All of these thoughts flitted through my mind as we embarked on the training. But I reminded myself that discomfort is often a prerequisite for growth. If nothing else, the workshop would be an opportunity to understand my colleagues better and to let them understand me in turn. And if it made feedback even slightly less awkward, then it was probably worth it.

Beyond the Feedback Loop: What Actually Worked

The facilitators deftly walked us through best practices, and the exercises made feedback feel less like an event to be dreaded and more like a normal, inevitable part of collaboration. But as the seasons changed and the intensity of the training amped up, I started to feel like I was caught in a loop. We were giving feedback, then giving feedback on the way we gave feedback, and at times, reflecting on how we felt about giving feedback on the way we gave feedback. Could feedback actually create a self-sustaining ecosystem, where feedback exists only to reinforce itself? I wondered, as my brain struggled to keep the word from losing all meaning.

That’s not to say the workshops weren’t valuable. While thornier topics like power dynamics and implicit workplace rules were not unpacked in a way that would have made them truly useful to an individual contributor (perhaps inevitable, given how impossible it is for external facilitators to be precisely attuned to the nuances and undercurrents of this organization, in this moment), the workshops did help reframe feedback as a process rather than a personal indictment. 

There were no groundbreaking revelations, but the sheer act of repetition worked to build the feedback muscle, allowing the anxieties that often accompany these conversations to atrophy. And if nothing else, they made the prospect of performance reviews feel a little less like an ambush. (Still, I can’t help but wonder if we peaked at workshop three, when “feedback” still felt like a real word.)

By the time the training wrapped, I noticed that something else had shifted — not dramatically, but just enough to make a difference. As a communications professional, I’ve always been able to say what needed to be said (if this blog post is any indication), but I used to spend far too much energy making sure my words were wrapped in the right amount of careful phrasing, the right level of upbeat tone, the right signals of warmth. Now, with “feedback” as the buzzword du jour, I find myself trusting that people will take my words as they’re intended. 

With the workshop series behind us, the question becomes: What’s next? Because there’s a fine line between normalizing feedback and over-processing it, between creating a culture where people feel comfortable speaking up and creating one where feedback itself becomes an endless topic of discussion. Some organizations — especially ones that take culture-building seriously — can fall into the trap of making feedback its own recursive loop, a thing to be endlessly refined rather than simply practiced. It’s the workplace equivalent of those relationships where you spend more time analyzing the relationship than actually being in it. And we all know how those tend to end.

So while I do hope we revisit this in the future, I also think there’s value in stepping back for a moment. Leading Edge has just gone through a major organizational transition. Maybe what we need most right now isn’t another structured conversation about feedback, but the space to work together, observe one another, and build trust in a way that isn’t so prescribed. If we think back to the moments when feedback truly made a difference, chances are they didn’t happen in a scheduled session. They happened in the middle of real work, when it mattered most. If the best feedback happens organically, then perhaps the best thing we can do is make room for it. 

Written by our Senior Associate, Communications, this article is part of a series highlighting perspectives from various Leading Edge team members as we reflect on our journey through a feedback workshop series.

Feedback On Feedback On Feedback: An Individual Contributor’s Take

Culture

Outside the palace, the Ten Plagues rage. Pharaoh’s advisors urge him to compromise and send out just the men. Pharaoh agrees and makes the offer.

But Moses answers: “With our youth and with our elders we will go. With our sons and with our daughters, with our flocks and with our herds, for it is a pilgrimage of God to us.”

Pharaoh scoffs. He can’t believe his generous offer is being rejected. He can’t fathom what it means to value every member of a community.

One of the central messages of Passover is that every single person matters. We all have a role to play. We all are part of the community. Young and old,  wise and wicked, simple and unsure, we all have to consider ourselves as if we personally came out of Egypt. Unlike with some sacrifices that are eaten only by the priestly class, every community member is to be nourished by the korban Pesah (Passover offering), just as in every generation we share the dangers, and the promise of rescue, that we sing about during the Seder. 

Getting the Jewish community out of Egypt is one thing; getting the Egypt out of the Jewish community is another. How deeply have we in the Jewish nonprofit sector internalized Moses’ message that everyone counts? How much “Pharaoh mentality” still remains in our field’s decision-making?

What would it look like if we valued people not like Pharaoh, but like Moses? Would we be more invested in things like onboarding, intensive professional development, and psychological safety? Would our compensation philosophies change? Would our approach to time and workload management evolve?

Recently, Prof. Joshua Margolis of Harvard Business School and I co-authored an article arguing that the Jewish nonprofit sector needs a mindset shift in how we think about talent. We need to stop thinking about talent as a cost and start thinking about it as an investment, we argued.

