<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
    <channel>
        <title>The Artful Manager</title>
        <link>http://www.artsjournal.com/artfulmanager/</link>
        <description>Andrew Taylor on the business of arts &amp; culture</description>
        <language>en</language>
        <copyright>Copyright 2009</copyright>
        <lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 09:02:46 -0600</lastBuildDate>
        <generator>http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/</generator>
        <docs>http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification</docs>
        
        <item>
            <title>Cultural Workforce Forum</title>
            <description><![CDATA[The National Endowment for the Arts is hosting a Cultural Workforce Forum today, from 9:00 am to 4:00 pm Eastern, and has opened the event to the public through a live webcast. You can login and listen in here:<br /><br /><blockquote><a href="http://www.arts.gov/artworks/?p=358">Cultural Workforce Forum</a><br />Live Webcast, November 20, 2009<br />9:00 am - 4:00 pm Eastern<br /></blockquote>They've also promised an archive version of the event by next week.<br /><br />There are some great funders, researchers, and policy-makers on the agenda. And you can pop in and out for the parts of the agenda you want to watch (assuming they stay on schedule).<br /> ]]></description>
            <link>http://www.artsjournal.com/artfulmanager/main/cultural-workforce-forum.php</link>
            <guid>http://www.artsjournal.com/artfulmanager/main/cultural-workforce-forum.php</guid>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">main</category>
            
            
            <pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 09:02:46 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>My chat with Bill Ivey</title>
            <description><![CDATA[As part of this fall's special topics course I'm co-teaching at UW-Madison -- <a href="http://www.uw-artsenterprise.com/">Arts Enterprise: Art as Business as Art</a> -- we hosted a public forum and a class discussion with Bill Ivey, Director of the Curb Center for Art, Enterprise, and Public Policy at Vanderbilt University, former chairman of the National Endowment for the Arts, and recent leader for Obama's transition team for arts and humanities.<br /><br />Bill is working hard to reframe and refocus the realm of cultural policy from its traditional emphasis (almost exclusively) on the public and nonprofit arts. From his perspective, this frame excludes some rather important elements of our nation's cultural life -- including copyright, media ownership and consolidation, and even international trade.<br /><br />During his visit to Madison, I recorded this 20-minute podcast about his current work. Give a listen (also available <a href="http://www.archive.org/details/ArtAsBusinessAsArtBillIvey">on the Internet Archive</a>, or <a href="http://deimos3.apple.com/WebObjects/Core.woa/Browse/wisc-public.2313344055.02313344062.2777429094?i=1462910793">on iTunesU</a>).<br /><br />

<blockquote>
<embed type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="350" 	height="24" 	allowfullscreen="true" 	allowscriptaccess="always" 	src="http://www.archive.org/flow/flowplayer.commercial-3.0.5.swf" 	w3c="true" 	flashvars='config={"key":"#$b6eb72a0f2f1e29f3d4","playlist":[{"url":"http://www.archive.org/download/ArtAsBusinessAsArtBillIvey/ArtAsBusinessAsArt_BillIvey.mp3","autoPlay":false}],"clip":{"autoPlay":true},"canvas":{"backgroundColor":"0x000000","backgroundGradient":"none"},"plugins":{"audio":{"url":"http://www.archive.org/flow/flowplayer.audio-3.0.3-dev.swf"},"controls":{"playlist":false,"fullscreen":false,"gloss":"high","backgroundColor":"0x000000","backgroundGradient":"medium","sliderColor":"0x777777","progressColor":"0x777777","timeColor":"0xeeeeee","durationColor":"0x01DAFF","buttonColor":"0x333333","buttonOverColor":"0x505050"}},"contextMenu":[{"Item ArtAsBusinessAsArtBillIvey at archive.org":"function()"},"-","Flowplayer 3.0.5"]}'> </embed></blockquote>]]></description>
            <link>http://www.artsjournal.com/artfulmanager/main/my-chat-with-bill-ivey.php</link>
            <guid>http://www.artsjournal.com/artfulmanager/main/my-chat-with-bill-ivey.php</guid>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">main</category>
            
