Showing posts with label money. Show all posts
Showing posts with label money. Show all posts

Monday, 23 May 2011

FiLE update

Emerging from FiLE's autumn seminars were two proposals for further action.
 
The first involved participation in the Finance Innovation Lab, an open environment in which people can come together to explore, innovate and evolve the financial system so that it sustains people and planet (http://thefinancelab.ning.com/). Jonathan Evens has recently joined the Finance Innovation Lab (and, in particular, Peter Challen's 'Faith & Philosophy influencing Finance' group) and will aim to input from a FiLE perspective.

The second was for a centre blending social enterpreneurship, spirituality and work as part of the Olympics legacy, an idea that is being taking forward by a Development Group. As a FiLE representative, Jonathan Evens is now part of the core reference group for this new initiative which has been named Sophia Hubs. Sophia Hubs are intended to be incubators and catalysts for new social and economic enterprises harnessing the wisdom and energy of spiritual traditions. If you would be interested in exploring further the idea of Sophia Hubs please contact the Development Group at tel: 0207-766-1129 or email: sophiahubs@yahoo.com.
 
Jonathan Evens, as FiLE Chair, has also agreed to be a signatory of a letter to the Independent Commission on Banking, initiated by Peter Challen. The letter argues that "without radical reform our banking system is likely to fail again and again with various dangerous social, environmental and political consequences including, not least, ceaseless magnification of the gap between the rich and all others." A basic sense of self-preservation requires that we tackle the root of this problem, that is, the processes of money creation and the letter urges the Commission to take another hard look at proposals that address the fundamental question of how and by whom and for what purposes money is created.
 
Finally, Jonathan Evens has been asked to speak at a Taste of Religion event organised by the Employers Forum of Belief and KPMG which will cover religious festivals. Other speakers include Rabbi Dr Naftali Brawer, Khola Hasan, Shaunaka Rishi Das, Dr Satinder Singh and Simon Webley. More details can be found at: http://www.efbelief.org.uk/events.php/31/taste-of-religion.

Saturday, 11 December 2010

More, more, more

The Friday Essay from The Independent by John Lanchester and entitled 'More, more, more' is well worth a read, partly because it critiques our overconsumption in the light of the world's dwindling resources and also because it highlights the value of relationships in providing real richness for our lives. Here are some highlights from Lanchester's essay:

"... "Richness is a relationship between two people." This observation, by the Italian economist Ferdinando Galiani, was first brought to my attention by James Buchan, and it seems to me that it is one of the truest things ever said about money ...

much of the discourse about money is in some sense abstract, i.e. it is self-referential and circular – people talking about money in terms of its effects within the world of money. When we think about it in the non-abstract, i.e. the effects of money in the wider world, the one idea we need to hold in our minds is that richness is a relationship. Richness, the idea of having plenty of money, is not an inherent state, nor is it an absolute state. Richness is about the amount of money you have compared with the people you see around you. It's about where you are in relation to others, and where they are in relation to you, and whether you can have the things you want and other people have ...

We are a desiring species. We want. It goes very deep in us. Perhaps we should just accept that we want, and we particularly want what we can see that other people have but we don't.

Unfortunately, we can't do that, for two reasons. First, the incitement of envy is built into the mechanics of capitalism and advertising. We are made to want more and more, not just as an accidental feature of modern life but as a fundamental principle of the modern economy ...

At the moment, we are stuck on what is called the "hedonic treadmill": as you have more and more, your idea of what it would be to be happy keeps receding just out of reach. It's always the next pay rise, the next purchase, the next place you move to or where you go on holiday, which will make you happy. We in the West can do something that no people in history have done: we can show the world that we know when we have enough. As the planet runs out of resources, due mainly to the fact that everyone on it wants to live an equivalent lifestyle to those of us in the West, this lesson would have the potential to offer a new model for how we should live. If the people who have everything are content to live with less, maybe the whole world will consider the virtues of knowing when to stop. We have no choice other than to learn this at some point, because the planet is not an all-you-can-eat buffet. It's going to run out.

We are either going to be saved from the problem of over-consumption by some magic technological fix, or we are going to face planetary crisis, or we are going to learn to consume less. We have to start thinking about when we have sufficient – sufficient money, sufficient stuff – and whether we really need the things we think we do, beyond what we already have. "La ricchezza รจ una ragione." We are richer and more fortunate than most of the people who have ever lived. We should look less at what our next-door neighbours have, and more at what the rest of the planet dreams of having. Then, we should try to learn to be content where we are. In a world running out of resources, the most important ethical and political and ecological idea can be summed up in one simple word: "enough"."

