Home - Blog

8/9/2010

Ask any ten board members what would make their organizations more successful and nine of them will say, “All we need is an endowment.” An endowment provides ‘guaranteed income,’ reducing the need for fundraising, and provides a measure of stability for the organization, they argue. Since private fundraising is such a scary concept for so many board members, and feels so uncontrollable, the concept of guaranteed income seems like a godsend.

Of course, I certainly would rather have an endowment than not have one. And if a donor offers me a sizeable contribution to our endowment fund I am, of course, extremely pleased and grateful for the largesse.

But there is a large difference between having an endowment and having fiscal stability, and certainly an immense difference between having an endowment and mounting an endowment campaign.

Endowments do not necessarily create fiscal stability. As we observed in this recession, one cannot depend on endowment earnings. When the capital markets crumble, endowments are worth far less and the income they generate falls proportionately. Those arts organizations that depend heavily on their endowments certainly suffered over the past two years. Just observe how major universities that have billions of dollars in their endowment funds are struggling at the moment.

But less obviously, I find that organizations with substantial endowments simply raise the level of their budgets to accommodate the investment income generated and don’t routinely cut the level of contributed income they plan to raise. If an endowment generates $100,000 of revenue annually, the organization’s budget is likely to rise $100,000 a year. In other words, arts organizations always grow to a point where they are uncomfortable. This is not necessarily a bad thing; it means we are more dedicated to pursuing our missions than to creating a period of fiscal relaxation. But it also means that the notion that endowments reduce the need for private fundraising is faulty.

And I would argue that an endowment campaign can actually cause fiscal instability. The cycle that healthy arts organizations enjoy stems from exciting art that is aggressively marketed. This allows the size of the organizational ‘family’ to grow, yielding larger amounts of revenue. When this revenue is invested in more and better art and marketing, the family continues to grow, revenue continues to rise and everyone is happy.

But when an organization decides to divert its attention and resources to an endowment campaign, this invariably means there is less money, during campaign years, to invest in better programming and marketing. As a result, the family does not grow, revenue does not continue to accelerate and fiscal health is placed in jeopardy. And the amount of endowment that must be raised to make a difference is so large since only 4-6% of its principle can be taken as income each year. It takes $3 million of endowment simply to produce $150,000 of annual income. Raising this amount while still raising the annual fund required to continue operations and produce great art is far beyond the fundraising capability of most small and mid-sized organizations.

Some organizations are so disciplined and well-managed that they can balance the needs of programming and marketing with the desire to build the endowment. But these organizations are few and far between.

The next time you hear someone say, “All we need is an endowment,” think twice.

Posted at 2:34 PM by Kaiser, Michael | Permalink | Email this Post | Comments (0)

8/2/2010

The Art of Celebration

One of the things arts managers very often forget to do is to celebrate success. It is easy in the current economic climate, when we are all struggling to make ends meet, to ignore this vital element of good leadership. But I would argue that this is the time we need to celebrate victory most of all.

All members of our organizational 'families' need the motivation and inspiration that come from celebrating the victories our organization enjoys. Mounting a great production, increasing enrollment in an education program, securing a major foundation gift, or simply surviving another fiscal year, all demand celebration.

We must take the time to gather our artists, educators, board members, volunteers and staff and celebrate those activities that went well and to thank the many participants who worked so hard to make the project possible.

At a time when so many board members are fearful and pessimistic, when staff members are exhausted from coping with two years of recession, and when artists question whether the institution has it priorities in place, and when there does not seem to be an end in sight to the fiscal challenges we face, it is essential to take time to acknowledge that we are still vibrant and important organizations making progress and contributions to our communities.

Celebrations can take the form of a simple email to all 'family' members, an informal gathering, picnic or trip to an amusement park or a more formal meeting or dinner where successes are detailed and appreciation expressed. The esprit de corps that is established at these events can help carry participants through the next set of challenges and crises. And the public recognition that good work has been accomplished can ease tensions that easily arise between board and staff and between executive and artistic staffs during difficult years.