            
            <pubDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2009 07:50:21 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Rent, buy, build, or borrow</title>
            <description><![CDATA[When a for-profit enterprise wants to build its capacity to do something (manufacture a product, launch a new service, provide a new option for their clients, or the like), they face a classic business question -- should we rent the capacity, buy the capacity, or build the capacity? If they need a new manufacturing process, for example, they can either outsource the manufacturing to a third party (rent), purchase a fully operational plant or a competitor that already does the work (buy), or construct a new facility from scratch that will become part of the company's assets (build).<br /><br />The answer to a rent, buy, or build question is usually determined by the math (which pays the highest return on investment over an identified period) and by the strategy (will owning the process give us a strategic advantage, or will renting keep us quick on our feet). But smart businesses recognize and engage the choice whenever such decisions present themselves.<br /><br />Yet, experience with nonprofit arts organizations suggests that they tend to make rent, buy, or build decisions without such reflection. Rather, these choices are made based on tradition or common practice without full analysis of the dynamics in play. Should we build or buy a theater to call our home? Should we hire a consultant to run our capital campaign or develop an internal board capacity to do the job? Should we hire professional staff? These are all rent, buy, or build decisions with complex implications behind them.<br /><br />And since nonprofits have a fourth option to the question -- borrow at no cost -- such decisions should demand even more consideration at every step.<br /><br />Rent, buy, build, or borrow decisions live at every level of an arts organization, especially if we use broad definitions of the terms:<br /><br /><ul><li><i>Rent</i> - pay for limited-term use of a reasonably complete capacity. This can be for a physical asset like a performance venue, or for a professional capacity like strategic planning consulting or third-party box office solutions.</li><li><i>Buy</i> - find and internalize the capacity to your organization, either by purchasing a capacity outright (like a theater or gallery space), or by adding the capacity to your professional set (hiring artists, staff, or administrators through an on-going salary contract rather than per service).</li><li><i>Build</i> - identify an individual, group, or asset that's not quite ready to deliver the new capacity, and prepare it to do so (building out an old warehouse into a performance space, sending current staff to professional development for a new skill set, constructing your own software solution).</li><li><i>Borrow</i> - leverage your organization's access to volunteer labor, shared space, and community goodwill to get the capacity without direct expense.</li></ul>Since most arts organizations are very lean and highly leveraged, it's useful to explore these options for every major growth or strategic choice you make, and every asset you currently use. <br /> ]]></description>
            <link>http://www.artsjournal.com/artfulmanager/main/rent-buy-build-or-borrow-2.php</link>
            <guid>http://www.artsjournal.com/artfulmanager/main/rent-buy-build-or-borrow-2.php</guid>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">main</category>
            
            
            <pubDate>Mon, 16 Nov 2009 08:42:43 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Is our fundraising writing wrong?</title>
            <description><![CDATA[Many arts organizations work really hard to craft the perfect fundraising message in their letters, their brochures, and their online communications. They strive for strong evidence that what they do makes a difference, they anguish over the specific words they should use to convey that evidence, and they hope to close the deal by making the rational case for financial support. But somewhere in there, many of us forget to tell a compelling story.<br /><br />So discovered <a href="http://www.thewrittenvoice.org/">Frank C. Dickerson</a> in his dissertation research on the language of philanthropy. After running more than 2000 fundraising letters through a text analysis system, he found a frightening consistency with a similar, smaller study, which discovered that fundraising discourse:<br /><br /><ul><li>failed to connect with and involve readers on a personal and emotional level, and</li><li>failed to tell stories about real people whom readers might actually care about</li></ul>Instead, messages were clinical, detached, evidence-based, and academic.<br /><br />Of course, I'm a big fan of evidence, and supporting your impact with sufficient credential to prove your point. But that evidence need not be exclusively rational, linear, or statistical. A good story -- the transformation of a key constituent or participant, the revelation of another, the influence on a child's daily life -- is evidence of a different kind. But also of a more compelling kind when asking people to support you with their attention, passion, and cash.<br /><br /> ]]></description>
            <link>http://www.artsjournal.com/artfulmanager/main/is-our-fundraising-writing-wro.php</link>
            <guid>http://www.artsjournal.com/artfulmanager/main/is-our-fundraising-writing-wro.php</guid>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">main</category>
            
