"I have spent much of the last two years trying to convince arts organizations to plan their art four or five years in advance. I believe that this time frame gives the organization the time it needs to find resources, create excellent art and attract an audience. Virtually every project we mount at the Kennedy Center was planned five years before it is on one of our stages."
Jennifer Edwards, another contributor to the Huffington Post, posted this rebuttal in her article, In Times of Crisis: Saving Art:
"Planning ahead is important, but if art is truly in crisis we need to step back and see the whole picture before promoting future spectacles. I think it is safe to say we need more leaders thinking about realistic options for artists and arts organizations. I would like to begin conversations about what 'saving the arts' might look like. Let's start by individually and collectively deciding what we are trying to save: the act of making art? The idea of what it means to be an artist? Or the non-profit arts structure we currently have."
Do you think such early planning for programming is realistic for all arts organizations? If not, which disciplines/types of organizations would have a more difficult time planning four to five years ahead?
I feel that for almost every discipline, five years is too far in advance! I wouldn't know how to gauge what the public wants five years from now. A skeleton schedule/season could be in place, but not the specifics.
ReplyDeleteFrom a theatre perspective, mounting original productions would certainly benefit from the additional time, but on the other hand there is such a thing as peaking too soon!
Is it better to give the people what they want or tell them what they want?
P.S. This is Mandee.
I agree with Michael Kaiser that 4 or 5 years would give ample time to effectively market and attract an audience. And while this may work for some organizations like the Kennedy Center, I don't think it would even be realistic for other organizations to set a season program two years in advance.
ReplyDeleteI work at a small community arts organization where they rely heavily on audience trends and popularity of certain shows from the previous season to determine what kinds of shows they should get rid of and what they should do more of for the upcoming one. The organization is relatively new and is looking to more firmly establish itself within the community. So in response to Mandee's closing question, I think it is especially important, in this case, to "give them what they want" as opposed to "tell them what they want". This way, they can get more people into the center and hopefully increase the chances of those people utilizing other services the center has to offer such as music and dance classes and small exhibits in their gallery.
The Kennedy Center is firmly established in the community, city, and national level so I think it's realistic for them to not only give the audience what they want but also have more liberties in telling them what they want.
-Cathy T
On the other hand, planning in other areas, especially financial and structural, is a smart idea. I like to be able to hold the plan in my head -- this year we have 3 staff and 4 shows, next year we will raise 50K more and have 4 staff and 5 shows, etc. Nailing down which shows you will do seems a little inflexible, unless the organization is a musical theater or opera or significant museum. But that's just one quirky opinion among many. What are the advantages of knowing your artistic plan four or five seasons ahead? (AS best you can know it)
ReplyDeleteFrom an artist's standpoint I think this could be hard, especially with performing arts. A visual artist could use the time to craft their work and truly create something they can be comfortable with. In the performing arts, this would be very hard. If a band had a gig booked 4 years in advance, it could be very problematic. What if the band changed line-ups, or broke up? What if a lead dancer in a dance troupe suffered some sort of injury?
ReplyDeleteFrom an arts manager's standpoint, I could see this being very helpful for all the reasons pointed out. It would be beneficial to have a solid outline of goals, fundraising, etc.
I also agree: How do the organizations know what their audiences/patrons/customers will want in 5 years?
It may not always be successful, but it may be safe to take up the advice Michael Kaiser offers. The arts sector sways with society, I think critical research of social patterns may help arts organizations pseudo-predict and prepare for the future. If investors and economists have been able to anticipate economic downturns and growth, I think it possible to predict (to a degree) the interests of audiences (if the audience is the focus). If an organizational mission references "art for art sake" then planning ahead may not be necessary. However, since arts and society are closely related, it would appear that, with great assessment, arts organizations could do well to stay one step ahead of social tangents and prepare, provide, or commission works that appeal to society and potential audiences. My simple and untrained observation of fashion, fads, social and artistic movements leads me to believe that these aforementioned movements last at least a decade. Taking a decade into consideration makes it practical to consider planning only 4-5 years in advance (2-3 years in the least for performing artists). Issues may and will come up, but I think it is best for an organization to at least have a plan to alter upon necessity versus create a plan during a crisis.
