Barry's Blog

Demand for More Arts Organizations is Internally - not Externally - Driven

2012-05-06T22:29:00.000-07:00

Good morning.
"And the beat goes on................"

Supply and Demand:
In the latest issue of the GIA Reader, Adrian Ellis provides an excellent summary of the Supply and Demand issue for the arts.

Quoting the latest Americans for the Arts National Arts Index, this overarching statistic is a sobering comment on the debate:

"......between 2003 and 2009, a new nonprofit arts organization was created every three hours in the US."

Arguably that growth happened at a time of economic prosperity when some of the current problems occasioned by that growth were of less concern. But I'm not convinced that the growth is not going to continue despite the economic downturn. And if that trend does continue we will add an additional 2,920 arts organizations to the fold this year, and over a five year period, nearly another 15,000 arts organizations. Is this a good thing, or a negative?

With support (audience participation, philanthropic giving, public support and earned income) down in the past five years, the net result has to be that an increasingly smaller pie is being divided by an increasingly larger number of organizations. There seems little debate that the "demand" is not leading the growth in the supply. So why is this happening? Clearly the nonprofit arts are not truly market driven. Where then is the demand coming from? I think we are hung up by discussing supply and demand in the usual market driven sense - demand from the public or private sector for the arts.

I suggest the demand to create new arts organizations is coming from us; from inside the arts sector. Some of it is logically new people not currently involved in the nonprofit arts infrastructure wanting to provide art; much more is very likely existing people in the arts who, for whatever reason, do not find what they are looking for within our existing organizations and want thus to start their own organizations. Their motivation isn't some logical market analysis of the chances of success and cannot be analyzed or discussed in such a context. It isn't necessarily rational - driven rather by ego and passion, and perhaps frustration as well. Some of this trend is off the grid - meaning it is not really part of the status quo arts infrastructure as we know it - higher tech entries; migration from "professional" to "amateur" or whatever. Much of it is likely supported by the very sources (arts agencies - from the Endowment to local city agencies - and foundations, plus all those that facilitate the growth by providing such services as fiscal sponsorships) that decry the overbuilt result in the infrastructure. Because the funding pie is finite, allocation to one organization literally comes at the expense of another.

What does the growth - and support of that growth, even if indirectly or reluctantly, do to the sacrosanct goals of capacity building and sustainability? If you fund the XYZ Theater group on Main Street, and at some point some of the talent of that company decides it wants to form a new organizations (assuming, arguendo, legitimate reasons - at least from the new founder's perspective - for so doing), do you then also fund that new ABC Theater Company located just down on Main Street? Does that new company take some of the donor support with it? What if neither company has its own stage facility, but both rent from a municipal facility - crowded scheduling increasingly then narrows to the breaking point. For example, there are two hundred plus dance companies in San Francisco. Many want to have space at Yerba Buena Center's auditorium facility - which is one of the few in the city conducive to dance - yet the facility cannot possibly accommodate the demand for even the established companies, let alone all the new ones. Does unbridled growth make capacity building and sustainability a futile exercise?

Yet there is no logical reason to simply continue to support the status quo and ignore newer entries. To do so would stifle new creativity. And so the growth continues.

The question though is why do so many (of our) people apparently feel the need to start new organizations rather than find a platform for what they want to do within the existing infrastructure? What are the needs that are not being met that gives rise to this kind of unbridled growth - given that the public demand is, at best, constant? We don't seem to have any reliable hard data that would give us some handle on the motivations of all of those that feel compelled to go outside what exists and start a new structure to do what it is they want to do. So we don't have any real discussions about whether or not there are factors at play that we might be able to impact so as to give those seemingly dissatisfied or unhappy with the existent structures available to them more opportunity to stay within the infrastructure as an alternative to going outside of it with yet another new enterprise. It would be enormously valuable to have some reliable data as to the reasoning behind this trend.

I wonder if we might be able to address some of the major issues that are at the heart of the dissatisfaction? First, of course, we need to figure out how to identify what those major issues are. The simple explanation is the understandable and common yearning in many leaders to have their own "shop" as it were. Arts people are entrepreneurial and many want to do it their "way". But I think that factors behind that yearning may be broken into several broad categories:
1. Decision making: I suspect that many of those that decide they want to start their own organization, do so because they have come to the conclusion that existing options simply don't allow them enough (or any?) role in the decision making process - either because of the legacy of the structural system in which they find themselves wherein things are done a certain way because they have always been done that way, or because they feel marginalized or ignored. This situation may be particularly acute in artist / founder driven organizations, and those where the board is insular and protective of the legacy of the organization within the community. Some of those that want to start a new organization may rebel against the hierarchy of leadership; others may feel that the philosophical differences between them and the senior leadership and / or board are too great; still others see limited career advancement opportunities resulting from their being excluded from the decision making process and so they opt to strike out on their own.
2. Artistic Differences: Certainly, many new organizations are born out of the frustration of artistic differences wherein there is no room for any shared vision for the future.
3. Geographic: Logically, a portion of the newly formed organizations are created to fill a void in certain geographical venues, or because the entrepreneur relocates.
4. Generational: As alluded to above, a percentage of new organizations are created because there seems little to no room for upcoming generations to transfer into senior leadership positions.

