« August 2004 | Main | October 2004 »
September 2, 2004
The next best thing to an arts org. simulator
The New York Times Magazine a few weeks back featured a story on military training using the XBox video game player. The idea is to provide cheap and engaging video games that mimic real-life strategy issues or battle environments, so soldiers can learn as they play. 'Full Spectrum Warrior' for the XBox is now available in a commercial version, as well as its classified government version. So your kids can learn the nuances of urban warfare at home. Fun with a capital 'F' (or perhaps I'm thinking of another word).The specific application of simulation games is frightening, but the basic premise behind the idea is sound. Games, when designed well, can teach...not necessarily in the same way as a classroom experience, but in a wonderfully different way.
You may think that such simulation technology is decades away for arts and cultural managers, and horribly out of economic reach. But there's a silly little game available right now (actually, available for years already) that can provide hours of educational fun for the cultural manager's mind: Roller Coaster Tycoon. Price? $9.97.
Part of the popular and growing 'Tycoon' and 'Sim' series, Roller Coaster Tycoon puts you in charge of a theme park. You build the rides, you place the refreshment stands, you set the research and development budget, you hire the ground crew, entertainers, and maintenance team. And when you open your virtual park, the people come pouring in.
So how are you learning to manage cultural facilities? Click on any patron on screen and you'll see exactly what they're thinking about your park, what they've spent, how much they still have in their pocket, and how the experience is fitting their specific needs (they may be thirsty, or hungry, or nauseated, or bored). Click on any ride or refreshment stand and get a profit or loss statement, read what customers think about that feature, change the prices, modify the policies (does the coaster have to be full before the cars run, or can it run more frequently). Click on the budget screen, and see how you're doing financially, month by month, for the whole park. Take out loans, launch a marketing campaign, adjust your R&D budget accordingly. (And be sure to build an information stand that sells umbrellas...trust me on that one.)
Okay, it's not like slogging through a managerial economics textbook, but there are some essential elements of learning here. Chief among them, the sense that all your choices are connected to a larger picture. Don't hire enough janitors, and visitors start to notice the dirtiness of the park. Place refreshment stands too close to the really fast rides, and patrons start to get sick (so you hire more janitors). Don't charge enough, and a ride's popularity can kill your bottom line.
Learning through games certainly has limits. According to one expert quoted in the Times article:
'You can't play Full Spectrum Warrior and become a squad leader,' he said. 'It doesn't work that way. But you can experience a few things. You can make a few mistakes. You can learn from those mistakes.'
But at least those mistakes don't cost lives, or arts organizations, or bad patron experiences (well, not real patrons anyway).
There is a determined group of programmers and educators already working to explore the learning potential of the video game (one collaborative group is called Serious Games). The Stanford Research Institute recently expanded its grant support to encourage a new generation of programmers in the field.
A true performing or visual arts organization simulator is likely far, far away (although Cultural Initiatives Silicon Valley has a wonderful arts foundation simulator that's also worth a look). In the meantime, games like Roller Coaster Tycoon and SimCity are pretty darn good for the pricetag.
NOTE: There is a new and more expensive version of the program coming in October, Roller Coaster Tycoon 3, that certainly has more bells and whistles. But the cheaper older version is just fine if you want to save the $30.
Posted by ataylor at 8:39 AM
Roller Coaster Tycoon
Computer simulation games have been providing training grounds for military personnel and corporate executives for decades now, with more sophisticated versions coming every year.You may think that such simulation technology is decades away for arts and cultural managers, and horribly out of economic reach. But there's a silly little game that can provide hours of educational fun for the cultural manager's mind: Roller Coaster Tycoon. Price? $9.97.
Part of the popular and growing 'Tycoon' series, Roller Coaster Tycoon puts you in charge of a theme park. You build the rides, you place the refreshment stands, you set the research and development budget, you hire the ground crew, entertainers, and maintenance team. And when you open your virtual park, the people come pouring in.
So how are you learning to manage cultural facilities? Click on any patron on screen and you'll see exactly what they're thinking about your park, what they've spent, how much they still have in their pocket, and how the experience is fitting their specific needs (they may be thirsty, or hungry, or nauseated, or bored). Click on any ride or refreshment stand and get a profit or loss statement, read what customers think about that feature, change the prices, modify the policies (does the coaster have to be full before the cars run, or can it run more frequently). Click on the budget screen, and see how you're doing financially, month by month, for the whole park. Take out loans, launch a marketing campaign, adjust your R&D budget accordingly. (And be sure to build an information stand that sells umbrellas...trust me on that one.)
Okay, it's not like slogging through a managerial economics textbook, but there are some essential elements of learning here. Chief among them, the sense that all your choices are connected to a larger picture. Don't hire enough janitors, and visitors start to notice the dirtiness of the park. Place refreshment stands too close to the really fast rides, and patrons start to get sick (so you hire more janitors). Don't charge enough, and a ride's popularity can kill your bottom line.
