In April 2024, Leading Edge surveyed 10,854 employees at 192 Jewish nonprofit organizations in the Spring cycle of our Focused Engagement Survey, which will be offered again in September (2024). (Note: The 200+ professionally-staffed Hillel campuses who participated are counted together as just one of the 192 participating organizations.) 

Of the 192 organizations that participated in this Spring 2024 survey, 155 organizations had also participated in our Spring 2023 Employee Experience Survey, offering the chance for year-over-year comparisons of the same organizations. 

Leading Edge has administered employee experience surveys every year since 2016 (with the exception of 2020), making this the 8th time we offered such a survey. In 2024, however, given recent events in Israel and the global Jewish community, many organizations in the Jewish nonprofit sector needed more timely and focused feedback from their teams to understand how best to support them during this critical time. Therefore, the 2024 survey is focused on the engagement questions that our data has shown are the most powerful for driving organizational culture change. 

The purpose of the survey is to help each participating organization identify ways to improve employee engagement, retention, and performance. Leading Edge also uses aggregate data from all participating organizations to inform the field about trends over time.

1. Engagement has held steady — for now?

(What is "employee engagement"? Click here for an explainer.)

After October 7th, Jewish organizations scrambled to support humanitarian and security needs in Israel, and also to support their people. Given the dramatic nature of this crisis and the subsequent ongoing upheaval, we expected to see a decline in employee engagement. Culture Amp, our survey platform partner, finds that engagement drops of up to 6% are typical after a crisis. Additionally, recent polling from Gallup finds that employee engagement across industries in the United States has dropped in 2024 to its lowest level since 2013, citing “less role clarity, lower satisfaction with their organizations, and less connection to their companies’ mission or purpose” among many employees.

That’s why it’s notable that between Spring 2023 and Spring 2024, aggregate employee engagement held steady in the Jewish nonprofit sector — not a single point down.

Several engagement metrics not only held steady, but improved:

This resilience may reflect a rallying-together effect related to the sense of crisis. We observed a similar pattern in our first major survey after the onset of COVID-19, in 2021. A rallying effect would make sense in the context of what the Jewish Federations of North America has called “The Surge and The Core.” Following October 7th and the rise in global antisemitism, they report a “surge” of Jews seeking out greater Jewish connections. Meanwhile, a “core” of already-committed Jews also wants more connection and support. The Jewish nonprofit workforce already includes many of these “core” people who may be more motivated than ever to remain in the field. The Jewish nonprofit sector may also have an opportunity to benefit from the “surge” by welcoming new applicants who, in this moment, may be more interested in a Jewish workplace.

We know that engagement — like other key drivers of the work experience — is dynamic. We will no doubt continue to see new ups and downs in engagement as time passes. 

2. Leadership, belonging, and well-being drive engagement.

Each year, Culture Amp uses an algorithm to analyze which survey questions are most strongly correlated with favorable answers to engagement questions in our data. These highly correlated questions are called “engagement drivers,” and they show what key workplace experiences contribute to higher engagement. This year, the top five engagement drivers focus on leadership, belonging, and well-being.

What’s new in top engagement drivers? Leadership communication. The top three engagement drivers, as well as the #5 engagement driver, are the exact same questions, in the same order, as appeared in our 2023 data. The only difference between 2023 and 2024 is in this year’s 4th-strongest engagement driver. In 2024, “Our leaders communicate honestly with employees” rose to the 4th-strongest engagement driver. This is especially noteworthy considering that in 2023, the same question ranked #11.

3. Internal communication is more vital than ever.

Internal communication has emerged as a prominent theme over a number of years of our survey. This year, as discussed in the previous finding, it has increased in importance, with communication from leaders rising to become a top-5 engagement driver.

Communication drives confidence in leadership, which drives employee engagement. As shown in the previous section, confidence in the organization’s leadership is the strongest driver of employee engagement. Our data shows that questions about communication are strongly correlated with confidence in leadership, particularly these ones:

“Our leaders communicate honestly with employees.”

“At my organization there is open and honest two-way communication.”

