Don’t succumb to conservative theater!

August 4, 2009 • 2 Comments

Isaac Bulter’s recent post Here Come The “Rock Solid”s could be a depressing but necessary read, but I prefer to think of it as a challenge to the field.  He talks about the conservative leanings of institutional theatre in response to a crisis.  I would argue the tendency towards conservative, safe choices began far before the economic implosion of Wall Street but that is another post.  But however we got here Issac puts his finger on the proverbial button by pointing out:

Looking over season after season and theaters all over America is not exactly inspiring to say the least.  I’m not saying this to draw some comparison between New York, which has plenty of theaters doing uninspiring work, don’t get me wrong. But I’m on a regional theater beat right now, and its a little depressing. …you get no sense looking over the seasons that they are serving their particular communities wants/needs, and many of the seasons look remarkably similar.

Certainly Issac is right New York City theatres are not immune from the issue.  But the key here is if a theater isn’t serving a specific community and looks like handfuls of other theaters, are we (1) doing our jobs and (2) the least bit surprised that raising money, engaging audiences and selling tickets are such challenging tasks?

After looking at one theater’s safe choices for the upcoming season (even including a production of The Odd Couple), Issac goes on to portray the dilemma of the leaders of said theatres:

I’m even sympathetic to theatre’s plight right now.  AD and EDs have a responsibility for the survival of their theaters.  They have employees whose livelihood depends on the theater.  They have boards to satisfy. There’s a lot of needs pushing and pulling their decisions other than “what is the best work we could be doing right now?” and I imagine most people are trying very hard to do the best work they can given the environment we have right now.  Or at least, they think they are.  No one wakes up in the morning and goes, “wow, I can’t wait to devote my year to doing uninspiring work that will at least make sure we don’t lose too many subscribers this year!” and I’ve spoken to an artistic director or two who took a bath over the last couple of years trying to move their theaters in edgier directions.

That it’s understandable doesn’t make it less depressing. Or, frankly, less frightening for those of us who care deeply about the future of theater in America.

Here’s the thing, to me the situation is understandable as in of course I get how we landed here – I lived it day and night for years, but there is a difference between understandable and acceptable.  I think as theater artists and leaders we have to realize this isn’t acceptable.  And before we blame anyone including our boards we need to look at our own place continuing this unacceptable course.  The reality is the conservative, safe route is just that SAFE.  It is easier.  It allows us to bemoan the situation rather than doing something about it.  But what can we do about it?  Actually we can do several things:

1.  We can understand our local community and its relationship to the national and global community and actually pick plays that are relevant to the issues of that community.

2.  We learn to address the unrealistic expectations that are place on shows.  Artists, audiences, press, and leadership have all placed ridiculous expectations of what we and a show are supposed to be versus looking at who we are and what a show needs.  Guess what, Director X doesn’t get a huge set budget just because he is Director X.  Some shows require a minimal setting.  The audience and critics shouldn’t feel the show is under-produced because the bells and whistles they have gotten used to every production having are more often than not now-a-days are simply excess fat.  The rest of the nation is putting an end to excessive consumption – shouldn’t the theater reflect that.  As leaders of these institutions we need to assess whether our own expectations are about the work or about ourselves.  Is the big enhancement project because we want to be players and have tricked ourselves into thinking it helps the budget or is it an important project for the company to producer that happens to help the bottom line.   And as we strip away the expectations that have been handcuffing our organizations we need to publicly and eloquently debunk said expectations.

3.  We have to stop making excuses and roll up our sleeves and create change.  There are so many opportunities out there!  The theater can do so much to address our community’s needs.  We need to reset our minds.  Find a way to break those bad old habits.  We need eliminate the concept of structural deficits, we need to produce in a manner we can afford, and most important we must take artistic risks.

The good news is that there are a decent amount of theaters that are doing just that.  Unsurprisingly, they are also weathering this economy a bit better.  Issac pulled a random example to evaluate in his post, I want to point out the first theater that popped into my mind that is breaking the mold.  It happens to be one of my local theaters (and yes, my definition of local included NYC).

There is nothing generic or boring about Hartford Stage’s 2009-2010 season – a nine play Horton Foote cycle, a gospel musical, a new theatrical experience exploring motherhood, and even their choice of Tom Sawyer for a family oriented show is spot-on in its tie in to Twain’s relationship to Hartford.   I will certainly be heading up to see at least four of their shows this season and I am familiar enough with their work to know that the plays will likely be produced beautifully and simply.  I congratulate Michael Wilson and Michael Stotts for a creative, intelligent and relevant season!

5 things we have learned about nonprofit theater in the last year and what they mean to the new reality we produce in

July 26, 2009 • 2 Comments

As many nonprofit theaters end or are near the end of their fiscal year, we are getting a better picture of the industry.  Arena Stage, Guthrie, and many others scraped by despite all of the economic challenges of the year.  Others like Hartford Theater Works and Shakespeare Theatre Company are using staff furloughs and other cuts to try and end the year in a reasonable place.  The news over the last few months had been full of theaters who are reassessing budgets and programming for the upcoming year – Manhattan Theatre Club, Long Wharf Theatre, etc.  Of course we all know about the theatres that have closed or been threatened with near closure.

On the news we have started to hear experts say the end is near – for the recession that is.  That recovery is on the way (Suzy Ormond said it on the TODAY show – what more can you want).  Whether it is or not, July is a traditional time for reflection of what the last year has brought to the industry.  Over the last week or so, I haven’t posted because I was talking to peers in the industry to see – well – what’s up.  So, what have we learned?

1.  There is a call for greater focus on mission and programming.  It isn’t exactly a revelation that we must focus on the art of what we do and the education programs that are key to our future.   But there is a growing realization that the field has spent a lot of time building our real estate portfolios and “corporate infrastructure” rather than building community.

