Prisoners Creating Our Own Dilemmas

Taking a gander over at the TED website to see what talks have been released since last I visited. Apropos to yesterday’s entry is this talk from Howard Rheingold about collaboration and cooperation. It is a short piece, only 20 minutes, but if you don’t have time to listen to the whole thing, move the handle down to the Cooperate=Wealth section of the index that pops up when you move the cursor across the bottom of the video.

He addresses the idea that if survival is all about competition, there wouldn’t be so many humans. At some point, humans began to cooperate and that helped them thrive. The benefits of cooperation are generally understood, even across cultural lines. He speaks of how players of the ultimatum game seem to innately know that proposing a 50/50 split offers the most likely path of greatest reward. (At least among Americans, Europeans and Japanese. Rheingold notes that slash and burn folks in the Amazon, pastoral herders in Central Asia and other countries proved to have different sense of fairness when playing the game.)

He also briefly addresses the Tragedy of the Commons, the idea that unless there is a way to restrain overuse, humans will exhaust a commonly held resource. He cites a counter study that found that people are only captives of what is essentially a multi-player prisoner’s dilemma if they view themselves as such. Those who are able to successfully break out do so by “creating institutions for collective action” with common design principles.

As his talk draws to a close, he cites the example of how some of the most cutthroat competitive corporations like IBM, HP and Sun Microsystems are open sourcing their software and some of their patents to be worked on by the commons. He mentions that Eli Lilly has “created a market for solutions for pharmaceutical problems.” Though he doesn’t mention it, I assume that is also an open source type effort. He also cites Toyota which works to make their suppliers more effective even though it means increasing supply efficiency for Toyota’s competitors. EBay has solved the prisoner’s dilemma by introducing a mechanism by which two people who can’t necessarily trust each other can make an exchange. He says they are doing it because they have realized that a certain degree of cooperation is beneficial for the bottom line.

So my obvious question is, if multinational corporations can extend a little trust to cooperate, can’t arts entities from the service organizations down to the smallest theatre/dance/music/visual art company find a way to do it as well? While large organizations might be most immediately influential by providing an example for many others to emulate, technology allows the successes of smaller to be disseminated as they couldn’t even a handful of years ago.

I Just Invented the Wheel! Whadda You Mean You Did Too?

My thanks to David Dombrowsky of the Center for Arts Management and Technology at Carnegie Mellon who commented on a recent entry. In response to my entry on how well things were developing for the Emerging Leadership Institute, he suggested that instead of independently inventing the wheel arts organizations like APAP, Americans for the Arts and the Southern Arts Federation which all have leadership programs combine their efforts to offer greater opportunities for learning and conversation.

He isn’t the first to express this sentiment. Andrew Taylor said the same thing two years ago when I did an entry on Southern Arts Federation’s National Arts Leadership Institute. As Andrew noted, there are many such programs throughout the country. I listed a sampling here.

Someone in my Emerging Leaders meeting at APAP suggested that it might be logical and beneficial to open a channel of communication with the American for the Arts Emerging Leaders program alumni.

I had a brief email exchange with David about causes and solutions. We generally both agreed a little bit of ego and territoriality came into play. As Andrew Taylor noted in his comment, we are often enjoined to partner and collaborate by these service organizations but they may not be providing a good example for their constituents.

One thing I mentioned to David was that change in outlook might have to come at the grassroots level and technology made such things possible where it hadn’t been before. I will make no promises or idealistic statements about success at this juncture, but I am going to talk to some people and do some research and see what develops. Given that I don’t know exactly what success will look like other than people engaging in effective communication and exchange of ideas, I can’t be more committal about what my plans are. If people have any suggestions about who to speak with or want to get involved in organizing an effort, as nebulous as it might be at this point, drop me an email.

Arts and the Law

While looking around at the sites on my blogroll when I came across a link (On Theatre Forte I think) to Theatre and Entertainment Law blog. The blog and associated podcast are created by Gordon Firemark who answers entertainment and intellectual property law questions.

I have addressed legal issues in the past, but obviously he is better at it and speaks with greater authority. His blog and podcast cover some of the basic issues everyone asks about like “Can I make a video tape of a play whose rights are controlled by a publisher?” He also addresses more complicated problems like negotiation and enforceability of non-compete clauses.