The problems for the sector is that this growth in the number of organizations is not on any parallel track with a rise in funding available over the sector. Smaller pie, more people who want a piece. And each new organization, for the most part, duplicates certain overhead costs ranging from personnel to accounting, to marketing, to rent to advertising. More jobs perhaps, but not necessarily better pay or more career advancement routes. More competition, and perhaps more confusion in the public mindset. I suspect this works in a backhanded way to the benefit of the more established cultural organizations with a more recognizable brand in the marketplace. Yet, many of the major cultural institutions have felt the pain of a diluted support base in the past five years.

So what, if anything, might we do to provide mechanisms within the existing infrastructure that would address the needs that feed the demand for the creation of so many new organizations. Might we create umbrella organizations that might house a wide swatch of these new enterprises - providing the structure allowing for the independence and freedom to create and provide art, yet which might cut down on the duplication of many of the overhead costs? Is the Fractured Atlas model of fiscal sponsorship already doing this? Is there anything we can do to address this demand and neutralize any of the negatives that result from it? Are there other negatives to this increased demand beyond the dilution of funding, audience support, competitive marketing, public confusion?

And on the other side, is the growth in new organizations really a positive trend despite the complications it seems to be causing? Do we really want to consciously try to inhibit the desire to create new structures, particularly if, in so doing, we are stifling creativity and putting up artificial barriers to the recruitment of new talent to our field? While we don't operate in any true market sense, do we not have our own funding market mechanism (clumsy though it may be) which will, ultimately, weed out the organizations that are not viable? Which approach will result in the most healthy and vibrant arts ecosystem and ecology?

I think we have to move to understand what drives this trend (demand) of our own people to create new organizations (the supply) and whether or not there is anything we can do to stem that growth without creating more problems than we would solve.

Have a good week. I'm taking off next week. Traveling. An early Happy Mother's Day to all.

Don't Quit.
Barry

A Little Humor to Start Your Week

2012-04-29T18:58:00.000-07:00

Good morning.
"And the beat goes on........................."

Ok get ready to groan and moan. Puns - I know I know. I'm just trying to brighten up your Monday with a little humor..............You have to smile at one or two of them.

When chemists die, they barium.
Jokes about German sausage are the wurst.
A soldier who survived mustard gas and pepper spray is now a seasoned veteran.
I know a guy who's addicted to brake fluid. He says he can stop any time.
How does Moses make his tea? Hebrews it.
I stayed up all night to see where the sun went. Then it dawned on me.
This girl said she recognized me from the vegetarian club, but I'd never met herbivore.
I'm reading a book about anti-gravity. I can't put it down.
I did a theatrical performance about puns. It was a play on words.
They told me I had type A blood, but it was a Type- O.
A dyslexic man walks into a bra.
PMS jokes aren't funny, period.
Why were the Indians here first? They had reservations.
Class trip to the Coca-Cola factory. I hope there's no pop quiz.
Energizer bunny was arrested. Charged with battery.
I didn't like my beard at first. Then it grew on me.
How do you make holy water? Boil the hell out of it!
Did you hear about the cross eyed teacher who lost her job because she couldn't control her pupils?
When you get a bladder infection, urine trouble.
What does a clock do when it's hungry? It goes back four seconds.
I wondered why the baseball was getting bigger. Then it hit me!
Broken pencils are pointless.
I tried to catch some fog. I mist.
What do you call a dinosaur with a extensive vocabulary? A thesaurus.
England has no kidney bank, but it does have a Liverpool.
I used to be a banker, but then I lost interest.
I dropped out of communism class because of lousy Marx.
All the toilets in New York's police stations have been stolen. Police have nothing to go on.
I got a job at a bakery because I kneaded dough.
Haunted French pancakes give me the crepes.
Velcro - what a rip off!
Cartoonist found dead in home. Details are sketchy.
Venison for dinner? Oh deer!
Earthquake in Washington obviously government's fault.
I used to think I was indecisive, but now I'm not so sure.
Be kind to your dentist. He has fillings, too.