2.  The recession is just now hitting our theatres full force.  Not surprisingly considering seasonal planning and grant cycles, we seem to be about 6 months behind other industries. Every major gathering last year centered on the idea that 2009 would be tough but 2010 would be a bitch – this seems to have been a pretty solid prediction.

3.  The theatres that are surviving are those in the larger and smaller budget categories.  The larger companies have significant subscriber bases and have budgets that although not fat – can withstand some cuts.  The smaller companies prove again that they are the most nimble and adaptable.  It is the much discussed mid-size theaters that are in the most danger.  Each budget cut is equivalent to cutting a limb off of a body.  However several of these companies are taking huge artistic risks and are getting some rewards.  For example, Hartford Stage is undertaking a tremendously ambitious coproduction with Signature Theatre Company of Horton Foote’s The Orphan’s Cycle.  Hartford Stage is receiving unprecedented support from the Mellon Foundation for the project and Signature continues their affordable ticket initiative with major support from Time Warner.  Writers’ Theatre in Glencoe, IL has produced acclaimed show after acclaimed show this year and just announced the FOURTH extension of A Minster’s Wife.  What these and other theaters that are surviving and growing have in common is that they were as prepared as you could be for an economy like this.  They were and are in the middle of long-term projects and initiatives that are the result of lots of planning and innovative thinking.  They were challenging the traditional assumptions and models before it became a necessity to do so.

4.  There are a lot of theatres that were not run as well as they could have been.  Sorry, someone had to say it.  Whether is was poor management, bad artistic decisions, lack of clarity in mission or focus, or an interfering/apathetic board, we are seeing case after case of organizations out of control.  Milwaukee Skylight Theatre has become the poster child for bad decision-making (and bad public relations), but they aren’t the only ones.  I don’t know the details (nor will any of us I imagine) that put the Magic in such debt that it was in danger of closing, but it certainly seems that before Loretta Greco and the board righted the ship, that “something was rotten in the state of the Magic.”   And surely I am not the only one who has noticed that a handful of leaders have been let go not to be replaced – therefore saving money on budgets.  The interesting question will be – do we as a field find a remedy to these leadership issues or is this a necessary correction that results in many theatres closing or down-sizing.  Goodness knows we have been working on it for years, so can we do more?   Is it simply a fact of an industry?  Ironically, as we become “more like business” (boy, do I hate that phrase and idea) we have in many ways become less effective, we have buildings we can’t afford to operate and staff salary structures that are completely dysfunctional and frankly abhorrent.   We have more “corporate” boards, many of whom are filled with board members who have no respect for the leadership’s understanding of their own industry or who want to impose corporate structure/personnel that makes no sense to the field.   Certainly there are healthy examples of boards and institutional leadership – most of them are running the types of theatres discussed in number 3, but it is no secret and it is time to stop denying that the other exists as well.

5.  Social media and web 2.0 are really cool and are great ways to communicate with audiences, donors, artists, etc. But in the end, if you don’t have anything to say, it doesn’t matter how you communicate it.  There are so many theatres who are doing amazing things with social media – MCC Theater, Steppenwolf, Berkeley Rep, and so many more.  RELEVANCE is demanded in everything we do.  There are too many other choices out there.  If you aren’t relevant and meaningful in our art and communications, you will cease to matter.  On the flip side, cheers to those who have taken a huge leap into exploring how to uses social media and web 2.0 in creation of the art, I do believe they will have a tremendous effect on the art form and frankly am more interested in that in the long run.

Last fall there was a lot of talk about was the recession a setback or were we entering a new reality.  I want to suggest this:

As we exited the information age and entered into the realm of user-generated content, as professional and amateur definitions have been challenged, as we have seen several corporate giant who were held up as models to emulate fall into ruin, the reality is that there are no new realities, there are no set-backs, we have entered into a period of constant evolution and change.  We will not be on “firm” ground again during the next cycle of time.  We will need to adapt constantly and be able to maintain a long-term visionary outlook as well as accomplish the day to day.  This isn’t new.  It began several years ago.  We are just becoming cognizant of the constantly shifting ground because the bottom finally fell out.  The beautiful thing about this is that this is a huge opportunity for theater and the arts in general.  This is a moment in time where we should stake our claim, speak out for and with our communities, and create great work.

For the last week I have been letting the things we have learned get me down, so much so that I stopped writing for a while.  I wasn’t and haven’t seen the kind of improvements that I would like to see.  I have written a lot about crisis and the opportunity that I believe comes from it – both on a very personal level and for the industry of theater.  I thought there would be more folks in search of the opportunity versus clinging to the past.  However, I realized today that this isn’t what was really bothering me.  The real issue that we are all struggling with and dealing with in our own way is the lack of stability.   On a personal level I have had a horribly difficult time accepting this idea of a constantly shifting ground, especially one completely out of my control and not a result of any of my actions.  In my own way I have down what several organizations have done – clung to the past, thrown everything out the window, and circled back to the core essence of what I believe in.

I can’t deny – I am scared shit-less.  Some days I can’t bear to get up and go out into the world, but each day I do, and I have to believe that there is a reason for it all.  I seek ways to interact with others, a platform to express my viewpoint, and an exploration of the issues that face my community.  Well, if that doesn’t sound like the process of creating theater, I don’t know what does.

This week’s interesting articles and blog posts!