            
            <pubDate>Fri, 13 Nov 2009 08:53:44 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Arts policy, reconsidered</title>
            <description><![CDATA[<blockquote><i>UPDATE: We've just posted a <a href="http://www.uw-artsenterprise.com/?p=507">20-minute podcast interview</a> with Bill Ivey online. The video of his public presentation will come later.</i><br /></blockquote>If you're in or around Madison, Wisconsin, this Thursday, November 12, consider coming by the Madison Museum of Contemporary Art at 7:00 pm for a <a href="http://www.overturecenter.com/production/bill-ivey">public forum with Bill Ivey</a> on arts and cultural policy. I know, I know, ''arts'' and ''policy'' together often bring to mind dry and detached discussions of standardized test scores and economic impact. But Bill Ivey has an alternate and rather compelling view.<br /><br />Former chair of the National Endowment for the Arts, and recent transition team leader in Arts and Humanities for the Obama administration, Bill Ivey is working to reframe the conversation about arts, culture, heritage, creativity, and policy, and reconnect them to the daily issues of expresive life. From his home base at the <a href="http://www.curbcentervanderbilt.org/">Curb Center for Art, Enterprise and Public Policy at Vanderbilt University</a>, he is connecting the dots between the public sector, nonprofits, commercial entertainment, and community arts. And his recent book, <a href="http://www.curbcentervanderbilt.org/arts-inc"><i>Arts, Inc.: How Greed and Neglect Have Destroyed our Cultural Rights</i></a>, blasts away at our traditional approach to the arts in American life.<br /><br />The event is <a href="http://www.uw-artsenterprise.com/?page_id=38">one of three public forums</a> curated by the UW-Madison Arts Institute, and the special Arts Enterprise course I'm co-teaching with Stephanie Jutt. Should be a fascinating conversation. I'll be facilitating the Q&amp;A with Bill, and with our friends from the state, county, and city arts agencies. The event is free, and open to the public. <a href="http://www.mmoca.org/information/directions.php">Directions and parking information are available here</a>.<br />]]></description>
            <link>http://www.artsjournal.com/artfulmanager/main/arts-policy-reconsidered.php</link>
            <guid>http://www.artsjournal.com/artfulmanager/main/arts-policy-reconsidered.php</guid>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">main</category>
            
            
            <pubDate>Tue, 10 Nov 2009 08:26:11 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Oh, the power(lessness), the absolute power(lessness)</title>
            <description><![CDATA[If you're getting tired of 'top 20' lists of people who are richer, smarter, more attractive, better connected, and more interesting than you are, the folks over at Hyperallergic have a ranking for you! In response to the <i>Art Review</i> <a href="http://www.artreview100.com/2009-artreview-power-100/">'top 100' power-brokers</a> in the art world, they suggest <a href="http://hyperallergic.com/711/powerless-20/">The Top 20 Most Powerless People in the Art World</a>. Among them:<br /><br /><ul><li>Independent curators without trust funds -- There's a saying, ''No trust, no love.''</li><li>Artists who can't speak English, French, German, or Spanish. While the world is filled with approximately 6,800 languages, artwork must adhere to the linguistic realities of economics.</li><li>Beleaguered Administrative Assistants at MoMA -- This is a group that knows what it's like to be underpaid, under-appreciated and powerless -- the trifecta!</li><li>Anyone living in only one place, as opposed to ''between Berlin and Beijing,'' or ''based in London, Amsterdam, Sao Paolo, and Los Angeles.'' Where have you been, mono-urbanity is so 20th century...</li></ul>It's nice to find a list that we all have a chance to actually get on!<br /><i><br />Thanks <a href="http://www.wired.com/beyond_the_beyond/2009/11/the-top-20-most-powerless-people-in-the-art-world/">Bruce Sterling</a> for the link.</i><br /> ]]></description>
            <link>http://www.artsjournal.com/artfulmanager/main/oh-the-powerlessness.php</link>
            <guid>http://www.artsjournal.com/artfulmanager/main/oh-the-powerlessness.php</guid>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">main</category>
            