John Lanchester will be delivering a sermon for the School of Life on 'Enough' this Sunday - see www.theschooloflife.com.  

Wednesday, 27 October 2010

Making money or making a difference - are they opposed? (3)

Making money or making a difference - are they opposed?
  • It’s not so much about how much money you have, but about how you make it and how you use it.
  • They are often but not always opposed. We urgently need to harness our economic system to goals of justice, human rights and environmental stewardship.
  • We need a resource based economy, not money/profit. Do no work that’s not socially constructive/sustainable. Audit and manage what actual resources we have.
  • The love of money is the root of all evil but shared or given money can be a sign of love.

Thursday, 21 October 2010

Making money or making a difference - are they opposed? (2)

Making money or making a difference - are they opposed?
  • In my opinion it's relationships that make economies work; so you can make a profit and make a difference if you put other people first.
  • Money can be made in an ethical or in an unethical manner - and it can also be used ethically or unethically.
  • It depends how money is made.  Speculation and separating means from ends in finance and economics is unjust and undermines  spiritual, social and environmental value.
  • NO - If you are making money to allow you to make a difference. YES - If you are making money at the expense of people.

Wednesday, 20 October 2010

Making money or making a difference - are they opposed?

Making money or making a difference - are they opposed?


We have begun today asking people to email their response (in no more than 25 words) to this question (send to jonathan.evens@btinternet.com and forward the request, if you are willing to do so, to other people in your address book). All responses received will be posted here.


The first responses received have been:
  • Making money is not as great an issue as using effectively the money you have, for the benefit of those who have little.
  • Having money-making as an ultimate aim is, by definition, self-centred (even if that ‘self’ is an organisation or community). Making a difference requires selflessness.
  • Money made can be put to good use to make a difference. Many millionaires donate to charity and sponsor events that make a difference.

Sunday, 10 October 2010

'Profit vs Prophet' - Harmander Singh

When I was contacted, I was told that the aim of the seminar is to explore whether making money and making a difference are opposed?

My immediate thought and reaction to the question was that they are NOT opposed as long as the making of money is by honest means and if it is NOT the sole purpose of making money and the making of difference is just an accidental by-product. The fuller answer is that they can be complimentary.

I also said to myself, it is why I personally have achieved neither.

Looking at the topic in Sikh terms, I believe that being rich and being a Sikh are not mutually exclusive. One can be rich and still be a good Sikh. The Sikh Gurus bestowed upon the Sikhs the concept of "Miri-Piri" and "Raj Jog" which is princely living according to Gurmat (Gurus teaching/thinking) and therefore attuned to the Almighty.

I felt I needed to back my thoughts up with some Scriptural excerpts in case someone says I am making it up – and luckily I found loads but will just give you three that were suggested to me by Tarlochan Singh - a Sikh friend on the internet.

As the malady of egoism is annulled, by grace of the Master, shalt thou practice sovereign yoga (Rajyoga)]
(5th Guru, Guru Arjan Dev, Guru Granth Sahib, 211)

God's devotees, even though householders, in contemplations of the essence of enlightenment to worldly pleasures remain indifferent.
(3rd Guru, Guru Amar Das, Guru Granth Sahib, 599)

Sayeth Nanak: By contact with the Master is the true device of living perfected. In a life of smiling playfulness, enjoyment of wear and food, Is attained liberation.
(5th Guru, Guru Arjan Dev, Guru Granth Sahib, 522.)

(English translations by Gurbachan Singh Talib)

Miri-Piri is the balance between Spiritual and Temporal living and denoted by the two crossed swords in the Sikh symbol the Khanda.

All Sikhs are encouraged to be householders – this does not mean property developers or Peter Rachmans. Being rich is not a pre-requisite to being a Sikh. The point I made was that it is okay to be rich as long as you live according to the principles of Gurmat and not indulge in un-Sikh businesses or those businesses which force you to a life that is anything but "honest living."  Here, the three basic principles of Sikhi always apply.  These are: Naam Japna, Kirat Karni and Vand ke Shakna.

Where, Naam Japna is to remember God lovingly during all waking moments.

Kirat Karni means making an honest living that is according to Gurmat living. I doubt if selling alcohol, tobacco, illegal drugs, and being in the adult entertainment business is according to Gurmat at all because these kinds of activities promote what Gurmat strictly forbids. In Britain and Europe, Sikhs own a large number of businesses that sell alcohol and and tobacco. Many of them are stinking rich and some claim to make a difference too.