July 5, 2009 • No Comments

 

 

    From the papers and websites:

     

  • Now, Sarah’s Folly – NYTimes.com – http://shar.es/Gj5o

  • Female playwrights find it’s still a man’s world — Newsday.com – http://shar.es/GvPV

  • ‘Girls Night,’ Bachelorettes plays – WSJ.com – http://shar.es/G7al

  • Summer tourism to NYC down sharply. Tourists forgoing Broadway for less pricey atttractions. http://tinyurl.com/n6zegy

  • Mayor Michael Bloomberg – A public insurance plan will help heal a broken health care system – http://shar.es/cj5u

  • How Not to be Hated on Facebook – TIME – http://shar.es/cjaT #fb

  • BackStage on the amazing Bernie Telsey http://bit.ly/EkA1b w/actors Telsey tales-note 1st one http://bit.ly/tQGlP

  • City’s Funds For Film and Television Tax Credits Run Out http://bit.ly/DeLkn

  • Critic Peter Marks says that the power of the critic "theater, like most politics, is local," http://is.gd/1lpVZ

  • Bravo, Sarah Jessica Parker launching art-themed reality series http://bit.ly/ayTQZ

  • Playbill profile of MCC Artistic Director Bernard Telsey’s double life as a casting director – http://bit.ly/11dlAF

  • Kaiser on Arts in Crisis http://bit.ly/hQfwE H

  • Nonprofits Employ Tougher Measures as Downturn Deepens http://bit.ly/18ud9h

  • Twitter Revamps Following and Followers Pages – http://bit.ly/LFlWJ

  • Male Nonprofit Executives Earn 27% More Than Female Leaders, Study Finds http://twurl.nl/hfkofm

  • Kennedy Center to Spread the Knowledge http://bit.ly/1gwGiq

  • Productive but Neurotic New York – Crain’s New York Business – http://shar.es/5W13

  • Charles Isherwood of the NYT on the NT Live Phedre http://bit.ly/lbi00

  • It’s official: T.R. Knight is headed to Broadway http://tinyurl.com/nqz2vz

  • Guthrie Theater Wraps Up Highly Successful Kushner Celebration http://tinyurl.com/mdxv5f

  • Recession Taking a Toll on Nonprofits, Bridgespan Survey Finds http://bit.ly/LMxYt

  • Facebook Could Create a Revolution, Do Good, and Make Billions – NYTimes.com http://ow.ly/fYGc

  • Variety – interesting business/creative model for the musical "Ella": http://bit.ly/OpU1z

  • Bard Stars Esparza, White Help Raise $1.3 Million for Public – Bloomberg.com – http://shar.es/74rL

  •  

     

      From the Blogs (For a daily update check What’s being talked about on the Blogroll regularly.  It is updated several times throughout the day.  Follow me on Twitter to receive a tweet whenever it is updated.)  If there is a blog I am not following and I should please let me know.  You can see the blog roll by category here.:

       

       

      • *’Bums on Seats’ * "PR folk are always asking how… from Hannah Nicklin – Blog

      • The Huffington Post says The Skylight is following… from Artsy Schmartsy

      • Be careful what you say from The Mission Paradox Blog

      • Acceptance Video for the ITBA’s Citation for Excellence from Flux Theatre Ensemble

      • On Theatre Etiquette from Theatre Bay Area Chatterbox

      • July 1, 2009 – Can we practice empathy together? from SEE Blog

      • Paneled on July 8th! from Parabasis

      • What? A Panel About Theatre Blogging? from The Playgoer

      • Ohio Theatre Update from The Playgoer

      • Here’s how to solve the arts funding crisis  from Stage: Theatre blog | guardian.co.uk

      • Have we seen the last of the looooong running musical? from PRODUCER’S PERSPECTIVE

      • Women Actors Make Way Less Money Than Men from Women & Hollywood

      • Valuing Cultural Diplomacy and Engagement for the arts from ARTSBLOG

      • Creative risk pays off for the Guthrie from Carolyn Jack

      • Gender Bias Gets Confusing! (But Poetic) from Parabasis

      • My last e-mail to Emily from The Hub Review

      • Microphilanthropy from Createquity.

      • Thinking Bigger with your Vision, your Board and your funding from For Impact Daily Nuggets

      • Are Nonprofits Good At Social Media? from The Agitator

      • Is Michael Kaiser a Demigod or Merely Superhuman? from Clyde Fitch Report

      • As Mayoral Control of Schools Lapses, Will Arts Education be affected from Clyde Fitch Report

      • On Quality, Value and Criticism from Flux Theatre Ensemble

      • Goodbye and Thanks from AmericanTheaterWeb

      • First Rehearsal to the Third Power from Steppenwolf Theatre Company Blog

      • Free, Says Gladwell: Such a Little Word… from Clyde Fitch Report

      • How is Tony Voter turnout? from PRODUCER’S PERSPECTIVE

      • Gentle Persistence from A Small Change- Fundraising Blog

      • Gender Bias in Theatre — Digging a Little Deeper from Women & Hollywood

      • The “Turn-A-Round King goes National from off-stage right

      • The 500th Post: 16 Nonprofit Marketing (and Life)… from Katya’s Non-Profit Marketing Blog

      • Truth, beauty, trust from The Artful Manager

      • Around the horn: Thriller edition from Createquity.

      • Are Audiences Lemmings or Thinking Lemmings? from Clyde Fitch Report

      • Today’s Must Read from Parabasis

      • O, malignant and ill-boding audience! from Struts and Frets: Kris Joseph

      • I’m lost, but I don’t think I am the only one from off-stage right

      • A Balancing Act from The Halcyon Blog

      • Broadway (officially) lends T.R. Knight ‘Tenor’ role from Entertainment Weekly’s Ausiello Files

      • Why Every Nonprofit Is Accountable For A Vision from SPURspectives

      • And then it’s gone… from Theatre Aficionado at Large

      • How convenient are we? from One Producer in the City

      • Women Directors Breaking Through in Theatre from Women & Hollywood

      • Is the Curtain Closing on Live Theater in America? from Culturebot

      • Jerry Lewis, Marvin Hamlisch taking ‘Nutty Professor’… from Culture Monster

      • A ‘West Side Story’ for the Twitter set from Culture Monster

      • Saving Arts Programs? There’s an .App for That. from ARTSBLOG

      • What You Do Isn’t Worth Paying For: The Message Google… from Technology in the Arts