Here are my five favorite jokes from the internet in the past year:

I want to die peacefully in my sleep, like my grandfather.. Not screaming and yelling like the passengers in his car.
I asked God for a bike, but I know God doesn't work that way. So I stole a bike and asked for forgiveness.
The last thing I want to do is hurt you. But it's still on the list.
Why does someone believe you when you say there are four billion stars, but check when you say the paint is wet?
And this mother in law joke: A patient says, "Doctor, last night I made a Freudian slip. I was having dinner with my mother-in-law and wanted to say: 'Could you please pass the butter?' But instead I said: 'You silly cow, you have completely ruined my life." Ok, Ok, I know. But it is kind of funny.

And if you missed Jimmy Kimmel at last night's White House Press Correspondent's dinner, here are a couple of his one liners:

"If you told me when I was a kid I would be standing on a dais with President Barack Obama, I would have said, 'The president's name is Barack Obama?'"
"They say diplomacy is a matter of carrot and sticks, and since Michelle Obama got to the White House — so is dinner."
To Obama: "I know you won't be able to laugh at my jokes about the Secret Service. Please cover your ears, if that's physically possible."

Got this photo in the email. Supposedly a sign in an Atlanta WalMart. Not true according to Snopes. Actually a finalist in some design / humor contest. But don't you just wish you could point to it when some moron unloads a full cart in front of you -- and the checker says nothing. My own experience is that this would actually be of value to about 10% of the population. Or maybe not as they would probably be confused by that third hand...........If they want to count to fifteen they usually have to take off one shoe and sock first.

Have a good week. Smile and laugh if you get the chance.

And Don't Quit.
Barry

Interview with APAP's Mario Garcia Durham

2012-04-22T21:46:00.002-07:00

Good morning.
"And the beat goes on.............."

Mario Garcia Durham Interview:
Bio: In October 2011, Mario Garcia Durham became the fifth executive director of the Association of Performing Arts Presenters since its founding in 1957. A graduate of the University of Houston, Mario comes to APAP from the National Endowment for the Arts where he was Director of Artist Communities & Presenting. At the NEA, Durham was involved in creating programs such as An Evening of Poetry hosted by the President and Mrs. Obama, and was the initiator of Live from Your Neighborhood, a groundbreaking study of the impact of outdoor arts festivals in the U.S.
After holding numerous management positions and serving as artistic director at the Yerba Buena Center for the Arts in the 1990s, he founded Yerba Buena Arts & Events in 2000, the producing organization of the annual Yerba Buena Gardens Festival. The outdoor event offers more than 100 free performances by the San Francisco Opera, the San Francisco Ballet and more for an audience of 100,000 attendees. Durham has previously served on the APAP Board of Directors and on the Executive Committee.
Durham’s large Mexican American family in South Texas has roots in the historic King Ranch, and his great grandfather was a legendary Texas Ranger.

Interview:

Barry: You've been in your post as head of APAP now for about six months. What have you learned?
Mario: I am on a very exciting learning curve. I’m learning about the importance of attracting new members and keeping veteran members, assessing the true value of membership, understanding the details of the APAP|NYC EXPO Hall, the intricacies of hotel contracts and much, much more.

Barry: What are the three or four biggest issues facing the presenting community?
Mario:

Supporting leadership development for the next generation of arts leaders;
Addressing the coming “gray wave” of retiring baby boomers;
Assuring performing arts centers are relevant, important and vital to communities;
Highlighting successful audience engagement approaches;
Diversity, diversity, diversity.

Barry: What encourages you about the field, and what worries you about its future?
Mario: I am encouraged by the brilliant and talented generations of young artists and arts administrators. What worries me is the peril faced by individuals and organizations reluctant or resistant to adapt as the presenting landscape changes.

Barry: What are the most pressing needs for presenting community administrators and leaders in terms of professional development, and how is APAP working to address those needs? What help do you need to better address the professional development needs of your field? Specifically what are the particular needs of the emerging leaders sub-sector of the presenting field?
Mario: We are deeply concerned about professional development. The number of arts administration programs at colleges is a great foundation, but they can’t teach you the creativity, compassion and decisiveness of on-the-ground professional activity and experience. APAP offers a professional development track each year at APAP|NYC, we provide mentoring to our college-age volunteers at the conference, we are developing a new series of webinars, we profile outstanding professionals in Inside Arts magazine, we train emerging leaders with our Emerging Leadership Institute, and generate fresh ideas among mid-career leaders with the Leadership Development Institute. Our hope is to contribute to an environment in which strong missions, true visions and best practices are a part of every arts organization.