            
            <pubDate>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 00:18:24 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>What if the &apos;new normal&apos; is really the original normal?</title>
            <description><![CDATA[Neill Archer Roan posts <a href="http://www.theroangroup.com/working-smart/2009/11/4/welcome-to-the-new-normal.html">a rather interesting thought</a> on his weblog about what we're all calling the 'new normal' for our economy, our society, and our work: what if the past 50 years were the exception, not the rule, to human history? What if the conditions we all considered to be 'normal' as we built our businesses, our industries, and our common sense were actually&nbsp; anomolies? He quotes <a href="http://money.cnn.com/2009/01/15/news/companies/Jim_Collins_Crisis.fortune/">a recent interview with Jim Collins</a> in <i>Fortune</i>, who says: <br /><br /><blockquote>It turns out that 1952 to 2000 was an aberration. We had a combination of tremendous stability brought on by two monolithic superpowers -- danger, yes, but stability, combined with unprecedented prosperity. Very rarely in human history -- maybe the Egyptian empire or 200 A.D. in Rome -- only a few times you can go back and find those.<br /></blockquote>And yet, most of the nonprofit arts industry was born and evolved in that aberration. And what we consider 'standards of practice' could be standards for a universe that's not coming back.<br /><br />Which is not to suggest that arts organizations throw in the towel, but rather that it's a good time to check ALL of our assumptions about what we do, how we do it, and what we define as success. And it also might be a good time to dust off our history books to see how arts and culture worked before 1952. There might be some useful ideas from the OLD normal that could be revived.<br /> ]]></description>
            <link>http://www.artsjournal.com/artfulmanager/main/what-if-the-new-normal-is-real.php</link>
            <guid>http://www.artsjournal.com/artfulmanager/main/what-if-the-new-normal-is-real.php</guid>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">main</category>
            
            
            <pubDate>Wed, 04 Nov 2009 08:29:05 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Thoughts on the &apos;portfolio career&apos;</title>
            <description><![CDATA[If you thought you were just bouncing from gig to gig, juggling multiple part-time or limited-term jobs in the arts and elsewhere, or just patching together a living from a seemingly diffuse bundle of clients, employers, and projects, you may not have realized that you were engaging in the job strategy of the future, the <a href="http://www.quintcareers.com/portfolio_careers.html">portfolio career</a>. The phrase and the concept seem to be popping up in organizational theory circles as a way of capturing an age-old practice that's becoming an emerging trend.<br /><br />The ''portfolio worker,'' defined by organizational and management theorist <a href="http://www.thinkers50.com/biographies/43/2009">Charles Handy</a> a few decades ago, doesn't work for a single company, but rather gathers a ''portfolio'' of jobs around a common theme or skill set, and balances that portfolio much like an investor manages a bundle of stocks. <br /><br />I've been using the phrase a lot lately, as it describes both the reality of so much cultural work, but also the tension and intention of managing such complex working relationships. We've seen lots of evidence lately that policy-makers don't consider portfolio jobs to be ''real jobs'' (which are defined, it seems, as permanent, persistent employment opportunities). Further, our career counseling for creative professionals, and our training for prospective professionals in higher education, does little to engage the challenge.<br /><br />Anyone know of an organization or a research cluster that's specifically looking at this issue in the arts? Would love to know who already knows about it.<br /><br /><br /> ]]></description>
            <link>http://www.artsjournal.com/artfulmanager/main/thoughts-on-the-portfolio-care.php</link>
            <guid>http://www.artsjournal.com/artfulmanager/main/thoughts-on-the-portfolio-care.php</guid>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">main</category>
            
