Nonprofit Arts Organizations – Are you aware that the other parts of the sector believe that you’re stealing money?
In most nonprofits, a donor gives and someone else benefits. Food banks solve hunger, which promotes family stability, which stimulates re-entry into society for the impoverished. Environmental nonprofits encourage clean air and water, which promotes health, which supports longer, happier lives for everyone. Many religious organizations sponsor high morals (“Do unto others…”), which provides a sense of community, which fosters a safety net.
In the arts, the donor and the recipient are often the same person. The donor gives to a company, the company produces a performance or exhibit, and the donor/recipient enjoys the event. The arts are seen by many as elitist and unworthy of support.
We in the arts have to recognize that there is an enmity-laden relationship between arts nonprofits and all the other charities.
And then we have to do something about it.
Nonprofit hiring… Consensus…check. Fairness…check. Zombie interviewers…GRAXAGHZ.
Employees are your biggest asset as an organization. Nonprofit employees hold greater importance. Relationship-building through positive, passionate human interaction are better portents to success than technological advances.
And yet, too often the hiring process – especially in communities seeking “consensus” or “fairness” – has devolved into “Interviews in Zombieland.”
“Consensus” is not unanimity. “Fairness” is irrelevant when you’re seeking great people.
The group interview is quickly disintegrating. Every person takes turns reading pre-designed, pre-printed questions in the dullest drones imaginable. Your staff turns into a cast of Zombies in a badly-written, badly-acted play, and everyone uses the same dull inflection to every candidate.
And then, invariably, zombie staff members complain about the candidates’ dullness.
Nonprofit leaders: is your hiring process as undead as your results? And are zombie interviews the best way to show off your organization?
Flagship or Dreadnought: Regional Theaters in America
With the recent blog by Annah Feinberg currently making the circuit, it seems a good time to chronicle the regional theater “movement.”
1910-1930s: The “Little Theatre Movement.” Few paid artists, but it reflected a community need. Killed by the Depression/WWII.
1947: Dallas – Margo Jones founded Theatre ’47.
1950: Washington, D.C. – Zelda Fichandler founded Arena Stage.
1959: Tyrone Guthrie placed an ad in The New York Times. Asked if any communities wanted to sponsor a resident theatre. 1963 – Guthrie Theatre opens in Minneapolis.
But this did not become a “movement” until the late ’60s when some plays moved from regionals to Broadway, turning many regional theater companies into minor-league baseball clubs.
People outside New York want to experience great plays relevant to their lives.
Unwieldy regionals often gauge success in the form of plays transferring to Broadway.
Irony or disconnect?
Neither artists nor nonprofit arts organizations are entitled, they just act that way sometimes
Every kid wins trophies.
There are two possible takeaways from this fact:
a) Trophies don’t mean much; or
b) Every kid deserves trophies.
Or both.
If a), then the result is that external recognition must be useless. Which means:
1) We reward mediocrity.
2) We foster cynicism to greatness.
If b), then the result is that external recognition must be unrelenting. Which means:
3) We reward everything.
4) We foster entitlement to greatness.
I have rarely seen folks as entitled as those in the performing arts today, at least here in Seattle, the epicenter of externally-based self-esteem. I’ve known dozens of actors who have insisted that they’re too talented to audition. Dozens more of nonprofit arts organizations feeling too holy to follow a mission.
Consider: Oscar Isaac had to audition for the role of Llewyn Davis. It wasn’t handed to him.
This. Happened.
Years ago, I dined with a board member/lawyer who’d given $100,000 of unrestricted funding for four consecutive years. Ninety miles from home. Nice restaurant. Just us two.
Asked for this year’s gift.
Silence.
Then, he said, “Now, why do you do all these plays for the n**g**s? They’re uneducated, unsophisticated, they don’t like us, and you’re just rubbing our noses in it?”
I wanted simultaneously to vomit, slug, and flee, none of which are socially acceptable responses.
Dad once said that using the bathroom is the most socially acceptable way to buy ten minutes. I bought ten minutes.
“It’s not my money. It’s not my money,” I chanted to myself for about ten minutes. “It’s for the company. It’s unrestricted. We can spend it any way we see fit.”
Came back.
What would you say and do?
“That Happened to Me!” – Can nonprofit arts organizations figure out a way to quantify personal meaning?
I wrote a strange and pretty bad play.
One scene took place at the World Trade Center in the wee hours of September 11, 2001. A financial analyst for Cantor Fitzgerald berates a brown-skinned file clerk. The scene was meant to be darkly humorous and uncomfortable.
After one public reading, a woman screamed about that scene.
Tearfully, she raged, “That happened to me! The World Trade Center happened to me!”
I asked, “Oh, were you in New York?”
“No. Baltimore.”
While social impact nonprofits exhibit myriad ways to show purpose beyond basic human needs, arts organizations struggle to show any measurable societal value. However, if we can quantify personal meaning with specific results and stories of value, then we can become successful charitable organizations.
For in every “That happened to me,” the impact is genuinely meaningful.
Positive Signs in the Nonprofit Arts Community
Some nonprofit arts organizations are making new, better choices – and it’s working.
One theater company, eschewing the managing director template (part operations director, part fundraiser, part CPA), has chosen to split the duties. They’ve brought on a strategy director to handle outside duties (fundraising, speaking, lobbying) and strategic plan piloting. The operations and financial duties lie with the general manager.
One children’s arts company, eschewing the arts-revenue template (part production house, part arts education academy), produces in the same facility as several social service agencies. They incorporate the other nonprofits into everything they do, produce a specific style of performance art that speaks to the values of their ethnically, linguistically diverse neighborhood, and gauge success by how well all the nonprofits are bettering the lives of their constituents.