Of course one must be careful. One does not want to over-hype minor successes nor does one want to leave the impression that the organization is unaware of larger challenges and problems it faces. Some will argue that when staff members are facing furloughs or salary freezes, or cuts are being made to artistic or educational programming, it is uncomfortable to have party or to celebrate a new grant.

But the key is to place the victory in context of the overall plan for the organization.

If the organization has devised a strategy to move it from its current position to a new, more secure place of higher achievement, celebrating successes along the way confirms that the strategy is working. This can encourage all participants, especially board members and donors, to continue their support.

Managing an arts organization successfully is, in large measure, a challenge in psychology. We ask so many things from so many people, many of whom are either not compensated or undercompensated for their participation.

Celebrating institutional successes in visible ways encourages every participant to continue to work to implement the strategic plan. This is an inexpensive, joyful way to encourage strategy implementation.

Posted at 10:06 AM by Kaiser, Michael | Permalink | Email this Post | Comments (0)

7/26/2010

Remembering Denise Jefferson

The dance world lost a giant on July 17 when Denise Jefferson passed away. I would venture to say that hundreds of thousands of dance lovers, who may not even know her name, have great reason to celebrate her memory.

Denise, the director of the Ailey School, was one of the four pillars of the Ailey organization for decades. Along with Judith Jamison, Sylvia Waters and Masazumi Chaya, Denise provided a rock-solid foundation for the organization. It is not surprising that more than 85% of the dancers who currently perform with the Alvin Ailey American Dance Theater received training at the school. And many more of her students went on to important careers with other major dance companies.

Denise invested herself in every child in the school. She knew that by teaching children to dance, she was also teaching them to respect their bodies. This was a great gift for the young people in the school. She knew there were life lessons to be learned through dance that could benefit every child, not just the most talented who would eventually become professional dancers.

She was kind and caring, but she was also tough. She knew that the benefits of dance required discipline, hard work, and an endless striving for perfection. She would not compromise on quality and she would not tolerate dancers who did not work to their full potential.

But anyone who worked hard received her admiration and her support. Forever. Denise cared about her students long after they left her school.

Denise became a special friend of mine when I became executive director of the Ailey organization in 1991. She taught me a great deal about the various techniques that an Ailey dancer had to learn and about the history of African-American choreography.

We discussed ways to make the school more visible and better able to meet the needs of a very diverse student body.

But Denise was also my special personal tutor in all things African-American. She was an unembarrassed guide into the world of black customs and culture. I will always love her for the day she showed up at work, covered from head to toe in clothing. She quickly raised and lowered a sleeve to fulfill my request, rude as it was, to see what "ash" was. I must admit the glimpse was so fast I didn't see what all the fuss was about!

Denise and I did not agree on everything. Her three-hour recitals in our non-air-conditioned studios in June seemed far too long to me. She disagreed. Every child who had worked so hard all year should have a chance to dance, she said. We argued about this for three years. Even after I left the Ailey organization, Denise and I would argue about the length of recitals.

I will miss arguing with her.

And I will miss my special guide. I will miss her honesty and humor and grace and beauty.

Posted at 10:05 AM by Kaiser, Michael | Permalink | Email this Post | Comments (0)

7/19/2010

My 50-State Tour

I just completed a 50-state, 69-city tour across the entire United States. I traveled 83,000 miles and spoke with nearly 11,000 artists, arts managers, board members, elected officials and concerned citizens.

We discussed both generic approaches for dealing with (and not dealing with) an economic downturn as well as local arts issues and concerns.

The motivation for this tour came from my fear that the recession would set many arts organizations on a path that would create problems for years to come. When an arts organization's first response to a fiscal crisis is to cut programming and marketing, bad things are sure to happen.

Surprisingly, and thankfully, the name of the tour, "Arts in Crisis," surprised people in many communities. Many people said they were happy to come and talk about how to improve their organizations, but they didn't feel in crisis. Yes, things were tougher than they had been, but they did not feel their organizations were in danger.

When I started the tour, I thought I might write a book about the experience. I thought it could be interesting to illuminate the differences in the arts ecologies between each community.