            
            <pubDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2009 09:17:14 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>An artist&apos;s alternative to material wealth</title>
            <description><![CDATA[In an era when our economy is in flux, and many are revisiting their penchant for buying more stuff, conceptual artist Jonathon Keats offers another way: buy the <i>opposite</i> of stuff. His upcoming exhibit on The First Bank of Antimatter (<a href="http://www.boingboing.net/2009/10/29/artist-says-we-will.html">BoingBoing blog here</a>, and here's <a href="http://www.modernisminc.com/exhibitions/Jonathon_KEATS--THE_FIRST_BANK_OF_ANTIMATTER/?image=Jonathon%20KEATS">the exhibition site</a>) suggests a mirror marketplace to reinvigorate our current one. Says he:<br /><br /><blockquote>"Economic equilibrium is upset by our unbalanced pursuit of material
wealth.... My plan is to offset materialism with modern
science, by exploiting the economic potential of antimatter, which is
the physical opposite of anything made with atoms, from luxury condos
to private jets."<br /></blockquote>The exhibit creates a new form of currency, backed by antimatter stored in a vault. Sounds like a plan to me.<br /><br /><img alt="positrons.jpg" src="http://www.artsjournal.com/artfulmanager/images/positrons.jpg" class="mt-image-none" style="" height="141" width="400" />&nbsp; <div><br /></div>]]></description>
            <link>http://www.artsjournal.com/artfulmanager/main/an-artists-alternative-to-mate.php</link>
            <guid>http://www.artsjournal.com/artfulmanager/main/an-artists-alternative-to-mate.php</guid>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">main</category>
            
            
            <pubDate>Fri, 30 Oct 2009 00:39:43 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Signs that you&apos;ve stayed too long at the party</title>
            <description><![CDATA[In this job market and this economy, it's challenging to consider leaving a job. But it's never a bad idea for any cultural manager to at least ask the question: Am I in the right place, doing the right work? CompassPoint's Tim Wolfred offers <a href="http://www.blueavocado.org/content/six-ways-know-if-its-time-leave">six signs that it might be time to move on</a>. Among them:<br /><br /><ol><li>I keep returning to this thought: the organization needs to go in a new direction (or to a new level) and I'm not the right person for it.</li><li>I'm burned out and I know it. </li><li>I don't think I'm burned out, but other people think I am. </li><li>I can't stand my board anymore . . . and/or, I can't seem to please the board no matter what I do. </li><li>My clock is ticking. </li><li>Family roles are calling me.</li></ol>For most of the above, there are alternatives to departure -- such as additional training or professional development, refreshing your perspective with your board (or refreshing your board), or redefining your job or your place within the organization. But even these take proactive identification that there's a problem to be addressed.<br /><br />Worth a read, and a ponder.<br /><br />[Thanks to <a href="http://www.westaf.org/blog/archives/2009/10/three_quick_lin.php">Barry's blog</a> for the link.]<br /> ]]></description>
            <link>http://www.artsjournal.com/artfulmanager/main/signs-that-youve-stayed-too-lo.php</link>
            <guid>http://www.artsjournal.com/artfulmanager/main/signs-that-youve-stayed-too-lo.php</guid>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">main</category>
            