ReplyDeleteLastly, I don't think Jennifer Edwards's rebuttal to Michael Kaiser is really relevant. It seems that Kaiser is offering strategical advice for arts organization and operation; Edwards's response is more academic and seeking to find a philosophical understanding of why the arts suffer and need saving.
At first glance, the Kennedy Center's September calendar appears to include a wide variety of programming. When you look closer, it appears much of it consists of an art installation and Millennium Stage performances (free). Based on my limited knowledge, I’m pretty sure Millennium Stage shows are not booked years in advance. The primary main stage shows appear to be Verdi’s opera Un Ballo in Maschera and Shear Madness, a “theater lab” show that has run for over 20 years. The free shows certainly add balance to the overall programming schedule, however, that is a luxury most performing art venues are not able to provide. As for the two shows I mentioned, they are incredibly established and probably carry little to no risk in terms of ticket sales. While I’m sure Kaiser’s approach works at the KC, I wonder how effectively it could be applied to a smaller venue, especially one whose mission is to consistently provide less established programming to its audience.
ReplyDeleteI've played at the Millenium Stage. We booked it about 3 months before the actual date. Just FYI...
ReplyDeleteI think the planning period depends on not only the on the discipline but on the type of institution. Both perspectives have a degree of truth, but a combined approach is necessary. It's been pointed out that despite planning major exhibitions in advance, the Kennedy Center's popular Millennium Stage has booked performances in as short a period of time as 3 years. However 4-5 years are likely needed to find the the resources to pursue big-name shows and market them successfully to a target audience. Successful institutions will find the proper balance between advance planning and the immediate focus of “saving the arts.” Bigger exhibitions probably should have years of advance planning in the works in order to cultivate resources, audience, and artistic excellence. But smaller exhibitions benefit from the sense of immediacy. I’m not arguing against planning, but if institutions planned everything 4-5 years in advance, they wouldn’t be able to offer free/inexpensive artistic alternatives.
ReplyDeleteThat said, not all institutions have the luxury of staff and budget for advance planning. I work at a co-op gallery where each artist knows up to 2 years in advance when their show will be. However sometimes we have artist who back out of a show at last minute for various reasons, sickness, lack of work, and other life problems. Because we have around 40 members, we have always been able to find a member with enough work and desire for a show to put something together. Our artist’s are members who pay for the privilege of being part of our gallery, we cannot penalize them for pulling out of a show. In fact it is often a blessing in disguise when an older member pulls out, giving a new member an opportunity to have show that feels fresh and fun because of the short period of time in which it was produced.
Just to kind of piggyback on what has been said already, I agree, having an outline for the number of shows/exhibits, budgeting, etc would be very helpful, but I don’t think that all arts organizations should plan their artistic projects that far in advance. The Kennedy Center is established enough where they can plan 5 years in advance because much of their audience may choose to attend an event just on the premise that it’s “The Kennedy Center,” but that same strategy cannot work for all arts organizations.
ReplyDeleteI also think that audience’s interests in participating in the arts depends on too many factors (growth or decline in the economy, developing technology, societal views) to try and predict within 5 years what will be most relevant to the audience and their interests. For instance, just 5 years ago Youtube was almost non-existent, now it’s changed society’s views on what is entertaining and how people choose to spend their time, and that affects how organizations must work to attract audiences. How can we really predict when something will impact society that drastically in a 5-year period?
The overarching theme I'm getting from the comments is that planning, in a perfect world, would happen just as Kaiser says, 4-5 years in advance. But, the common problem with that, which I think most of you hit on, is funding and financial stability not only within the organization but within the community (i.e. your patrons).
ReplyDeleteFrom a little experience, I do know that longer-term planning can be necessary if you're working with international artists and/or their very valuable foreign government-owned works of art. The governments need to know that an organization is stable and will be able to take care of the work that they loan out, so your institution has to prove its stability by starting the loan process years in advance.
Good discussion!
National Organizations, or venues focused on presenting nationally acclaimed and supported artists/productions are capable of planning in advanced. These programs (I would think) are already proven to capture an audience and in turn, allow an organization like the KC to plan programs their audience wants to see. The programming department must have enough confidence in their programming research to attract audiences year to year. I would hope the marketing department would work closely with the programming department to provide enough insight in what a 'national audience' wants to see. This cultural identity of a 'national audience' is less likely to evolve faster because it is already proved popular on a national level. Programming for a 'national audience' is predictable programming.