A bank robber or a thief too cannot claim to do "kirat karni" simply because they use both their hands in doing those illegal and dishonest deeds. I am deliberately making the distinction between dishonest and illegal for tax avoidance and tax evasion fall into a good analogy but, to the poor person who cannot afford well versed accountants, both are dishonest.

Vand Ke Shakna is to share with others, especially the needy and vulnerable. As there is no Welfare State equivalent worth mentioning in certain parts of the world and certainly not in the times gone by, Sikhs donate (Daswandh or Darshan Pehta) whatever they can from their earnings to the Gurdwara – which is more than just a place for congregational worship.  It provides a centre where support of all kinds can be sought either directly or signposted.  This can make a difference for some.

I just make both ends meet and take out Daswandh, but I have never been rich in my entire life. Life has always been a struggle. Regardless, I always feel blessed by the Guru.

Conversely, if a Sikh cannot even make ends meet, he/she cannot take out Daswand and help the needy or contribute to a wider Panthic cause. I know it is not always possible, but a Sikh should strive to be in a position where he/she can help others.

How can this be practised one may ask? I can offer you a story my late father used to tell me which may strike a chord with some rich corporate bankers around the corner.

There was once a rich businessman who came across a holy man (funny how it is always men), and asked for a blessing to make him even richer so he could do some good later on in life although whatever his business was selling was already making a difference to people’s lives anyway.

The holy man thought for a moment and then asked the rich business man what the secret of his success was that made him as rich as he was already?

‘Oh that is easy’ the rich businessman replied, ‘I wheel and deal extensively, stay on top of my business sector, am good with words and people in that I can guess what the buyer wants to hear and I just tell him (yes a man again) exactly that. He buys the product or service and I make a profit – it matters not whether it is the best product I have, or even the right one and will not be what he needs’ the rich businessman continued and ended by saying ‘I obviously do not tell him if he can buy it cheaper elsewhere’.

The holy man paused for a while and then asked the rich business man if people liked him, trusted him and if that mattered to him?

‘Of course, everyone likes to be liked and trusted, but in business one has to cheat, lie and be ruthless to get ahead’ replied the rich businessman. ‘these are the rules of the game and inherent in any business manual written by authorities on the subject in my profession – it is what guarantees a return on investment’ he added.

The holy man took a deep breath, looked the business man straight in the eye and said‘ I will do you a deal that will make you richer both in terms of money and in spirit, what is more, people will also like you and trust you too – my business manual demands a return too and clearly there will have to be an agreement between both of us before I share the technique from my business manual – it happens to be written by a higher authority in my profession and also guarantees a return which is longer lasting’.

‘Sounds great’ said the rich businessman ‘what is the catch or fee for the secret in your profession’s manual?’ he asked.

The holy man continued looking at the highly excited rich businessman and said ‘There is no catch or fee, but you need to follow the instructions religiously (sic) and perhaps make a voluntary donation to a worthy cause from the additional profits you will be making after a short while’.

‘Just tell me the secret and I will give generously’ said the rich businessman, rubbing his hands expectantly.

After shaking hands on the deal, the holy man asked the rich businessman to make a note of each occasion he lied or cheated a customer daily and aim to reduce the total by one or more if he could every day until it reached zero – he must also return each month to give the holy man an update on the progress made.  The rich businessman explained his industry relied on cheating and lying but he had given his word and shaken hands on it so will come back at the end of each month to report back as agreed.

At the end of the first month, the rich businessman came and reported that at first he found it really hard, having to turn away business hurt him but as the weeks passed, it got easier and he had recovered the lost business by the end of the month.

At the end of the second month, the trend of increased business continued as word got around about this ‘honest’ businessman. As he had decreased the number of lies and cheating at a faster pace his business also grew, he had to increase the number of staff he employed to keep up. He had also taken up matters with his suppliers to give him more reliable and quality goods of his own accord. Business and profits were booming beyond all expectations.  He wanted to make a large donation to the holy man or a charity of the holy man’s choosing – but the holy man declined and suggested that the very rich businessman give the donations to causes of his own choosing.

By the end of the third month, the now very rich businessman had stopped lying and cheating altogether, he was wealthier beyond expectations and even more surprisingly, people openly said they liked him – this in turn affected his close friends and even competitors – who all wanted to practice the new technique of not lying and cheating in order to get richer. They soon began following his example and made a real change to society with generous donations to the vulnerable and needy.