      • What You Do IS Worth Paying For, We Just Can’t: Non-Profit… from Technology in the Arts

      • New York Arts Fund Offers Cheap Rent to Charities from Give and Take

      • Femme Fight from Blank New World

      • Rock and a Hard Place 3: What Actors Want from a poor player

      • Theatre as Case Study? from Parabasis

      • Fisking Emily Glassberg Sands from The Hub Review

      • The Impact of Giving Circles from Nonprofit Law Blog

      • Politics Of Online Ad Targeting from The Agitator

      • Considering the Creative Ecology from The Artful Manager

      • Keeping The Passion Alive While I am Away from Butts In The Seats

      • Question For My Inside The Arts Family from Butts In The Seats

      • Rehearsing opposites from Struts and Frets: Kris Joseph

      • Breaking the ‘5th Wall’… from NEA New Play Development Program hosted by Arena

      • Engaging Dissent from NEA New Play Development Program hosted by Arena

      • I Want To Make Something Really Clear from Parabasis

      • A Good Post From David Dower from Parabasis

      •  An Open Letter to Roundabout from Theatre Aficionado at Large

      • Box? What Box? from Entrepreneur The Arts Blog

      • The Norman Conquests – Table Manners from Everything I Know I Learned from Musicals

      • TWITTER’S TIME HAS COME from Jane Fonda

      • Twitter Guide Book… from Mashable!

      • Theatre is about more than comfy seats | Matt Trueman from Stage: Theatre blog | guardian.co.uk

      • How to Lose Your Audience in One Easy Step from Theatre Bay Area Chatterbox

      • How Broadway Talks to its Audiences Using Social Media from Mashable!

      • The “Turn-A-Round King” goes National

        July 1, 2009 • 2 Comments

        Michael Kaiser, the “Turnaround” King of the arts is out to create a nationwide movement.  For those who aren’t familiar with Kaiser’s put the money in art and marketing approach, I suggest reading his recent book The Art of the Turnaround.   His theory is simple.  Spend on the art and marketing.  Take artistic risks even in bleak times – even more so in bleak times.  It is the art that will save the organization not gutting the institution.  The lynchpin of the entire philosophy is that the arts have an issue with income generation.  I am drilling down here – it should be noted that the Kaiser lists 10 rules that are required that address things like mission, alignment, and most importantly a leader – he lists these among key ingredients for a turnaround.  All three are important but the last can not be underplayed so read the book – it is a quick read – at least read the first chapter for the 10 rules.

        A few months back Kaiser and his team at the Kennedy Center announced a peer counseling initiative Arts in Crisis.  The program seems to have had a lot of volunteer mentors and not enough volunteer clients so it is hitting the road according to the New York Times.

        As part of the program, Arts in Crisis: A Kennedy Center Initiative, which offers free emergency planning assistance to organizations that submit online requests at artsincrisis.org, Michael M. Kaiser, president of the Kennedy Center, will lead arts management symposia in all 50 states, Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia. At each event, hosted by a local arts organization, Mr. Kaiser plans to address the challenges facing nonprofit performing arts organizations today in areas including fundraising, building more effective boards of trustees, budgeting and marketing.

        “There were a lot of organizations that weren’t signing up but who had lots of questions,” Mr. Kaiser said. “It seemed important to go face to face with many of them. So I’m going to just under 100 cities to talk about their problems specifically and to make sure they get the support they need.”

        In a Huffington Post piece, Kaiser summarizes his take on the current issue facing the arts:

        It is the decision-making of boards and staffs in response to economic challenges that has much greater long-term implications for the health of our arts ecology.

        While arts funding only fell 6% last year, many arts organizations are making drastic cuts to their programming. Many have canceled performances, eliminated educational programming, shortened seasons, or closed altogether. Others are “dumbing down” their product; there is a widespread call to make programming more accessible (read boring). Still more are cutting their marketing dramatically; after all, they argue, who will notice if we spend less on communicating our (reduced) programming?

        These approaches to dealing with the current recession all assume that cost is the underlying problem of the arts; conventional wisdom suggests that an arts organization can “save its way to health.”

        But this is wrong, dangerously wrong.

        Arts organizations across the world have a revenue problem, not a cost problem. We are a remarkably efficient industry, doing more with less. But we do not yet know how to create the revenue streams we need to do our work in a consistent manner.

        Now, I won’t go read every post I have written, but I would be shocked if any disagreed with Kaiser, his general thesis, or ideas.  In fact I have been a proponent of them and broadened the discussion based on this to include mission, vision, community and individuality.

        I think he is an important leader in the arts and I am glad he is at the helm of one of the most important performing arts centers in the country, but…come on you knew there was a but coming…

        I think the reason the Arts in Crisis initiative hasn’t taken off as much as the Kennedy Center thought it would and the reason why sadly it probably never will is that a lot of organizations don’t have the necessary leadership.  Not that the leadership makes bad decisions (there are certainly plenty that do) but simply there is a lack of organizations in the field that have quality, committed, and trained key leadership at the artistic, management and board level.  They might have two out of the three, mediocrity in all three or more likely one bending the others to his or her will.   Many organizations have to reach a crisis point to do anything about this – all of the organizations Kaiser has “turned-around” were in critical danger.  Kaiser took organizations that were lost and turned them into survivors.

        Kaiser in his book insists that someone must lead (it is actually rule number one), that organizations in trouble “suffer from a diffused leadership.”  Don’t mistake this as a dismissal of the relationship between artistic, management, and board for one almighty, all powerful leader who all else must bow to.  Quite the opposite.  It is about BALANCE and ALIGNMENT between artistic, management and board leadership.   It is about trust, authority and responsibility for the art, vision and health of an organization being placed in the proper hands.

