Picture an apprentice carpenter. She learns to translate architectural drawings into physical structures; how timber, steel and concrete respond differently under weight and force; and the regulations governing how to build a structure safely. All of it is necessary — indeed, it is vital — but none of it makes her a carpenter. She becomes a carpenter the moment somebody hands her a hammer and lets her build something that matters — and affords her the space to get something wrong. 

It is a point I took from Ilana Kaufman, CEO of the Jews of Color Initiative, during lectures this summer at Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion’s Zelikow School of Jewish Nonprofit Management: mentorship without a handover of real decision-making power isn’t leadership development; it’s leadership delay.

chaliya/Adobe Stock

A 2018 survey by Leading Edge found that 52% of Jewish nonprofit employees wanted to advance within their organization, while only 38% saw an opportunity to do so. Of the 13,000 employees surveyed in Leading Edge’s “State of Jewish Nonprofit Talent 2025,” only half of those under 30 expected to still be at their organization in two years; it also found that most organizations are unprepared for the chief executive turnover they know is coming. 

We are running short of leaders at the top while losing those who would succeed them.

And what we do not measure is more revealing. How many graduates of our leadership programs go on to run Jewish organizations? How many join boards? How many leave for the private sector, or leave Jewish life altogether? How many take on more senior roles as a result of the programs in which they participate? While evaluations of these programs themselves exist, research into their long-term impact is harder to find.

We have seriously and meaningfully funded leadership development for at least four decades and have barely scratched the surface of asking whether it actually produces leaders. Measuring outcomes would tell us more about whether the bottleneck lies in training or in handing over the reins.

Jonathan Woocher’s 1986 book Sacred Survival: The Civil Religion of American Jews mapped the belief system underpinning American Jewish organizational life and found that many institutions had turned survival itself into something close to a creed. If he was right, then handing real authority to unproven leaders will always feel like heresy, however much we claim to want it. But if Woocher is potentially wrong — that our institutions are not just based on surviving, but are focused on a desire to thrive — then that is only possible by taking risks; by giving the carpenter the training needed to use the hammer and handing it over.

But what if they fail? Let them! Let them learn from that failure. What if they succeed beyond your wildest expectations? Why is fear of failure what drives our decisions as opposed to potential for success? What about the donors? What about the risks? If a single failure can put an organization’s entire future in jeopardy, I would argue that the organization’s foundations probably weren’t strong enough. 

In 2015, at just 28 years old, I was offered the role of executive director of the Zionist Federation of Great Britain and Ireland. The president took a chance on a candidate with no senior leadership experience, no experience managing staff, no fundraising experience and no organizational management background. (This was not, I should stress, my entire pitch.) He took the risk because he saw something and did not wait for proof, and that role taught me what no leadership or development course could: that competence gets built by doing the job, not only by preparing for it. It also led directly to my next executive leadership role. I would like to think the risk paid off, but that is not the point. The point is that he took it.

The philanthropists, senior professionals, board presidents and other gatekeepers are not giving the next generation real opportunities to exercise their leadership muscles. We are brilliant at leadership courses, fellowships and training programs. We are poor at handing over power.

Yes, we have a duty to ensure the success of the Jewish nonprofit sector and the longevity of the Jewish community as a whole. Yes, that absolutely starts with training — fellowships, courses, ZSchool. But if that is where we stop and pat ourselves on the back for a job well done, frankly, that’s not good enough. It is an absolute must for those holding the keys to leadership positions to ensure that space at the top table is made for younger, less experienced people; to ensure that younger people have spaces at board level, are given senior executive roles and are allowed to be in positions of genuine decision-making. Otherwise, how on earth will they ever gain experience? And when the next job advertisement has “senior leadership experience” as a prerequisite, they won’t get that job, either. 

There are numerous exceptional leadership development programs globally. I have had the huge benefit and opportunity to participate in some of them. They really are exceptional, and should absolutely continue to grow and develop future leaders. But that simply can’t be the end goal. 

This is the time to take a stand and reframe the conversation. These are not “future leaders.” They are the leaders of today and tomorrow, a framing that gives us so much more potential for greatness. So let’s take the chance and capitalize on that potential now, before it is too late and the private sector inherits yet another brilliant Jewish leader. 

Arieh Miller is the CEO of the Commonwealth Jewish Council.