The moral of the story is that you do not have to forgo making money in order to make a difference – while using performance monitoring and bonuses for higher achievements – something in their original business manuals.

Saturday, 9 October 2010

'Profit vs Prophet' - Mannie Sher

Biblical prophets preached at a time when their societies were agrarian and their times were harsh and under threat from warring neighbours.  But for the Prophet Micah, one of the minor prophets who lived in the 8th Century Before the Common Era, it was a time that witnessed the emergence of a commercial civilization of great material prosperity.  Its foundations were laid in the peace and security established under Jeroboam II and Uzziah during their long reigns and in the extension of the borders of their kingdoms, giving the Hebrew States command of all the main trade routes.  But it was a civilization which displayed all the problems of a society making haste to be rich – greed and covetousness, reckless and unscrupulous competition and a pitiless disregard of the claims of sympathy, charity and brotherly consideration. 

Extremes of wealth and poverty, which had been impossible in an agricultural society based on the Biblical system of land tenure, were dividing the nation into classes of possessors and dispossessed.  The rich built up large estates and with the help of corrupt judges added house to house and field to field while the oppressed and dispossessed peasantry sought in vain for legal redress.  The pursuit of commerce encouraged the development of cities to which the landless farmers migrated in search of a livelihood, where wealth, luxury and vice dwelt side by side with poverty, misery and squalor.  With the exchange of goods went the exchange of ideas.  New age cults, pornography, standards of luxury and splendor and materialistic aims of living which hitherto had been foreign were introduced.

Against this moral and social background Micah received the call to prophecy.  Himself a countryman, he felt the deepest sympathy with the misery and destitution to which the rapaciousness of the rich and powerful had reduced the masses; but he also saw clearly that a society built on tyranny, corruption and false standards of wealth was a society doomed to destruction.  Micah fearlessly denounced the demoralizing pursuit of wealth which he considered the opposite of the demands of righteousness.  He inveighs against the seizure of houses and estates, the expropriation of peasants, the cruel use of the rights of creditors, the corruption of rulers and judges, the venality of priests and prophets who lived by the flattery of the rich.  He attacks the utterly mistaken conception that no harm can befall the rich; he announces in unequivocal terms the inevitable consequences of the corruption of his society – defeat and exile.  And over against the injustice, cruelty and luxurious ostentation of his age, he states in simple terms the essence of God’s demands: Justice, Mercy and Modesty.

It has been said that Micah combines in his character the ethical fervour of Amos and the compassion and love of Hosea.  His denunciations of injustice and oppression were as fierce and categorical as any in Hebrew prophecy, his threats as absolute and unconditional.  And since those whom he denounced were the rich, the powerful and the privileged, one marvels at his courage and his fearlessness.  They writhed under his verbal lashings; they called on him to cease his prophesying, but they must have recognised that his prophesying came from on High and they did not harm him. 

Here is what Micah says in Chapter 3; Verses 9-12
Hear this, you leaders of the house of Jacob, you rulers of the house of Israel, who despise justice and distort all that is right;
Who build Zion with bloodshed and Jerusalem with wickedness.

Her leaders judge for a bribe, her priests teach for a price, and her prophets tell fortunes for money. Yet they lean upon the LORD and say, "Is not the LORD among us? No disaster will come upon us."

Therefore because of you, Zion will be ploughed like a field; Jerusalem will become a heap of rubble, the temple hill a mound overgrown with thickets.
____________________________________________________________
Jeremiah 6:13 – 15
For from the least of them even unto the greatest of them every one is given to covetousness; and from the prophet even unto the priest every one dealeth falsely.

They have healed also the hurt of the daughter of my people slightly, saying, Peace, peace; when there is no peace.

Were they ashamed when they had committed abomination? Nay, they were not at all ashamed, neither could they blush: therefore they shall fall among them that fall: at the time that I visit them they shall be cast down, saith the LORD.

Ezekiel 22:25 – 28
There is a conspiracy of her prophets in the midst thereof, like a roaring lion ravening the prey; they have devoured souls; they have taken the treasure and precious things; they have made her many widows in the midst thereof.

Her priests have violated my law, and have profaned my holy things: they have put no difference between the holy and profane, neither have they showed difference between the unclean and the clean, and have hidden their eyes from my Sabbaths, and I am profaned among them.

