or months now, the Enron bankruptcy scandal has gripped the attention of people in the United States, Canada, and even beyond.1 Are there any lessons Adventists might learn from the fall of this economic giant, once the seventh-largest company in the U.S.? I have space for only two.
1. We should take membership on boards and committees seriously. This thought came to me amid reports that at least six members of Enron's 14-person board of directors had resigned in the wake of the scandal. There's a feeling they'd failed in their oversight responsibility to the company (and to the public)-failed to ask the right questions, to be sufficiently vigilant.
How seriously do we take our responsibility as members of committees and boards on the various levels of the church? In this connection I've heard several complaints about the attitude of delegates at General Conference sessions. Walk in on, say, a midafternoon meeting of the session, and you're surprised at how few delegates are in their places. Many are out shopping, visiting, resting, or in other ways simply doing their own thing. Important debates take place, important actions are voted, but these delegates are AWOL (absent without leave).2 The same holds true for Annual Councils, Spring Meetings, union constituencies, etc.
Yet often the presence or absence of just one person can make a significant difference. A pertinent question, a cogent observation, a well-timed word of support or disapproval from a single individual (sometimes based on information available only to them), can spell defeat or passage for a critical item.3
2. We should pay attention to financial reports. At the typical Adventist meeting attendance falls when time comes for the treasurer's report. For many attendees it's a good time to get a breath of fresh air or to network with colleagues. But Enron shows that failure to pay attention to financial reports is not a good idea.
By the same token, financial officers should do all they can to make these reports intelligible, presenting (in the words of investment specialist James Glassman) "clear, transparent statements, written in understandable English."4 Whenever possible, moreover, such reports should circulate ahead of the meeting, providing sufficient time for members without a finance background to digest their contents and, if necessary, raise concerns. "The only stupid questions," as someone said recently, "are the ones not asked."
And every committee should include persons with accounting or finance backgrounds, individuals who're able to spot potential problems and raise the red flag. According to financier Robert Olstein (in reference to the Enron failure), detecting trouble is a job for professionals.5 "Just from the evidence that has emerged so far," says an article in Newsweek, "the trio of [Ken] Lay, [Jeff] Skilling and [Andy] Fastow [Enron's three top officers] will be remembered for their ability to fool a lot of people, including some very smart ones, for a long time."6 Personally I have absolutely no fear of corruption on the "higher" levels of the church-the checks and balances are too tight for that. What sometimes gives me nightmares are the possibilities for blunders-serious financial or investment blunders that can damage or embarrass the organization.
A final word. We are a church, not a secular enterprise. And in every situation we must remain Christian. Speaking to Newsweek magazine, Betty Skilling, the 77-year-old mother of one of the Enron principals, "blamed her son's divorce, as well as a hardening and coarsening of his character, on the demands of his job. 'That's what these high-flying jobs do to you,' she said. 'They distort your personality.'"7
But even low-flying jobs can have a similar effect. And we must never let that happen to us.
_________________________
1 This editorial assumes the reader is up to speed on the Enron story.
2 On the other hand, session planners need to build in appropriate time for some of these activities-or delegates will simply take it.
3 It would be unrealistic, of course, to expect 100 percent attendance for every meeting. At a GC session, for instance, there are always a number of subcommittees convening simultaneously with the main session. Some voting delegates carry other responsibilities pertaining to the session that, by their very nature, keep them from any protracted presence on the floor. All this being the case, the need only increases for all members/delegates not otherwise legitimately occupied to attend faithfully to the business of the session.
4 Washington Post, Feb. 17, 2002, p. H-14.
5 Ibid., p. H-1.
6 Newsweek, Feb. 18, 2002, p. 24. (Italics supplied.)
7 Ibid., p. 25.
_________________________
Roy Adams an associate editor of the Adventist Review.