Learning through games certainly has limits. According to one expert quoted in a New York Times Magazine article on military simulations:
'You can't play Full Spectrum Warrior and become a squad leader,' he said. 'It doesn't work that way. But you can experience a few things. You can make a few mistakes. You can learn from those mistakes.'
But at least those mistakes don't cost lives, or arts organizations, or bad patron experiences (well, not real patrons anyway).
A true performing or visual arts organization simulator is likely far, far away (although Cultural Initiatives Silicon Valley has a wonderful arts foundation simulator that's also worth a look). In the meantime, games like Roller Coaster Tycoon and SimCity are pretty darn good for the pricetag.
see it at Amazon.com...
(any purchase benefits the Bolz Center for Arts Administration library fund...not much, admittedly, but a bit)
Posted by ataylor at 3:40 PM
September 3, 2004
More on the value of art
Russell Smith has some great musings on the value of art in the Globe and Mail. His thoughts are launched by the recent theft from the Munch Museum in Oslo. 'The Scream,' specifically, has no market value (since it can't really be sold), has no bragging value, since any collector that has it can't show it publicly, and hasn't been put up for ransom. Says Smith:
Objects only have monetary worth because we say they do, and, more importantly, both sides of a transaction must agree that they do: Paper money is the clearest example of this consensual symbolism, since it has no intrinsic value. It is a contract. But then nothing really does have intrinsic value -- even gold is more valuable than silver only because we have agreed to say that it is.Rarity increases value only because of convention. A rare stamp can be worth thousands, even though it is useless, not necessarily beautiful and made of paper, simply because it benefits both seller and buyer to imagine it as a vessel for value -- rather like a bank note. And the value assigned to it is the result of a negotiation that is fundamentally arbitrary.
So value is a social construct, which we always knew. But the keys to understanding that construction seem essential to any manager or steward of cultural artifacts or expressions.
In a comic twist on the same story and subject, The Onion parody newspaper recently offered the following news brief:
'The Scream' Poster Stolen from Area Dorm Room
ST. PAUL, MN‹Concordia University campus police are still investigating Tuesday's theft of a poster of Edvard Munch's The Scream from an area dorm room. 'We're doing everything in our power to recover the poster,' officer Donald Benson said of the poster, which was stolen while the two residents of 204 Walther Hall were studying in the second-floor common area. 'With its iconic contorted human figure beneath a swirling red sky, The Scream is a masterpiece of German expressionism, and the poster was valued at $7.95.' The work of art is one of only 86 copies known to exist on the campus.
Posted by ataylor at 8:33 AM
September 8, 2004
GETTY: Crafting the audience
In past posts about the June leadership roundtable at the Getty (see bottom of this entry for links in the series) on the nonprofit and forprofit cultural industries, I've focused almost entirely on the production side of the discussion (cash and capital and capacity, oh my). Equally compelling is the consumption side, where nonprofit and commercial find and engage their audiences.The general sense of the difference between nonprofit and commercial was one of scale and scope. Commercial cultural enterprise (aka, entertainment) was seen as a 800-pound gorilla of marketing muscle, while nonprofits were seen as mom and pop operations. Here's an extended quote from the session's briefing paper that framed the discussion (available for download here or here):
Marketing for the non-profit arts remains relatively speaking, Neanderthal, and compromised by the combination of lack of resources and by an over-reaching scale of ambition. In particular social agendas for wider access often create multiple agendas for marketing that have a political and moral logic, but little financial logic. The problem is not only one of resources or political and social ambition. Many non-profit arts organizations face tremendous challenges because of the specificity of their product. Reproduction is either impossible, as in the case of original works of art, or considerably lowers its value, and consequently its attraction for the consumer. Limited mobility and duration of events -- whether theater runs or exhibitions -- also prevent these entities from engaging a broader audience base.
Once again, however, the conversation is distorted a bit by our bias to equate 'for-profit entertainment' with big corporations. When we say 'commercial culture,' our brains find their way to multi-national media companies, major labels, and big film studios. More relevant to most nonprofit cultural organizations -- more often than not, regional organizations -- are smaller, local commercial enterprises that vie for the same audience (restaurants, movie theaters, bookstores, nightclubs, and on and on). These, thankfully, are equally Neanderthal in their strategy and limited in their budget.
The cost of a single major studio film is twenty-fold larger than my local symphony's total annual budget -- and their potential market is several thousand times bigger. While I'm as quixotic as the next guy, that windmill isn't even in the same time zone.
Posted by ataylor at 12:15 AM
September 9, 2004
The silent (audience) killer
Drive time is one of those quiet variables at work in the heads of our audiences, when considering a night out, a spontaneous group activity, or a season subscription. Who among us hasn't thought about catching a show, only to consider the hassle of it and visit Blockbuster, instead? Who hasn't come home after a bad traffic day and succumbed to the urge to cocoon?Audience studies by AMS Planning & Research and others have shown that the large bulk of an arts organization's audience comes from within a 20 - 30 mile radius of its facility, one key indicator that drive time is an essential part of the decision-making puzzle.
