New Economic Model Working Group

November 10, 2003 - minutes

Location: Shambhala International (SI), Halifax, plus conference call hookups

1. Introductions

Jim Rosen, Chair of the New Economic Model Working Group. Worked in the software business for 18 years where he started 2 companies.

Eric Spiegel (via phone hook-up): New York City Shambhala Center treasurer. Recently retired from 20 years working in finance with a Wall Street firm.

Connie Brock (via phone hook-up) Minneapolis Center treasurer. Retired in 2000 from 30 years with Wells Fargo Bank doing management technology planning.

Richard Siebold (via phone hook-up) Chief Financial Officer for Shambhala Mountain Center (SMC). Previously worked for a Big Six accounting firm for two years. CPA.

Terry Rudderham, comptroller, Shambhala International. Previously had not-for-profit experience and was self-employed in the film industry and in day care.

Dan Naistadt, New York City. On the Boards of the New York Shambhala Center and the Sky Lake Lodge. He has had 25 years experience owning and operating businesses in the garment industry.

Richard Reoch, President, Shambhala International. Before becoming President Richard coordinated the Stupa Consecration, and before that he spent 20 years with Amnesty International, 15 of which was in senior management.

Ed Keizer, Netherlands. Retired from 35 years as a computer consultant specializing in management information systems and data warehouses. One of the team that developed the European membership system. Upcoming CFO of Shambhala Europe and member of the European Donors Group

Brian Callahan, Director, Gampo Abbey. In the past worked in management and as a psychotherapist.

Jeff Waltcher, Director, Shambhala Mountain Center, Colorado.

Nancy McCabe, coordinator, Annapolis Shambhala Group, Nova Scotia. Formerly worked as a CPA in the US doing audits and working as a consultant for governments installing computerized accounting systems. Worked on SI combined financial statements.

Absent: (traveling)

Michael Greenleaf, Shambhala International Board member and chair of Board Finance committee.

Chris Tamdjidi, Director of Shambhala Europe

This first meeting of the Working Group was attended by Richard Reoch, President of Shambhala. Before becoming President Richard coordinated the Stupa Consecration, and before that he spent 23 years with Amnesty International, 15 in senior management.

2. Appointment of Secretary for the Meeting: Nancy McCabe

3. Comments from President Reoch:

It was clear from the Shambhala Congress which concluded November 8, that people are willing to step forward and contribute actively to the mandala. This New Economic Model Working Group is one of the first manifestations of that spirit, meeting only two days after the congress.

Michael Greenleaf, Chair of the Finance Committee of the Board of Shambhala has agreed to be a member of the working group and is delighted with the prospect of receiving additional input.

In defining his own role, Richard indicated that there is no need to refer to him for decisions on the internal affairs of the Working Group, or for him to be a bottleneck.

Communications is the key. Be sure this group is not a cocoon of its own. It’s important for the community to feel this group is a tool for solving problems, even if it takes longer to ensure good communications to and from the community. It’s important to communicate the workings of this group such as posting minutes on a web site.

The following comments were in response to questions:

This working group is not intended to be permanent, though it may be in existence for an extended period before its work is completed.

Regarding how long the mandala could continue with pared down staffing levels; Richard indicated we are all aware of organizational risks of this strategy. We are willing to ride the edge, relying on the goodwill of the community, to not rush into employment contracts until we have a plan and project a long term sustainable financial situation and structure. We need to balance availability of funds and clarity about structure.

It is possible that short term staff persons could be hired for specific projects. We are not rushing into reconstruct everything exactly as it was, even if we had the funds to do so. This is an important time for reflection.

4. Comments were requested from the working group members regarding where we are, hopes and fears, aspirations, what could derail progress.

We need to be transparent, clear and accountable. The Sangha needs to feel included. (Brian Callahan)

SMC has a lot of experience to offer. They have had to deal with many of the issues currently under discussion. The heart of the financial situation is really not about money, it’s about trust, or joining vision and genuine friendliness. (Jeff Waltcher)

Transparency is expensive. We need to be willing to spend the time and resources to make the information available that people want. Also, we need to identify all legal requirements such as audited financial statements, and make sure that the shortage of staff does not prevent our compliance. (Nancy McCabe)

The Congress has provided a mandate for change. People want to define a new set of interdependent functions that are then implemented by economic relationships. (Dan)

The problem is really not about money. Community concerns will be hard to redress. Transparency will be hard to achieve and may require paid staff with appropriate skills and experience. (Terry Rudderham)

Before the congress, I was concerned that reaching consensus within the working group would be a daunting task. It now seems workable given the progress we made at the Congress. We have received a mandate for change and can move forward productively. We need to have small demonstrations of successes quickly, which would be energizing. (Jim Rosen)