ReplyDeleteIf there is a decrease in sales, the use of advanced financial planning & marketing could mask the organizations present projection of budget. This sustainability the public views, will allow this organization to project consistent quality programs. This 4-5 years of financial flexibility could also allow the organization to thrive whereas other organizations may not succeed.
I can understand the philosophy Michael Kaiser is willing to share with other arts organizations. I also hope that he understands not all arts are programming for 'national audiences' which have previously projected ticket sales. Organizations that don't always appeal to the standard 'national audience' should not plan 4-5 years ahead due to their constantly evolving art forms. These audience members, I'd like to refer to as 'local audiences' represent a culture that is defined by a specific area. The cultural identity of the 'local audience' in DC, NYC, Seattle, etc are evolving faster than the cultural identity of the 'national audience'- new art is produced through smaller arts organizations and transient cities (like DC) can't project programming which could be created 4-5 years in advanced.
SO .... it depends...
on the organization, their mission, their financial stability/resources, etc.
I believe an arts organization should plan at least a season or two in advanced to ensure the job security and financial stability of their organization. With this stability (like the KC has successfully acclaimed), an organization can thrive in the departments of public relations and have an opportunity for future growth.
I agree with what most people said about financial stability being one of the main variables in strategic planning 4-5 years in advance. Yes, an organisation should plan early on, to prepare for specific loans/ programmes that take more preparations, however, I do not think 4-5 years is a good time frame most arts organisations should stick to when it comes to programme planning.
ReplyDeleteFor budgeting reasons, strategic planning further ahead is absolutely necessary, for example, building renovations. However, it is difficult for an arts organisation to know that far in advance what they would like to include in their season. Their board, artistic directors etc could have left by the time these plans come to play, and often with new blood in executive positions lead to innovative programming.
If rigid decisions were made that early in advance, then it will just make programming at the organisation in flexible, and it probably isn't very feasible for any arts organisation.
Perhaps there could be a mix of both views and make strategic plans further ahead, and finalise programming plans when the season is a bit closer. Of course, the timeline could be altered depending on the needs of the specific organisation.
-Vennesa
I find the idea of planning five years in advance very appealing in a broad sense. Perhaps it is feasible for the Kennedy Center to pull off planning a entire season that much in advance, but it seems to me that the lesson to be learned here is not that arts organization need to book their shows five years in advance, but rather to emphasize strategic planning and have a goal (or goals) in mind for the organization.
ReplyDeletePlanning ahead is not unrealistic by any means. Jennifer Edwards writes that "if art is truly in crisis we need to step back and see the whole picture before promoting future spectacles", but I imagine that the first step in creating a long-term plan is precisely to "step back and see the whole picture". Planning and evaluating are not mutually exclusive.
I know that with my own life I function better if I plan far ahead, but with an almost certain expectation that it will completely change. My goal might be concrete, but my current plan might not turn out to be the best way to accomplish my goal. Even Michael Kaiser admits that "there is a likelihood that not every plan will be implemented, that some better opportunity will arise or some external factor may not allow for the quality of implementation [he] would have wanted and expected".
Planning and flexibility - that's my motto!
I believe that some kind of a foundational and artistic plan for each arts organization is vital in helping to fuel growth in an arts organization. Planning ahead helps the organization to set goals and achieve them. A stagnant organization who continues to do the same thing over and over again could find itself in serious trouble later on. I believe this advanced planning is very important to the life of the organization and how it relates to its audience.
ReplyDeleteWhile I do believe that some kind of a plan is vital to arts organizations both big and small, it is important to understand that a plan that does not adopt with a changing society will most likely fail. Arts organizations must be flexible and willing to allow for change in order for a plan to work effectively. I believe this lack of a wiliness to change “the plan” or a lack of a plan entirely is what has pushed a lot of arts organizations into a very concerning time. The lack of an audience, funding and appreciation for the arts can be destroyed by both of these things.
Therefore, I do believe plans are important to fuel growth, however detailed they may be, but they can also bring trouble in themselves if not appropriately adapted to the times they are implemented, if implemented at all.
