The Mission Paradox Blog

Considering the future

I got a remarkable email from a subscriber to my day job yesterday.  Out of respect to the subscriber I'm going to leave the name out . . . and only share a tiny portion of it, but it is something that merits discussion.

"We are long-time subscribers to your organization, well out of the age group that your group has to attract to survive.

We understand that programming has to take into account the need to find plays that younger people will attend, and that will give them a reason to support you.  

So, what follows in this email might reasonably be at least discounted, perhaps ignored, as coming from the old crowd that cannot be relied on to support the theater in the future." (emphasis added)

The subscriber then gives a well reasoned, passionate, intelligent statement about how he disagrees with the direction the art is moving in and thus would not be renewing his subscription.

I respect his decision, even if I disagree with the reasons behind it. 

For the record, I don't think the theatre is trying to serve a younger audience, it's just trying not to do the same thing over and over again . . . when you have been around for 50 years, sometimes your biggest challenge is avoiding death by repetition. 

But what I love about this (former) patron is that he understands that the art must evolve . . . even if it evolves to a place that lives him behind.

It's a question with no easy answer . . . how do you serve both the audience you have and the audience you want?

In a perfect world they would all want the same things, but the world isn't perfect.  So you have to make the strongest artistic decisions you can and hope people follow you.  Many will.  Some will not.  That's just how it is.

 

 

 

 

Diversity and the Arts

Last week's blow up with the American Theatre Company raised some very interesting. very complex questions about diversity in the arts, theatre in particular.

At the risk of getting myself into a world of trouble, I figured I would dive into those trouble waters and talk about it a bit.

I'll do it with four points.

Point 1:  The best way to diversify the arts is through the creation and support of strong, culturally specific arts organizations.

In Chicago that would mean supporting groups like Silk Road Theatre, Muntu Dance and Teatro Vista.  You can figure out the comparable groups where you are.

When these types of arts organizations partner with their mainstream (or if you need to blunt about it, white) counterparts that is when you get closer to the world of true diversity.

An example:

When I was the ED of Chicago's Congo Square Theatre (an African-American ensemble theatre)we partnered with the Goodman Theatre (one of the largest regional theatres in the country) to do a play called "Black Nativity" by Langston Hughes. 

I believe the partnership was successful in the early stages because each organization understood that the other party was bringing value to the relationship.

Now don't get me wrong, the Goodman was clearly the stronger party.  We were doing the show in their space.  But I think the Goodman respected the fact that we had our own resources and artistic style.  They also appreciated that we could bring a different audience to their space.

We did the show and all was well.  It was a quality event, we made some money, the Goodman got to enhance their credibility and build some new relationships.  It was as close to a win-win as you get in this world.

But again, the key was that it was two organizations working together that had a mutual respect and appreciation for each other.

Often in diversity efforts that mutual respect is missing.  One party thinks they are doing the other a favor by engaging in the effort . . . and that never works.

Point 2:  The answer to whether or not your arts organization is diverse enough lies in your mission.

My day job began producing theatre 53 years ago.  Their mission is to "discover the power of classic theatre."

Now the truth is that for a long time what the theatre was actually doing was "discovering the power of classic theatre that was written by white males."

There are a lot of reasons for this, you can figure out most of them.  But the point is that for a long time the theatre was not living up to it's full mission.

But as Tony Kushner said in Caroline or Change, "change comes fast, change comes slow, but change comes."

In this case, change came when the theatre produced a classic written by an African-American author . . . and people flocked to the theatre. 

It was a lesson to the theatre.  White people aren't the only ones that like theatre.  Or museums, or dance, or classical music.

Now you could argue that they should have figured that out years ago, but at least they got it eventually . . . some arts organizations are doomed to never learn this lesson.

So while doing this sort of work has some financial benefit, the real point of it is that now the organization is closer to living their mission.

Look at your mission.  Is a commitment to diversity included by the very nature of it?  If so you need to live up to it.

Point 3:  Any diversity effort that doesn't involve the investment of time, money and energy is a bunch of BS.

I have to go back to my favorite quote, "don't tell me what you value, show me your budget and I'll see what you value."  In that spirit I measure an authentic diversity effort by these metrics:

-  How long have you been at the effort?

-  How much money have you invested in the effort?

-  Are the key players within the organization involved?

Those are the things that matter.  Everything else is just lip service.

Point 4:  The larger your organization is, the stronger your commitment to diversity should be.

I hold the five largest theatres, museums, dance companies, etc. to a much higher standard then I do every one else.  That's because these organizations (which would include the place I work at) command a large amount of resources.  If you are fortunate enough to be relatively well resourced then you should make sure your organization reflects the town you are a part of.