New this year: what we call a “broken telephone effect.” In previous years, middle managers reported the lowest favorability on internal communication. This year, individual contributors (people who don’t supervise anyone else) are least favorable about communication questions. Communications seem to be breaking down in a linear pattern from top executives to individual contributors.

Leadership communication can suffer in “crisis mode.” Since October 7th, many leaders have been operating in a “wartime” or “emergency” mode. That heightened state requires quick decision-making and execution. Leaders have less time and capacity for deliberation and open conversations with their teams or understanding how these decisions were made or may be landing. The speed of action coupled with imperfect information needed during these times often short-circuits leaders’ abilities to give context (the “why”) for new plans. Yet with so much changing, and with the stakes of the moment so high, the potential impact of effective two-way communication between leaders and teams has never been greater.

4. At risk: retention of the youngest, newest, individual contributors.

When it comes to likelihood of leaving their organizations, levels of engagement, and direction of favorability scores year to year, three groups stand out in our analysis as being particularly in need of attention and support: employees who are youngest (under 30), newest (under two years of tenure at the organization) and at the individual contributor level (they don’t supervise anyone). (In both 2023 and the spring 2024 survey cycle, this group represented approximately 20% of all respondents.) 

These employees were more likely to leave last year. When we look at who, among our 2023 survey respondents, left their organizations between Spring 2023 and Spring 2024, we see these patterns:

Employees under age 30 were 89% more likely than their older counterparts to leave their organization.

Employees with under two years of tenure were 65% more likely than their longer-tenured counterparts to leave their organization.

Individual contributors were 33% more likely than employees at other job levels to leave their organization.

Intention to leave is growing in these groups. For all three of these groups (individual contributors under age 30 with less than two years of tenure), desire to stay at their organization for the next two years dropped five percentage points between 2023 and 2024. 

These employees feel less involved in decisions compared to last year. The question with the most notable drop in favorability scores from 2023 to 2024 is the same across all three of these groups: “I am appropriately involved in decisions that affect my work,” which is a question strongly correlated with both engagement and retention. Between 2023 and 2024, favorability scores changed:

-5% for employees less than two years on the job.

-8% for employees in all three groups (individual contributors under age 30 with less than two years of tenure).

These employees feel declining trust that their leaders are communicating honestly. Among the 1,084 employees who are in all three categories (under 30, less than two years’ tenure, individual contributors), agreement dropped five percentage points between last year and this year for “Our leaders communicate honestly with employees.”

Younger generations are stressed beyond our field. Addressing the wider context beyond the Jewish nonprofit sector, Deloitte reports that stress levels are high for Generation Z and Millennials in 2024. We’re interested in watching this trend over time, and we will learn more from the Fall cycle of our survey. 

“How can we improve?” There is no one formula for improving workplace culture. But we all need a place to start. These Action Inspirations, written by Culture Amp and Leading Edge, with contributions from  LifeLabs Learning and research completed for Leading Edge by Prof. Adia Harvey Wingfield, are a great place to start.

What is data for? Multiple times in the Torah, the Israelites are commanded to take a census, and at these times, the Torah uses a peculiar idiom for this counting — it refers to “lifting the heads” of the people. The late Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks commented on this idiom: 

“The challenge that emerges from the way the Torah describes taking a census is that we must ‘lift people’s heads.’ Never let them feel merely a number.”

Data — even 100% accurate data — isn’t inherently good or bad. Data is what we make of it: how we interpret it, how we use it, and what kinds of changes happen as a result. As we interpret this snapshot of one moment in time for our field, the Leading Edge team is reminding ourselves, along with our partners working to improve organizational culture across the field, that the value of this and all data can only be truly known by how well we use it to lift people up.

Leading Edge is the first and only organization strengthening the entire Jewish nonprofit sector by developing leadership and culture.

More about us • For organizational culture • For executive leaders • For boards

Insights into engagement, retention, communication, and the post-October 7th era in Jewish nonprofitsbased on the Spring 2024 cycle of our Focused Engagement Survey, with data from 10,854 employees at 192 Jewish nonprofit organizations.