New prototypes. New measurements. New realizations. Excellent work.
“Here we go, Rembrandt, here we go!” – Fans (who cheer) or audiences (who hear)?
“HOLD THAT NOTE! HOLD THAT NOTE!”
“PUSH ‘EM BACK! PUSH ‘EM BACK! NOW STEP, TOUCH, JETÉ AND HOLD!”
“S-C-E-N-E, SCEE-EEENE, SCEE-EEENE!”
Years ago, I sat in the third-to-top row of an NFL stadium with an artistic director friend. First game of the season. Even people behind us were screaming their heads off and waving their foam fingers. And the experience was more personally meaningful to them than many arts experiences I’ve loved.
Sports fans no more control the action of a game than arts fans do a play or concert. But they’re encouraged to be blitheringly engaged. And all too often, arts fans are encouraged to sit back and relax. Or shut up and listen. Like a lecture at school.
We wondered, can arts organizations find ways to encourage blithering? Or are we too clubby for that?
Cue the heavenly chorus…your nonprofit arts organization will never be hungry again!
Acting is not about performing; nor is painting about artistry; nor is music is about musicianship; nor is dancing about prowess.
Similarly, nonprofit arts organizations cannot be about exhibitions/performances.
The impact of the arts can be quantified. There are myriad studies. But the impact of any individual arts organization is not an equivalent discussion. Each organization must provide specific impact, or better, impact2.
Impact2 is the impact’s impact. As a food bank provides positive impact to a concrete number of families, its impact2 may be the number of households that escaped poverty from having had the gift of food in its worst times.
Many nonprofit arts organizations often define themselves by the quality of production. No surprise, then, that so many struggle to reach new donors. Quantify the impact2 of your nonprofit, and you’ll find your Grail.
Nonprofit Arts Lingo Ready for Expunging…and Words to Use Instead
Subscription Season Tickets, Packages [“Subscription” = “Newspaper” = “Dying Industry”]
Audience Fans, Partners [Audiences hear, fans root, partners invest]
Watch Participate, Enjoy, Love [See “Audience”]
Us, we It, the [“We” requires “They”]
“Play a part” [Any non-cutesy non-cliche]
Spectacular, incredible, fabulous, gifted, talented, great, wonderful, delightful, fantastic, poignant, moving [Overused and does not describe the event – unless literally (big 3-ring circuses, for example, are spectacular); it also insults readers by dictating how they should feel]
Witty Funny, hilarious [“Witty” makes some feel as though the work is above their intellectual pay grade]
“Lost Ticket Insurance” [No one cares]
Engage, enlighten, educate Brighten, connect, involve [see “Witty”]
“Something for Everyone” [Never use this phrase. What your organization does is NOT for everyone; therefore, it’s a lie. It also implies that your organization is profit-seeking. Who would donate to McDonald’s?]
2014. A year of art awaits you. Predictions for the year to come…
A company you’ve never heard of will produce something special.
A famous company everyone knows will close down.
A play will shake your long-held beliefs.
A concert will move you to tears.
You’ll stop short and get lost in a painting.
You’ll attend an amazing performance that can’t be pigeonholed as theatre, dance, comedy, or music.
Another new study will come out proving that kids with in-school arts education will enjoy great test scores, not join gangs, and will have a tendency to be drug-free. Their community participation will be more extensive, and they’ll be likelier to enter college.
Despite that, in-school arts education will disappear.
Great arts nonprofits will find universally-accepted ways to quantify impact and will receive all the funding they require.
I wish you love, luck, and success in 2014. Oh yes, and art.
No contact necessary! Never have to talk again! But wait…there’s much, much less!
As an ED, I hired many talented people who, surprisingly (given the industry – nonprofit arts organizations), did not care for interaction. One told me, “I communicate best through email. You should email me.” Her desk was thirty feet from mine.
It is the custom among many to jump to the latest innovation, a practice that is not in itself innovative. Operating technology is no less clubby than ordering at Starbucks. If a customer is unaware of the script, the club members become twitchy.
Cyber-innovation, however, offers addictive isolation as an objective. Solely to rely on it to do person-to-person activities for a nonprofit organization – especially one in the arts – is tantamount to reading directions on how to build IKEA furniture and assume that the building process will be complete without physically interaction with the tools and materials.
Technology, isolation, live theater, community, hope, and Vin Scully
Technology is not new. Nor is its ability to isolate. Man’s choice is to buy it and do so.
On a 1960s-era transistor radio, while there was an earphone jack, few used it. Sandy Koufax’ 1965 perfect game was accompanied by the hum of 29,139 transistors all tuned to Vin Scully, as if he were sitting in the adjacent seat.
Many people buy into that latest-thingamabob fervor and complain that they can’t meet people. And when they do, the people they meet seem incapable of a simple conversation. IMHO, peeps b txtg 511 & CBB w/PLU.
Live theaters have the wonderful capacity to bring people together. To share a purpose. To provide the capacity for strangers to personally interact. Not merely to entertain us, but to foment optimism. Do they? Or do they just put on plays?
One size fits one.
I recently worked with a nonprofit theater company to find ways to increase its revenue. The assignment was through a parent volunteer organization. There were a slew of rules dictated by that organization, mostly leading to lots of pre-printed worksheets.
This is a longstanding theatrical outfit that’s doing fine, but outside the current audience and tiny board, there is little chatter. That was the issue.
Even the mission statement only described their activities. It did not define their goals.
The best project would have been to aim higher, enhance internal branding, and take steps to build a fan base (instead of audience). But that advice wasn’t allowed.
It’s too bad. Each nonprofit is unique. Leaders are too often drawn to uninspired project management tools because they’re easy, and obviously worked at some time for some company somewhere.