        Today, the companies that I observe being innovative, growing, thriving or changing the landscape seem to have some version of this balance and alignment. Those that are on the cusp of bankruptcy seem to have leadership that is unbalanced, in conflict and sometimes at war with one another.    But most of the companies are in that middle area.  They aren’t on the at the risk of closing and they aren’t highly successful, they just are open.  As much as these company would benefit from Kaiser’s work or the work of several others out there (there are a lot of great thinkers and workers out there), those companies don’t seem to have leadership who will or can pull themselves up above the day to day to look at the bigger picture so they will simply stay flat, mediocre, unbalanced, or on the brink, choose your phrase, but they won’t reach the potential of the impact they can have.  I am not saying this is wrong.  It just simply is.  In any industry there is going to be a continuum of size, success, and quality – it is key to the ecosystem of the industry.   However there is a lot of room for improvement across the field the “top of the continuum” is not toppling over no matter what criteria you use for placement.  I do think if/when we have more quality leadership structures at more arts organizations we will see an increase in arts participation and the modern renaissance of the arts will flourish!

        Additional thoughts and reading:

        David Dower and Isaac Butler have been having an interesting dialogue about institutions, their responsibilities and their effect on continuing the status quo.  It all informs this key concept of Kaiser’s work and my feelings in this post and I recommend reading them.   I think both David and Isaac bring some great conversations to the blogosphere.  All of the discussion that has been happening around the next generation of leaders with some great thinking from Ian David Moss and others will be key to this as well.

        A MUST READ POST FOR EVERYONE IN THE ARTS!!!

        June 16, 2009 • No Comments

        Ian David Moss over at Create Equity has always written some interesting and insightful posts, but yesterday he wrote a post that brilliantly summarizes all the key issues the arts are facing.  I have great hope that it will unify the many conversations that have been happening on these issues in many blogs (including Off-Stage Right and many of the blogs on the blog roll on the left) including discussion on “sustainability,” business models, artist compensation and equality, and power distribution.

        I beg everyone to go read the post in full.

        On the Arts and Sustainability

        Bring it to scale

        April 28, 2009 • No Comments

        Bridgespan has released a new report about bringing organizations to scale.   Organization replication and scale is something we tend to forget about when it comes to the arts.   But isn’t the first question we should ask – what is the “right-size” for an organization to accomplish its mission?

        The Bridgespan report notes some key challenges for nonprofits in determining and fulfilling scale:

        1. Distinguishing promising programs from proven ones is complicated, costly and essential.  Many social service organizations have little if any evidence of their programs’ efficacy. This doesn’t mean that they aren’t producing results. But it does mean we cannot say for certain that they do.
        2. Scaling requires rethinking traditional patterns of funding. If we want to make a pervasive impact on our nation’s most difficult problems, we are talking about supporting fewer organizations with larger sums of money. Concentrating resources on a few organizations is rarely how money flows today.

        Last summer at Harvard Business School’s Strategic Perspectives for Nonprofit Managers, we spent a lot of time talking about scale.  This was the first time I really fully explored the concept in terms of the arts and in particular theatre.  In the post, I pointed out four strategies in terms of scale.

        1. Get support for fixed costs (and maybe semi-variable costs), and have variable (and maybe or semi-variable) costs covered by earned income.
        2. Franchise.
        3. Engage in partnerships (or even possibly mergers).
        4. Create a subsidiary of a commercial business.

        Shouldn’t successful organizations and programs be replicated? What would bringing it to scale mean for theatre? Can we “franchise?” Aren’t co-productions, touring, or moving a show be a type of franchising in the theatre?  Certainly education programs are replicated – it happens naturally more often than not without a strategic plan, but why not plan to replicate and take certain ideas for programming to scale.  In a way the NEA Big Read program is doing exactly that.

        When talking about funding models and whether theatre’s should be saved, if we can talk replication, we have to take mergers under consideration.  For some reason in the arts, mergers are often interpreted as failures.  But consolidation, restructuring, and resource-sharing can be VERY effective for theatre organizations and individual productions, so why not out-right mergers?  Certainly in terms of scale it may make sense for organizations and the community.

        We certainly are seeing a form of mergers in co-productions and new play development.   Adrian Ellis wrote in the Art Newspaper that this would be one of the three ways to compensate for the losses in philanthropic, endowment and visitor incomes for museums, “what museums accept they cannot do alone, they will explore doing together more thoroughly and earnestly than in the past: collection sharing, joint acquisitions, pooling conservation resources, and pooling curatorial appointments.”

        Without question determining scale is difficult and requires significant examination, but it seems to be an essential step which we don’t take enough time to address and plan.

        If you are reading this post via Facebook Notes, please click-thru to Off Stage Right and be counted (and keep reading other posts).

      • Ongoing research, evaluation and performance measurement are imperative as an organization scales. Put simply, there is no other way to ensure that even a well-funded program with proven outcomes will be expanded and sustained. A good idea absent its execution is in fact not a good idea at all.
      • Scaling a nonprofit’s programs without investing in its capacity is a recipe for failure. Building organizational and human capacity – putting in place the strategy, systems and, above all else, the right people in the right jobs to convert money into results – is as important a factor in bringing a program successfully to scale as the money itself.
      • Cris-i-tunity

        April 6, 2009 • No Comments

        The post below is something I wrote for a new blog or perhaps even a book that I plan to start writing soon. It has been on the sidebar of Off-Stage-Right for a while, but some readers suggested I bring attention to it by making it a post. I will still leave it on the sidebar, it is a guide for me in a deeply personal way. As I was thinking today about why I am writing this blog, I realized the friends who suggested it be a post here were right:

        I can’t help but feel that we (and unquestionably I) have entered a new era and that we must shed the past, taking with us what we learned but facing the fact that none of it may be useful in the future.

