The boom of nonprofit arts organizations over the 80s and 90s had much to do with the economy, and with the rise of philanthropy, but also with the massive inflow of educated, passionate individuals into the workforce. As outlined in John Kreidler’s classic article on the dynamics of nonprofit arts in America Leverage Lost, these workers were young and idealistic, willing to take a salary hit to do something they loved, and confident that the job market would support them when they changed their minds. Now, of course, professional leaders of arts organizations are entering their later years. And just in terms of size, the next wave of candidates isn’t nearly as big.
Given that dynamic, it’s not just constrictions in earned income, individual giving, and funding from government, corporations, and foundations that should have us wondering what’s coming. We should also be watching the workforce dynamics as the boomers wander toward retirement age.
Professional churn has its benefits, I’ll admit. Fresh ideas and new perspectives can do wonders to reconnect an arts organization to its purpose (assuming that’s what the board has in mind). But that’s only true if there are engaged, professional, passionate, and creative people waiting in line to get into leadership positions. And they’ll only be waiting if they haven’t burned out on the whole idea of arts leadership by the time they get the chance.
An on-going effort by the Illinois Arts Alliance Foundation is looking into the issue of succession…how our current leaders are feeling, how emerging leaders are connecting or not to their career path, and where we can look to fill the inevitable gap. There’s some good reading here, for any leader or board member with the slightest inkling that they should be thinking about their organization’s longterm welfare.
