"Islamic Organizations" One of the biggest deceptions

Any organization that calls its self an "Islamic" organization is nothing short of a deception. They might look good on paper but in reality, they aren't really up to their standards. These organizations are run in a few ways. One, they have people leading who are not properly qualified or not properly trained or both. Second, all efforts and advice to better the organization are completely ignored because they are given by those who are "outside" the organization. Third, members of these organizations tend to stay disappointed, bring up their disappointments here and their, rather than in their meetings (assuming they have meetings). These are just some of the many faults with those organizations that call themselves Islamic.

So to address point one, many of these organizations, from what I have come to know, have people how are only "leaders" because they completed some sort of course or something within the organization and something that is "Islamic" related. They hear and read from books about how Islamic work should be done (some of which is not followed at all) and talk or discuss those topics. All literature pertains to Islam and the Islamic movement or something Islamic related. They never go outside their bubble and explore secular books on leadership which could offer some great advice. Nor do they look at books pertaining strictly to leadership from an Islamic perspective. Everything seems to be improvised on how to run things. There is no consistent model followed [within an organization]and there is no way to "overthrow" a leader [for poor workmanship or leadership]. To overthrow a leader is considered "haram" in some people's minds. Not training individuals on how to become leaders or how to properly run an organization leads to many organization's demise. Having a leader who is untrained or under qualified might work in some instances but it is usually because of a strong support system and great brothers/sisters who surround these leaders. These are very minor cases and are very rare to find these days. Masajids and Islamic organizations are starting to die or slowly fade because of bad leadership. 

Moving on to point two. Some people in these organizations have a problem when someone who is probably a volunteer and not on the "inside" of the organization brings up a problem within the organization. Yes, that sounds confusing. But I'll try to explain. I see a problem in organization X, I try to bring it up to the "leader" of organization X but I can't. And if I do, it is coming from someone who is a mere volunteer or someone with only a slight attachment to the organization. I might be right 110%, but since I'm not a "member", the advice or issue is only someone moving their mouth. Now, this could be a sincere advice to move the organization in the right direction, or a fault that needs correcting, but I am not a member so my word is meaningless. But to avoid this "volunteer" trying to talk and better the organization, some organizations are starting to hire people for work that can be done for free (so be careful who you donate to. And trust me, even if an organization looks amazing or has had a good "record", always do your research time and again before you open you wallets and checkbooks now-a-days). More and more organizations, to avoid and sort of conflict, are hiring individuals for work that can be done by volunteers [sometimes just as good or even better]. Im not saying don't hire people, but if there is something you can get for free, people should go for it. But even after hiring an individual, these organizations really dont have a proper way of firing an individual or dont fire at all. 

As for those wondering what is a difference between a member and a volunteer, well it could mean 2 things. One is members pay to be part of the organization and have more rights and decision making calls because they pay into the organization. The other thing in some organizations is that a person has to take some sort of "oath of loyalty" for the organization. That he/she will work to the best of their abilities and follow all the written rules and blah blah blah... Then those who are already members somehow magically believe that this person is part of them. I personally like the pay to play version bc if you dont pay, you are automatically kicked out. in the other way, its REALLY hard to kick someone out (but easy to get in if you have the right connections). 

Because of this dilemma of volunteer vs member, it brings me to my third point. I have seen many different "members" (remember, these are the individuals who have paid to play or taken some sort of oak), who are distraught with their organization or the way things are being done talk here and there but never seem to bring it up in their meetings. They never talk about it in the channel that it is supposed to be talked at (AKA their member's meeting). You will hear disappoints of things here and there, and even the leader (which they probably elected or not) and it just seems sad. But at the same time, it might make one angry why they are not just bringing it up in their meeting. Maybe others feel the same way and they will back them up. But then again, some organizations just don't have meetings for all their members. They just get rid of it all together because the leaders know they are doing a poor job and don't want anyone to bring it up. So what do these leaders do, they hold small meetings with a select few of these members and talk about small points and get it over as quickly as possible. 

I can write MANY more things about organizations and their destructing structures, but keeping it at these 3 should just make you think, are these "Islamic Organizations" really Islamic? Ask questions, demand answers or people will continue to spend the money you as individuals give them any way they like. And they will continue to do things how its seems fit to them because there is essentially no challenge for them. The earlier Muslims in general start to realize that it is OK to ask questions, raise their voices, and not shy away from organizational politics that are meant to shut them down, then only will we start moving back on the right track. Problems exist everywhere, but to address them and solve them are the only way to fix them. To hide them under a rug or a curtain or anywhere else, only makes things worse. 

