How Do You Take Your Compliments?

by:

Joe Patti

A woman who was our assistant theatre manager is now pursuing her doctorate in Thailand and recently sent us a questionnaire. She is surveying the difference between the way Americans and Thai respond to compliments based on the relative age and social standing of the person delivering the compliment. All my answers were pretty much the same but from what I know about Thai culture, your status relative to the person giving the compliment dictates how humbly you might respond.

I got to thinking a little about how we handle compliments in the arts. A few years ago, Holly Mulcahy had talked about how difficult it is for an artist to accept a compliment graciously rather than offer apologies for the performance. I remember doing something similar when I was acting, barely being able to mumble out a thanks.

It is easier now that I am in administration. I get to stand in the lobby during intermission and the end of the performance accepting compliments about the show without reservation because I am generally as unaware of the flaws the performers may perceive about their performance as the audience is. Though there have been a few rare times when I have been witness to some very tense moments backstage when artistic directors and stage managers voiced their disapproval of a performance.

As I think about the value and significance of those compliments, one thing I don’t feel I do enough of is solicit feedback beyond, “Thanks, that was a great show.” from a wider variety of people. I have advocated having conversations about the arts where ever you find the opportunity whether it is at a wedding reception or on the checkout at the grocery store in order to get people to voice what they do or don’t like about the arts experience. You can often get people who say they aren’t arts people to recognize they are actually more involved and invested than they realized. Having them reflect on that is good for the arts in the long run.

Starting and sustaining those conversations in the grocery store can be a challenge, but it is easy as falling down in a theatre lobby or gallery. I certainly do talk to a lot of people throughout an evening but it is often the same familiar faces who are knowledgeable about the arts and know they have access to me.

With them it is easier than falling down. What I need to remind myself to do is take “Thank you, that was a great show,” from “strangers” and extend my response to something beyond “Well thank you, thanks for coming out this evening.” Last year I had the presence of mind to do that with a couple and suddenly their high school aged daughter piped in with observations that were so insightful, I was about to beg her to come to college here when she graduated.

My intuition tells me making time to encourage other than the usual suspects to expound a little more on their experience is probably the doorway to better fund raising opportunities. Making the connection with new people may certainly inspire a personal donation from those who find themselves becoming more invested in the organization, but it may also indirectly lead to identifying and connecting with companies/organizations interested in providing support who were never even on your radar.

I am not suggesting that you should be in the process of always closing a fund raising pitch. Rather I am pointing out that relationships are the real basis of enduring support. It is easy to fall into the trap of always speaking with the same familiar people at every performance. It is another thing that solicit additional feedback from an unfamiliar person. Even if their first words are compliments, the next words might not be. But doing so can go a long way toward not only securing their loyalty, but alleviating the impression of elitism in the arts.

Arts & Job Crafting

by:

Joe Patti

Apropos to yesterday’s Labor Day holiday there was a blog post on the Harvard Business Review site back in June about job crafting, basically changing aspects of your daily activity to make your job more enjoyable.

I thought many of the suggestions cited by the author, Amy Gallo, were particularly applicable to arts organizations. Arts employees are apt to feeling burned out and unfulfilled due to wearing many hats and having a large workload.

But compared to many other types of businesses, employees of arts organizations generally have a fair bit of freedom about how they accomplish tasks. Employing a little creativity in the process isn’t likely to be viewed as disruptive and might even be applauded.

One of the first suggestions Gallo mentions is examining oneself to assess whether the problem might be that you are simply prone to being dissatisfied all the time. Another is to think about ways to change your outlook about your job and perhaps form emotional connections with colleagues and co-workers.

Next is to look at restructuring the job itself:

“Spreitzer and Wrzesniewski suggest using a job crafting exercise to redesign your job to better fit your motives, strengths, and passions. “Some people make radical moves; others make small changes” in how they delegate or schedule their day,…For example, if your most enjoyable task is talking with clients, but you feel buried in paperwork, you might decide to always speak with clients in the morning, so you’re energized to get through the drudge work for the rest of the day. Or you might save talking with your clients until the end of the day as a reward.

If it’s not the work you dislike but the people you work with, you may be able to change that too. Wrzesniewski says she has seen people successfully alter who they interact with on a daily basis to increase job satisfaction. Focus on forging relationships that give you energy, rather than sapping it. Seek out people who can help you do your job better”

In some respects, the fact that just about everyone performs multiple functions in an arts organization can be an asset to job crafting efforts. Lacking concrete job boundaries, people can swap some of their duties a little bit. What is mind numbing to one might provide a refreshing respite to someone else. One thing I have appreciated about the arts jobs I have had has been the ability to get up and away from one task to do essentially all of the things Gallo mentions.