        Everyone is more than aware of the global economic turmoil we are experiencing. It is impossible to escape TV reports, newspapers and magazines, internet alerts, etc. that let us know how horrible the situation really is. Even the President of the United States has to be honest that these are trying times, and they are going to get worse. And, no one can really say how long recovery will take or what recovery looks like. We find it difficult to even discuss or if it is recovery or is it more truthfully outright change.

        The world of theater – especially nonprofit theater – is not experiencing a bump in the road, a correction, or simple challenges. We must acknowledge that we are entering a new reality and must adapt our organizations and, yes, our art to thrive in this new reality.

        Personally, I am also going through circumstances beyond my control that are creating a new reality for me. I have lived my professional life in the world of theater – although I had a global perspective in learning, I rarely journeyed outside of the theater world, and today I am faced with a great unknown as to whether I can or will continue to do so, or whether I am supposed to be traveling another path.

        Without question this personal, national, and global crisis has manifested for myself and I am sure many others a response similar to Elizabeth Kubler-Ross’s five stages of grief -denial, anger, bargaining, depression, acceptance. I am sure that dissertations have been written relating grief to life changes or periods of crisis.

        However, I posit that for life changes or crises there is a sixth stage. A stage in which we take action. That stage is opportunity.

        Therefore, even though my professional and personal life may be in crisis and the world is facing tremendous social, economic and cultural crises, it is time I emerge from denial, anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance into opportunity. I expect there to be minor/major shifts and bumps in the road, so I will just call this period – Cris-i-tunity.

        Moments to remember

        March 30, 2009 • No Comments

        I have been asked a lot recently about why I work in theatre…here are just a few examples why…

        Each time I walk into a theatre I haven’t entered before, whether for work or simple pleasure, I am awed by the sacred space in which artists do their work. No matter how small, how large, or how odd a space is, the magic that is created within it engulfs me in feelings and sensations. It is equally exciting to walk into a space that has been utterly transformed for a specific production –space that has been transformed to support a vision and convey a message.

        Above all else I cherish the first moments I walked through the doors of theatres I have worked for, lived in. I remember vividly the first things I saw, the smells, the people who were there, and my stomach fluttering with excitement – whether it was MCC, Union Square, Vineyard, Signature, WCP, or the three academic institutions that shaped my love of the world of theatre. I hold those first moments in the deepest part of my heart and soul.

        The show that had the most significant impact on my life professionally and personally was the original Off-Broadway production of Wit. I remember lying on the floor of my New York sublet reading the script and knowing it was something special. Of course the script has some flaws – there are no perfect scripts — but I knew just from the first reading that it would reach into audience members’ hearts and remind them to connect to the people in their lives with love and respect. The company of artists on the show became a true family – theatre people often say that but in truth, it’s a very rare occurrence. I remember the break-through moment that took the show from good to great – when the set designer eliminated the rolling walls from the set and added the curtains on tracks. That simple but profound decision visually and psychologically opened the staging in a way that tied together all the elements — the writing, directing and acting — and fully served the arc of the piece. It was a wonder to behold.

        Kathleen Chalfant led the company with grace and taught me that kindness, equity, respect and dignity were the most important tools a person could possess. It was my first show to transfer to a commercial run. I worked with all three New York companies, even after I had left MCC. I was so proud when I was introduced to Judith Light and she told me how glad she was to finally meet me because the entire company kept telling her I was the one who knew the show best and held it together. I fell in love with my husband on the show and was honored that Kathleen did a reading at our wedding and most of the members of the three companies were there to see us married, years after the show and tours had closed. Most of all I love that Maggie Edson told the story she wanted to tell, said goodbye to a dear friend after helping him achieve a directing legacy, and went back to teaching kindergarten.

        At the Vineyard, I recall reading the treatment for Fully Committed and knowing it would either be brilliant or a disaster. Thank goodness it ended up the former. For weeks on end Mark Setlock (the actor playing tens of roles) and Becky Mode (the playwright) would run from the rehearsal room to our administrative offices and gather us quickly so they could run an idea by us to see if it was funny. It was a period of great spontaneity, collaboration, and fun. It was wonderful to watch the audiences each night laughing at the rudeness or foolishness of the play’s restaurants’ customers some of them unaware they had acted in the exact same manner towards the box office when purchasing or picking up their tickets. Our box office even wrote their own version of the show which was performed for Becky and Mark after the closing performance.

        I am grateful that I got to hear Anika Noni Rose, Mandy Gonzalez, Ronell Bey, and Judy Kuhn sing the songs of Laura Nyro in Eli’s Coming every night (except Mondays) for ten weeks. I hadn’t even heard of Laura Nyro when we started creating the show, and although the storyline never pulled together, the music and performances were among the best I have ever witnessed. It was on this show that the true art of orchestration and arrangement was taught to me.

        I was at the Vineyard on September 11, 2001. I couldn’t get into the City from Brooklyn and watched it all from my roof just across the river. Our crew had gone in at 8 am that day and the master carpenter’s wife worked in the North Tower –so everyone worked together to find her (thankfully we did). I remember Doug Wright who had written and directed the show that was in rehearsals at that time was also stuck in Brooklyn and we spent most of the day on the phone. We were talking when the Pentagon was hit, and I can still here Doug saying, “Jodi the world will never be the same, what is happening?” We were back in rehearsals two days later, bound together forever by the experience of walking through Union Square each day looking at the posters of those missing and the vigils. I think we all survived that week by being in the theatre working on a show.