Insights into engagement, retention, communication, and the post-October 7th era in Jewish nonprofits. Based on the Spring 2024 cycle of Leading Edge's Focused Engagement Survey, with data from 10,854 employees at 192 Jewish nonprofit organizations.

Jewish Workforce Snapshot: Spring 2024

Data, best practices, and other resources on creating leading places to work.

Organizational Culture

Article

Leading Edge defines “employee engagement” as being motivated to do your best work, proud to work at your organization, likely to stay working there, and likely to recommend your organization to others as a place to work.

Simply put: If you want your organization to succeed, you need your people engaged and thriving.

Employee engagement has a proven relationship with organizational success. Among the vast body of research supporting this conclusion is Gallup’s The Relationship Between Engagement at Work and Organizational Outcomes, a meta-analysis of 456 research studies covering more than 2.7 million employees at 276 organizations in 54 industries in 96 countries. Gallup found that employee engagement is significantly correlated with, among many other metrics: 

Everyone loves engagement. But definitions vary.

Gallup bases employee engagement on 12 questions, some of which are like Leading Edge's definition, and others of which are different and quite specific (e.g., "I have a best friend at work".)

Culture Amp (our survey platform partner) considers engagement to have five components: pride, recommendation, present commitment, future commitment, and motivation.

Qualtrics defines engagement as "how much an employee is committed to helping their organization achieve its goals."

Many more organizations have many more definitions.

Where definitions of engagement differ most is in where they draw the line between what's "engagement" vs. what's a part of the employee’s experience that might contribute to engagement, with some (like Gallup) drawing that line broadly and others (like Qualtrics) more narrowly.

What all definitions of engagement share is the goal of capturing the magical quality of being really “into” your job and likely to do your best work for your organization.

How engaged are employees in the Jewish nonprofit sector?

Our most recent data on engagement across the Jewish nonprofit sector comes from April 2024.

Jewish nonprofit employee engagement is at 75%. That’s good, but it could be better. Looking at the individual questions with which Leading Edge measures employee engagement shows how:

Employees at Jewish nonprofits are overwhelmingly proud to work for their organizations. But the other three engagement questions show significant room for growth.

It’s particularly concerning that the Jewish nonprofit workers we surveyed are less likely than the average American worker to say that they would recommend their organization as a great place to work. This question, akin to the “Net Promoter Score,” is a key barometer for any organization, and for this question, our sector’s favorability score is 6 percentage points below Culture Amp’s U.S. benchmark.

How has Jewish nonprofit engagement changed over time?

Jewish nonprofit engagement has held quite steady over the past five years, although there was a field-wide dip in 2022, which we interpret as being related to the “Great Resignation” (or, as our former Chief Strategy Officer Amy Born called it, “The Great Whatever”). 

Engagement held steady after October 7th. Remarkably, employee engagement held steady from Spring 2023 to Spring 2024, despite the upheavals of October 7th and a global upsurge in antisemitism. To learn how we understand and contextualize that finding, read our Jewish Workforce Snapshot: Spring 2024.

Support employees through the "engagement crater."

Charting employee engagement across tenure at organizations, we see a striking pattern. At each end of the tenure spectrum, brand new employees (under one year of tenure) and employees who have been at the organization for more than 10 years are both more likely to be engaged than employees with between one and 10 years of tenure. This basic pattern has recurred over multiple years of our surveys; the following chart shows one example, based on 2023 data:

Explaining the engagement crater. Brand-new employees often enjoy the novelty of a new workplace. They know all the positive things about the organization that led them to join it, without yet knowing the drawbacks. Engagement drops during the first few years, as the “honeymoon” ends and the employee gets to know the organization’s flaws. At the same time, as new employees are seen less as “exciting new faces” around the organization, managers and colleagues may not give them as much encouragement and validation as they did when they were brand new. Employees may begin to feel taken for granted. As more time goes by, those less engaged are more likely to find opportunities to leave. Those who were more engaged all along are more likely to stay and may also develop and refine strategies to make the best of the unique quirks and challenges in their organization. 

