Best Practices? The Arts and the Modern Economy.
Artist: Debra Tomson Williams
Stitched Staples No. 1
Recycled staples, thread, acrylic paint, paper
8” x 6”
2008
by Heidi K. Rettig
Dedicated studies have been made of “best practices” in the field of arts and culture – some of them by yours, truly. The idea is that if we understand what is working in one place, we can apply it to other programs and help our clients meet their goals.
There is strength in knowing “what works.” Front-of-house management, legal, and accounting matters will all benefit from the application of solid practice.
But what about the creative side? In my opinion, the best work is art and/or performance that is both innovative and well made.
Flipping through the September 2010 issue of Harvard Business Review, I found an article by Amar Bhide about the importance of innovation in the modern economy:
“Innovations are unprecedented, one-of-a-kind developments. Even incremental ones require imagination. An innovator cannot simply rely on historical patterns in placing bets on future opportunities. Knowing what has worked before and what hasn’t is but a starting point. Innovation also requires considerable trial and error. Unforseen technical problems –or customers [audiences?] not doing what they had told market researchers they would–demand recalibrations that combine on-the-spot observations and historical knowledge with leaps of imagination.”
Sometimes, the goal is to do what someone else is doing, i.e. bring Broadway to Minnesota. But I suspect you’d also like to do something else. Something innovative? Something your own.
The Influence of Time and New Technologies on Arts Participation.
by Heidi K. Rettig
Arts organizations and cultural policy researchers spend a great deal of time thinking about patterns of arts participation. According to several reports, audiences for the arts are shrinking and there is cause for concern about the future of arts and culture for the next generation.
Consultants scramble to provide solutions to the problem (audience engagement, community building), but we haven’t [yet] seen change of any significance. Museums, theatres, and orchestras still struggle to meet payroll, and the consultants soldier on doing the same thing over and over again with just enough success to sell the ideas to the next organization.
As an applied anthropologist, concepts of personal and geographic time and the impact of new technologies on society are concepts that fascinate me. I’ve been working on understanding how time and technology shape arts participation decisions and hope to present this work at the Society for Applied Anthropology conference in Seattle next spring.
In the field, we talk a lot about the way we can use technology to engage audiences, but we don’t generally think much about how technology outside the theatre is shaping experience of those inside the doors. And we don’t acknowledge that the concept and availability of time – out-of-work, in-school, and out-of school – has radically changed over the past ten years.
Watch Stanford University Professor of Psychology (Emeritus) Philip Zimbardo explain these concepts in this simple, wonderful video from RSA Animates.
Fundraising for Small Arts Organizations.
If you’ve just joined a board, you might find Andy Robinson’s book, Big Gifts for Small Groups: A 1-hour Board Member’s Guide to Securing Gifts of $500 to $5000 helpful. You can read it here at Google Books or find it in your library.
NEA and HUD will offer $175 million for arts and communities.
On Wednesday, July 7, 2010, the National Endowment for the Arts or NEA and the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development or HUD will offer a webinar to discuss $175 million in funding opportunities for the arts and creative sector.
The webinar will discuss two innovative funding opportunities: HUD’s Sustainable Communities Regional Planning Grant Program and a joint grant program via HUD and the Department of Transportation or DOT: Sustainable Communities Challenge Grant Program.
According to the press release, this is the first time that HUD and the NEA have co-convened the arts and creative sector on a national level around funding opportunities, and it demonstrates the Obama Administration’s commitment to changing the way the federal government operates by working more collaboratively across federal agencies and making smarter investments
Anyone interested in participating in the webinar should log on to HUD’s website at 3:00 p.m. EDT on Wednesday, July 7th, 2010.
This grant program will be extremely competitive and an arduous undertaking for interested communities. All the same, I’ve had lots of good luck with the NEA for my clients – so I always encourage people to give it a try!
How to Fundraise: Effective Conversations with Wealthy Donors.
I was chatting to a colleague a few weeks ago about an upcoming rendezvous she had planned with a potential donor at a social event. “A friend of a friend is going to introduce us. This lady’s husband just died a few weeks ago. He made a lot of money selling widgets and, since she’s got more money than God, I’m sure she’ll give us some for our [completely unrelated to widgets] project.”
Because every bereaved widow gives away lots of money to people she meets over drinks. Really rich people have so much money they use Louis Vuitton trash bags and remove their eye makeup with dollar bills, right? Wrong.
It’s very tempting to think that because someone has more than you that they don’t care about their finances. The reality is that most philanthropists have worked very hard to earn their money and work even harder at maintaining their level of success. They know that people who give their money away and spend willy nilly (Ed McMahon; Michael Jackson) wind up seriously compromised or even bankrupt.
With that in mind, the next time you prepare a request for a major gift, I think you’ll find it helpful to consider the following:
–Approach wealthy donors only when you can make a genuine connection. Is money (or stuff) the only reason you maintain a relationship with this person? Or is there a genuine exchange? Does or will your partnership provide mutual satisfaction? Are you working toward something meaningful to both of you, given your shared interests, feelings, and values, as noted above? Or are you just hoping to be asked out to their beach house for a weekend?