            
            <pubDate>Wed, 28 Oct 2009 12:30:24 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Of management metaphor and myth</title>
            <description><![CDATA[Anne Midgette at the <i>Washington Post</i> <a href="http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-classical-beat/2009/10/conducting_ones_business.html">offers a short slap in the face</a> to those who suggest the orchestra conductor as a model of modern management (<a href="http://views.washingtonpost.com/leadership/guestinsights/2009/10/leadership-secrets-from-a-maestro.html">a la Roger Nierenberg</a>, et al). Sure, in theory, conductors work to bring different talents together into a single expression. Sure, in theory, conductors engage a complex range of knowledge, context, and personnel to achieve a creative goal. But Midgette counters that, <i>in practice</i>, orchestras are a bit of a mess.<br /><br /><blockquote>Orchestras are notoriously dysfunctional places, often filled with
talented people suffering from acute frustration at their lack of
autonomy or of artistic self-expression. And the conductor of
stereotype is an autocratic figure who doesn't care if his musicians
are happy or not.<br /></blockquote>And while those archetypes are changing by necessity, increasingly toward collaborative leadership and venture-friendly conductors, it's still not clear that the orchestral metaphor holds much water for the modern manager. Says she:<br /><br /><blockquote>...orchestras with conductors have not traditionally been the happiest
places for their employees; orchestras without conductors do not
necessarily make the best music; and yet orchestras are being presented
as holding keys to business success.<br /></blockquote>Discuss, indeed.<br />]]></description>
            <link>http://www.artsjournal.com/artfulmanager/main/of-management-metaphor-and-myt.php</link>
            <guid>http://www.artsjournal.com/artfulmanager/main/of-management-metaphor-and-myt.php</guid>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">main</category>
            
            
            <pubDate>Tue, 27 Oct 2009 09:51:21 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>The challenge of blending physical business with on-line</title>
            <description><![CDATA[Slate's ''The Big Money'' blog <a href="http://www.thebigmoney.com/features/kindle-chronicles/2009/10/22/nook-doom?page=full">offers a fascinating analysis</a> of the new Barnes &amp; Noble eBook reader, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/21/technology/21nook.html">the Nook</a>. Author Marion Maneker suggests that while the Nook is designed to compete against Amazon's Kindle, it might only underscore the fundamental differences between Barnes &amp; Noble's business model and that of Amazon. <br /><br />In brief, Amazon is in the business of delivering books through on-line sales. If that book can be delivered digitally, rather than in physical form by mail, Amazon wins by delivering a comparable product with vastly lower cost. Barnes &amp; Noble, on the other hand, is a bricks-and-mortar retailer. And while their Nook strategy offers incentives to actually bring the device to one of their stores, the cost implications are vastly different -- prices drop, more digital books are purchased instead of physical books, but the retail side of that equation gets hammered in the process.<br /><br />Barnes &amp; Noble still needs to stock shelves, pay rent, and hire staff...at least for the immediate future. And if they're successful with the Nook, their margin to do so will get narrower and narrower (and perhaps negative) really quickly.<br /><br />For arts and cultural managers, the analysis offers a sideways glance at the challenge of adding on-line strategies to place-based businesses (theaters, museums, galleries, and the like). It's a necessity if your goal is really to engage an audience. But it can have consequences that accelerate the business problems you already have in your primary endeavor. And you don't get a lot of time to decide. Says Maneker:&nbsp; <br /><br /><blockquote>In an orderly world where change takes place incrementally, the Nook
might be a smart long-term strategy to shift Barnes &amp; Noble's base
from physical stores to e-readers. But we don't live in that world. The
book business has shifted into hyper-space with dramatic change taking
place within a compressed time frame.<br /></blockquote> ]]></description>
            <link>http://www.artsjournal.com/artfulmanager/main/the-challenge-of-blending-phys.php</link>
            <guid>http://www.artsjournal.com/artfulmanager/main/the-challenge-of-blending-phys.php</guid>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">main</category>
            