How to address the “engagement crater?” Support midtenure and new employees. Clearly, mid-tenure employees could use more support from their organizations. At the same time, newer employees represent key opportunities to break the “engagement crater” pattern in the next “generation” of employees. Leaders and managers can make a special effort to speak with and listen to new employees before their engagement crater begins, and to proactively, explicitly prepare them to navigate challenges as the “honeymoon” period of their employment wears off. Discussing this pattern openly and setting expectations of honest, respectful communication about addressing challenges might set up both employees and their managers to prevent the engagement crater—or, at least, make it a bit less steep.

“Employee engagement” means being motivated to do your best work, proud to work at your organization, likely to stay working there, and likely to recommend your organization to others as a place to work. Here's why it’s so important for organizational performance.

What is employee engagement and why does it matter? | Leading Edge

Since October 7th, many Jewish nonprofits have faced challenges relating to managing teams with diverse views about Israel and the war in Gaza. At the same time, controversies around higher education have opened painful rifts about how institutions pursue diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging, while political polarization continues apace.

Disagreements about passionately held beliefs can be painful, especially for many Jewish nonprofit employees who choose to work in this sector because the Jewish community can feel familiar, like family. For some employees, their colleagues are also friends from camp or people with children in the same schools. This sense of closeness, so common in our field, can be wonderful — but it brings challenges as well. People may assume, erroneously, that everyone around them has similar views to their own — especially about Israel and Jewish issues, but also more broadly. Alternatively, even when people are aware of differences of viewpoint, they may hold back their views — even views directly relevant to the organization’s work — to try to avoid conflict in the workplace. But excessive avoidance can ultimately lead to festering and possible escalation. 

These challenges are not unique to this moment or any one issue. People are multi-faceted and any team will naturally include some amount of differences in deeply held beliefs about any and every high-stakes controversy. Whether those differences are large or small, they can be difficult to manage, and, at worst, they can be severely damaging to a workplace culture. 

But when organizations manage diversity of viewpoints well, it can be a superpower. Evidence shows that interaction across ideological boundaries is associated with higher levels of skill development, career success, life satisfaction, and leadership growth. Cognitive diversity measurably improves team performance. Having teams with diverse ideologies and backgrounds can be a powerful source of new ideas and innovation.

As a partner organization in A More Perfect Union: The Jewish Partnership for Democracy, the Leading Edge team is also mindful that workplaces can contribute to a healthy culture of democracy. Democracy isn’t only about free and fair elections, important as those are; it’s also about pluralistic civic habits and a culture of respect across differences. As the U.S. prepares for a potentially divisive 2024 presidential election and its aftermath, organizations that work to improve how their workplace cultures manage differences of deeply held beliefs will strengthen not only their own organizations, but also the health of democracy more broadly.

This topic of how to handle differences of deeply held beliefs in an organization is sensitive, complex, and difficult. Different organizations have different needs and situations, and not every resource presented here will be relevant or appropriate for every organization, situation, or issue. Leading Edge is not an expert in this; we are learning and growing along with everyone else. The following are resources we hope may be of use to some organizations as we all continue working to find constructive ways forward, with curiosity and humility.

Many organizations have been reviewing or re-establishing their expectations around how employees communicate, collaborate, and productively support the organization’s mission and values in this tumultuous time. These expectations are typically outlined in the Employee Handbook or HR Policies. 

Below are policies that are typically relevant to differences of viewpoint in an organization or workplace conflict, and some questions about each. These questions don’t constitute full guidelines for constructing a policy; rather, they are questions relevant to each policy that may be particularly important for organizations to consider at this time. For each policy area, evaluate whether your policy already answers these questions, or whether the organization has made an informed decision to not include certain guidelines. Furthermore, policies alone cannot necessarily prevent many difficult challenges and dilemmas from arising. Nonetheless, they are a valuable starting place.

Please note: Consult legal counsel to ensure compliance with federal, state, and local laws and regulations.

Guided by your mission and values, the code of conduct policy outlines rules and expectations for behavior during work-related interactions.

Include specific expectations for internal interactions between employees or between employees and board members?

Set guidelines for employee or board member interactions with participants/community members in the organization’s external meetings/spaces/events?

Recognize the likelihood of differences of opinion on sensitive topics and yet mandate respect for colleagues? How is respect defined in your organization?