May Allah guide us on the straight path and help us get rid of tyrant and/or unqualified leaders so we can become a strong Muslim Ummah once again. Ameen

Dysfunctions of an Islamic Organization

I got this a while back but being involved in an Islamic Organization myself for a while, I think I should share this. It is a really informative piece, specially for those in the "leadership" positions of Islamic Organizations. 

Five Dysfunctions of an Islamic Organization

This information should benefit anyone involved in Islamic organizations, but it really needs extra attention from those in leadership positions in their communities to start to effect the type of change needed to prevent dysfunction.

The Five Dysfunctions Are

1. Absence of Trust
2. Fear of Conflict
3. Lack of Commitment
4. Avoidance of Accountability
5. Inattention to Results

These are laid out by Patrick Lencioni in his book, The Five Dysfunctions of a Team: A Leadership Fable. While the pertinence to a professional or corporate environment is obvious, these are at the core of the problems faced by Masajid and Islamic organizations across the country.

1. Absence of Trust

The fear of being vulnerable with team members prevents the building of trust within the team.

Understanding trust means refining our notions of the term. Trust means knowing the others around you have good intentions, and that you don’t need to shield yourself around them. It is distinct from reliance, which is “trusting” that a peer will perform a given task reliably. Trust is being able to open up, and show vulnerability while knowing that those vulnerabilities won’t be used against you.

What we find with many Islamic organizations is that people’s actions are dictated by what others will think about them. Think about the person elected to be the Masjid treasurer with no accounting or financial experience whatsoever. This person continues to do this job day in and day out, despite not being able to do it well. Instead, this person is focusing on holding this position for strategic reasons vis-a-vis others within the organization. He is constantly trying to protect himself. If trust existed within the organization, he would be able to display that vulnerability and instead be 100% focused on performing the treasurer duties to the best of his ability.

It is commonplace that the higher ranking members in these organizations are usually the “well-educated” ones (e.g. the “doctor uncle”). One thing we often fail to realize is that these people have been trained their entire lives to be competitive with their peers and constantly outperform them. Personal reputations are at stake. If these instincts cannot be ‘turned off’ for the betterment of the organization, then a lot of time is invested into managing the fallout. Examples of this include having constant meetings to manage people’s behaviors, and seeing a decrease in the willingness of organization members to help one another.

Organizationally, another factor that contributes to a loss of trust is not identifying and utilizing people’s skills. How can trust exist in a masjid construction project when a Muslim contractor who has been managing construction projects for a living for over 20 years is sitting around while the organization turns over the masjid construction plans to a pediatrician?

This is the fundamental building block to freeing Islamic organizations of dysfunction, and it is perhaps the hardest because it requires the greatest overhaul in attitude and environment.

Once established however, it can foster constructive conflict.

2. Fear of Conflict

The desire to preserve artificial harmony stifles the occurrence of productive, ideological conflict.

-Important concept to understand: Ideological conflict vs. Personal conflict-

Have you ever met a husband and wife who never had an argument with one another? Have you ever met a parent that never had a disagreement with his or her children? Didn’t think so.

Why do we expect that Islamic organizations should operate under some kind of happy-go-lucky utopia? To preserve this naive notion of how things should be, we avoid engaging in any kind of conflict. What ends up happening then is that direct conflict is avoided within the organization, but it is replaced with back-stabbing, personal conflicts, and politics.

You have seen the organization where there may be a body of 7 people. 3 of them meet separately, and 4 of them meet separately. Then they concoct conspiracy theories about how the opposing camp really feels about an issue, and why they are pushing a particular position over another. Then they get riled up, and go out to the community seeking more support for their own side. Next thing you know, it’s an all out community conflict with name-calling, people not talking to each other, and the conflict finally erupting at a dinner party at some innocent person’s house while the innocent bystanders try to enjoy some chicken biryani.

Muslim organizations simply seem to want to avoid having any healthy conflict (discussion). This is why they all dread meetings that are boring, and where nothing gets done. When organization members trust each other, they can talk freely with one another and debate the merits of different ideas. Sit down and completely hash it out. A certain level of maturity is of course required, so that the debate does not turn personal. The element of trust is what allows people to freely credit or discredit ideas without worrying about hurting someone’s feelings (and then later making personal attacks behind their back).

Meetings should be lively and focus on the concepts and ideas being discussed – even if they become emotional. Let people be passionate about why they feel that a certain project is a waste of money, or that the dome of the masjid should be 25 feet in diameter instead of 30 feet, and so on.