Who Runs It?

Artistic ensembles and Boards of Directors are a tricky mix. 

It takes a really special group on both sides to make the marriage work.

When it doesn't work, things like this happen.  That link will take you to a Chicago Tribune story about the American Theatre Company (ATC). 

Pretty much the entire ensemble that has been with the company for well over two decades walked out, leaving behind a relatively new Artistic Director and most of the Board of Directors.

The link will take you to an interesting story, but the real fun happens in the comments section where two camps have formed:

One camp feels like the new Artistic Director was taking the theatre to artistic places it didn't need to go and ignoring the ensemble that was the foundation of the company.  There is also many claims that the new AD is a raging egomanic using the the theatre as his own person platform.

The other camp feels like the old ensemble was holding the theatre back because of their unwillingness to grow and change.  For even more fun there's a bit of racial dynamic in there as people wonder how an almost entirely white ensemble could make claims to be an "American" theatre company.

Good times.

You decide for yourself which side you're on.  For me, it's just a reminder of how complex the relationship can be between a Board and an artistic staff.

Wait a minute, I'm wrong, it isn't complex at all.

The Board of Directors runs a nonprofit arts organization.

The Board of Directors runs your arts organization.

So if that Board is composed of artists, then they run it.

If it's composed of grey haired old ladies, they run it.

So if a fight breaks out between an ensemble and the Board and neither side is willing to budge, then the Board wins.

This is why it is vital important for you to think long and hard about who will be on your Board because those individuals have far more power then most realize, whether they choose to exercise that power or not.

If you don't like the idea of a Board having that much power then you need to specifically, in the by-laws of your organization, limit the Board's power.

Yes, the by-laws, that document you slapped together a few years ago and haven't thought about since. 

It is technically the most important document your organization has.  Because unless the by-laws specifically limit the power of the Board then the assumption is that they run the company.

Just something for you to think about.

The situation at ATC is tragic, but it damn sure isn't new.  So read the story, read the comments and then think about what you can do to make sure nothing similar happens where you are.

 

More Website Madness

People seemed to enjoy yesterday's post on arts marketing websites, so here are few more riffs:

1.  Give your audience what they need first.  People come to our site with these basic questions:

-  What's show is going on now?

-  What's the show about?

-  How can I buy tickets?

So we try to give them all the information as quickly and cleanly as we can on the first page they see.  Now if they want to know more about some aspect of the theatre there are plenty of links they can click on to get that sort of thing . . . but first things first.

2.  Designate an updater.  You should have someone on your team who has, as part of their job duties, the responsibility to update the website.  Don't give the responsibility to everyone in the company . . . pick one person and hold them accountable. 

Also, make sure that person understands how often they should update the website.  Daily?  Weekly?  Monthly?  Whatever.  Just have a schedule and stick to it.

3.  Don't be lazy.  Fix typos on your site quickly (and trust me, you have some).  Remove broken links as soon as you are aware of them.  Your website is a public face of your work.

Update:  Ed weighs in with a cautionary tale (from the comments):

This is a topic near and dear to my heart of late. I have to say one crucial caveat here is that when you dedicate one person to be your appointed website updater, *always* make sure there's at least one other person in the org with the access and knowledge to also update the site if necessary! My org is learning this the hard way right now- Unfortunately the one person in our org who is currently able to modify our website has completely flaked out.

We have a benefit this weekend and no info on our site about it (we've had to do all of our promotion via email blast and facebook) because we can't get a hold of him (he's remotely located so we can't even lie in wait outside his apartment...like I said, learning the hard way). In the long term we'll fix this, but in the short term our company is getting screwed.

Website Madness

A post Tony did on arts websites (and why many of them are bad) is a perfect springboard to discuss my day job's new site.  There are some lesson we took from building it that could prove helpful to you.  Here are a few . . .

1.  Our old website had a lot of problems, it was ugly, didn't represent our "brand", etc.  But that wasn't the biggest problem.  The biggest problem was that it was too damn hard to update.

To do something as simple as add show reviews and links to the old site took entirely too long.

So my first (and most important) piece of website advice to you is . . . build a site that is easy to update and then update it regularly.

Now I understand that often in web world if you want your site to be easy to update it can't be too visually appealing.  The only reason that our new website both looks nice and is easy to update is because we had the money to pay for both things. 

If you don't, then make sure the site is easy to update, even if it costs you some visual appeal.

2.  Websites are marketing turf.  In an arts organization there are a lot of interests to be served, the artists, the artistic leadership, fundraisers, education folks, you get the idea.

