Management Philosophy

A recent article that appeared on Artsjournal about the value or lack thereof of intermissions, and how they might be more pleasant in Pittsburgh than in NYC, got me to thinking about some recent observations.

For some reason I don’t understand (though perhaps it was simply related to the number of ushers available at the time) the woman who was the house manager of my theatre before I arrived wouldn’t open the exterior doors of the theatre until it was time to allow the audience in to the theatre.

Because I had so many things on my mind and had come from a theatre with a lobby so small that we essentially had to keep the audience outside until the house opens time, I maintained this policy for the first few show. Then I realized how silly this was. I had a lobby with a gorgeous 23′ x 104′ mural by Jean Charlot and an extensive lobby display commemorating the 30th anniversary of the theatre. I wanted people to look around!

For the last few performances, I have started letting people in as soon as enough ushers have arrived to rip tickets and prevent folks from entering the theatre before we are ready. I am almost glad I had kept people out because I would have never noticed the difference in audience behavior. Before people would rush straight in to the theatre, come out for intermission and then leave at the end of the show.

Now people walk around, admire the mural and peruse the display, discuss all the great performances they attended over the past 30 years and continue when they come out at intermission. The number of requests for brochures and additional information has increased. More people approach me with comments and suggestions (I do a curtain speech so I am easily identified.)

At this stage, I would say the lobby is really a valuable venue in the development of a relationship with your audience and communicating what you are all about as an organization. Now that I have seen the impact of having audiences linger in the lobby, I am starting to think about what I can do for next year when the 30 year anniversary material comes down so I can continue to educate my them about the organization.

Well I must say I am quite surprised. I usually don’t get comments on my blog entries with the exception of Drew McManus over at Adaptistration. But after my last entry outlining how my anti-social tendencies are in conflict with my public professional life, I actually got a handful of responses. I guess I need to share personal quirks more often.

I didn’t make an entry last night because I was overseeing a performance. The experience seemed well suited for tonight’s entry. I talk a lot about insuring that you are providing audiences with a quality experience when they attend shows. From time to time, I talk about performers who really offer a quality product. But I don’t think I have ever spoken about quality control performers exert over their product as it were.

Last night was an example of a artist who brought a sense of craftmanship to his music, but also to his show. The group was Mariachi Los Camperos de Nati Cano. The group is lead by Nati Cano who has been performing mariachi for nearly 45 years now. He is recognized as one of the most influential figures in mariachi, shifting it from being perceived as the province of street musicians, to something worthy of international concert halls. About 10 years ago, he was recognized by the National Endowment of the Arts with a National Heritage Fellowship.

Now all this is well and good, but as anyone can tell you, accolades don’t guarantee a pleasant working relationship with a person. He was determined to make the show the highest quality it could be. He asked me questions about the audience, would it be made up of older audiences or younger, mostly Latins or a large contingent of Hawaiians? He wanted to make sure he didn’t perform songs that were only familiar to Latin families who grew up on the music if there was a sizable contingent of people from other backgrounds.

The truth was, a large percentage of the audience had Japanese surnames. When I mentioned this, he told me that yes, that was about right, when he was last in Hawaii (30 years ago) they had comprised a very large and very appreciative portion of the audience. Then he went back and talked to the band about a set list that reflected this.

It was like that all day. Before the show he and other band members inquired if I was happy with the size of the audience they had attracted for presale. (Indeed!) After the show–did I approve of the performance energy and song selection, was the audience an acceptable size, did I approve of the state in which they left the dressing rooms?

I have had performers ask me if they show and audience size was good before, but the detail to which Nati and his group went to in order to fashion the show and then solicit feedback is one I have rarely experienced. This is probably why he has been performing for 45 years. He is dedicated to good customer service that encompasses both his audience and his employer de jour.

I don’t normally listen to mariachi and I don’t speak Spanish either. I was listening to the group’s CDs to set the tone for their arrival. You forget though the power of a good live event. When you have energy, musical prowess and showmanship in a performance, you end up saying “Wow, I don’t know what they said, but I sure know it was good.”

You might think that artists and presenters are motivated simply by the best monetary situation they can position themselves in to. Certainly that keeps the doors open and people fed so it is important. But I know for a fact that both artists and presenters talk about their encounters with each other and that can absolutely influence a decision to book a performance and can tip the scales when the money isn’t quite what one would want to pay/be paid.

It occurs to me that my suggestions in my entry yesterday didn’t really solve the problem of arts organizations feeling forced in to professionalizing their organization. My suggestions really were only applicable for organizations who had just started out and didn’t have their own theatre space.

What happens if you are a member of a theatre group that was started back in the early part of the 20th century as part of the Little Theatre movement? Even if your only ambition is to be a resource for the community and the kids in the neighborhood and provide them with a place they can express themselves artisitical on weekends and after school, you face some problems.