This is important because once the merits of an idea have been thoroughly discussed, everyone has had a chance to air their objections or concerns, and people can respond to them. So let the best ideas win. Once that is done, even the people who initially opposed the idea, can support it from an organizational perspective. Contrast this with a board member who unwillingly votes in favor of a certain project, waiting for it to fail, then running around telling the community, “I told you so!”

3. Lack of Commitment

The lack of clarity or buy-in prevents team members from making decisions to which they will commit.

Commitment only comes from the step above – once everyone’s perspectives and opinions have been heard, they can all buy into the concept knowing that all ideas have been considered. And of course, that discussion cannot take place without step 1 – establishing trust.

According to Lencioni, the two biggest factors hindering commitment are:

1. Desire for consensus
2. Need for certainty

It seems many Islamic organizations refuse to move forward even one step without both of those being in place. Finding consensus is a nearly impossible task, and consensus is usually sought out of fear of backlash. It seems leaders are unwilling to make decisions without 100% support in case something goes wrong, they can defend themselves. This is unhealthy for the growth of any organization.

People do not need to agree with a decision in order to support it. As long as their ideas have been properly heard (explained in the step above), then they can rally around the decision – even if they disagree with it.

The need for certainty is closely related to the phenomenon of analysis paralysis. Organizations are unwilling to make a decision until a certain amount of data is available to them – at which point it might be too late. They have an innate need to feel like they have made the correct decision. Often times, a decision will need to be made quickly, and without the benefit of having all of the relevant information available. It is important to decide, and move on. Better to go down swinging then not show up at all. We are blessed with Istikharah and shura. Utilize them. Constantly delaying a decision, or flip-flopping back and forth will not help you make the correct choice, instead it will just kill your credibility.

Symptoms of lack of commitment include: ambiguity about direction and priorities, lack of confidence, fear of failure, and revisiting issues over and over for discussion. Islamic organizations need to clearly define their goals, rally around those common objectives, create an environment of learning from mistakes, and moving forward without regret.

The Prophet (sal-Allahu ‘alayhi was-Sallam) said the believer is not bitten from the same hole twice. We cannot demand perfection, but we demand the best effort.

4. Avoidance of Accountability

The need to avoid interpersonal discomfort prevents team members from holding one another accountable.

Lack of clarity and direction (as explained in the step above) makes it impossible to hold anyone accountable. How can someone be accountable if they do not know what is expected in the first place?

Successful organizations must have an environment in place where people are able to call each other out for not living up to their standards. This should be the case whether positions are paid or unpaid. People are uncomfortable letting others know that their performance may not be up to the expected standards because they fear losing a volunteer, or perhaps even a friendship. Letting these feelings fester though, will only cause those relationships to deteriorate. It is time for Islamic organizations to stop settling, and demand the best – even if it requires some personal discomfort along the way. Doing this will actually develop mutual respect amongst the people working within the organization because they know they are equally being held to the same high standards by one another.

If this accountability is not there, then people begin to simply look out for their own self-interests over and above the interests of the organization.

5. Inattention to Results

The pursuit of individual goals and personal status erodes the focus on collective success.

Once an organization has clearly defined its goals and objectives, it must focus on meeting them. When an organization loses sight of those results, their attention shifts elsewhere. Lencioni says ‘elsewhere’ in this case would be team and individual status:

Team Status: For [some], merely being part of the group is enough to keep them satisfied. For them, the achievement of specific results might be desirable, but not necessarily worthy of great sacrifice or inconvenience. As ridiculous and dangerous as this might seem, plenty of teams fall prey to the lure of status. These often include altruistic nonprofit organizations that come to believe that the nobility of their mission is enough to justify their satisfaction … as they often see success in merely being associated with their special organizations.

Individual Status: This refers … [to people focusing] on enhancing their own positions … at the expense of the team.

The collective results must be more important than individual aims and objectives. One important note is the relationship of this dysfunction to the issue of trust (step 1). Individuals getting involved must also cleanse their hearts of any ill intentions such as seeking fame and credit in the community. The eventual breakdown of an entire organization can start from the simplest of individual wants or intentions.

Concluding Thoughts

Lencioni summarized it best:

And so, like a chain with just one link broken, teamwork deteriorates if even a single dysfunction is allowed to flourish.

Another way to understand this model is to take the opposite approach – a positive one – and imagine how members of a truly cohesive team behave:

1. They trust one another.
2. They engage in unfiltered conflict around ideas.
3. They commit to decisions and plans of action.
4. They hold one another accountable for delivering against those plans.
5. They focus on the achievement of collective results.