–A donor’s interests, goals, values, tragedies and budgetary demands guide and inform the investment decisions they make each year. Your request is one of hundreds, perhaps thousands. The only way you can find out what a potential donor values is to pick up the phone and begin an honest conversation.
–What kind of information and/or evidence would you need to give $1000 to a stranger? (You wouldn’t give your money away at all, would you?) What kind of information/evidence can you then prepare for your donors to demonstrate that your art project is investment worthy on their terms? It’s o.k. to ask them upfront what kind of information they use to make a decision.
–Accept rejection with grace and care. Really listen to what the donor is telling you when they say “no.” Is it “no, not ever?” Then stop asking. Is it a “Not right now, but perhaps next year?” Then wait patiently until next year.
–Be open to gifts in-kind. A donor may not choose to support your project, for whatever reason, but offer something else as a compromise. It may be an introduction or a product for a goody bag. Again, respect their decision and accept whatever they offer – perhaps just their friendship – with good grace.
–Beware of “wealthy” time wasters. They are out there. Folks who use perceptions of their “wealth” and “power” to draw attention to themselves and create a circle of “social” support in a community. They suck all of your time and energy and give very little joy (or money) in return. If you run a nonprofit, chances are you’ve already run into someone like this. Remember that principle of mutual exchange and check your relationships against that guideline from time to time. Are you drained each and every time you interact with this person? Do they need you more than you need them?
–And what about the money part? You can check the total assets of donors’ private foundations and their history of giving via mandatory IRS 990 form tax returns made public through the National Center for Charitable Statistics.
Good Luck!
June 3, 2010: Event to Discuss New Funding Opportunity for Minnesota Arts Organizations.
Paleo lab, Science Museum of Minnesota. Photo: Heidi Rettig
On Thursday, June 3rd, from 6 – 9 p.m., I’ll be attending Minnesota Association of Museum’s event, “Summit at Summit Brewery”. This event is opportunity for arts professionals to socialize and listen to a panel discussion about new funding opportunities presented by the passage of Minnesota’s Arts and Cultural Heritage Amendment. Loosely interpreted, that means: Come find out if your organization can apply for a grant.
Representatives from the Metropolitan Regional Arts Council; Minnesota Public Radio, Minnesota Association of Museums; Minnesota Citizens for the Arts; Minnesota Public Television and Minnesota State Arts Board will be there. The event is at the Summit Brewery in St. Paul. It is free to members of MAM and a nominal charge to non-members. You can read about the evening and register here.
I’ll be there, dressed in black.
How to Be Famous: Become a Product.
The sad truth about fame is that it often has very little to do with your talent. OK. It is a *little bit* about your talent, but more about how effectively you manage to sell yourself as a “product” to the star-maker industry – whether it be Hollywood, New York art galleries, theatre critics, or record labels.
When you start getting jobs, gallery shows, or reviews, you start to figure out which part of you “sells” and what grows stale on the shelf. I’m not talking about the money (yet). I’m talking about the artistic work you make or perform that audiences want to see. Think of that work as your artistic “product.” What “sells” is what people want to see. You may have more than one “product” and some of them might be more successful at generating income than others.
The early success of your artistic “product” is the beginning of a story – the choices you are making shape that story at every turn. You’ll be presented with many difficult choices in the early years – should you do or make something just because it sells? Or do you stick to your guns and wait for the parts you really want? Do you keep performing for an audience of twelve people who bought tickets or for the four hundred who all got in free?
Each choice you make tells your fans who you “really are”, but more importantly, perhaps, this story will tell you who you have to be to maintain that level of success. Being multi-talented, beautiful, intelligent, and globally accomplished (Vanessa Williams) will not be enough to make a family audience forget about those old naked pictures. Naked pictures may not be enough to convince the world that your other work is worth looking at (LaToya Jackson).
So, who are you, really? And what do you want your career story to say? Do you want your character to change and grow over the course of your career (Ellen DeGeneres) or will your character need to stay the same (Meg Ryan, Kevin Costner)?
Ultimately, your story becomes a script for the play that is your life as an artist. It’s an evolving spiritual text, in a way. A statement of your mission about how you – the talent, the famous person, the artist and her “product” - will behave in the public eye. This script will guide you through decisions about the art or performance work you accept from this point forward. However you feel about Tom Cruise – he’s an actor who knows who he is and what he wants to be. His career decisions are careful and deliberate and each one contributes to a very clear picture of who “Tom Cruise” will be for the public eye.
We’ve all seen popular celebrities try (and fail) to be themselves after a long spell of being the person their agent wanted them to be. American Idol talent Kelly Clarkson is a great example. After cutting a series of successful albums with Clive Davis at RCA, Clarkson decided she wanted to go out on her own and make music that was closer to her heart. She went off the [probably] RCA-encouraged diet plan and started going out in public without her hair and makeup on. She altered the “Kelly Clarkson Product” in one fell swoop. The album flopped. Now, she’s left with the hard work of starting over – on her relationships within the industry, and even amongst the fan base that she abandoned with her radical switch from pop to metal.