Back when your theatre was formed, the community was more focussed on itself. Businesses were run by people you knew and they could be easily approached about supporting you. Now it is all corporate owned. Chances are you don’t know the community giving officer when you approach a company and probably won’t have much contact with them outside of your project. Chances are also about even that they may not be the community giving officer next year when you go back for an annual appeal.

Banks used to be owned locally and focussed locally as well. Now your bank can easily change names 3 times in five years as they merge and get bought out. Instead of dealing with a local person, you end up sending grant donations in to a corporate office in Delaware or perhaps a regional headquarters.

Instead of talking to someone about giving you a donation and having them stop back to see the results, now you have to fill out all sorts of paper work and are judged heavily on your persuasive writing skills. If you are given a grant, you then have to follow up with more forms typically backed up with survey data to show how you served X number of people or improved the lives of folks in the community.

All these things require you to be organized to such a degree that the move to having a professional staff take care of it rather than shuffling paperwork between committee members homes seems like a logical step.

Only now you find that the people funding you are interested in doing a lot of bragging about how many school children they serve and they want to get as much bang for thier buck so the place that says they can serve 4000 kids for a 10,000 donation is a better investment than a place that does a really great job serving 400.

Then you discover you need to have matching funds. So for the $10,000 you want, you need to raise $10-20,000 from another source, be it donations or earned income. So then there is more effort to expend organizing, tracking and reporting for other grants/donations or ticket income.

It is all a pain in the ass, but you are really dedicated to providing support to the community, so much so that you will start doing things you never initially envisioned in order to make yourself attractive to granting organizations. Some of it is really great and rewarding, but you are getting tired so you bring on more people to help you out.

Now you see how easy it is get into a situation where your organization is overbuilt as the Artful Manager referred to. You get into a position where you are focussing on preserving funding to things you aren’t interested in doing simply so you can divert some resources to the things you are. But you aren’t fulfilling your original purpose well because you are distracted by the effort of keeping all the other balls in the air. (And by the way, by this point you are talking about every arts organization.)

I can really see how expectations in today’s environment can really put a lot of pressure on organizations to professionalize. I can’t see any viable solutions. In an age where governments are dissolving arts councils, I can’t see foundations and businesses tasking more employees to going out and getting to know their communities to the point where donations can be made on a handshake.

I absolutely think there is a need for accountability and recordkeeping so that businesses know where their money is going and how it is being spent. Unless a company or foundation is going to have their employees travel around collecting support materials, pictures, etc from small arts organizations and then fill out the paperwork themselves to take the burden off the arts, I have a tough time imagining an alternative at this time.

So I haven’t even had the first performance of this season occur and I have already started on the process of picking performers for the next. The Performing Arts Presenters of Hawaii (of which I am now a board member!) had a meeting on Monday to discuss what we saw when we were in Spokane, WA at the Western Arts Alliance conference. I was expecting it would take 12 hours from the way people spoke, but it really ended up taking about 6. (Which I think was actually due to the president limiting presentations and moving things along.)

About 10 of us sat in a theatre watching DVDs and tapes projected on a screen and listening to CDs. We went through the list of potential artists people were considering by category (and there was strangely a bit of debate about grouping Latin and Jazz into the same category–mainly because many of the artists up for consideration seemed to be Latin influenced Jazz or vice versa. After listening and watching said offerings, there was considerable discussion about artists mislabeling their genre in an attempt to repackage themselves.)

In any case, people in the consortium were only interested in about 20% of the artists I suggested alone (as opposed to ones I was asked to pick up information for prior to the meeting and thus knew there was interest in). I would have felt a little slighted that they weren’t taking the suggestions of the new guy seriously if it weren’t for the fact that about an equal number of proposals by one of the more senior members also met with a lack of interest.

In the end though it might be a good thing since I will only have to take the lead on two or three artists if a number of members of the consortium are ultimately interested in presenting them next season. I will probably approach many of the performers I alone was interested in because I chose them in part for for their small company size and lower fees and so can likely afford them on my own.

Those that many people are interested in I will have to take the lead and negotiate on behalf of the others, collect feedback and information, plan the routing from one island to another on a series of dates (and since the dates for at least one theatre will inevitably fall on a week night rather than a weekend, see how things can be shifted beneficially.) It is probably better for me being new to the scene to avoid too many instances where I have to be answerable to people outside of my own organization and patron base.

One last observation, I don’t know if it was coincidental timing or a shift in the Force, but the day after I returned from this meeting, I suddenly had 4 calls from agents asking me if I had considered their material. I hadn’t told any of them about the meeting, yet something inspired them to call.

And of course, as luck would have it, none of them represented people we wanted to present so I ended up talking to people I really had no interest in speaking with.