The Congress was encouraging because of the readiness to change and the goodwill that was evident. One concern is that, no matter how good a job we do, it’s hard to get the message out. Many people did not know there were congress working papers, even though we used every known tool to communicate this. People feel better knowing that information is available, even if they do not access it themselves. How many ways do we need to tell people the information is there? (Connie Brock)

One concern expressed was for the productivity of the group because it’s not clear where we’re going at this point. Another issue is transparency. For a comptroller to share financial information he needs feedback to indicate that the information is understood. Also, there is a need for centers to share information regarding such things as available insurance carriers. (Richard Siebold)

There needs to be a relationship between finance and the way teachings are propagated. We are in a shifting situation. We have a changing structure and mandala which will alter traditions. However, we have to be sure not to throw out the baby with the bath water. Know what we’re leaving behind, continually willing to reassess what we’re doing. Efficiency is not the only game in town. (Eric Spiegel.)

5. Review of Shambhala Congress Working Groups:

The findings and discussions from several working groups at the congress were reviewed. The notes from these reviews are not being included in these minutes since they will be available in other publicly available documents. The following groups were reviewed since we felt that they were particularly relevant to this working group:

a)   Finance and Risks

b)   Unified Mandala

c)   Membership

6. Mission and Process of Working Group

· Working Group Objectives

· Develop a financial model that enables all constituent parts of the Shambhala mandala to have a sound financial foundation:

· Design a cohesive financial function in the mandala that will help enable our society to flourish and engender trust from our members:

· Focus on solutions that can be implemented and will provide a long term solution.

Comments from President Reoch: This group will facilitate discussions across the mandala and bring forward issues and a practical model that can be presented to the president and board for decision. It will build on the ground work done by the Finance topic group at the Congress, but it also needs to work in close touch with centers throughout the mandala so that the outcome of the group’s proposals are grounded in the realities of our mandala, workable and supported by centers

7.    Where are we in this process? – A discussion was had regarding where we are in this progress and how to move forward. Some of the key points made include the following:

· There is no perfect final model. What we can do is bring more people into the process so less people feel marginalized and to provide answers.

· We can’t undermine the Shambhala Congress. This working group uses the congress outcome as a basis. We will gather feedback from the sangha to the congress suggestions and use it as the basis for a final proposal

· The papers submitted to the Congress will also be included as input.

· This working group’s product will also be distributed for feedback. It needs to be comprehensible. There needs to be a concise summary for ease of communication throughout the mandala.

· We should replicate the process used in the congress by encouraging a lot of questions.

· The key point of the congress is that Shambhala Centers should fund the core functions of the mandala. Our revisions should first be sent to the Congress topic group for feedback, then to the centers for further review.

· The new model proposed at the Congress did not presuppose that we wanted to increase the funding level of the center.

· One of the Congress topic groups identified a number of functions that could be performed centrally by Shambhala. This would prevent duplication of effort on the part of local centers. To support these functions funding would need to flow from the local centers to the core.

· One assumption is that the center would service the needs of the mandala.

· The Congress topic group suggested that Shambhala Centers support the core functions through dues and program revenues rather than using direct individual donations.

· There is a problem with the words “fringe” and “center”. Currently the “fringe” does support the center via individuals on the fringe sending in contributions. In Europe local groups have a written obligation to the center, and this is the main source of funds for the central activities.

8.    Key Questions

· Do we have the right members and chair.

· A list of people who have offered to join and/or support the group was distributed.

· The consensus was that, in the interest of manageability of the group, the current size would be maintained, and that the interested people would be drawn on to participate in specific projects and/or reviews.

· The consensus was that Jim Rosen should continue as chairperson.

9. How do we proceed?

· The following plan was proposed and agreed upon:

· First the congress report goes out to the entire community.

· Second, the New Economic Model Working Group reshapes this initial model. This revised consultative document goes first to a review group made up of centers and others who have expressed an interest in the finance project and to those who have expertise in the area.

· The document is then revised based on these reviews and then goes out to all centers for feedback.

10. Next Steps

· A sub-committee was formed to assemble a review group. Connie Brock and Jeff Waltcher are leading that effort.

· A subcommittee was formed to build on the Congress results and produce a document that expands and clarifies the work from the Congress. This is made up of Connie Brock and Brian Callahan. (First draft to be ready in one week, distribution to group in two weeks)

· The mission statement of this working group will be reshaped by Jim Rosen.

· A discovery questionnaire will be developed to obtain data needed. Terry may have much of this information on file.

· Communication Infrastructure will be needed to communicate particularly via email and web sites.

Next Meeting: Monday, December 1at 3 PM Atlantic Time via phone hookup