The bad news is, of course, that drive time is growing across the nation, as new housing developments sprout, as cities work to rebuild their downtowns, and as little is done to expand the roads. The new 2004 Urban Mobility Study breaks down the problem in glorious detail. Among the findings: The annual delay experienced by the average rush hour traveler has risen from 16 hours in 1982 to 46 hours today...striking 30 hours from his or her available, non-work life.
For arts organizations, one clear response is to encourage residential development nearby, to grow an audience that doesn't have to drive. Another response is to engage actively in local and regional transportation policy conversations, since roads are the arteries that bring you life. A third response is to build facilities where people live, or where they already drive (suburbia, malls, and such), which creates a wonderful tension with efforts to make arts the anchor of downtown vitality.
NPR did a quick audio news item on the traffic study, if you don't want to read the report. If you're interested in traffic congestion statistics for your area, take a look at the handy map that offers access to local data.
Posted by ataylor at 8:42 AM
September 10, 2004
Teaching old books a new trick
Richard Adams in The Guardian has a great piece on a counter-intuitive result of the Internet on a venerable old retail model, actually helping it rather than killing it. Says Adams:
It wasn't meant to be like this. The internet was supposed to bid farewell to the need for buying books in shops. When the dotcom bubble was at its peak, web gurus claimed sites such as Amazon would undercut and undermine traditional bookstores, and that ebooks would eventually do away with "dead tree" media altogether.But what no one saw coming was that the internet would, in fact, provide a lifeline for possibly the least fashionable and most technologically backward part of the marketplace: old books.
The growth of an international distribution model for old books (through stand-alone web sites or more importantly affiliate-based sites like Amazon's used book section or Abebooks) has liberated old books from their usual local reach, and into a new realm of book enthusiasts.
Adams again:
They might not be ditching the traditional shop, but the suggestion that booksellers would crumble under the challenge of the internet has been utterly refuted.Instead of becoming a footnote in bookselling history, the industry has used the web to secure its future. And the resulting competition between the main players means that, right now at least, the second-hand book field really is a buyer's market.
There's plenty of bad news for more traditional new book retailers, of course. But it's nice to see a large group of culture enthusiasts and cultural merchants finding a new way to connect, rather than screaming at the tide of change.
Posted by ataylor at 11:35 AM
September 13, 2004
The joys of statistics
The fun and intrigue of a national election (especially in a swing state like Wisconsin) always bring me to wonder at the glory of statistical evidence, and its practical application to really important decision-making. We all take measures of things when deciding which way to turn, how to vote, how much energy, cash, or staff to allocate to a specific project. And somehow we come to think that the measure, itself, is an objective yardstick against reality.
Of course, measures, statistics, and other forms of feedback are just pieces of an astounding puzzle. They can frame our thinking, or test our assumptions. But as stand-alone evidence, they will always come up short.
It brings to mind three quotes that always kick around in my head -- two jokes about statistics, and one rather imponderable quote about what we actually measure when we measure. First the two jokes:
Did you hear about the man with his head in the oven and his feet in the freezer? On average, he was quite comfortable.
...and...
Studies have clearly shown that when you open your umbrella, your feet get wet.
Then the quote about measurement, from the über-brilliant physicist Werner Heisenberg in the 1950s:
''...what we observe is not nature itself, but nature exposed to our method of questioning. Our scientific work in physics consists in asking questions about nature in the language we possess.''
Surely, evidence is an essential part of making decisions, and of understanding our world (our physical world, business world, social world, and on and on). But that evidence is always subject to our own internal flaws and foibles, and always ready to lead us to a false conclusion (okay, to keep my feet dry, I won't open my umbrella anymore). According to Heisenberg, at least, our language and perspective are as much part of the measure as the object itself.
Posted by ataylor at 12:48 AM
September 14, 2004
Fill out this survey, or I'll probe your brain
A recent article in The Economist, and another in Newsweek, explore the early stages of 'neuromarketing' and 'neuroeconomics,' or the use of brain scanning equipment in pursuit of consumer cash and decision making. Since people can't usually describe their actual motivations (or they describe them incorrectly), a few research centers and consulting firms are hard at work applying the discoveries of neuroscience to the hazy world of consumer preference and choice -- from Coke to Pepsi to cars to political ads.One such firm on the commercial side is BrightHouse Neurostrategies Group, who frame what they do as follows:
Our goal is to define the neural basis of behaviors that are of specific interest to strategic business decision making, as well as of generic interest to the field of neuroscience. We are not interested in telling companies what people think about their products, but rather how they think. Our focus is decidedly from the consumer perspective with the direct intent to influence the behavior of companies, rather than consumers.
Catchy but creepy.
