ADDENDUM as of 2/5/09: While I am still excited about the materials I discuss in this post, it is with great sadness that I feel compelled to note I have discovered there are reasons for caution with respect to the sources referenced herein. With respect to Vision Forum Ministries and Doug Phillips, I call your attention to the series of articles at Ministry Watchman and Jen’s Gems. And with respect to Geoff Botkin, see Who is Geoffrey Botkin? at the Under Much Grace blog.

I’ve been listening to a presentation called The 200 Year Plan: A Practicum on Multi-Generational Faithfulness–a CD set put out by Vision Forum Ministries.

It was about three weeks ago that someone suggested I look at the program. Considering my own emphasis on multi-generational, indeed, 200-year plans and more, how could I not take a look?

So I purchased the series . . . and am glad I did!

Wow! Read the rest of this entry »

“The world’s oldest continuously operating family business ended its impressive run last year,” the article began. I just ran into the article yesterday on a news feed, but when I looked at the details, I discovered it was first published on April 16, 2007 and in areferred to an event that had occurred more than a year before that.

But the date of the article is probably not too important. The company that went bankrupt was over 1400 years old, having been started in 578 A.D. The president at time of bankruptcy was a member of the 40th generation to run the company. Read the rest of this entry »

I was reminded yesterday, once more, of the need for a long view.

Louis Basenese of the Oxford Club, wrote yesterday,

It only takes 176 seconds for an untrained pilot to crash a plane if he flies into a cloud. The reason it happens so quickly is simple – the pilot ignores the gauges in favor of natural feelings. And the latter are almost always incorrect.

Today, the Dow was off 346 points. As such, I want to caution against trusting your natural feelings. Or you could similarly crash and burn your portfolio.

So before I tell you what I think’s going on, let me be clear: Don’t act hastily and bail on your investments. Instead, stay the course. . . .

As long-term investors, we needn’t concern ourselves with what the market does from one day to the next. That’s because such a small window of time has little impact on the underlying fundamentals of the companies [we own]. Read the rest of this entry »

Will those who follow you–your sons and daughters–fulfill your charitable intentions? Have you ensured they understand what you mean by what you have said in your final documents?

At our last family meeting, in discussing our charitable interests, one of our sons-in-law said he had no idea how we made choices concerning to whom we would give. At the time, I thought that was rather strange. I thought we had delineated our interests and policies rather well in our Family Wealth Letter of Intent. But apparently not.

So our legacy planners drafted what they called a “Holzmann Family Foundation Gifting Criteria” document and asked me, last week, to modify it for our next family meeting (a meeting to be held later this morning).

As our legacy planners explained, the policy statement “was constructed through the conversations that we have had and what you had put in writing in your prior plan. It is intended to be a guide for the foundation and for potential ministries/charitable organizations.”

Oh!

Sarita and I, both, were rather taken aback by what we read. Read the rest of this entry »

One of James Hughes’ great themes–something he stressed in his first book, Family Wealth, and that he emphasizes again in his latest volume, Family: The Compact Among Generations–is the idea that a family needs to grow its human and intellectual capital. The growth of human and intellectual capital must come before the growth of monetary capital. Human and intellectual capital are more important than monetary capital.

In Family: The Compact Among Generations, Hughes insists that family members must participate in the family from desire and interest rather than out of any sense of obligation or external compulsion.

“[N]o human being will voluntarily join any organization unless he first perceives that he will be enhanced by it before having to contribute to it.” And so, Read the rest of this entry »

A wealthy man had completed his estate plan. His advisor asked, “So when do you plan to hold your family meeting to talk with your kids about their inheritances?”

“Family meeting?!? There’s not going to be any family meeting!!!”

“Oh, there will be a family meeting. The question is only when it will occur,” said the advisor. Read the rest of this entry »

I got the title for this post from James E. Hughes Jr.’s Family: The Compact Among Generations. A strict, literal translation of the phrase would render it as “persons of confidence.” But the meaning that Hughes wants to convey has to do with “persons in whom [a family] can have confidence,” “trustworthy persons,” or, in brief: “confidants.”

Hughes suggests every family needs personnes de confiance, and he goes into some detail describing their duties, responsibilities, and characteristics. In sum, he says, personnes de confiance fulfill “the role of the great ‘number two’–the person whose mission is to make others great.” These are people who subordinate their own ambitions to help promote the concerns and interests of those they serve. [p. 247] Read the rest of this entry »

Carol Weisman makes some really useful suggestions for a family meeting. (See Raising Charitable Children, Chapter 3.) She says in her family they start out each annual meeting by passing a list of the charities to which they’ve donated in the past. The list not only shows the names of all the charities, but also expresses why the family donated to them. Weisman says that’s a good way to get people brainstorming about where the current year’s donations might be directed. Read the rest of this entry »