Indicate the procedures to provide “pauses” for processing, allowing passions to dissipate, and allowing time to evaluate whether or not the code is being met?

Clarify how to escalate concerns if the code of conduct is not being met?

Conflict of interest policy defines actual or perceived scenarios where decision making or reputations might be compromised based on relationships, financial investment, or other factors and the appropriate process to protect the individuals and the organization from impropriety.

 Include distinct guidelines for all employees? The executive team? The board?

Define specific organizations or causes that are defined as “in conflict” and prohibit membership or any participation?

Organizations often create representation policies if aspects of their mission could be seen as political, controversial, or could jeopardize safety.

Define what “representing” constitutes? Naming one’s job title and employer? Explicitly claiming to represent the organization? Some other standard?

Allow for explicitly saying that one’s views “do not represent the employer” as sufficient for the policy to allow naming one’s employer in a public forum?

Differ by particular causes, topics, or organizations, or is it a general guideline?

Indicate a vetting or approval process for participation in events or signing outside statements that may be or be perceived as representing the organization?

Include language about when an organization’s logo (clothing, “swag”) can be used?

Include language regarding individual rights to freedom of speech,  while avoiding saying/signing/writing/ doing anything that would lead someone to reasonably attribute their personal positions to their organization without explicit approval?

This policy governs all media interaction relating to the organization, mission, funding, employees, or any other factor. 

Offer specific escalation points if employees are contacted by the media?

Outline specific expectations if confronted by media or a non-supporter of the organization outside of the workplace?

Define “crisis communications” and any unique requirements?

Explicitly authorize only certain individuals to speak on behalf of the organization? Articulate the expectations around “off the record” or anonymous contact with the media?

A subset of the code of conduct that guides employees on representing the organization (brand) online in a way that protects security, privacy and reputation.

Specify which organizational posts can be reposted or commented on by all employees versus those that only individuals with expertise should engage with?

Encourage (or discourage) employees from tagging or using specific hashtags?

Include guidelines that could impact physical safety of employees? (i.e., only post about in-person events after the event)?

A personal social media policy defines expectations for how employees associate with the organization and the appropriate behaviors for any personal social media presence.

Encourage employee disclaimers regarding personal thoughts rather than representing their organization?

Contain reminders that connections to the organization are easy to research, particularly if all employees are listed on the organization’s website?

Require discretion and offer clarity around repercussions of posting confidential information or material regarding the board, funders or other corporate partners?

Mention that the policy is not intended to interfere with protected activity under Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA)?

This policy sets clear boundaries for the time and place that non-work-related written materials can be circulated among employees.

Include mention of use of electronic systems such as Teams, Slack, or other DM/IM software to solicit or distribute non-work-related literature?

Please note: Inclusion in this list does not indicate an endorsement from Leading Edge. This list of providers was compiled from some organizations we have worked with, some organizations that have been recommended to us by others, and some organizations whose published materials we have found informative. They represent a range of approaches and viewpoints. Organizations should thoroughly vet potential vendors for service capabilities and alignment with their mission and values. Leading Edge cannot provide any information about fees for these services. If you have any feedback on the listed vendors, please email info@leadingedge.org.

De-escalation training, directory by state (Bridging Divides Initiative)

The Bronfman Fellowship Consulting Services: Building Pluralism

Bridging Differences Playbook (Greater Good)

Fostering Dialogue Across Divides: A Nuts and Bolts Guide (Essential Partners)

 A Guide to Dialogue Across Generations (Essential Partners)

Dialogue: A Virtual Workshop (The Public Conversations Project)

 Polarization Detox Challenge (Starts With Us)

Skills for Bridging the Gap curriculum (Interfaith America)

Reflective Structured Dialogue (Essential Partners)

Moments of Dissent Exercise (Essential Partners)

Active Bystander Intervention and De-Escalation (DC Peace Team)

Managing a Polarized Workforce: How to foster debate and promote trust

Preparing Your Team for a Year of Intense Political Polarization

Political discourse at work: Managing the 2024 election

The neurobiology of threat, and what facilitators need to understand about our biology

Why employer misunderstanding of psychological safety is hurting teams’ performance

Three Insights to Help You Build Bridges Across Differences

Argue better by signaling your receptiveness with these words

How to Beat Stereotypes by Seeing People as Individuals

What Makes a Good Interaction Between Divided Groups?