It’s tempting to say you want to be “real,” because the distinction between “soul” and “product” is difficult to maintain over the course of a lifetime. We’ve all read People magazine (only at the doctor’s office, I swear) and know that fame can alienate the soul in some pretty profound ways. But the truth is the “real” you – unless it is what made you famous in the first place – might not be what your fans want to pay for. And this may be the most difficult choice your character ever has to make – do you work for the money? Or do something else for the money and do the work for you?
This is the first post in a new series called “How to Be Famous.” Stay tuned….
Tips for Speaking or Performing in Public.
Even the most seasoned performers get a little bit nervous before they take the stage. Nerves are normal.
The best performers know that the only antidote for “nerves” is the many hours of careful preparation and rehearsal before the show. They know their material so well they can tailor it to the mood of the audience each night, “wardrobe malfunctions,” and other surprises.
This is true for the rest of us, as well. Preparation leads to a great performance. You can collapse when you get off stage.
Here is a great article that will help you prepare for your next presentation:
Danielle LaPorte offers 15 Tips for Public Speaking That Apply To Shining At Work, and Just About Everywhere Else.
NEA Access to Artistic Excellence Grant Award goes to The PlayGround Theatre
Congratulations to my client, The PlayGround Theatre in Miami Shores, Florida!
Today, the National Endowment for the Arts announced that PlayGround Theatre has received a $15,000 grant award under the Access to Artistic Excellence program.
This grant recognizes the quality and scope of PlayGround’s Theater Inclusion Program, which adapts performances and materials to allow disabled children, families and caregivers to enjoy live performances and ensure their full participation in educational programs at PlayGround Theatre.
A Geography of Rural Arts Participation.
(Keep click on this map to zoom in – it’s interesting. )
Walking the halls of Urban Institute, I thought a lot about the geography of arts participation. We were working on an evaluation of a grant program that had made strategic investments aimed at addressing the “barriers” to cultural participation. More than one of those “barriers” related to the location of events.
The research team knew from the National Endowment for the Arts’ comprehensive surveys of arts participation that, on average, people reported participating in arts events just a few times a year. They were most likely to attend arts and cultural events at public schools or neighborhood venues.
I can’t speak for the rest of the team, but I know that I always interpreted those results through the filter of my own environment. I was a single woman in Washington, DC. The opportunities to participate in arts and culture were unlimited, and many of them were free. It seemed to reflect poorly on the nation’s interest in arts and culture.
I had a lot to learn. Ten years later, I find myself in rural Montana, a three hour drive from a major performance venue, and married to a cowboy who loves his country music. The geography of arts participation in this place has an entirely different meaning, but many of the tools funders employ are much the same. And they don’t always work very well.
For example, the monthly arts calendar published by Montana Arts Council is a good service, but it’s print rather than online. I don’t usually see it hit my newsstand until the middle of the month. By that time, I’ve missed half of what I might like to see and don’t have enough time to plan what for what remains.
Events listed in the publication include the entire state. I see the point, from the Arts Council’s view and mission statement, but from mine? I live 650 miles from Billings. I’m no more likely to drive to Billings to see a play than you would be to drive from Washington, DC to Cincinnati, Ohio to catch your favorite band. I can drive to Seattle (even Calgary!) in less time than it takes to get to Billings. Perhaps an online resource that has a regional, multi-state representation would be more effective.
Every few years, efforts will be made to move arts conferences and meetings outside of New York, Philadelphia and Washington, DC. While the intentions are good, involving small arts organizations in national conversations doesn’t necessarily mean moving the conferences to small towns. While I would love to visit Rapid City and see the organizations show off their buildings and collections, I can’t get there any easier than folks from the big cities. A round-trip ticket in this market takes $675.00 and 12 hours of flight and layover time. I can fly to Minneapolis non-stop in two and a half hours for $385. I want to go to the big city. I’m like every other conference attendee – I’m looking for easy, cheap flights and affordable, safe, hotel rooms.
Finally, some grant programs have encouraged the adaptation of creative work to be “meaningful” and “culturally relevant” to specific populations. Perhaps, at one time, I supported that idea as well – but that was obviously way before I saw a traveling production of Don Pasquale – as a cowboy staged against the backdrop of the “Wild West.” Television, Netflix, and the internet have collapsed the distance between artist and consumer. As a consumer of ideas, I’m as close to Paris as you are.
It seems appropriate, before any project aimed at “diversifying” audiences or increasing “accessibility” or “participation”, to ask ourselves how we understand the populations we intend to serve. Who are they? Do we really know what they think? How do they make decisions about programs and events they decide to attend? Or are we relying on stereotypes? Are we making decisions based on survey data from communities that look very different than those we are attempting to reach? Do evaluations of your other projects ask the right questions? Do they tell you what you need to know to make your programs better for your audience?
If someone asks you how you decide to do what you do, what will your answer be?