Her princes in the midst thereof are like wolves ravening the prey, to shed blood, and to destroy souls, to get dishonest gain.

And her prophets have daubed them with untempered mortar, seeing vanity, and divining lies unto them, saying, Thus saith the Lord GOD, when the LORD hath not spoken.
____________________________________________________________

Isaiah 42:22
But this is a people robbed and spoiled,
They are all of them snared in holes,
And they are hidden in prison houses;
They are for a prey, and none delivereth,
For a spoil, and none saith: “Restore.”

This is a description of the pitiable plight of the people, the homelessness and bondage (bankruptcy).  The people’s insensibilities and lack of understanding are rebuked.  The disasters Isaiah says are the result of lack of moral discipline leading to the deliverance of a chastened people.

So what about profits?  Are the Prophets against profits?  No, they are against excessive profits, unequal profits, profits without moral justice.  Profits are meant to be put to social and economic use, not feed the greedy parts of our natures.

Even in early agrarian society it was understood that production was not meant only for immediate consumption; a proportion had to be left over and saved for the next year's planting.

How much is enough?

It is a generally accepted principle that the proportions of the selling price of products or services divide into thirds - one-third covers direct costs; one-third covers indirect costs; one-third is meant to be profit for future investment (seed corn)

Profit and Prophecy are linked to ideas about future time.  Work processes are geared to time – it is essential to calculate the amount of time required to complete a task and if possible to shorten it; in prophecy too, time is calculated for the present downward spiraling of moral and unjust behaviour and a future state of affairs of contrition, retribution and redemption.  For unrestrained profiteers, the constraints and limitations of time do not seem to apply – their behaviour suggests that for them time is focussed on the now - it all has to happen immediately and forever – the unbridled escalation of value and wealth, supporting a rags to riches fantasy.

For example, the “Double or quits” proposition of gambling supports phantasies of unlimited wealth for no effort - greed is what we call it - having it all - supporting a phantasy of I am the greatest - I am king of the castle – I am capable of creating my own personal invulnerable universe.   These dynamics are characteristic of big multi-national corporations where the corruption of the idea of greed is common, e.g. media stories of Enron, Worldcorp (in the USA), Parmalat (in Italy), and HIH (in Australia), often focus on what seems to be the intent of senior executives to have huge salaries, plus shares, and other financial interests in the company and its future.   Stories of lies, fraud and cover-up, where the company’s true financial status is hidden from the market, confirm our cynicism about big business being a potential breeding ground for greedy and exploitive executives and board members.

Our title is prophet/profit.  That brings to my mind another pair of words with an “f” and “ph” usage - fantasy/phantasy.  Fantasy with an “f” refers to a paraphrasing of conscious imagination – the things we can conjure up in our minds; phantasy with a “ph” is located firmly in the inner unconscious world of the psyche in which all sensations and perceptions are interpreted and represented under the influence of the pleasure-pain principle.  We all have feelings about money – about wanting more of it (pleasure) or fearing not having enough of it (pain).  But money is primarily a means of sustaining reciprocal relationships. Reciprocity is the key because it maintains social relationships – it is not wealth for its own sake.  No exchange is ever equal. All exchanges are unequal.   It all depends on what can be tolerated to maintain good reciprocal feelings.  Usually an imbalance in the order of 60-40 is tolerable.  Anything beyond that begins to feel uncomfortable and ultimately socially and politically unacceptable.

What feelings does it evoke?

In a piece of research I conducted this year with a colleague, Alison Gill, we attempted to assess the thinking of the people who look after our money - senior bankers - about the financial and banking issues they were involved with on a daily basis.  In conversations with us, our respondents appeared to confirm a view that they inhabit a bubble in which they talk only about their investments.  Day-to-day dialogue revolved around investment opportunities.  We heard how investment decisions were made solely on ‘how much this has gone up in the past’, not ‘what is this worth?’  Greed had overcome fear.  They focused exclusively on the upside and ignored the downside.  Prudent risk assessment stopped.  They were disconnected from the true value of what they were selling.  Their organisations were over-leveraged and investment bankers borrowed whatever they could.  Huge mortgages, often as much as 125% the value of the property, or 6 or 7 times earnings, spoke of a system drunk on debt.   In the complexity of a financial system driving debt, innovation in finance meant intelligent individuals, who should have known better, were maximising returns primarily to satisfy shareholders and some banks were borrowing as much as forty to fifty times their capital base.  Being caught in the cross-fire of high leverage was the only means of keeping up with other banks.  To be sure, most of our respondents struggle to understand the global, social and systemic nature of the financial crisis, but they seldom came up with anything better than headline catch phrases like ‘trust’, ‘behaviours’, ‘relationships’, ‘inter-dependence’ but they could not go further to help them really understand what had happened to their industry, nor lead them to effective solutions.  Despite their many words, and they were articulate, to us they seemed lost.  For many of them, it seemed their distress was about their careers ending on a note of appalling indignity, some even facing the prospect of criminal charges; they appeared to be saying that they could not believe that they had been found wanting, caught out by such a catastrophic failure. They seemed unsure how to judge their own part in the failure; unsure as to whether their failure should be judged as personal rather than systemic. To what extent did they understand their roles in choices they made and their accountabilities that could have prevented the failure?  They had become unconscious players in the dramas of the groups to which they belonged.