        I am one of the fortunate people in this world to have lived on Avenue Q. I learned all the ups and downs of enhancement deals on the production – if it could happen it certainly did on the original off-Broadway production. We went through six full set design versions before finding the right one for the show. We had to learn an entire art – puppet making and maintenance. We had an actor fall off stage and have to perform all of previews from a wheel-chair on the side of the house. But the entire time we laughed until we cried. I had fractured my ribs right before the tech of the show. During the tech rehearsal for the love scene between Princeton and Kate Monster, I actually laughed so hard that I re-fractured a rib. I spent the rest of the week and previews watching the show with pillows stuffed around me in my chair.

        Simultaneously, with Avenue Q, I began work at Signature – working 60 hour weeks covering both jobs for 30 hours each. It was glorious. Downtown, I had the kids on Avenue Q and uptown, the talented cast of Lanford Wilson’s Fifth of July. When it opened I was general manager for both the biggest hit musical in town and the hottest play revival.

        At Signature there are almost too many profound, life-changing moments to list: my first conversation with Arthur Miller (very relaxed and inspiring), my first conversation with Edward Albee (very awkward and unnerving), watching Bill Irwin endlessly disappear into that trunk, and on and on.

        I do have to talk about the luminous production of Horton Foote’s Trip to Bountiful. The only other cast that was a family to me and still truly is to this day. I am not sure why but of all the playwrights I have ever met and worked with, I connected most powerfully with Horton . Perhaps as a fellow Texan, his words spoke to me in a special way, or perhaps it is simply that he was a true gentleman of the theatre. I am blessed to have known him, and his wonderful words will live with me forever.

        There are so many more shows or moments that I could go on and on about good or bad but all cherished – like the night at the Vineyard when the grocery store above the space decided to defrost their meat freezer and the drain poured meat “by-product” that had been in the drain onto the stage and the actors. The night that a prop gun didn’t go off and an actor jumped up and down on stage screaming bang, bang, bang until the other actor picked up the cue. Each standing ovation is its own memory – the ones that were earned and not obligatory as they so often are on Broadway. Or the endless times I sat watching the audience, seeing them lean in as if they could feel the moment even more if they were just a bit closer to the stage. Or the artists who proud of their performances or filled with joy of seeing their work on stage lit up a room with their smiles. And those are just the shows I worked on.

        Not included are the wonderful events, galas, readings, and education programs that I carry with me. Angela Lansbury singing “Nothing’s going to harm you,” or David Hyde Pierce singing a John Kander song that had never been heard before by anyone as John had written it for a lost love . Kevin Bacon bringing down the house while honoring Susan Sarandon and Tim Robbins. And there was the magical moment when Harper Lee toasted Horton Foote on his 90th Birthday (and told me to call her Nell).

        And all of this still doesn’t include the shows I have seen but not worked on. Those unforgettable moments that are burned into your memory– the frying pan in Beauty Queen of Lenane or the grabber in Well. Or the emotions that well up when I think of a show I have seen, for instance, the sheer anger of Stuff Happens or the pure awe of anything done by Cirque du Soleil. Or the opportunity to see some of the great talents of our time on stage – Paul Newman in Our Town or Meryl Streep in Mother Courage. Or the joy one finds in discovering a new talent – Tom Sadowski in Reasons to be Pretty. The shows that were embarrassingly fun – Mamma Mia and Jersey Boys. Or the shows that hit you so hard in the gut that you can still feel the pain of watching them – Grey Zone or The Baltimore Waltz.

        I could write forever on how much I love, crave and belong working in a theatre, watching theatre, and producing theatre. It is in a theatre that I come as alive as the actors and audience. I love the interactions with actors, crews, playwrights, directors, and the staffs who work far more hours than they can ever be financially compensated for. I could write another six pages about the moments where I saw an education program impact and change someone’s life in an instant. I could certainly write a book about how the theatre has changed mine.

        Theatre and its Community

        March 28, 2009 • No Comments

        I was recently asked what a theatre’s responsibility to its community was…here is an excerpt of my response:

        Every theatre has the responsibility to create a world where individuals can come together for a shared experience where stories are told, ideas are explored, and conversations are inspired.

        The written word has long been an important outlet for the creative exploration of the human emotional and social experience. Theatre—like no other medium—has the unique ability to create a dialogue between writer and audience that also bridges the gap between the individual and shared group experience.

        Theatre evolved as a social convention to teach people morals and; spur people to action through learning from the action on stage. Throughout the decades it has served as as a way to “communally experience” a situation– family drama, war, disease, loss, or triumph — providing an opportunity for connection or catharsis.

        Although the physical structure in which theatre occurs is important what is most critical is the feeling — the atmosphere — that the building exudes. I believe all theatres should emulate the comfort and welcome of a living room or an old fashioned drawing room – an intimate space where friends gather for good conversation or a lively debate.

        A theatre organization should strive to do the following in its own community:

        • Identify and explore relevant social issues happening at a global, national and local level.
        • Provide a safe forum for discussion and learning for people of all ages.
        • Make the theatrical experience as accessible to as many people possible through price, location, customer service, and other forms of outreach and support that remove barriers to attending.
        • Inspire audience members and participants to take action towards changing the world.

        It should be noted that leading a theatre means that you must also accept certain community responsibilities. You must personally get to know your local community and be an active participant in that community. You are taking the position of an educator –the most influential person in any community. Being an educator means that you can inspire minds, both young and old, to seek their personal best and demand the community be at its best. You must accept the mission to make sure that there is a future audience, a future generation of artists, and future funders. You must help create experiences similar to the one that sparked the fire of passion inside you, that led you to pursue a life in the theatre.

        You also have the responsibility to bring the national and global community to your home and to explore how the broader issues relate to us and why they are so important. Remaining relevant and current is the key to artistry. Theatre cannot be meaningful if it doesn’t grow organically from your community (local) needs and yet rise to meet the national and global challenges facing us all. It cannot be forced, it must be studied, learned and lived.

        What should we ask theatre artists to do for our community?