The problem is that if you allow too much input from these groups, then you end up with a disjointed website that looks like, to quote my mother, "a hot mess."

The hardest part of getting our new website built was going to some pretty powerful people in the organization and saying . . . this is how the site is going to look, period. 

Sure, there was plenty of time spent on building consensus and I think the ultimate product is something everyone was happy with but ultimately it was marketing's call about how the website functioned . . . which leads me to point 3

3.  Websites are about the audience.  So if a dancer loves the website because it has cool photos of him, but the person buying tickets to see said dancer HATES the website then you have a problem.

In the development of our website I had an easy job, it was to look at the site and constantly ask the question "if I were a patron, would I like this feature of the website or hate it?"

You are not doing a website to demonstrate your coolness, tech savvy or any other form of ego stroking.  You are doing a website so that the people who support (or want to support) what you do have a place to get info.

4.  Invest in your website.  I'm not saying you have to spent what we did (tens of thousands) or take as long as we did to get it up (months) but don't get all cheap about your website.  Yes there are pretty of free applications that can improve your site, but sometimes you get what you pay for.  A dollar spent wisely on your website can go a long way.

 

Worst of Both Worlds

I loved it when Ben Cameron pointed this out:

One of the biggest art subsidies that exists occurs when an artist or an artist administrator does their work for little or no money.

So when an actor performs for free, that is essentially a subsidy (or a gift) to the arts organization.

It is one of the most unfair and harmful expectations that comes with this line of work . . . the idea that we are all supposed to do this sort of thing for little or no money . . . because being in the arts is such a privilege.

So that's bad enough.

What's even worse is when some of these nonprofit arts organizations are managed by people who bring the most negative aspects of the corporate management style in.

----------------------

I'm talking to a colleague.  She makes 32K a year.  She loves her job.  She cares deeply about the organization she works for.

But her boss is an idiot.

She has 30 minute lunch breaks and if she is back a minute late she hears about it.

She has to clock in and clock out.

She's not allowed to make "personal" calls for a work phone.

Now let's be clear, she doesn't work at the huge corporation where sometimes you may need those sort of dracoian measures to keep a lot of people in line . . . she works for freakin' dance studio with eight employees.

So now this woman is getting the worse of both worlds.  She's subsidizing the art by not getting paid a lot for it AND she's getting the same heavy handed corporate management style that really should be avoided at all cost.

-------------------------------

If you are running a nonprofit and not paying people much . . . you should find a way to pay them more.

But if you can't for whatever reason, then you have to give these people who are subsidizing your art, something else.

Freedom.

A pleasant work environment, whether it's in the office or the rehearsal room.

A sense of autonomy.

Because giving people the worst of both worlds is an easy way to ensure that they don't stay around long.

You never know

I read a neighborhood blog (in this case the neighborhood is Hyde Park in Chicago) once or twice a week.

I read it because the people that host it have a similar worldview about the neighborhood, namely that we want to see it evolve and improve.

The blog mentions a new cafe in town.  They review it.  The review is positive.  The comments that follow the review are positive. 

Weeks later I'm finally around the cafe.  I check it out.  The owners are nice, the food is good, the coffee is strong.  I'm happy.

Now of course the owner's of the cafe don't know that I'm affiliated with an organization that can probably drive some business their way.  But they will soon when I offer to help.

--------------------------------

Here's what I want you to consider:

What if the whole experience had been a disaster?

Then the cafe would have hurt themselves on two levels:

1.  They would have lost a future customer.

2.  They would have lost a connection with someone that may be able to help them.

------------------------------

Here's my point:  Be good to people, because you never know who you are dealing with.

 

Creative Chicago Expo 2009

For my Chicago peeps . . .

Last year I did a workshop on Word of Mouth Marketing at the Creative Chicago Expo.  It was fun.  People got something from it.  So I was asked back.

This year, the topic is Marketing For the Cash Strapped And The Time Poor

I'll be talking about the tricks I (and others) have used to make their marketing effective when you are short on cash and time. 

It will be perfect for those artists and arts org who have to balance marketing with all the other demands on their time and energy.

The 2009 Expo will be on April 4.  Click here to learn more.

I'll be speaking around 10am.  The entire expo is free, so if you are in Chicago you should come out.  And I'd be honored if you spread the word about the presentation I'll be doing.

In addition to the Expo there will be a Consult-A-Thon, where people will have a chance to meet with a consultant for 25 minutes to talk about their needs.  A session is $10.

I'll be one of the consultants.  You can sign up in advance.  If you want to learn more about that particular service click here.  I'm part of the Afternoon Session.

See you (hopefully) at the Expo

Benchmarks

"How's the show going?"