            
            <pubDate>Mon, 26 Oct 2009 09:06:53 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Blogging the GIA</title>
            <description><![CDATA[The annual <a href="http://www.giarts.org/">Grantmakers in the Arts</a> conference has long been a closed affair -- gathering foundations and funders for several days of discussion, workshops, and panels to inform their work. The reasons for the closed circle are obvious: Funders can speak more freely about their challenges and opportunities if they're aren't being swarmed by potential grantees. Plus, as a community of practice, they can benefit from reasonably pure peer-to-peer connections.<br /><br />Nonmembers can come if they're invited (I've been to two of them, which makes me cool). But otherwise it's a bit like Fight Club and its first rule. Which is why it's rather nice to have <a href="http://gia2009.wordpress.com/">a blogger on-site this year,</a> in the form and phrases of Ian David Moss of the <a href="http://createquity.com/">Createquity</a> blog. Ian engaged the tension of blogging from a closed conference in one of his posts:<br /><br /><blockquote>The conference is traditionally closed to all but staff of grantmaking organizations and invited speakers. In addition, there is a strict policy against solicitation of any kind... The result is that the conference creates, as GIA board member Janet Rodriguez characterized it, a ''safe space'' for the sharing of ideas among colleagues. However, at the only major national convening for arts funders every year, this strategy can also remove the possibility of healthy confrontation in a field in which getting honest feedback can be a challenge.<br /></blockquote>Lots of great summaries and perspectives. Although I'm rather eagerly awaiting the reports from the morning workshop entitled ''The Future and Our Role in Shaping It'' where Ian was not invited. If ever there was a topic for funders to engage with transparency, openess, and full-on critical engagement, that's it. ]]></description>
            <link>http://www.artsjournal.com/artfulmanager/main/blogging-the-gia.php</link>
            <guid>http://www.artsjournal.com/artfulmanager/main/blogging-the-gia.php</guid>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">main</category>
            
            
            <pubDate>Thu, 22 Oct 2009 08:43:55 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Rethinking arts economies and arts exchange</title>
            <description><![CDATA[A breadcrumb trail of conversation (from Twitter to <a href="http://fluxtheatreensemble.blogspot.com/2009/10/community-supported-theatre-vs-dont.html">Flux Theatre</a> to <a href="http://www.stolenchair.org/CST.html">Stolen Chair</a>) led me to Stolen Chair Theatre's new initiative to support new works. Instead of grants and traditional subscriptions, they propose a community support system modeled on <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community-supported_agriculture">Community Supported Agriculture</a> (CSA). Says Stolen Chair:<br /><br /><blockquote>Like the CSA model, Stolen Chair hopes to build a membership community,
a "CST", which would provide 'seed' money for the company's development
process and then reap a year's worth of theatrical harvests.<br /></blockquote>The organization has received a grant to create the model as part of The Field's <a href="http://www.thefield.org/t-erpa.aspx">Economic Revitalization for Performing Artists</a> (ERPA) initiative. More on the model and the metaphor in a future post. But in the meanwhile, I was struck by an extended quote from Stolen Chair's Jon Stancato (<a href="http://stolenchair.blogspot.com/2009/05/speech-that-got-booed.html">transcribed in his blog</a>), which seems to suggest the motivation for their CSA idea:<br /><br /><blockquote>There is no such thing as an arts economy since non-commercial arts by their very definition don't follow market logic and can't compete in the market place without dependence on non-profit support structures and the government. So we can embrace our role in the margins of the economy and struggle the way that performing artists have struggled since theatre and religion parted ways, or we can model ourselves on the only other two positions left to us in a market-driven economy: as charity (quite like an endangered species) or as community resource (like a neighborhood garden)....<br /><br />I don't want to be a charity, in large part because I don't think our social cause has enough merit to compete with other charities who actually change lives on a grand scale.&nbsp; So, the only round hole we can force our square peg of a "business model" into is as community resource. <br /><br />In this interconnected, digital age, if our art can serve as a meeting place for communities of like-minded individuals to connect, celebrate, and be challenged, then we might find a way of restoring theatre's primacy in people's lives and creating sustainable theatre-making organisms (not organizations).<br /></blockquote>For which he received both boos and applause. While I would nudge Stancato's definition of an economy, which seems to assume an exclusively commercial marketplace (which is only part of an economy), I think his central question is a rather important one:<br /><br />Is unprofitable theater (or other arts endeavor) a charity, a community resource, an entitlement, a labor of love, or some combination thereof? Whatever we choose as our cluster of definitions, it will be helpful to align our business models and our resource strategies accordingly. <br /><br />It will be fascinating to watch Stolen Chair, and the <a href="http://campaign.constantcontact.com/render?v=0013fIwE0AX_DHB4ptxq0RxSBE-58Zgj0Ky0YYxkM1K-JZHt_HfeUKKLfpZXXA5UgigeDjRNNWRkSaU7V_yuP7FrMO4fneZi1zbLnoqeHN9IU2UnP5_ePFYN_pJJZNia50w">other recipients of the ERPA funding</a>, explore these new alignments.<br /> ]]></description>
            <link>http://www.artsjournal.com/artfulmanager/main/rethinking-arts-economies-and.php</link>
            <guid>http://www.artsjournal.com/artfulmanager/main/rethinking-arts-economies-and.php</guid>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">main</category>
            