So far, neuroscience as applied to consumer behavior has proven interesting, but not immediately actionable. According to the Economist article, some studies have merely reinforced the mythical quality of brand over actual preference:
Most people say they prefer the taste of Coke to Pepsi, but cannot say why. An unpublished study carried out last summer at the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, Texas, found that most subjects preferred Pepsi in a blind tasting -- fMRI scanning showed that drinking Pepsi lit up a region called the ventral putamen, which is one of the brain's 'reward centres', far more brightly than Coke. But when told which drink was which, most subjects said they preferred Coke, which suggests that its stronger brand outweighs Pepsi's more pleasant taste.
Key to the findings is the fact that humans don't expend a lot of calculation energy in making many decisions, but undergo a constant series of almost automatic responses in assigning value to their possible choices. According to one scientist in the audio interview on the Newsweek site:
The amount of time that we're really thinking hard and making difficult decisions is relatively rare. Often we're on autopilot.
Since the human brain wasn't completely redesigned at each stage of evolution, they say, we still carry with us a bunch of functions and processes from earlier stages -- impulse, reflex, conditioned response, etc. In essence, we're all working with a reptilian brain with a few significant upgrades, some of which (the advanced reasoning function, for example) are still fairly weak.
A nuanced understanding of consumer decision-making is absolutely essential in finding and grabbing an audience, but also securing grants, gifts, and government support (they are all provided by people too, after all). It may be a bit premature to set up the magnetic resonance imager in the lobby or museum foyer, but it will be fun to watch others with far more cash learn from their attempts.
NOTE: I've just started reading Steven Johnson's new book on brain science, Mind Wide Open: Your Brain and the Neuroscience of Everyday Life. We'll see if it gets me anywhere.
Posted by ataylor at 8:50 AM
September 15, 2004
The IRS and executive compensation
Nonprofit arts leaders and staff responsible for payroll, hiring, governance, or financial reporting may want to keep an eye on the IRS in the coming months (more than usual, that is). Last month, they issued an advisory that they will be scrutinizing executive compensation practices for nonprofits, beginning with about 2000 throughout the sector (arts among them, one would think).According to the IRS official quoted in the release:
''We are concerned that some charities and private foundations are abusing their tax-exempt status by paying exorbitant compensation to their officers and others,'' said Mark W. Everson, Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service.''Particular organizations that we contact may or may not have problems in the compensation area, but specific aspects of their operations have raised questions that must be answered,'' he said. ''The IRS has an obligation to investigate questionable compensation practices and put a stop to abuses we find,'' he said. ''We wonąt let the misbehavior of a few organizations damage the credibility of the vast majority of law-abiding charities and foundations.''
According to a nonprofit alert from accounting/consulting firm GrantThornton, the review will also extend beyond actual compensation to include any excess financial priveleges received by executives (called 'automatic excess benefit transactions,' catchy, huh?):
These arise when organizations pay personal expenses for insiders and fail to satisfy the technical requirements in the tax regulations to properly document payments as compensation.
In some examples of abuse, according to GrantThornton, organizations 'allowed insiders to use credit cards, cell phones, vehicles and residences without properly accounting for personal use. None of these items were reflected on Form W-2 or 990 as compensation,' but they were determined to be a form of compensation nonetheless.
It's dry stuff, to be sure, but an important part of living la vida nonprofit.
Posted by ataylor at 11:48 AM
September 16, 2004
For the wanna-be cultural literate
If you've forgotten what a Philistine is beyond the concert hall, can't distinguish Chaplin from Chopin, if a friend mentions the Apocrypha and you think about the Apocalypse, there may be a book you need on your shelf (or in your web bookmarks).The New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy (available on-line and in print) is a rather bold attempt to capture the core canon of cultural knowledge required of an advanced American citizen. With section entries from The Bible to mythology to the fine arts, the reference could be the pocket guide for the culturally informed (although with 6900 entries, you'd have to have a wonking big pocket).
Some might say that a reference to cultural literacy would have to be changed every ten minutes to be truly useful, since culture is always evolving. Editor E.D. Hirsch, Jr., takes another view, that:
Eighty percent of literate culture has been in use for more than a hundred years!
Like the surface water on a deep river, he suggests, some cultural references change quickly, but the bulk of them (the deeper currents) are slower to change, and some haven't changed in centuries. According to Hirsch, a detailed, common understanding of this core of knowledge isn't just good for Trivial Pursuit, it's a key to learning itself:
The novelty that my book introduced into this discussion is its argument that true literacy depends on a knowledge of the specific information that is taken for granted in our public discourse. My emphasis on background information makes my book an attack on all formal and technical approaches to teaching language arts. Reading and writing are not simply acts of decoding and encoding but rather acts of communication. The literal words we speak and read and write are just the tip of the iceberg in communication. An active understanding of the written word requires far more than the ability to call out words from a page or the possession of basic vocabulary, syntax, grammar, and inferencing techniques. We have learned that successful reading also requires a knowledge of shared, taken-for-granted information that is not set down on the page.
Whatever your educational theory, you have to admire the hubris of the effort, and revel in the details it contains. And any curious web surfer could get lost entirely in the on-line equivalent of the book. Just take a look at the section on idioms, and you'll see what I mean.