I have been able to attend artist outreaches to see the impact of our work on people in the community. I can talk with colleagues and patrons and develop connections with them. I have been able to get up from my desk to stick my nose in on rehearsals and classes to get some inspiration. Walking around to inspect facilities and equipment or setting my hand to some physical task often provides the distraction my mind needs to find a solution that wasn’t coming sitting in front of my computer.

If You Meet Mozart On The Road, Kill Mozart

by:

Joe Patti

Back in June there was an interesting piece on The Creativity Post about the Mozart Myth.

The Mozart myth goes something like this. Some people are born with talent so tremendous that music and other cultural products spring from their minds fully-fledged, as if by magic. Mozart, so the myth goes, would compose his symphonies in one sitting with nary a revision through a single act of inspiration. The more generalized myth, popularized by writers such as Arthur Koestler, is that all creative people work this way.

The authors, Michele and Robert Root-Bernstein, recount a story about a student they had who had made it big with a rock song in his first year of college, but when it came time to do a follow up, he felt his creativity was blocked. He took their class in the hope they could unlock his creativity again.

They had this student examine his creative process and he eventually came to realize he had actually worked on his first big hit over the course of 6 months. Finally, he had a eureka moment where everything gelled. The reason he felt like he was blocked was because he was waiting for another eureka moment to drop the next masterpiece in his lap, not recognizing the first hadn’t done so.

This story is a good reminder not to mistake the frisson experienced during that eureka moment as the whole creative process. How many times have we heard that genius is 90% perspiration and 10% inspiration but continue to value only the inspiration part?

We may be able to dash off some inspired prose or music in a few moments forgetting that there were years of reading, writing, listening, watching, thinking and practicing that have brought us to that moment. More to the point, there were probably long periods of mistakes, lack of comprehension and frustration involved along the road.

Having a solution come to mind so quickly can provide such a sense of relief and joy that it is easy to forget incidents like the anxiety of having to write a book report each week in third grade and the effort involved in that college paper that you still got an F on.

Yes, talent is still distinctly important and can significantly shorten the supposed 10,000 hours of practice to achieve mastery, but the effort and process is still required.

What is actually probably more damaging than self-recognized creatives buying into the Mozart Myth is everyone else believing it. Believing there is a hard and fast line between those who are blessed with the ability to create and those who are cursed with a lack, is what contributes and reinforces the perception of the arts as elitist.

There is not only the concept that an elite few are granted the talent and inspiration to create, frequently there is a message that there is only a select group that can understand it all, too. It can be difficult to understand that the ability to create and to appreciate are both cultivated over time.

As Michele and Robert Root-Bernstein note, we really only ever focus on the results rather than the process. Bands tell stories in interviews about how they completely wrote a song on the tour bus between Indianapolis and Cincinnati, but no one credits the 15 years spent in 4 different bands no one ever heard of as the incubator in which the requisite abilities were developed.

For the most part, however, our educational institutions tend to do just the opposite: we hold up for scrutiny only finished products, strip them of the processes, tools, skills, histories and personal stories that gave them birth and, intentionally or not, discard and erase creative know-how.

Info You Can Use: Telling Your Boss What You Really Think

by:

Joe Patti

One of the challenges non-profit organizations often face is in relation to personnel evaluation. Many organizations don’t have a formal human resources department and don’t often engage in a constructive evaluation process. Even if they did, so many companies are so small it may be a little difficult to speak candidly without fear for repercussions.

I became aware of a website, Tell Your Boss Anything, which provides a tool that can help with this process a little. The site allows employees to submit feedback anonymously. This can be used by employees who want to tell their bosses something, but also by bosses who want to solicit feedback from their employees/team about programs and situations.

The service can be set up so that upper management in the organization can monitor what people are saying about a manager, though the anonymity of the commenter is preserved and the lower/middle manager apparently doesn’t receive direct access to the feedback.

There is a cost involved with the service but it seems pretty reasonable. A manager can solicit unlimited feedback for $20/month. Larger companies can get plans to solicit feedback for multiple managers.

There doesn’t seem to be a cost involved for an individual providing feedback to their boss. I suspect there is probably some mechanism which monitors and limits how much feedback is going to a particular email address in a given period to thwart an attempt to avoid paying for an account.

There will still be challenges using this tool in smaller organizations since it can be difficult to avoid providing information that makes one identifiable. Unless everyone in the office is openly disgusted with the boss, it may be easy to deduce who is complaining about lack of opportunities, the sick leave policy, or that big project with which only three people were involved.

Whatever feedback is submitted goes through a moderation process. I initially assumed it was to prevent people from using anonymity to issue a stream of explicative laden invective, but perhaps they would also suggest changing elements that might make it easy to identify an individual.

If nothing else, the tool can be useful to solicit feedback from employees on many topics where perceived expectations and peer pressure might keep them from more publicly voicing their true thoughts: the board’s proposed capital campaign plan; health insurance and retirement plans; reflections on how a controversial decision might have been better handled.