Creating actionable, tractable answers to these questions is not easy, and we are imperfect leaders of imperfect organizations during a hard time. The past year and a half have been a tremendously difficult and painful time for the Jewish people, and for all people, Jewish and otherwise, who work, lead, and serve in the Jewish communal field. 

But like Moses, facing off against Pharaoh with audacity, our job is not to despair in the face of obstacles, but to demand miracles — and work toward them.

May the Passover holiday bring a sense of rest from our labors, and a sense of hope against darkness and despair. As our community faces war, antisemitism, and increasing societal upheavals and divisions, let’s remember that it was at “about midnight” when the Exodus truly began. As we prepare this year for the hope and the respite that the Passover season may bring, let’s all recommit to valuing one another like Moses. Let’s recommit to investing in each other like partners in a shared covenant.

One of the central messages of Passover is that every single person matters. How deeply have we in the Jewish nonprofit sector internalized Moses’ message that everyone counts? And how much “Pharaoh mentality” still remains in our field’s decision-making? As we prepare this year for the hope and the respite that the Passover season may bring, let’s all recommit to valuing one another like Moses.

The Pharaoh Mindset: Passover 5785

News and Ideas | Leading Edge

News & Ideas

Why You Should Collaborate Across Boundaries

Today’s organizations are complex and deeply interconnected, making it essential for leaders to look beyond their own teams and functions. Those who span boundaries — across departments, levels, stakeholder groups, geographies, and identities — are better positioned to drive innovation, agility, and results. Still, while 86% of senior executives say this kind of collaboration is “extremely important,” only 7% feel very effective at it. Closing the gap starts with building the skills to manage difference, create alignment, and work toward shared purpose across divides.

Pew Research Center: Gender pay gap in U.S. has narrowed slightly over 2 decades

J.: OPINION | It’s getting harder for young professionals at Jewish nonprofits

WorkLife: Ex-government workers make for rich talent pool for private-sector employers

MIT SMR: Why Great Ideas Die on Managers’ Desks — and How to Save Them

HBR: The Pandemic Proved That Remote Leadership Works

Blue Avocado: From Crisis to Clarity: Five Steps to Demystify Succession Planning

eJP: Reaching our true potential: 7 ideas for investing in all of our talent 

NonProfit PRO: Why Your Nonprofit Should Hire an Interim Leader After an Executive Director Departs

SSIR: Mergers and Acquisitions as a Strategic Tool for Nonprofit Growth

What We're Learning | April 2025

When I first heard about the feedback workshop series we would be participating in at Leading Edge, I was excited, and maybe a little nervous. Feedback isn’t always an easy topic, and I’ve seen the mixed emotions it can bring up in a workplace. But the idea of learning alongside my colleagues and diving into practical exercises felt like the perfect way to tackle the challenge head on. I went in hoping for plenty of practice time, and the experience didn’t disappoint.


Before we started the workshops, feedback in our organization wasn’t fully normalized. The word itself often carried a negative connotation. When someone mentioned “feedback,” it usually meant constructive criticism, not praise or recognition. And we had a habit of waiting too long to give it. By the time feedback was shared, the moment or situation was in the rearview mirror, which only complicated things.

As a middle manager, I knew feedback could be leveraged to strengthen team dynamics and performance. Honest, timely feedback builds trust and creates opportunities for growth. But when it’s withheld, we lose the chance to reflect and improve. I was eager to help shift how our organization approached this vital practice.

As a middle manager, my role in feedback is multifaceted. Sometimes, I serve as a translator, listening to feedback and providing context that others might not see. Other times, I reflect on my own leadership and how my actions impact the team’s performance. I also often help my colleagues rehearse feedback conversations, fine-tuning their wording and tone to make the exchange as productive as possible.


But being in the middle comes with its challenges. I genuinely want feedback from my team, but I know my position might make them hesitant to share openly. At the same time, I have to weigh my words carefully, knowing the impact they carry. I hoped the workshops would help us all become more comfortable with feedback, and they did just that.


The workshops were eye-opening. One of the biggest takeaways for me was the importance of practice. Whether feedback is positive or constructive, the words we choose — and how we say them — matter deeply. Rehearsing ensures our communication is clear, and the felt impact of what we say aligns with our intentions: to support each other’s work and growth.

The case studies we explored were particularly helpful. They reminded me that feedback isn’t personal, it’s a universal part of working together in any organization. These exercises also reinforced the value of being specific, using clear examples to support praise or constructive feedback.


Since the workshops, I’ve seen shifts in how my team approaches feedback. We’re much more deliberate about building feedback loops into our projects. It’s become second nature to ask for input at different stages of program design, which has elevated our work.


I’ve also changed how I deliver feedback. I’m more urgent, sharing thoughts sooner rather than sitting on them. At the same time, I’m more intentional, thinking carefully about how to frame my feedback for the best impact. These two seemingly contradictory habits have made a big difference.