A little warning before you listen or read his work, while ignorance of the law is no excuse, it also brings bliss. You may be a little depressed to learn just what your responsibilities are in obtaining permissions for what seem to be the most innocuous activities like showing videos in a dorm lounge. Granted he is a lawyer so his suggestion that you do things like get a different release from a model every time you change your shooting location is all about covering every possible contingency that might arise. (He has the requisite minute long disclaimer in the middle of the podcast, of course.) Still, it is good to be aware of the issues you might face in the course of doing business.

Emerging Leadership Plans Emerging

There are times on my blog when I am critical of people’s practices or state/imply that there is action that needs to be taken to improve a situation. With that in mind, I also think it important to acknowledge when people do act to rectify a situation. Such is the case with the Association of Performing Arts Presenters. As I have mentioned, I am involved with their Emerging Leadership Institute and have been one of the initial forces behind making the experience worthwhile for the once and future participants.

A number of alumni (including those who had just graduated) met during the conference to discuss what where we wanted to see the program go and how the APAP leadership could help. In attendance was newly hired Education Specialist, Scott Stoner who had declared before a room full of people on the previous day that if APAP didn’t make significant inroads in developing a significant knowledge base, thinking strategically and making use of the people that they have on their team, he wouldn’t be working there next year. So we knew we were dealing with someone who was quite serious about effecting change.

So two days ago I had a conference call with the other two people who helped spearhead the effort to get the ELI alumni together and advance our agenda with the APAP administration. (Laura Kendall, Lied Center, University of Nebraska-Lincoln; Joe Clifford, Hopkins Center, Dartmouth College. Smart, passionate people. Give them fulfilling jobs with good pay!) We spoke about involving more people in planning and programming for next year. We also divvied up responsibility for talking to different people at APAP to remind them about the changes and additions we would like to see implemented.

Imagine my pleasure when I got an email yesterday from APAP sent out to all alumni signed by Scott Stoner and others essentially committing to address all the issues we had discussed at our conference meeting. My partners in crime and I pretty much don’t have to do any reminding.

Among the the things they have committed to do are:

Send a letter from Arts Presenters’ President/CEO Sandra Gibson to recent graduates’ chief administrator – acknowledging the value of participation in the program and you as a member of the ELI network (done)

This was actually very important to the alumni. I am thrilled to see it has already been done. The ELI alumni feel the experience is valuable but don’t believe the chief administrators feel the same. Frequently, they won’t send new people to the conference or resend the program alumni. We felt the letter would help reinforce the value of participation in the administrators’ minds.

But we also know that conference attendance involves a considerable investment of time and money. While the ELI alumni are committed to finding ways to help finance or reduce the fees for returning alumni, we are also dedicated to providing opportunities for interaction between the annual conferences which is where the next three goals APAP has come in.

Identify links to online and other information and resources to assist with building knowledge and skills.

Identify opportunities for ELI members to meet on-site at state, regional and national arts meetings and conferences (links to meeting calendars and suggested events will be forthcoming in the near future)

Create a home for ELI on the Arts Presenters website and an online facility for peer-to-peer networking

This last item was actually fairly important to the ELI alumni. We had been frustrated with the Listserv as a communication tool. Until Scott Stoner mentioned that they were going to try to create an improved communication system, one of our agenda items for the meeting was to decide on an alternative mode like Yahoo Groups.

One last thing related thing I want to say. I was very impressed by how thoughtful and perceptive my colleagues in the ELI program are. In addition to all the aforementioned items we felt were important, there was also well considered conversation about where the ELI program fit into the greater process. People noted that in two years the student volunteers at the conference would be ready to apply for the Emerging Leadership Institute. It was also noted that since the first ELI class was 6 years ago, those early attendees were moving beyond the emergent portion of their careers.

By the end of the meeting a loose framework for three stage track starting with greater focus on improving the conference experience of the student volunteer and grooming them to apply for the ELI program a couple years down the road. Then would come the ELI experience and the aforementioned improvements. Finally a person would transition into an Advanced Leadership stage with a slightly different system to support their needs and goals.

It was a little strange to be organizing a group for the first time, turning to some of the members and telling them that they should make plans to leave and start their own group. Fortunately, those people were already of the same mind. They were happy the effort to organize was going forward, but they suspected they were moving past the scope of the group.

Yes, I know it all sounds very self-congratulatory. Frankly, having left a lot of meetings in my time feeling good about the future when the discussions came to pass and then having nothing actually develop at all, I am a little dazed to be involved with an effort that is apparently bearing fruit. (Though I am still realistic enough not to count my chickens.)