How the Growth Mindset Can Increase Cooperation

Eleven Tips for Making a Hard Conversation Work

Meditation in the Workplace: Does Mindfulness Reduce Bias and Increase Organisational Citizenship Behaviours?

Can You Get Fired for What You Post on Social Media?

David Brooks, “How to Know a Person: The Art of Seeing Others Deeply and Being Deeply Seen”

Kenneth Cloke: “Mediating Dangerously: The Frontiers of Conflict Resolution”

Kenneth Cloke and Joan Goldsmith, “Resolving Conflicts at Work: A Complete Guide for Everyone on the Job”

Peter T. Coleman, “The Way Out: How to Overcome Toxic Polarization”

Robbie Gringas & Abi Dauber Stern, "Stories for the Sake of Argument" 

Mónica Guzmán, “I Never Thought of It That Way: How to Have Fearlessly Curious Conversations in Dangerously Divided Times”

Irshad Manji, “Don't Label Me: How to Do Diversity Without Inflaming the Culture Wars”

Kerry Patterson, Joseph Grenny, Ron McMillan, and Al Switzler, “Crucial Conversations: Tools for Talking When Stakes Are High”

Amanda Ripley, “High Conflict: Why We Get Trapped and How We Get Out”

Harold H. Saunders, “Sustained Dialogue in Conflicts: Transformation and Change”

Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton, and Sheila Heen, “Difficult Conversations: How to Discuss What Matters Most”

Mary-Frances Winters, “We Can't Talk about That at Work!: How to Talk about Race, Religion, Politics, and Other Polarizing Topics”

Sy Landau, Barbara Landau, and Daryl Landau, “From Conflict to Creativity: How Resolving Workplace Disagreements Can Inspire Innovation and Productivity” 

Disagreements on a team about passionately held beliefs can be painful. But when organizations manage diversity of viewpoints well, it can be a superpower. This topic is sensitive, complex, and difficult, but here are some resources that might help.

Differences in deeply held beliefs can be difficult to manage. But when organizations manage diversity of viewpoints well, it can be a superpower.

Resources for Managing Teams with Diverse Viewpoints | Leading Edge

Resources for Managing Teams with Diverse Viewpoints

This report shares data from the Jewish nonprofit sector that we collected in May 2023, before anyone knew how our field’s work and context would change this autumn. It’s important to remember that certain parts of the experience of leaders and employees, and certain parts of CEOs’ relationships with their boards, have changed since our 2023 surveys were in the field. And yet, we firmly believe this report is still valuable for understanding today’s world, and for helping to improve the effectiveness of Jewish nonprofits. Jewish organizations do amazing work, Jewish organizations are under strain, and these findings are a snapshot of the field's workforce and leadership as we entered into this crisis. This report shows the starting point, just before this nightmare began.

This “State of the Jewish Workplace” report is a new format for us. In previous years, Leading Edge published two reports sharing separate insights from the Employee Experience Survey and the CEO Survey. This year, we present one unified report, based on both of those surveys and also informed by all the other ways Leading Edge learns about the field. We hope that this new format will make our findings clearer, more accessible, and more relevant.

State of the Jewish Workplace 2023-Leading Edge.pdf

Based on data from 18,212 employees and 304 CEOs at 327 organizations, this report shares findings about how things were going at work for employees and leaders in Jewish nonprofit organizations in May 2023.

State of The Jewish Workplace 2023 | Leading Edge

Report

For us at Leading Edge, as for so many people in the Jewish nonprofit sector, our hearts are with the people of Israel as they try to be resilient in the face of recent heartbreaking and terrifying events. The Jewish nonprofit sector in North America is deeply bound up with communities in Israel, and nothing can be "business as usual" as this crisis unfolds.