The ripple effects of the workshops have been noticeable across the organization. There’s a growing openness and trust, with people feeling more comfortable saying, “This isn’t working,” and pivoting when necessary. Embracing reality and adjusting course has made our work stronger — and I think our feedback culture has played a big role in this shift.


Personally, the workshops have helped me see feedback as a leadership tool, not just a task. I’m modeling how to give and request quality feedback, and we’re piloting new ways to incorporate it into our work, like rehearsing new learning experiences with test participants during program design.


If there’s one piece of advice I’d give to other middle managers, it’s this: Feedback training is a game-changer. It helps you navigate the complexities of giving, receiving, and mediating feedback while strengthening trust and collaboration. The key is to treat feedback as a skill — a muscle that needs regular exercise. Step away from the daily grind, practice in a safe space, and watch how it transforms your team and your leadership.


Feedback isn’t just about fixing what’s wrong; it’s about recognizing what’s right, fostering growth, and building a supportive culture. And that, in my book, is worth every minute of effort.

Written by our Vice President, Leadership Programs, this article is part of a series highlighting perspectives from various Leading Edge team members as we reflect on our journey through a feedback workshop series.

From Awkward to Awesome: A Middle Manager’s Journey with Feedback

A few years back, I wrote an internal concept paper that proposed a pseudo-census of the Jewish nonprofit sector. I wanted to do a rigorous, multi-phase research project that would not only tell us how many Jewish nonprofits exist in North America, but also how many people they employ, how many board members sit on their boards, and where they are. I dreamed of a map, a catalogue, a dataset with rows upon rows and columns upon columns of data. To those of you who are kindred spirits in data, who are reading this and can truly visualize that dream and are excited by it, I say to you: fingers crossed, one day! But not yet.

Honestly, I’ve wanted to do this for nearly a decade. I’ve been fortunate enough to have been part of every survey Leading Edge has launched to the field and to have supported hundreds of Jewish nonprofits through the survey tools we’ve built. In the early days of my tenure with Leading Edge, we were looking to understand what our “sandbox” looked like and today, over 85,000 survey responses later, I want to be able to contextualize our reach even more.

I first read Paul Burstein’s 2011 article “Jewish Nonprofit Organizations in the U.S.: A Preliminary Survey” in a graduate school class in 2015 (shoutout to the Hornstein program at Brandeis University!) and was intrigued by the methodology and the calculations — a third of our sector are synagogues, two-thirds fall under a national/umbrella entity, and there are more classifications of Jewish nonprofits than I was aware of at the time. A decade later, this study still sits at the center of the most-frequently-cited Jewish nonprofit sector estimates. Using IRS filings of 990s starting in 2009, Burstein provided a foundational analysis estimating around 9,500 Jewish nonprofits in the United States. 


In the early days of my tenure at Leading Edge, we used this number to help us get some sense of how many people are employed in the Jewish Nonprofit sector. First, we divided an estimate of total jobs in the US nonprofit sector (12.3 million, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics in 2016) by an estimate of total nonprofit organizations in the US (1.6 million, according to The National Center for Charitable Statistics in 2016) to yield an average of 7.68 employees per nonprofit organization. Then we use Burstein’s 9,500 Jewish nonprofit organizations figure and assume that the Jewish nonprofit sector does not significantly deviate from the US national nonprofit average for average number of employees, with which we come up with an estimate of ~73,000 people working in the Jewish nonprofit sector.


In 2023, JPro (which, much more recently, joined together with Leading Edge) queried the field through national and umbrella organizations to get fresh counts for the number of organizations and employees in our field and calculated that there are 6,518 organizations and 121,178 employees. 


No estimate has been perfect for defining our “sandbox” but…

As large language models (LLMs) have become more powerful recently, I’ve wondered: could AI help test our estimates? As the fastest-growing technology to date (according to Forbes), it has experienced incredible diversification in its capabilities, which can sometimes feel overwhelming to keep up with. On Feb 2, 2025, ChatGPT added an exciting new feature — Deep Research — “an agent that uses reasoning to synthesize large amounts of online information and complete multi-step research tasks for you.” What fun!

When we first asked Deep Research to look into this, it returned an essay that relied heavily on… Leading Edge and JPro! It used our estimate, the one we were trying to test. But after some course correction, it made a new estimate, scrupulously excluding Leading Edge and JPro from its sources, and relying most on estimates of the component categories of organization types in our sector.

What was truly surprising, in this second round of results, was to see that we may not have been that far off all along! 