Managers of arts and cultural organizations are often the translators of their communities -- connecting, transcribing, framing, cajoling, debriefing -- between artist, audience, and art. Advanced cultural literacy would seem a requirement of that job, and not just in the artistic discipline you manage.
Posted by ataylor at 2:32 PM
September 17, 2004
Let the galas begin
Madison, Wisconsin, is set to open phase one of its new $205-million arts complex, beginning this Saturday. Everybody who is anybody will be there during its full opening week of free and paid performance/exhibit activities (I'll be there too, even though I'm not anybody).For those that want to dig deep into the unprecedented single-donor gift of $205-million in a county of about 450,000 people (that's about $456 per man, woman, and child in the county, mind you), our city paper had a somewhat cloying but otherwise nice special section on the project's history, its donor, its architect, and such.
It's easy to be cynical about the state of the arts, the business models at work, the funding infrastructure, and the disconnect of some arts organizations from their audiences. But in the face of such a glorious gift, and in the breathtaking new public space it created in my hometown, I'll admit that all cynicism is off at least for this week. There's a cool new place for arts and culture in the world. In the grand scheme of things, that still feels like a good thing.
Posted by ataylor at 8:38 AM
The New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy
If you've forgotten what a Philistine is beyond the concert hall, can't distinguish Chaplin from Chopin, if a friend mentions the Apocrypha and you think about the Apocalypse, there may be a book you need on your shelf (or in your web bookmarks).
The New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy (available on-line and in print) is a rather bold attempt to capture the core canon of cultural knowledge required of an advanced American citizen. With section entries from The Bible to mythology to the fine arts, the reference could be the pocket guide for the culturally informed (although with 6900 entries, you'd have to have a wonking big pocket).
Some might say that a reference to cultural literacy would have to be changed every ten minutes to be truly useful, since culture is always evolving. Editor E.D. Hirsch, Jr., takes another view, that:
Eighty percent of literate culture has been in use for more than a hundred years!
Like the surface water on a deep river, he suggests, some cultural references change quickly, but the bulk of them (the deeper currents) are slower to change, and some haven't changed in centuries. According to Hirsch, a detailed, common understanding of this core of knowledge isn't just good for Trivial Pursuit, it's a key to learning itself:
The novelty that my book introduced into this discussion is its argument that true literacy depends on a knowledge of the specific information that is taken for granted in our public discourse. My emphasis on background information makes my book an attack on all formal and technical approaches to teaching language arts. Reading and writing are not simply acts of decoding and encoding but rather acts of communication. The literal words we speak and read and write are just the tip of the iceberg in communication. An active understanding of the written word requires far more than the ability to call out words from a page or the possession of basic vocabulary, syntax, grammar, and inferencing techniques. We have learned that successful reading also requires a knowledge of shared, taken-for-granted information that is not set down on the page.
Whatever your educational theory, you have to admire the hubris of the effort, and revel in the details it contains. And any curious web surfer could get lost entirely in the on-line equivalent of the book. Just take a look at the section on idioms, and you'll see what I mean.
Managers of arts and cultural organizations are often the translators of their communities -- connecting, transcribing, framing, cajoling, debriefing -- between artist, audience, and art. Advanced cultural literacy would seem a requirement of that job, and not just in the artistic discipline you manage.
more info on Amazon.com...
(any purchase benefits the Bolz Center for Arts Administration library fund...not much, admittedly, but a bit)
Posted by ataylor at 3:38 PM
September 20, 2004
What's in a web site?
My weblog neighbor Drew McManus has been doing some heavy surfing lately, reviewing and rating 70 orchestra web sites in his First Annual Adaptistration Web Site Review.At the top of the list was the Chicago Symphony site, followed closely by the National Symphony (see the full rankings here).
As an annoying academic, I'm always as interested in the criteria of measurement as much as the results, and Drew's criteria seem fairly straight-forward, listing access to a performance schedule first, followed by access to tickets, orchestra information, donation options, and content/navigation. His measures clearly carry the bias of an aficionado, placing more emphasis on artist and repertoire than the bulk of orchestra patrons might. It would be interesting to take Drew's top 10 sites and submit them to a stress-test by a full range of potential audience members (from the expert to the drag-along spouse) to see who actually rose to the top.
The real success of a web site lies not in how it connects to those already connected (except to get them to buy more, give more, want more), but how it prepares and connects the slightly less inclined. To that end, I love Drew's links to the sites worthy of special recognition for one feature or another. These (especially Oregon and their on-line musician roster) are working extra hard to leverage on-line communications to connect.