Nice motto Kylene! :)
In Kaiser’s defense, I think he’s speaking of large-scale events. The people who run Millennium Stage must find a different artist EVERY single night of the year (this includes all holidays—they never get a break). Imagine booking that five years in advance! So they really cannot do more than a few months ahead, especially considering these shows are largely self-produced by the independent artist.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand...if one is staging a huge event like the Kennedy Center often does (Sondheim Festival in 2002, Festival of China in 2005, Mame in 2006, Ragtime in 2009, etc.; the list goes on!), of course advance planning at least four to five years in advance is absolutely necessary. These are massive undertakings, and common sense dictates that one can’t contact Sondheim’s library or delegates in China within a year or two of such a planned event and expect everyone to be on board.
I know for a full-season orchestra, the artistic department must work a few years in advance in order to secure the guest artists they would like to have. They are also under the confines of working under each artist’s repertoire: a soloist usually offers one or two options he or she will be play in a given season, and the artistic department has to work their programming around those pieces. Then fitting it all into a well-rounded season is the next step. These things take time.
Even with all of these factors, I agree that the Kennedy Center and NSO are working under ideal circumstances. Sometimes a smaller community organization working from season to season might have a very generous donation suddenly come through to fund the next season. At that point they’re given a bit more artistic freedom, although they’ve lost some of the time for planning. But I think that this shows that sometimes the timing of what a smaller arts organization can offer will simply depend on means and opportunity. A place like the Kennedy Center has the budget to project what it knows it can do a few years down the road. Smaller organizations can have goals for the next five years but many only have the resources to put down concrete plans for the next two seasons or so at hand.
I guess I see both sides--and really agree with Kylene's broad sense and flexibility approach.
I mostly agree with Michael Kaiser, and while a small arts venue certainly doesn’t have resources comparable to those of the Kennedy Center, I still believe the far-reaching goal for many or most arts organizations should be to implement an advanced calendar for major projects, while allowing room for responding to relevant trends. An example of the need for advanced planning would be the creation of a core exhibition in a museum. From inception to its opening, a core exhibit could easily require over five years of planning, depending on the scope and size of the exhibit. On the other hand, a museum may be able to respond to a contemporary event and create a temporary exhibition, addressing an issue of immediate importance. For example, the Smithsonian’s African Art Museum was able to create and open a small exhibition, The Healing Power of Art: Works of Art by Haitian Children after the Earthquake, six months after the disaster occurred.
ReplyDeleteA lack of early planning can mean the loss of opportunities for financial support in the forms of grants and sponsorships, curtailing plans for any project. It can also create an unreasonable schedule for staff and artists, leading to a less than stellar exhibition or performance. Like a strategic plan, program planning demonstrates stability and foresight—or at least the guise of stability and foresight—in the eyes of stakeholders.
The key is to find the balance between essential long-term planning while still remaining relevant and reactionary. Of course, this is most difficult for young organizations and those in crisis, but that’s the challenge, isn’t it? The challenge doesn’t necessarily make it impossible.
Sharon C.
One more thing...who is this Jennifer Edwards and what are her credentials, exactly? It appears she's been selling real estate for the last 20 years.
ReplyDeleteSharon: This is Jennifer's bio via the website.
ReplyDeleteJennifer Edwards is interested in stimulating conversation and action around kinesthetic intelligence, contemporary dance, health, and neurobiology as they apply to the human experience. A writer, performer / choreographer, consultant, and body-mind maven, she has toured nationally and internationally as an artist, arts activist, and teacher. Ms. Edwards is passionate about bringing art to communities. Her work in site-specific pieces has ranged from dancing in the 4th-floor windows of Grand Central Station, NYC to the streets of Shanghai, China. Her work in applying the body-mind connection to stress management, has be written about in the New York Times and her client list includes: Columbia University, New York University, The American Heart Association, and The Girl Scouts of America. www.jened.com
I knew China National Centre for the Performing Arts and Kennedy Center were planning to have an agreement on collaborative production and employee training programs for the next 5 years. Similar agreements were signed with Lincoln Center, London Royal Opera House, etc. But, when I looked at the draft agreement, most of the points were very general, although they were trying to be more specific and strategic. I think it's hard to pin down on details, like a particular performance or show, 5 years ahead or even 2 or 3 years ahead of time. But, it's not hurting to have a vision, and would have positive impact on organization's development since a big and long-term picture is presented, and managers and staff who actually run programs won't just focus on events, shows, and office matters. It's good to have a big and future picture in mind while keep a close attention to details at the moment.
ReplyDelete