Our respondents stressed the importance of collaboration and interdependence as the most viable way forward for government and society, but on the whole they seemed unable to consider that rivalry, envy, fear, greed, competition and conflict - the dark side of human functioning - had played a significant role in the financial meltdown, and how ignorant they really were of human psychological, systemic and ecological systems and complex, large and impersonal organisations. The balance between the positive forces of optimism, humanitarianism and hope and the negative forces of competition, rivalry, envy and greed had been distorted to such an extent that they had actually been re-defined and glossed over as all positive in their own right.  (Greed is good) Little regard was given to how the forces of irrationality had inverted the meaning of language and had distorted and perverted reality.

So, is it all about making money or making a difference?  On balance I think I am more on the side of the Prophets than on the side of the profiteers.  But we have to strive for a middle way.  Of course, with no profits there would be no commerce and we would have to revert to a barter-type economy and that is unthinkable, although that almost happened in September 2007 when the ATMs nearly stopped issuing notes.  Maybe, with more education and training, everyone involved in the money business will come to understand that money is more than the value of the things it buys – it is a medium that serves as a receptacle for our fantasies with an “f” and our phantasies with a “ph” and that unless we understand the feelings and dynamics of money, we will always be heading for the next crisis in unending cycles of growth and bust.  What I am saying here is we will always need both our Prophets and our profiteers – the challenge is not whether they will be one versus the other, but whether we, as individual consumers or corporate market-makers, can acquire sufficient wisdom, humility, moral integrity and care alongside our intelligent, gifted and quick-witted economic and financial selves.

Monday, 27 September 2010

Profit vs Prophet: making money or making a difference?

Profit vs Prophet: making money & making a difference, are they opposed?, which is the first seminar in the Renegotiating 'value' series, includes a group of speakers able to provide a varied and stimulating set of responses to the above question:
  
Jay Lakhani is a Hindu Educationalist promoting Hindu education in schools, colleges and universities in the UK. He runs the Vivekananda Centre London and is Education Director of the Hindu Council UK. He is also trained scientist (theoretical physics) and believes science and religion meet at the level of the infinitely small. He believes that the Hindu idea of spiritual humanism manages to reconcile differences between religious and secular world-views and argues that religious pluralism offers the best prescription for making religions once again the cohesive force in our society.

Abigail Morris is Director of ResponseAbility, a new cross communal organisation which provides a contemporary Jewish commentary on cutting edge issues. ResponseAbility, which is in its first year, is seeking to bridging the two worlds of the Jewish and the secular, speaking to both and enabling the two worlds to meet and speak to each other. Prior to her current role, Abigail was artistic director at the Soho Theatre where she was the moving force behind the move in 2000 from the Cockpit Theatre into the former synagogue which is now its home. 

Mannie Sher works as an organisation development and change consultant in health and social care, industry, the financial sector, public protection agencies, faith organisations, the arts, charities, voluntary organisations and professional associations. He concentrates on redefining organisational aims, introducing new operational strategies, addressing staff morale, fostering inter-dependent systems of work and understanding the role of technology. His consultancy projects undertaken through the Tavistock Institute include conducting a major 2-year Transformational Programme of a foreign national bank penetrating banking systems throughout the country to improve cross-business collaboration capability; increase market share and share value (up 40% in 9 months).

You can register for this seminar, which is taking place on Thursday 7th October, 4.00pm - 6.30pm, at St Ethelburga's Centre for Reconciliation & Peace, online at http://stethelburgas.org/civicrm/event/info?id=216&reset=1 or by phoning 020 7496 1610. It is also possible to register on the door or the day but advance registration will help in our planning.