Posted by ataylor at 9:32 AM
September 21, 2004
Holding open the experience yet to come
I talk a lot about arts organizations needing to focus on the experience of art rather than just the production or presentation of it...not 'experience' in the flashy, theme-store sense, mind you, but in the essential connection between perceiver and perceived that great art moments provide. It's so easy to get stuck in the production-oriented metaphors we use to describe our work (presenter, producer, outreach, education...all one-way words leading from us outward). But even as we get that right, there's another wrinkle to our charge as stewards of the cultural experience that makes life even more complicated.Nonprofit or public arts organizations also must hold the option of that experience open for those not ready to connect (those not old enough, those not born, or those generations yet to come). We must work in such a way that preserves the artifact or experience in time. In a sense, stewardship of creative works is an extension of our focus on experience...only it requires that we preserve something for a future experience we may never live to see.
The challenge of that, especially in a highly-charged economic environment for nonprofit culture, has become apparent more than once. For example, fellow blogger Tyler Green has a wonderful essay about the ethics and stewardship of the Museum of Fine Arts Boston, and their deal with the Bellagio Hotel in Las Vegas. He questions their 'rental' of 21 Monets to be displayed in a commercial gallery there -- especially as the power went out for several days, leaving the paintings to bake in the desert heat.
On the flip side, there are organizations and individuals working to liberate creative artifacts to ensure their preservation and access. One example is Brewster Kahle, founder of the Internet Archive and Rick Prelinger, a film collector, who are suing the federal government over changes to copyright law (here's an article in Wired magazine about the case, and here's a case description from Stanford). The suit suggests that copyright law, as now conceived, unreasonably blocks creative work from entering the public domain (especially works that nobody has a specific interest in).
Yet another example of the struggle of stewardship comes in the seemingly endless arguments about the Barnes Collection (that may well end with a series of court hearings beginning today, see this piece in the Wall Street Journal for more). The question there is whether moving a historical collection of exceptional art to a new location will preserve or destroy the experience of it, as intended by its original donor.
It's extraordinarily inconvenient to manage a business model that requires not just an emphasis on building experiences now, but also a stewardship of experiences yet to come. But that inconvenience is a large part of the nonprofit fiscal privileges we receive to do our work. When creative objects become more like assets than elements of the public trust (as I've discussed before), we only get deeper in the hole.
Posted by ataylor at 8:43 AM
September 23, 2004
GETTY: The perils of partnership
I've got one more post in me about the leadership meeting hosted back in June by the Getty Leadership Institute and National Arts Strategies in Los Angeles. The meeting, as you might recall, focused on the connects and disconnects between the for-profit and nonprofit cultural sectors. The goal was to define the difference, explore the common ground, and discuss where the twain could meet more effectively.Of course, anytime you talk about any 'twain' meeting, you're talking about partnership and collaboration...the formalized interconnection toward a common set of outcome goals. Here, the conversation ranged far and wide, from those suggesting there should be more connections, to those who were wary about bridging the chasm, to those who thought the whole distinction was a bit of a straw man to begin with.
The conference briefing paper outlined six areas where the nonprofit and for-profit creative industries might find more ways to connect effectively:
- Community and economic development
(Working together to define and enhance their collective impact on local community, economics, and civic life.) - Building the Talent Base
(Recognizing their common need for creative and technically proficient individuals, and the way these individuals already cross boundaries throughout their careers.) - Programmatic Collaborations
(Exploring the roles and capacities of each sector to generate new ideas, innovations, and a next generation of creative works.) - Distribution
(The opportunity for production in one sector and distribution in another is already a vital connection for many creative works...from theater to books to music. Might this area be more carefully explored and exploited for the benefit of both for-profit and nonprofit?) - Funding
(Exploring the idea of successful for-profit creative enterprise providing more financial support to the nonprofit ecosystem...obviously an idea that rings true for the nonprofit side, and a sounds bit whiny to the for-profit.) - Cultural Policy
(Government, funding, and other policies that affect one sector will often affect both...from copyright to international visas to censorship to zoning. Perhaps there is a more powerful way of exploring and influencing these policies if nonprofit and for-profit work more closely.)
Some specific examples of production partnerships between commercial and non-commercial theater underscored the complexity of such agreements...and the waves of unintended consequences that can flow from them. Nonprofit theater companies may enter into such collaborations without the organizational capacity to carry them through, without a clear understanding of how the commercial endeavor will impact their public perception as a mission-driven organization, and without a safety net if the project goes south after they've sunk their initial production costs. On the other side, the for-profit may be frustrated with the nonprofit's focus on aesthetic detail over consumer connection, and the slow process by which nonprofits aggregate resources and determine direction.
At the end of the day, however, the boundaries between for-profit and nonprofit creative activity are about as limiting as the borders between states: they are important in some essential issues (like if you're eluding the law), but irrelevant to the bulk of activity. Artists jump from side to side without blinking. Organizations on one side use suppliers and professionals from the other (think of commercial touring shows and nonprofit presenters, museums and art dealers, orchestras and independent contractor musicians). And the illusion of being separate in our choices and our outcomes is often more about comfort than about fact.
I've gone on before about how the word and concept of 'partnership' can actually keep us apart. And while the Getty meeting worked well in teasing out our perceived separateness, it was clearly only the beginning of a much longer conversation. Who's going to pick it up from here?
