If the Church of England doesn't have enough problems these days, its clergy retirement plan reports that assets equal only 57% of its actuarially-determined liabilities. The annual payout of benefits is running at 1.6% of assets. Projections are that young clergy in their 30s stand to receive pensions that will be less than half what current retirees get. Ouch.

What happened? According to the 11/3 Financial Times, the pension fund's advisors decided to go 100% into equities right around the time that the FTSE 100 index hit its all-time high in 1999. Bad prophets, no profits, if you will. By contrast, according to the article, the typical pension fund in the U.K. has just a bit over 50% of its assets in equities, and many are reducing their exposure.

The Church of England took another big financial hit in the early 1990s when a major British investment company that managed a large portion of the Church's holdings went bust. The resulting cutbacks were severe, and last to this day. For example, the Archbishop of Canterbury's diplomatic mission to the Vatican, called the Anglican Centre in Rome, became responsible for its own fundraising. It is now the only embassy funded through direct private donations, and its director is the only ambassador with fundraising in his job description.

When supposedly sleepy or conservative organizations become overly risk-loving, take that as an another indicator of a financial bubble on the verge of bursting.

A bit over a decade ago, I was asked by the president of a nonprofit to serve on a special financial advisory committee that he was forming. We already knew each other, through my support of that organization.

The members of that committee were drawn principally from the financial services industry, and it soon became apparent that the president had convened us mainly, if not exclusively, to develop creative fundraising ideas and to spearhead the organization's next capital campaign. By capital campaign, I mean a special multi-year fundraising effort aimed at augmenting the organization's endowment, rather than funding its current operating budget.

From the word go, I proved to be out of step with both the president and the other members of the committee. For one, I was the only person asking questions about the operating budget and seeking ways to improve operational efficiency. For another, I questioned the ethics of launching a new capital campaign immediately after closing another. Donations had been solicited for the previous campaign with the promise that it was to be the last push of its kind for decades to come. Moreover, that campaign had netted significantly more than its stated goal.

I was not surprised when the president did not ask me to continue when my term expired. Despite my continued strong financial support of the organization, his ire at my independence was still palpable, and he eventually succeeded in alienating me from this organization.

Lesson: if you are recruited as an unpaid advisor to a nonprofit, be sure you understand what level of independent thought will be welcome from you. If you are being brought on board to advance an insider's predetermined agenda, be sure you know what it is and be sure that you agree with it.

The centenary of late management theorist Peter Drucker's birth is being marked in the November issue of the Harvard Business Review. Meanwhile, the recent passing of the man to whom Drucker acknowledged a great debt is getting a modest amount of notice. Longtime Wharton management professor Russell Ackoff died October 29 at age 90, and was the subject of Stefan Stern's "On management" column in the 11/10 Financial Times and of the "Remembrances" feature in the 11/11 Wall Street Journal.

Both articles offers several incisive observations from Ackoff, a sampling being:

• The most dysfunctional organizations are those that are the most efficient at doing counterproductive things.
• "Business schools are high security prisons of the mind."
• The most creative organizations are those most welcoming towards nonconformist employees.
• The less you expect of employees, the less you get from them.
• "Complex problems do not have simple solutions."

The WSJ obituary goes into Ackoff's extensive consulting work for major corporations. He advised GM in the development of the OnStar navigation system. Using computer modeling, a revolutionary approach in 1960, he helped Anheuser-Busch design and implement an aggressive expansion strategy that turned it from a purely regional brand with 7% national market share in 1960 to the dominant national brand with a 40% share by 1990.

According to the WSJ piece, Ackoff credited his undergraduate studies in architecture at the University of Pennsylvania with helping him develop a holistic approach to organizations and systems. I never studied under Ackoff during my Wharton days, but a colleague of mine at AT&T did during the 1970s, and frequently spoke of this experience glowingly.

Providing care for elderly and infirm parents places real constraints on career choices and opportunities open to their children. This is a topic covered in detail in an excellent article, "Caring for an Ill Parent Even as Your Career Calls," in the 11/3 Wall Street Journal.

The article focuses on how these responsibilities limit a caregiver's ability to accept an attractive new position. However, it also offers several case studies about people who were able to negotiate special relocation packages that included their parents. Lesson: if the company values your services highly enough, and if the opportunity is attractive enough for you, don't hesitate to ask for such special consideration.