I was wrong. While there is certainly great variability in the intensity with which the recession has influenced each city, the issues faced by arts organizations are remarkably consistent.

How do you make a board more productive? How can we take advantage of new technologies to sell more tickets? How do we raise more money? What should start up arts organizations focus on? Where do we find trained staff or volunteers? These questions, or variations on these questions, were asked on every stop of the tour.

There will be no book after all; it would be too dull. I could write about the legroom challenges of regional airplanes, the best places to eat in Meridian, Mississippi or Billings, Montana, or the remarkable physical beauty of our country, but I would have nothing to add to the others who write about travel.

But this does not mean I did not learn anything of value on my tour. I learned of the vibrancy of the arts in America. I learned that arts leaders simply will not give up. I learned that some of the most interesting artists and most entrepreneurial arts managers are working in some of our smallest cities. And I learned that we need to give these managers and their boards a far better education if we want the arts to flourish.

Some have said I did this tour to promote myself. If so, I am incredibly inefficient and deserve to be fired. (I reach more people with one post on this blog than all the visits combined.) Indeed, we planned several stops in less-populous areas where expectations for attendance were low. Regardless of size, participants in every city shared common concerns and displayed a passion for the arts that inspired me tremendously.

And if the Kennedy Center is doing a better job of fulfilling its mandate to be the national cultural center then I certainly don't mind the attendant publicity. It is my job to create visibility for my organization.

But the overwhelming feeling I have is gratitude for the people who came to the sessions (often driving four or more hours to do so), the 69 local moderators who interviewed me, and the hundreds of people who helped organize the events. I know I was given a most rare opportunity and I am truly grateful.

Posted at 10:05 AM by Kaiser, Michael | Permalink | Email this Post | Comments (0)

7/12/2010

Verdery Roosevelt's Departure

The dance world was surprised recently to learn that Verdery Roosevelt was leaving her job as executive director of Ballet Hispanico. When most executive directors leave their jobs it barely causes a ripple. We are more interested in who will become the new executive than we are in the person who just left.

But Verdery is an institution. She has been at the helm of Ballet Hispanico for 31 years. She is largely responsible for building a thriving, important dance organization, one of the most important Latino arts organizations in the nation. For an organization that thrives on the dramatic, Verdery was always cool and collected.

It is unusual these days for an executive to last even ten years with one organization; to last more than three decades is an astonishing accomplishment.

It is not that she didn't have other options. Verdery has been asked on numerous occasions if she wanted to leave Ballet Hispanico and run larger, 'more prestigious' organizations.

But she always said no thank you.

Verdery truly and passionately supported the mission of her organization and the dreams of her artistic partner, Tina Ramirez, who retired last year. Characteristically, Verdery stayed on to ensure a smooth transition at the organization she loved.

At a time when so many people question the motives of arts executives, when it is assumed that we all care more for the bottom line than for the artistic mission of our organizations, Verdery is the shining example that such generalizations are untrue and dangerous. This is not to say she was not a great steward of the fiscal health of Ballet Hispanico; but she knew that good art creates good financial health and she was truly and properly supportive of her artists.

In fact, watching her work was an object lesson in good arts management: she taught me more about staying true to one's artists while doing what was best for the organization than anyone.

And she did it in her understated way: always professional, always kind, always supportive yet with a directness that suggested she would never work any way but the way she felt was best for her organization. Not surprisingly, donors adored her, especially professional donors such as corporations and foundations. They always knew that when they made a grant to Verdery, the money would be spent wisely, the project would proceed in a smart, planned way, and the arts world would benefit.

The dance world will be poorer without her at the helm of Ballet Hispanico. There is not a large pool of people like Verdery, with the sophisticated knowledge matched by intense passion, ready to run arts organizations. Unfortunately, we have not done a good job of creating the next generation of arts leaders.

I do not know her plans for the future. Perhaps she does not know herself.

But I hope for all of our sakes she doesn't stop leading by her shining example.