Posted by ataylor at 8:54 AM
September 24, 2004
Some games to prove my point (and scare you)
Early this month, I talked about simulation games, and their potential to support learning for arts managers and other complex activities. Now there are a few more examples -- beyond Roller Coaster Tycoon -- to show the idea in action. The interesting twist is that games are now supporting an agenda, a point of view, and aim to persuade the player about a certain way of thinking.Two cases in point, from both sides of the political aisle:
- Take Back Illinois, an on-line simulation game, sponsored by republican Tom Cross and the Illinois House Republican Organization. The game lets you tackle four issues of particular interest to the republican candidates and incumbants, specifically Medical Malpractice Reform, Education, Citizen Participation, and Economic Reform (only the first topic is currently available, others are promised soon).
- Kuma War, a first-person battle game, including among its mission scenarios Swift Boat PCF-94 -- John Kerry's fateful mission that earned him a purple heart. Says the promotional copy: 'Built using advanced game tools, this simulation puts you in Kerry's boots, in command of a Swift Boat on the Mekong Delta in 1969. Includes broadband video news show, real-world intel, satellite images and the background you need to understand a key issue in this year's presidential election.'
Like any teaching tool, games can teach bias, distortion, and forced point of view, as well as a balanced, nuanced perspective on a complex world (if there is such a thing). Once the big boys play with these toys a little longer, they may be affordable and accessible to us cash-strapped managers and educators in the nonprofit arts. It won't be long of a wait...and you can pass the time pretending you're John Kerry in the Mekong Delta.
NOTE: You can get more links and updates about 'games with an agenda' at watercoolergames.org. Also worth a look are Serious Games and the Education Arcade.
Posted by ataylor at 8:51 AM
Getty Roundtable Weblogs
In June 2004, I was one of twenty-three participants in a leadership roundtable on a particularly compelling and complex topic. Co-sponsored by the Getty Leadership Institute and National Arts Strategies, and held at the Getty Center in Los Angeles, the convening brought together fascinating folks from the nonprofit and for-profit side of cultural enterprise to search for key differences and common ground.The event was titled: 'Managing the Creative -- Engaging New Audiences: A dialogue between for-profit and nonprofit leaders in the arts and creative sectors.' The briefing paper that framed the discussion, and the summary report of what transpired, are both available for download in PDF format below (or at NAS or at GLI)
- Background Briefing Paper (pdf format)
by Adrian Ellis and Sonali Mishra, AEA Consulting - Summary Report (pdf format)
by Jim Rosenberg, National Arts Strategies
Managing the Creative -- Engaging New Audiences
A weblog extension of the conversation:
- Post 1: Extending a conversation
- Post 2: Nonprofit and for-profit
- Post 3: Fun with fungibility
- Post 4: In search of elbow room
- Post 5: Some capital ideas
- Post 6: More capital ideas
- Post 7: Crafting the audience
- Post 8: The perils of partnership
Posted by ataylor at 9:28 AM
September 27, 2004
What's in a price tag?
The Sunday New York Times has an extended story on the Museum of Modern Art, and their recently announced entry price increase from $12 to $20 when they open their new facility. The price would make MoMA 'the most expensive major art museum in the United States.'The article is fairly balanced in its exploration of the increase, noting the challenge a price increase would create for enabling broad access to the collection, as well as the MoMA staff's agony over the change. There's a weird tangent about how museum fee inflation has 'outpaced the price increases for nearly every other form of entertainment in recent years,' listing the Grand Canyon, Yosemite, and compact discs as comparables.
MoMA director Glenn Lowry suggests that the price bump is the only revenue stream available for significant growth:
'There are very few elements of a museum's budget that have any tweak to them,' Mr. Lowry said on a recent afternoon, sitting in his small interior office on Sixth Avenue. 'You're already raising $30 million in gifts. O.K., maybe you can raise $31 million, but you're not going to raise $35 million. And maybe you can tweak a little extra out of the museum's costs.'
Of course, the leadership and staff may have seen the problem coming, as they drew up plans for their new facility that would cost significantly more to heat, light, staff, clean, and manage (leaving a budget hole of about $20 million).
General reaction to the price increase has been shock and awe...from other museum managers (secretly grateful that someone else took the first step) to New York residents. The Daily News went so far as to suggest that MoMA should now stand for 'More Of your Money for Art.' The New York Post headline screamed out '$20 MOMA ADMISSION WILL GIVE YOU ART ATTACK.'
Let's see how soon the other major museums take MoMA's lead...
Posted by ataylor at 8:33 AM
September 28, 2004
When debt is your greatest asset
The Baltimore Symphony is considering a unique way to escape its debt and build its endowment...by leveraging the nonprofit's access to even more debt. Under a scenario described in the Baltimore Sun (username: ajreader@artsjournal.com, password: access) they would sell their concert hall to a newly created nonprofit, and use the proceeds to fill their coffers.Money for the purchase might come from tax-exempt bonds, a specialized form of debt available to nonprofit and public capital projects (like hospitals and housing projects and symphonic halls). In theory, the newly formed nonprofit would secure the bond financing to make the purchase (about $30 million by current rough estimates), and then lease the facility back to the symphony. The BSO would take the $30 million, use just under half to pay its current deficit, and stick the rest in the bank as part of their endowment.
