There is another level of demand for the arts and specifically for arts organizations that I subconsciously recognized, but just recently have come to better understand. Its the demand for association and status. And over the last couple of years of speaking with leaders of performing arts organizations, I've learned the demand for association and status are much greater than the demand for the arts experiences itself. As a result, arts organizations have become the product, rather than the conduit that delivers the experience being demanded. Programming has become a secondary function of the organization. Selling association and status has become much sustainable than selling engaging and entertaining arts events, especially in our hyper media entertainment driven world.
Absolutely nothing wrong with using the arts to make connections with others, or to use the association with the arts to enhance one's brand, but it does add a complexity to managing the arts that is filled with opportunities for inefficiency and corruption. Part of the complexity seems to involve not being able to publicly discuss the demand for association and status, yet alone responsibly manage it. Can you imagine telling your development office to rank donors or board members according to their influence or power rating? Yet we all know the hierarchy exists and influences decisions, and so does everyone in your organization. It's clear that executive directors of arts organizations need a high level of diplomacy, superior interpersonal skills and an ability to market a strong vision for the organization. That vision seems to include delivering the connections and public branding many donors and board members seek, I just hope it doesn't drive away the board members and donors that are committed to meaningful artist/audience experiences.
No comments:
Post a Comment