Posted at 10:04 AM by Kaiser, Michael | Permalink | Email this Post | Comments (0)

7/6/2010

Our Summer Fellows

Last week a new class of summer fellows arrived at the Kennedy Center for a four-week session. The summer fellows program brings arts managers from nations around the world to the Kennedy Center. The fellows come for three years in a row to study fundraising, marketing, financial management and planning. The program is a three-year program because we want our students to learn, to go home and experiment, to come back and learn some more and so forth. Simply giving them some information and sending them on their way would not be sufficient.

Our summer fellows are smart, ambitious and determined to make a difference in their home countries. They are extraordinary ambassadors for their nations. But virtually all of them live in countries where there is little or no access to arts management training. They have learned to manage their organizations on their own.

Patrick-Jude Oteh, from Jos, Nigeria, runs a theater company that has not only had to cope with a dearth of donors, the difficulty of building an audience, and the challenges of creating a board, but he does it while insurgents are killing and raping hundreds of people in his town.

Zvonimir Dubrovik, just 29 years old, successfully created and maintained for seven years a substantial gay arts festival in Zagreb, Croatia. While developing this project successfully, he also created a new contemporary arts festival and is about to develop a project in New York City.

Noora Baker runs a modern dance company in Ramallah, Palestine, and Tanya Surtees an avant-garde theater company in Cape Town, South Africa, that mixes deaf and hearing actors.

There are 41 such stories this summer, as we welcome, for the first time, a first-year class and returning second and third year students. Now in its steady state, the summer institute will allow each summer fellow to interact with five classes, or some 75 international arts managers, over the three-year course. This "United Nations of arts management" is creating a network of well-trained arts entrepreneurs who are certain to shape the arts world for decades to come.

And working on an ongoing basis with these immensely talented individuals also confirms our belief that cultural diplomacy is about building long-term relationships. We build relationships with these amazing individuals who will truly lead their nations in the years to come. The art they produce will help shape the minds of the citizens of their countries. The relationships we form, that continue long after the fellowship is over, can only help America rebuild its image abroad. The image created of American generosity (our fellows all receive full scholarships), expertise and belief that the health of the arts world anywhere depends on the health of arts organizations everywhere must certainly make an impact.

As our happy band of international arts leaders celebrates July Fourth together, watching fireworks and sharing a picnic, one develops great hope not just for the world of the arts but for the world itself.

Posted at 9:58 AM by Kaiser, Michael | Permalink | Email this Post | Comments (0)

6/28/2010

My Prescription for Summer

Every June I make the same recommendation to my students: use the summer months to plan for the future of your organizations but also, and vitally, to replenish yourselves for the year ahead.

During the height of the season, it is difficult, if not impossible, for many arts executives to do comprehensive, thoughtful long-term planning. Leaders of smaller arts organizations especially have trouble finding enough time to clear their minds and schedules of day-to-day challenges and to think more creatively and openly about the future of their organizations. Without this planning time, however, arts organizations are in danger of doing similar things every year, failing to solve central challenges and looking boring to audiences and donors. It is the surprising project that builds institutional image, not the routine.

The summer months, when most arts organizations are doing a minimum of producing (or the winter months for summer festivals), provide the perfect time for reflection. Just how good is our programming and how do we make it better? What kinds of projects do we dream of producing? How can we make this happen? How can we create the resources required and when might we find these resources? How can I build the image for excellence this organization needs to attract strong new board members, motivate those board members we have, and increase audience size at a reasonable cost? What sources of funding have we failed to energize and how can we do so in the future? What worked especially well this past season? What could have been substantially better? Why?

These questions and many others demand thoughtful analysis and creative thinking. The answers cannot be rushed and neither conventional wisdom nor superficial responses are helpful. The summer months, when things are less hectic, are the perfect time to reflect, respond and begin implementation.

But the summer months are also the time when we must replenish our souls. We need to get enough sleep, for sure, but sleep is not really the central answer for the tired arts executive. We need to also divert our attentions to non-work activities. A true vacation is not necessarily a trip to Paris or a week at the beach. A vacation is anything that allows your mind to refocus on other interests and endeavors.

For some of us this can mean learning a new language, reading important books or spending relaxed time with friends and family. Taking time away from obsessing about our work is essential if we are to return in the Fall with renewed vigor and energy and excitement.