Tax-exempt bond financing for nonprofits isn't a new idea, and is in fact quite common among new capital projects or purchases (the Detroit Symphony financed the construction of their new Max M. Fisher Music Center, in part, with bonds; museums have used the approach to finance major paintings or parking garages or even Sue the Tyrannosaurus rex).
The general idea is that capital projects that serve the public purpose are a good thing, and states and cities want to create incentives to their advancement. Tax-exempt bonds are one such vehicle, offering low interest rates (astoundingly low) to the borrower, and tax-exempt earnings to whoever buys the bond. Even if the nonprofit has cash in hand that might be used to build or buy, they can often benefit from the tax-exempt debt (since they can earn interest on the cash in hand above the interest accruing on the debt...an equation that can also raise the eyebrows of the IRS).
As you can tell, however, the catch here is attorneys...lots and lots of attorneys, and underwriters, and accountants, and bank representatives (who are often attorneys).
The twist in Baltimore is the sale of a current asset (Meyerhoff Symphony Hall) to a nonprofit that will likely be controlled in some way by the symphony itself (or members of its board), and with proceeds to pay off current debt and build an endowment. On the face of it, it sounds eerily like Enron's shenanigans with money-shuffling, except this time using public debt. Attorneys, attorneys, and more attorneys.
Tax-exempt bonds are a fascinating financial option for any nonprofit constructing or purchasing something very expensive (if it's not over several million, don't bother, the attorney fees will kill you). But when you invoke public debt, be prepared to cross every T and dot every I on the deal.
Let's watch Baltimore to see if and how it goes.
NOTE: If you're really interested in how this all works, there are some good article links on tax-exempt financing for nonprofits, and a downloadable brochure on the basics available on-line as well (called 'Nonprofit Corporations: Borrowing with Tax-Exempt Bonds,' the second download from the bottom of the list). It's a real page-turner...or not.
Posted by ataylor at 8:55 AM
September 29, 2004
See what's inside the latest technology
For those interested in the innards of major social trends, MIT's Technology Review has a few great links.First up is this nice info-graphic animation about what's inside an iPod. Basically little hard drives with a few microprocessors, the iPod and its digital brethren are fascinating extensions of the personal computer and the Walkman, with massive implications for the cultural industries.
Also linked from MIT is this weblog review of The Sims 2, the suburban life simulator and God-playing game. The review is particularly interesting because it's written by a player that likes to wreak havoc on his virtual world (called a 'griefer' in gaming circles). Some upgrades in The Sims 2 worth note for the cultural manager: players can now set up their lives and towns in a Shakespeare-inspired village called 'Veronaville'; personality and physical traits of virtual parents now carry forward to their virtual offspring in a nod to DNA; characters now have not only user-controlled personality traits in the moment, but aspirations for their lives, as well.
It's quite striking from the review how this wildly popular simulation game has become a form of playwriting for its players (in this case, the reviewer created an anti-hero specifically designed to mess with the other virtual characters). From costuming, to face design, to set design, to motivation and direction, games like The Sims 2 have become theatrical entertainment, with some of the same richness, depth, and interplay you might find on stage...minus the real people.
In a sort of on-line playwrights' colony, advanced players can also share and exchange the characters, sets, props, and other world elements they've created.
Be afraid.
Posted by ataylor at 8:35 AM
September 30, 2004
Act big or think small?
Anthony Tommasini offered a paragraph in last Sunday's New York Times that's well worth a moment's pause. Embedded within an article he wrote about the backstory on pianist Leon Fleisher's recording, Two Hands, the paragraph said:
The success of the CD, which quickly hit the top 10 of Billboard's classical chart, should offer the reeling classical music business an encouraging lesson: that at a time of financial challenges and uncertain mission, smaller may be better, and that every project should have a clear and meaningful purpose.
Contrast that thought with the 2002 Washington Post editorial by Michael Kaiser of the Kennedy Center. He was mapping out key steps to save the future of the performing arts, and this was number one on that list:
Such organizations must once again be willing to develop and implement large-scale, important projects that are risky and energizing. The arts world used to produce numerous big, daring projects each year: the construction of major arts facilities from Lincoln Center to the Kennedy Center, the production of large-scale dramatic works, such as 'Nicholas Nickleby,' the mounting of new Ring Cycles, even by small opera companies....We have been scared into thinking small. And small thinking begets smaller revenue that begets even smaller institutions and reduced public excitement and involvement. No wonder so many arts organizations are announcing record deficits.
So, thinking small and focused is either a sign of genius or cowardice, depending on who you ask. I'd suggest that thinking differently, whether larger or smaller or even sideways, is the most courageous response to challenge or stress.
Posted by ataylor at 8:40 AM
