'Destructive Innovation' at Mertom Road

All change please; mind the gap!

My next story offers more promise and hope.

The Sikh community and most of its leaders have always prided themselves on their capacity for innovation, discussed here in terms of the proven outcomes and the benefits that the community has enjoyed at the Sikh Temple at Merton Road. There has been a history of early impetus for proactive and collaborative action as well as collectively enforced subservience, over and above political aspirations, to the higher ideals for providing facilities for worship and community use at the modern temple in Southfields, South London.

The temple membership also reflects a wide geographical catchment area comprised mainly but not entirely of Sikhs who arrived in Britain at different times from East Africa largely in response to pressures to abandon their homes and careers in Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania.  Many describe rich and enduring histories in East Africa which they abandoned voluntarily to move to ‘greener pastures’ and in the process even managed to externalise their funds to safe bank accounts in Britain. This is mentioned here in so far as it seems to matter to the people who like to display their affluence. It also matters to others, not only in Southfields but also elsewhere to people who reflect on their wealth when they define their campaigns for leadership.

Other Sikhs arrived after facing shock and horror at the hands of the Ugandan dictator Idi Amin but were quickly absorbed by their welcoming brethren who had been well settled in the broader geographical region. It is said that the composition of the community is largely defined by Sikhs who have jobs and homes in the region.

There is an impressive history of highly successful service delivery by a well defined and highly focussed management group at the temple. A long list of committees have offered almost selfless leadership and safeguards to deliver sound and enriching religious programmes. However, there have been cold and icy undercurrents in the seemingly still glacier of Sikh brotherhood. A number of people seem to consider that they were treated badly by previous managements. Four or five notable members also endured hostility and abuse and left to make way for other ‘aspirants’ who may have benefitted from their allegiances with the powerbase. A pressure group realised that they would achieve more by building a separate temple. They left many years ago to establish a seemingly competitive provision not too far away. But all this is history. No one seems to have suffered any enduring trauma.

Moving closer to my thesis, the temple has been unique in successfully divesting power in some ways but also in discarding somewhat hostile power play which was apparently fuelled by dynastic allegiances and contradicting forces. Always looking at the positive side, a number of younger Sikhs appear to have gained valuable experience in community leadership. They have the potential for delivering further outcomes.

But communities lose momentum when neither the real nor the implied leadership fails to recharge itself. This writer is less concerned with the recent reflections of intrigue but more interested in the organisational restructuring. A ‘Board of Management’ has been installed and as is always the case with large scale organisational change, some people may perceive to be evicted while others may remove themselves. Neither the implied nor any real evictions as well as verbal or silent resignations merit attention here. However, I am very interested in finding out more about the Board of Management as an organisational model.

More on this later if and when information comes to hand.

However, consider this; for innovation to be effective it normally destroys what it seeks to replace.

Note: The concept of ‘creative destruction' is attributed to Josef  Schumpeter, the Austrian economist. It is well represented in history of economics and business ideas.

Trials and tribulation of Neville Road

Not much has changed since the last posting on this blog; at least on the surface… but there are always underlying currents which reflect the aspirations for the future guardianship of a community.

Two Sikh temples have provided interesting examples of guardianship. The temple on Neville Road saw the un-ceremonial exit of the former board of trustees just they tried to grapple with a useful agenda of change. There were notable but well guarded dissention between the outgoing trustees themselves but they realised to their great pain that their ammunition had run dry. They had promised much but the fundamental change that they were capable of delivering did not materialise. Visits to the temple highlighted the following signs of distress:

-          The trustees had lost the confidence of the more influential members of the congregation. However, very little effort was put in to win it back. The trustees went into the elections with their eyes shut but secretly hoping that their mandate could be retained by a notable application of aggression and bullying; a concern that was felt by people within the congregation and a few independent observers.

-          There was also a realisation that much as the outgoing trustees wanted to redress some of their own shortcomings; they had come to accept a natural end to their role as custodians and stakeholders of the temple at a time when other aspirations outside the temple started to look more appealing. There is no suggestion that the powerbase of the temple had been used to gain visibility and respect but community leadership can be a useful adjunct to other bigger and more visible roles in public life.

-          Sections of the community with significant presence were largely ignored or under-consulted, notably young people and women.  Modern Sikh youth in a evolving British society are highly motivated and conscientious but they are unable to forge a partnership with leadership which is mostly unable to win their confidence. There is a gaping chasm between Sikh leaders and the youth in Sikh society; it will widen further unless leadership strives to find new and innovative solutions to gain the trust of the younger members of the society.

In most cases and not just reflecting the debacle at Neville Road, Sikh leaders tend to define the eligibility of the youth to engage with the leadership by virtue of their ability to demonstrate command and compliance to religious symbolism. In almost all cases the leadership has not questioned its own claims to legitimacy and their own capacity to engage with young people. Generalisations can prove to be hazardous but it most unlikely that Sikh youth wish to become the temple managers of tomorrow. They have other aspirations and perhaps, even ambitions about the role and place of their communities in the wider society.

Indeed, have Sikh leaders examined their role in Prime Minister David Cameron’s ‘big society’? The answer does not lie in Sikh leaders proudly going to Downing Street for tea. It lies more in inviting Mr Cameron for tea at local community functions where local stakeholders are carefully selected and represented. This is a good time for Sikh leaders to ‘calm down’ and to allow the younger members of their communities to take the lead in discussing the agenda for community action with David Cameron.

Sikh leaders should define their success in terms of how they need to become agents for change and not as blockages to change.