When a director, choreographer or curator hears that question they interpret as "is your artistic vision being realized."

When a marketing person like me hears it they think "is the show going to make its financial goal?"

To help answers that question . . . and prepare my organization for the consequences of said answer, I use benchmarks.

Don't let the word "benchmark" freak ya out.  It's just a way of focusing on certain indicators that help you determine how things are going.

For example, at my day job the benchmarks look like this:

Say I need to sell $70,000 in single tickets to a show.

I should have 20% of those tickets sold before we do our first performance, so that would be $14,000.

I should have sold another 20% worth of tickets before our Opening Night, which is about 9 days after the first performance.  So that's another $14,000.

The rest of the money comes in during the rest of the run, which is typically about three weeks long.

How did we come up with those benchmarks?  Basically by observing sales patterns for shows that were financially successful and seeing what they had in common.

Coming up with similar benchmarks for what you do could prove to be invaluable.

Here's why. 

-------------------------

Most artistic events come and go relatively quickly.  My theatre's productions run for five weeks.  A dance company may perform over a few weekends.  An art exhibition may run for 8-12 weeks. 

All in all, it's not a lot of time.

Without benchmarks, the window of opportunity to put a show in a better financial position may come and go without you even realizing it.

Here's an example:

Alright, so I need $14,000 in sales before the first performance of a show.

The day before the first performance I check sales (in real life I check sales every day, but let's just pretend I only do it once in a while).

Sales are at $9,000.

I've got a situation.

Does it mean the show is going to flop?  Nope.  But it's something I should be aware of.

But the good news is that I still have some time to make some adjustments in my marketing strategy, or in a worse case scenario, tell my boss that I need to lower the ticket projections fo the show . . . which gives my boss some time to see if he can pull in some extra funds.

That sort of thing is only possible because I have benchmarks in place.

Now let's say I have no benchmarks.  I just let the show open.  Two weeks pass.  The reviews are in.  They aren't great.  Sales are bad.  The show is officially in trouble.

Now what?

-------------------------

Assume that I decide that the way for me to increase sales is by running twice as many newspapers ads then I normally do.  Let's ignore, for now, whether or not this is actually a good idea.

By the time I have had the ads designed, called the newspapers to order more space and sent the new ads in . . . another week has passed.

The show has a five week run.  I lost two weeks waiting.  I lost another week executing my plan.  Now I only have two weeks left.

Wait if the ads don't work?

Then I'm screwed, because I don't have time to try anything else.

Remember, in arts marketing time is a valuable weapon and having some benchmarks will help you to use your time wisely.

Planning for the End

What if I told you that in five years your arts organization had to close down?

What would you do differently?

What would your top priorities be?

That's what I think about when I read this article about how sustainable arts organizations, in this case musuems, should be.  (h/t for Chris for sending it to me.)

------------

It's one of those harsh truths of this world that you get in trouble for saying;

There are some nonprofit arts organizations that should disappear.

Many of them have one thing in common, they are far more concerned about keeping a paycheck in some people's pockets (and often a meager paycheck at that) then fulfilling their mission.

Now don't get me wrong, I think you can both pay people and fulfill your mission.  But ultimately it's about the mission.

Organizations are a lot like people, sometimes they get burned out . . . sometimes they become cynical.

When that happens it is often better for all those involved if the thing ends.

But here's the catch, unless you plan for it, the end never comes.

Instead you have organizations that are like old boxers . . . their skills long since exhausted they just enter the ring and get pounded because that's the only way they know how to earn a living.

It's sad.

It's also completely avoidable.  You just have to know when to quit. 

If that's too tough for you, then here's an alternative . . .

Don't plan for your organization to end, plan for your association with the organization to end.

Because sometimes an organization doesn't need to end . . . but it damn sure needs some new life in there.

In fact if I was the king of the nonprofit arts world I would start with this simple rule:

Everyone is on term limits.

Everyone.

The Board of Directors.

The Executive leadership.

The Artistic leadership.

Everyone.

How long should the term limits be?  Eight years sounds about right.

No one can be in there current position for more then eight years.

They can move up.

They can move out.

But they can't just stay.

---------------

It's a fundamental fact of life . . . things must change. 

New blood must be infused for any thing to flourish.

And sometimes, far more often then we may want to acknowledge, arts organizations severely overstay their welcome.

-----------------

Update:  Paul think's I'm being too generous with eight year limits, here is his suggestion:

"3 two-year terms for board members, 5 years for management positions. If you can't prepare for the end, at least prepare for a life outside of your current administration."

Anybody else want to weigh in on this issue of term limits?  Do so in the comments.