At the same time, and for that same reason, Leading Edge is proceeding with our work supporting leaders and workplace culture in Jewish nonprofits. Leadership and culture are never more important than when times are hard. It is in that spirit that we share this brief list of thoughts, ideas, and resources for supporting the people who are the Jewish nonprofit sector at this time. 

Supporting Your Team: Ideas for Professional Leaders, Managers, and People Professionals

Supporting Your Leaders: Ideas for Board Chairs and Board Members

Ensure your leave policies include emergency leave for those whose loved ones are directly affected.

Resource from PandaDoc: Personal Emergency Leave Policy Template

Communicate to your team and acknowledge things like these:

This is a difficult time, emotionally, for the sector and the Jewish community. 

Express care for the well-being of the team during this time.

Depending on the organization, “business as usual” may be suspended and changed. Certainly that is the case for the Jewish nonprofit sector overall.

Many people in our field have deep personal, familial, and professional connections to people affected in Israel.

Some team members may find it difficult to concentrate on work, and that’s okay.

Some team members may want to throw themselves into work and not think about the crisis, and that’s okay.

Some team members may not feel affected at all, and that’s okay.

People may have a huge variety of responses to what’s happening, and we can all create a supportive environment by holding space for that variety of responses.

Depending on how your organizations are responding, sometimes team members who are strongly emotionally affected may also have new and urgent responsibilities involved in responding to the crisis, and this may be particularly difficult.

Remind staff about mental health programs and benefits available to them.

Managers: Ask direct reports how they’re feeling and listen openly.

Keep the immediate, the short-term, and the long-term viewpoints in mind. We are in the onset of this crisis, but we should all keep in mind that the situation and its needs and contours will evolve over time.

Hold space for people to process what they’re feeling

Hold a physical or virtual meeting for people to come together

As much as is feasible depending on your work, allow extra flexibility with schedules and time off for people to process things in their own ways.

Organization-specific ways to help if your organization is responding

Links to relief funds if people are looking for places to give. (Make clear that this is purely optional and personal and will not be monitored or known by the employer.) Just one example, among many, is the Jewish Federations of North America response fund. (JFNA also has this page to sign up for Israel Emergency Updates.)

Share information about local communal responses and gatherings (making clear that participation is purely optional and personal, and the employer will not monitor participation).

Jump to: Ideas for boards supporting leaders

Supporting the Leaders: Ideas for Board Chairs and Board Members

Your leadership teams need to know more than ever that you have their backs.

Even though they may not show it, professional leadership teams are holding a lot, personally and professionally, at times like these. 

Understand that the order of the day may not be “business as usual” — and that’s OK.

Over-communicate with your leadership team. You may want to establish short-term regular contact points to check in more frequently. (However, still try to maintain appropriate boundaries.)

Ask your CEOs what they need and what their teams need.

Ask what you can do to help, understanding that might change day to day. 

While it is critical not to overstep boundaries into operations unasked, depending on your work, this could be an all-hands-on-deck situation and your expertise could be invaluable.

Be decisive and responsive. Your leadership teams cannot spend valuable time chasing down answers. Situations are fluid and may require prompt and immediate attention.

If feasible, determine whether your organization might need access to additional financial resources to help its team manage personally or professionally.

At the same time as you offer help, let the CEO and their team do the jobs that they were hired to do. They are balancing many considerations and they may need time and the space to focus on ever-changing priorities.

One of the roles of the board is to look at things from a long-term, high-level, strategic governance perspective. Take this opportunity to reflect on the nature of your mission and the way this crisis interacts with your organization’s long-term trajectory.

If this crisis specifically impacts the mission or work of your organization, form and empower a task force. It will give your leadership team support, thought partnership and quick decision-making. However, keep the board in the loop on decisions through regular communication.

Our hearts are with the people of Israel as they try to be resilient in the face of recent heartbreaking and terrifying events. The Jewish nonprofit sector in North America is deeply bound up with communities in Israel. Leadership and culture are never more important than when times are hard. It is in that spirit that we share this brief list of thoughts, ideas, and resources for supporting the people who are the Jewish nonprofit sector at this time.

Ideas, and resources for leaders, professionals, and board members working and supporting each other in the Jewish nonprofit sector at this time.