All arts leaders have been through a terribly difficult two-year period. But our roles demand that we not let our fatigue affect the way we lead. If we cannot return in September filled with excitement for the year ahead and optimism that our plans will help bring our organizations to a new level, we have no hope that our boards, staffs, artists and donors will approach the new season with anything but ennui.

Ignore this prescription for summer at your own peril!

Posted at 9:58 AM by Kaiser, Michael | Permalink | Email this Post | Comments (0)

6/21/2010

Our Visit to Japan

The Kennedy Center is fortunate to have the support of our International Committee on the Arts, a group of patrons from many countries who help to underwrite our international programming. This programming includes both the presentations of international artists and festivals at the Center and the training we offer to arts managers around the world.

Each year, the Committee holds a summit in a foreign country. This meeting allows us to discuss our international strategy, our current projects and the opportunities we see for the future. We also have an opportunity to experience the culture, history and, of course, food of the host nation. In past years, summits were held in Beijing, St. Petersburg, Rome, Paris, London and Buenos Aires. Next year we will visit Cape Town, South Africa.

This year the Committee met for one stimulating week in Tokyo and Kyoto. Our business meetings focused on our summer fellowship program that will bring 42 arts managers from 28 different nations to the Center this summer. The members of the Committee were particularly moved by a letter from a summer fellow from Nigeria who wrote of the murder and rape of hundreds in his city and the importance of art for the healing of his community. We also reviewed the numerous international presentations we are hosting at the Center this season and next including this season's VSA International Festival and next season's festival of India.

The Committee members also toured through each city visiting temples, museums, private art collections and historical monuments. We even attended the national championship sumo wrestling matches and the astonishing Tokyo fish market.

One of the highlights of each of these summits is an event that honors important artists from the host country. Previous honorees have included Valery Gergiev, Paloma Herrera, Julio Bocca, Trevor Nunn, Olivia de Havilland and Judi Dench. This year we honored four astonishing artists: architect Tadao Ando, violinist Midori, Kabuki actor Kanzaburo Nakamura and director Yukio Ninagawa.

What made this event special, apart from the remarkable artistry of each of the honorees, was that all four had participated in Kennedy Center programming. Kanzaburo Nakamura, who comes from a remarkably distinguished line of Kabuki actors, performed at the Center decades ago. Midori has been a frequent soloist with the National Symphony Orchestra and in recital. And both Tadao Ando and Yukio Ninagawa participated in our "JAPAN: culture + hyperculture" festival two years ago.

Because all four honorees had a relationship to the Kennedy Center, there was a lovely sense of family that developed that evening. The honorees were both gracious and self-effacing during their remarks. They all had great memories of working at the Center and appreciated the need for additional cultural exchange opportunities.

Needless to say, the members of our International Committee left Japan with a deep appreciation for the beauty and richness of Japanese culture and new motivation to continue to support the work the Kennedy Center does to use arts to educate our audiences about other people.

Posted at 11:40 AM by Kaiser, Michael | Permalink | Email this Post | Comments (0)

6/14/2010

Does Size Matter in the Arts?

One of the frustrating responses I receive to my "Arts in Crisis" presentations is that my recipe for success only works for large organizations in big cities.

I could not disagree more. I believe that planning far in advance is more important for smaller organizations than larger ones. Smaller organizations have a harder time developing the large transformational projects than larger organizations. That is why they tend to remain small. If they take the time to plan large, exciting programs four or five years in advance, they would be far more likely to find the resources they require to mount these programs. This would allow them to build visibility in the community, attract stronger board members, and increase their ability to generate resources. Planning should not be left to the larger groups.

And institutional marketing is also more important for smaller groups since they tend to be less well known, their programmatic marketing campaigns are smaller, and their projects tend to be of smaller scale.

The challenge is to determine which assets the organization possesses that can help build reputation. Is it a major production planned for the future? Access to important artists or politicians who might participate in events? A rich history that deserves a museum or library exhibition? An invitation to perform at an important festival? An opportunity to participate in a highly visible special event? A major announcement of a new program or grant? A special anniversary that can be celebrated?