Here is a table that summarizes what Chat GPT - Deep Research was able to gather:

Assuming that there are uncategorized organizations and uncharacterized employees, we can conservatively estimate 10,000 orgs and 120,000 employees in the sector. ChatGPT is conservatively estimating an average of 12 board members per organization at 9,000 organizations which we adjusted for the 10,000 count to arrive at 120,000 board members, a cautious estimate. 


The journey of re-estimating the population of the Jewish nonprofit sector has not reached its conclusion. I still strongly believe that we need to conduct a rigorous, research-backed count of the sector as I dreamed it. After all, Deep Research can only base itself on the imperfect information publicly available to it on the internet. “Garbage in, garbage out,” goes the saying, and while the publicly available information isn’t “garbage,” it’s also quite far from comprehensive! We need more.

Still, this exercise of using AI to re-examine the sources we have can strengthen our confidence, to some degree, in some of our past assumptions. 

As we continue to gather data and refine our estimates, it is essential to contextualize our findings within the broader landscape of nonprofit organizations. A dual approach — leveraging research data while embracing innovative technology — can allow us to pave the way for a more informed, engaged, and impactful Jewish nonprofit sector. Imagine being able to know how large our tent truly is — and to know not only who they are, but where they are. 


One day, I hope to say that the sector is able to leverage resources and communal knowledge to enhance the lives of XXX,XXX of Jewish nonprofit professionals at XX,XXX organizations, as a fact and not an estimate. 


Until then, at least we have our robot friends.

Sometimes the simplest questions are the hardest to answer. For example: How many Jewish nonprofits are there, and how many people work in them?

Re-estimating the Jewish Nonprofit Sector: A Journey Through Data and AI

For so many of us right now, we need an escape. An escape from the news, from the problems and dangers of the world. An escape from our emotions, from our losses, from our fears. Perhaps even an escape from ourselves…

Luckily, Purim is coming, and with it, the chance to become someone new.

Wearing costumes is one of the most distinctive elements of Purim. Lots of holidays have feasts; lots of holidays have alcohol (four cups of wine at Passover, anyone?). But showing up to a prayer service at synagogue to pray while dressed like Taylor Swift, or a unicorn, or Raygun from the Paris Olympics? Only on Purim.

Here, in gratuitous cuteness, is my son Gavi last Purim, dressed as a chicken.

Kids are expert costume-wearers. Look at Gavi’s face: There’s no self-consciousness, no ironic detachment; he’s just there, in the moment. “Yeah, of course I’m a chicken — What are you? What will we be next?”

Did you know that the tradition of dressing up in masks and costumes at Purim is not original to the holiday? Sure, celebration in general goes back to the Book of Esther. The Megillah mentions “feasting and joy” (“mishteh vesimha”), “sending portions [of food]” (“mishloah manot”), and “gifts to the poor” (“matanot laevyonim”). But look at the text — there’s nothing there about costumes. 

In fact, the earliest textual evidence for dressing up on Purim is in rabbinic texts from the 14th Century. Some scholars speculate that dressing up on Purim may have originally developed as a tradition European Jews borrowed from their Christian neighbors, who would dress up for the carnival season in advance of Lent around the same time of year. According to this theory, the cultural borrowing happened first, organically, and all the elaborate rabbinic ideas about connections between masking/costumes and the ideas of Purim  — costumes as a reference to Esther hiding her Jewish identity at first; masks hiding the face as a reference to “Esther” sounding like “hester panim,” “hiding the face [of God],” in connection with the megillah’s lack of explicit reference to God and the idea of hidden miracles; and the connection between hiding identities behind costumes and “venahafoch hu,” “and it [the calamity] was overturned”, i.e., the idea of good possibilities hiding behind bad facts — all these connections between dressing up and Purim theology, beautiful though they are, were all developed later, as explanations (excuses, even?) after the fact. 

Yet, if this theory is correct, then I think the practice of dressing up on Purim becomes more appropriate, not less so. It embodies its own symbolic meaning in its history. Just as the megillah relates events that appeared random on the surface, but turned out to be masking a miraculous deliverance, dressing up for Purim is a practice that “randomly” developed and appeared on the surface to be a simple borrowing from the majority culture, but turned out to be masking deep and vital connections to Judaism. 

In this difficult year, I’m thinking about dressing up on Purim as a way to escape from limitations. For everyone, but especially for leaders, I wonder what would happen if just for one day we stepped outside our assumptions, our habits, our biases, our ideas, or even our identities? What if we tried looking at ourselves, and the world in both its beauty and ugliness, through the eyes of new “masks”? What if we looked around and saw the people and institutions around us as containing new possibilities we’d never considered before?

It’s not an easy time to think like that.

For so many of us right now, we need an escape. An escape from the news, from the problems and dangers of the world. An escape from our emotions, from our losses, from our fears. Perhaps even an escape from ourselves… Luckily, Purim is coming, and with it, the chance to become someone new.