            
            <pubDate>Wed, 21 Oct 2009 08:32:35 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Calling all emergent leaders</title>
            <description><![CDATA[I don't spend much time on this blog talking about my day job, as I figure its a relatively commercial-free zone. But I do have a day job, directing <a href="http://www.bolzcenter.org/">an MBA degree program</a> in Arts Administration in the Wisconsin School of Business. And that day job is entirely intertwined with all that I do online and offline.<br /><br />Essentially, I work closely with my colleagues here in the business school, with alumni, and with international innovators in professional practice to do three things:<br /><br /><ol><li>Search for and select high-potential professional leaders for arts and cultural enterprise;</li><li>Connect those individuals to curriculum, hands-on learning, and professional networks to help them become not only masters of the task at hand, but also ready for the task ahead;</li><li>Build and grow an international network of alumni and colleagues in the professional world and in academia to ensure we know what success looks like for items one and two, and that we have the capacity to achieve it.</li></ol>Around this time every year, my focus narrows onto item number one: search and selection. Each February, we accept applications for fall admission. And each March, we select from that extraordinary international pool to build our incoming class. We already get a strong, competitive, and compelling group of applicants each year. But I'm concerned that we're missing large numbers of high-potential cultural leaders who aren't aware of the option.<br /><br />Which is where I'd appreciate your help. <br /><br />If you are (or if you know) an exceptionally passionate and focused professional in arts and culture, with two tor more years of full-time, post-undergraduate work experience, an aptitude for business thinking, and a commitment to innovation in the way arts organizations run, we should know each other. You provide the application, the transcripts, the GMAT score, and the compelling essays. We'll provide a fully funded (yes, all of our admitted students are funded through hands-on assistantships), intensive, immersive, conversational, and challenging two-year MBA degree in Arts Administration for those who are selected.<br /><br />I know it sounds like a sales pitch, but it's really a call for partners. Our students, our graduates, our network, and our faculty have defined professional practice in arts and culture for 40 years. We need your energy and your insights to redefine the field for the <i>next</i> 40 years.<br /><br />Interested? <a href="http://www.bolzcenter.org/contact.php">Send me a note!</a>&nbsp; <br /><br /> ]]></description>
            <link>http://www.artsjournal.com/artfulmanager/main/calling-all-emergent-leaders.php</link>
            <guid>http://www.artsjournal.com/artfulmanager/main/calling-all-emergent-leaders.php</guid>
            
                <category domain="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category">main</category>
            
            
            <pubDate>Tue, 20 Oct 2009 08:37:52 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
    </channel>
</rss>