The list of possibilities is endless.

It is up to the creative manager to use these assets to create a visibility campaign for the organization. No single special event or announcement will build institutional image enough to make a difference. All good marketing requires repeated 'hits' with a given message. A small or mid-size organization should be making news at least once a quarter; larger organizations need many more exposures a year.

The small organization may not get on a national television show but the number of people it must influence is fewer than for a big organization. In fact, most arts organizations must really only influence 100-200 selected people in their communities to have a life-changing effect on the organization. Making a list of these individuals and working aggressively to influence them is more important than appearing on late night television!

There are many smaller, regional organizations that have created great art and visibility and give testimony to the power of programming planning and institutional marketing in smaller markets.

Perhaps my favorite example is Glimmerglass Opera in Cooperstown, New York that produces very well-regarded opera performances in an opera house built in a town of fewer than 3,000 residents. People travel from far and wide to attend performances at Glimmerglass. The organization does not shy away from difficult operas or unusual interpretations.

If Glimmerglass Opera can build an international reputation for excellence, your organization can too, no matter where it is or the size of its budget. Begin to plan your art farther in advance and take time to find the resources needed for projects that will energize your audience and donor base. And initiate an institutional marketing effort that encourages new people to enter your organizational family.

Size doesn't matter in the arts.

Posted at 10:09 AM by Kaiser, Michael | Permalink | Email this Post | Comments (0)

6/7/2010

What I Am Learning On My Tour

My 50 state, 69 city tour is almost over; I will make my last presentation on July 16 in Boise, Idaho.

The tour has been both inspiring and depressing at the same time.

It is inspiring to see so many communities that value the arts and so many individuals determined to maintain arts in their cities and states. I estimate that some 11,000 people will have attended an "Arts in Crisis" tour presentation. Each of these individuals cares deeply for the arts in their home towns.

When I visited Billings, Montana some people drove as much as six hours each way to make sure they could take part in the discussion. Numerous South Dakotans drove for hours to Pierre for our session there. Many politicians came to these sessions as well--mayors, city councilmen, school superintendants, state senators, Congressmen--displaying their concern and interest in the role the arts play in their communities.

In too many cities to name, new or restored theaters and museums provided spectacular venues for our presentations and for the arts. Clearly there was enough interest in these cities to invest millions of dollars to ensure a proper home for the arts.

And in virtually every city, the press was present at these events. Newspaper, television and radio journalists have given this tour an astonishing level of coverage.

One had to come away from this tour with an overwhelming feeling of optimism for the future of the arts in America.

But I was depressed to see how many venues I visited presented performances that were entirely interchangeable with performances at other venues.

It is not that the art was bad. It simply was not special or unique to the organization. In other words, there was simply no evidence of curation. Kevin McKenzie, the artistic director of American Ballet Theatre, was the first person to teach me about how one must curate a season, selecting works that fit together and making sure the audience was learning along the way. I have extrapolated from his concept and believe that curating a special project or festival is an important part of being a good presenter.

Of course it is wonderful for any community to experience the Alvin Ailey American Dance Theater or a recital by Yo-Yo Ma. But shouldn't each venue also be creating projects unique to its community?

Presenters must do more than fill slots. They must develop projects that will build excitement and reputation for creativity and excellence. These projects can be interesting amalgams of guest artists or organizations or work that is produced specially by the presenting organization.

Why can't a mid-sized presenter create a festival, perhaps in collaboration with a local producing organization, museum or educational institutions?

When I talk about the need for large transformational projects heads always nod up and down in my "Arts in Crisis" sessions and people tell me how inspiring this concept is. But as I look at the schedules for U.S. presenters, with few exceptions the programming has not changed.

Perhaps I must give it more time. Perhaps in three or four years we will see great new projects that have taken that long to gestate.

But I am afraid my tour will not have accomplished enough to justify the expense of time and money if the programming in our theaters does not change dramatically.

Posted at 3:15 PM by Kaiser, Michael | Permalink | Email this Post | Comments (0)

RSS Feed