Barry: What is the current status of the major issues facing presenters in terms of international artists performing in America - including visa issues and what needs to be done to make that an easier process for both artists and presenters? And on the flip side of that issue, what are the major barriers to American artists performing abroad and how are we doing in supporting those efforts?
Mario: Two things here: The difficulty of procuring visas for international artists, and the state of the economy vis-à-vis arts funding in Europe. We support artists and presenters with our own government affairs work – writing letters on behalf of artists. The impact of post 9-11 security realities continues to be a major factor in our work. This is in spite of the fact many recognize cultural exchanges – such as the ones that are supported by the APAP Cultural Exchange Fund but also many that take place at grassroots and even large PAC levels – are the way we come to understand other peoples, their practices and cultures. APAP will continue to work on these issues in partnership with other national organizations to prove the value of the arts and of these exchanges.

Barry: What are the critical problems the presenting field faces in terms of dwindling arts journalism media coverage and how might we improve our position?
Mario: This is a real conundrum. Of course, we are delighted with the opening up of the protected arts journalism domain – with citizen bloggers and reporters. But nothing can replace the critical thought and extensive experience of our best arts journalists. Their numbers have lessened by about half nationally – and that’s bad for the arts. A proactive approach to this – and some performing arts centers have adopted this model – is to find a place for the critic’s voice either as someone who writes for a blog or creates a space for critical thought within the center’s own halls. It’s a tricky balance – because a journalist’s independence is always sacred. And yet we have to change with technology and with the crisis of the media industry. Both fields – arts and media – share an important experience: We both know what it’s like to be pushed out. So we adapt. I applaud journalists and arts centers developing a new model to keep these important voices at the fore.

Barry: What are APAP's short and long term advocacy strategies and priorities, and what are the major obstacles to success? How is the cooperative effort of APAP with Dance/USA, Opera America and the Theatre Communications Group working and do you envision any new kinds of advocacy training or other initiatives?
Mario: We believe very strongly in the strength of combined voices. We are committed to working with the Performing Arts Alliance, Americans for the Arts, National Assembly of State Arts Agencies and other arts and service organizations. As to the training of our members in advocacy, we see this as very important. We feel it’s important that organizations and artists are vigilant in maintaining a voice in their local and national communities. We will keep this issue at the forefront and assist our members in the most effective methods of advocating for support of the arts.

Barry: What aspects of audience development research needs improvement, and what current studies do you think will have substantial impact in the future? What is your take on the spate of "engagement" studies now dominating the audience development dialogue?
Mario: We know we have often fallen short in making sure that many in our audiences are as engaged with the performing arts as they are in other areas of their lives, such as religion, sports or hobbies. The focus on it right now is, I believe, a direct result of a longing to get closer to the artistic experience. So when Diane Paulus, who was a speaker at APAP|NYC 2012 (which not coincidentally was devoted to audience engagement), produced SLEEP NO MORE as part of American Repertory Theater’s season, she invited audience members to “curate” their own theatrical experience walking through a installation theater “stage.” The theater outsold every other show in its history. Audience members saw the show 5-8-10 times because they relished standing next to actors playing Macbeth or walking on the set for a Hitchcock film – all while theater was going on around them. Audiences are hungry for this type of contact, for a sense of belonging in theaters and concert halls rather than being alienated by red carpets and tuxedos. So for the future, those studies that look at the behavior of audiences in the moment of artistic experience will be the ones that make an impact on how we present, how we welcome and nurture audiences, and how we adapt to a world in which the audience member is co-author of the artistic experience.

Barry: How do you see presenting and tourism linked for the future? How might APAP further bridge the two industries?
Mario: They are linked now! When you arrive at the airport in Boise, Idaho, one of the first things you see is a welcome banner from the Trey McIntyre Project. We also know that the arts are selling points for many cities. If you’re applying for a job as a professor or as doctor in Bangor, Maine, you might be taken during your interview to a show at the Collins Center for the Performing Arts or to Penobscot Theatre Company. That’s not tourism but it has the same root as tourism, which is economic impact. Same for the American Folk Festival in Bangor – it’s about performing arts, but it also draws massive numbers of tourists. None of this happens if presenters and other civic leaders aren’t thinking broadly about the excellence of the arts and the role they play not only in community life, but also in the economy and in conjunction with daily life.

Thanks Mario.

Have a great week.
Don't Quit.
Barry