        • Create a world on stage where the artists often teeter on the brink of destruction or utter happiness and we, as the audience experience living on the edge through them, without having to actually do so to understand it and learn from it.
        • Bare their souls in telling a story
        • State the unthinkable.
        • Do the unforgivable.
        • Act in weakness.
        • Be trapped in fear and do nothing.
        • Inspire us to speak or be safe in silence.
        • State what must be said.
        • Act heroically. Take risks.
        • Make us laugh. Make us cry. Make us do both at the same time.
        • Teach us about our neighbors, people of distant lands, people from the past, and people from the future.
        • Force us to lean forward in our seats, hold our breath, and wait for the next word, moment or action.
        • Make us feel alive.

        Board retention in good and bad times

        March 25, 2009 • No Comments
        One thing I have been thinking about a lot in the recent weeks and keep meaning to write about is board member retention during these difficult economic times.  The Wall Street Journal article below was a kick in the stomach reminder that we need to be focusing some significant attention on our boards.  In times this dire, it is essential to keep key stakeholders engaged.  With the pressing economic concerns for both the organizations and the individual board members, a delicate balance must be maintained between being honest about situations and being overly negative or pessimistic.

        It is a necessity to remember to celebrate successes no matter how small.  Even in good times this is something many nonprofits forget to do.  By nature we are problem solvers and excellent at crisis management, once something has been achieved we often make the mistake of moving onto the next task before congratulating ourselves on our accomplishments.

        Our boards need to know that they are important to us in every way possible – as a workforce, as information resources, as access to networks and as funding sources.   There are plenty of reasons for board members to be concerned – if we are conscious of this during our interactions we will find a proper balance.  But the MOST important thing is to keep them engaged!

        Believe it or not most board members join a board for some reason other than to write a check – a deep connection to the mission/cause, a desire to make a difference in his or her community, social-standing/prestige, or a slew of others reasons.  Hopefully during the recruitment process and the individual’s time on the board the reasons that drew the person to the board are clear.  Our job as staff leadership is to make sure that we take time to address these reasons with positive reinforcement during these times (and all others).

        In times like these we have to fight the impulse to hunker down and have a small group make the tough decisions.  A healthy process must be maintained.  We need to work with our board leadership to ensure that each board member has a chance to be heard and be part of key decisions — especially organizations that are truly at risk or on the brink.  After all very few people join a board if they don’t want to take responsibility for the organization’s well-being.

        Healthy board management is going to be very important the in the months ahead.

        From the WALL STREET JOURNAL

        GETTING PERSONAL: Charity Board Members Insure Against Risk

        Board members should also keep tabs on the financial strength of insurance providers using ratings issued by companies such as A.M. Best Co.; Moody’s Investors Service, a unit of Moody’s Corp.; and Standard & Poors, a unit of McGraw-Hill Cos.

        NEW YORK (Dow Jones)–Even at charities, boards of directors are watching their backs.

        In an environment ripe for investment- and employment-related lawsuits, a number of nonprofits are increasing their directors and officers coverage – or D&O – while insurance companies say they have seen an uptick in the number and severity of claims.

        “Individual directors are now more concerned about making sure insurance is in place to protect them and their organization,” says Michael Schraer, a vice president and not-for-profit product manager at Chubb Group of Insurance Cos.

        Several prominent charities have been caught up in recent investment frauds, including the alleged $50 billion Ponzi scheme run by Bernard Madoff, and most are struggling with shrinking endowments because of the market decline.

        Charity board members can be held personally liable for mismanagement of investments or employment mishaps, among other things. An individual’s umbrella insurance policy won’t necessarily cover these claims.

        “If a board member is sued, it means their house, their retirement savings, their investments that could ultimately come into play,” says Scott Simmonds, an independent insurance consultant who advises nonprofits on D&O insurance.

        This kind of insurance “pays for poor decisions,” he adds.

        Coverage, which can start at around $1,200 a year for organizations with fewer than 25 employees, varies by plan and carrier but D&O policies typically cover claims over misused funds or mismanaged assets.

        Policies also address employment issues such as wrongful termination, discrimination and harassment – important at a time when many hard-pressed charities are being forced to trim jobs and other costs. More than 90% of claims against boards of directors involve some type of employment dispute, according to the Alliance of Nonprofits for Insurance Risk Retention Group.

        Know the Rules

        Most states have volunteer immunity laws that protect board members from personal liability when acting in good faith. However, coverage is limited and these laws may not protect against federal civil rights and anti-discrimination laws. What’s more, volunteers will likely have to pay fees to defend themselves.

        Nonprofits usually say they will indemnify board members, or pay for legal costs. However, nonprofits may not be permitted to indemnify board members against all types of actions and may require the board member to pay legal fees first and then get a reimbursement.

        And if the nonprofit doesn’t have enough money to cover the claims or has gone out of business, the individual could be held accountable.

        “Foundations that go out of business because they had all their assets invested in Madoff will not likely be able to pay for defense costs,” says A.Q “Skip” Orza, a vice president at RLI Corp., an insurance company in Peoria, Ill.

        D&O insurance policies can serve as additional coverage – typically at least $1 million of coverage per year – or pay claims on behalf of the nonprofit so the organization doesn’t have to dip into its funds.

        Sizing up your policy

        D&O insurance can differ from other types of liability insurance and policies should be reviewed annually.

        It typically covers lawsuits filed while the policy is in force, regardless of when the wrongful act occurred. And limits are aggregate, not per occurrence: Unlike an automobile policy that pays up to a certain amount each time you get into an accident, D&O insurance will only pay up to a set limit for all of your claims that year.

        Since contracts can span 30-60 pages, board members should carefully read the terms and conditions to determine what is deemed a wrongful act and what is excluded from coverage – such as bodily injury or sexual abuse.


        Blogged with the Flock Browser