Millennials to Overtake Boomers in 2015

Good morning
"And the beat goes on……………."

Last fall came news that the majority of Americans are now single.  Now comes news (from the Pew Research Center - click here) that this year the Millennials (18 to 34 years) will surpass the Baby Boomer generation in numbers.

"This year, the “Millennial” generation is projected to surpass the outsized Baby Boom generation as the nation’s largest living generation, according to the population projections released by the U.S. Census Bureau last month. Millennials (whom we define as between ages 18 to 34 in 2015) are projected to number 75.3 million, surpassing the projected 74.9 million Boomers (ages 51 to 69)." 

 

 What does that mean for the arts?   Short term, not much.  Long term, everything.  This isn't really news - we've been aware of the reality for some time.  And we've been actively trying to figure out how to engage the Millennials in three key areas:

1.  Audiences.  As our audiences decline, and as the growth that does exist is principally in the boomer cohort, the challenge is how to get the Millennials to replace the Boomers. Sooner rather than later.  Efforts in this area include both bringing more Millennials to our venues, and taking our art to them wherever they may be.  It's about old fashioned marketing, bricks and mortar, mundane concerns as the challenge and its about innovation, high tech, and fundamental differences in generational attitudes and thinking.

2.  Donors.  The same challenge exists here.  How to tap into those who in the future will be the ones who do, or do not, contribute to our revenue stream (and thus our survival).  How do we begin the process of cultivating those who hold our financial future in their hands?  As public funding remains political and thus problematic, varying widely across the country; as private foundational and corporate funding is simply not able to scale up to the demand;  and as earned income has a finite ceiling (movable or not) - individual donors are absolutely critical to the future of the arts, and so cultivating the Millennials to be those individual donors, if not now, real soon, is a core challenge to our longer term survival.

3.  Leadership.  How do we recruit, train and retain and support the generation of leadership we need to help us survive, and thrive?  Boomers are leaving.  Someday Millennials will move into those positions - perhaps sooner than has been true of generational shifts of the past.  Will we have an adequate pool of the best and brightest?  Are we meeting expectations?  Are we prepared to equip future generational leadership cohorts will all the skills, knowledge and support they will need?

So the question for each individual arts organization and for the field as a whole then is:  How are we doing?  What does the data, measurements and experience tell us so far?  Are we ahead of the curve or behind it?  If nothing else, this announcement is a reminder that the future is basically already here, and we need to first assess where we are, and then get very serious about our short and long term strategies.

But there's another consideration that we often overlook when we consider the Boomer / Millennial generational shift and its impact, and that is the fact that it is the forgotten generation - The Generation Xers - those 34 to 50 - who are the short term future -- no matter how you consider that future.

Consider:
1.  According to PEW:  "The Gen X population (ages 35 to 50 in 2015) is projected to outnumber the Boomers by 2028."   We tend to forget that the Xers aren't a tiny fraction of the population - there are over 55 million of them.  55 million.

2.  In terms of the three key areas above, it is the Xers who may be the most likely cohort to (at least short term) replace the boomers in the audiences.  Of course, we need to expand and somehow get Millennials into our audiences as quickly as possible and diversify as widely as we can, but short term, the Xers will be, if not our salvation, then our survival.  And it is the Xers who will be in a financial position and likely more approachable to be our donors and supporters than the younger Millennials - again at least in the short term.  And finally, it is the Xers who will soon move into the positions of power and leadership at the helms of our organizations as the Boomers exit the field.  It is the Xers with the requisite skills, networks, experience, training, ideas and vision to move us forward.  How the Xers relate to the exiting Boomers and the rising Millennials is very likely a far more important question than how the Millennials relate to the Boomers.  Remember - the Boomers are the Millennials parents and that is a key factor in understanding that relationship.  The Xer / Millennial relationship is much more arms length (for better or worse).  And its the Xers who will be managing that relationship for the benefit, or to the detriment, of the arts' future.  We need to spend some time on that relationship so as to understand the dynamics better and so as to better meet the challenges that will invariably come up and impact everything we do in ten years.

With all the talk about Millennials, we would be wise not to forget that in the generational maze, we need to work all three - boomers as they leave (and short of passing on, boomers are not arbitrarily going to be leaving irrespective of their age), Xers as they assume dominance (even if comparatively short lived), and Millennials as the longer term future.  We have to address the needs and wants of each if we are to successfully navigate that maze.

As the onslaught of demographic changes keep coming at us, sometimes it seems almost impossible to confront all the challenges facing us.  But we're not alone in the pursuit, and we benefit from the efforts and experiences across interests in meeting those challenges.  We need to continue to focus on the tasks - one by one - in what we might be able to do; learn from each other and from those outside our universe, and innovate and take risks.

Have a great week.

And to all of you in the path of the blizzard, I hope you can hunker down, stay safe and be comfortable until it passes.

Don't Quit
Barry

The NEA and the Federal Reserve Bank Reports

Good morning.
"And the beat goes on……………"

Two important reports of note this past week:

First, the release of the NEA report ("A Decade of Arts Engagement") on arts attendance and participation - widely reported almost everywhere.  Not much new here.  Confirmation that attendance in the core arts (the fields we are primarily concerned with) continues a two decade decline, while distribution of arts via technology is on the increase. Arts participation is up overall if you count 'selfles' and downloading your favorite pop song, or maybe dancing in front of your mirror.  And if you factor in movies, television and all the commercial forms of artistic expression, then the arts continue to be a dynamic engine (subject of course to variances up and down).

The companion NEA study ("Going Gets Tough:  Barriers and Motivations Affecting Arts Attendance") is what is getting the most attention.  It sought to find out the motivations of people who wanted to attend an arts event, but didn't - the "interested non-attendees".  The long and short of it seems to be that the pedestrian concerns of not enough time, inconvenience, price (to some degree) and nobody to go with [as "socializing with friends or family members was the most common motivation for arts attendance"(or non-attendance)] are the most important identified (identifiable?) factors in why people don't attend events. It wasn't that people were looking for 'transformative' experiences and couldn't find any; it wasn't because there was any perceived dearth of 'excellence', it wasn't because there wasn't any opportunity or choice -- it was instead mundane issues.  I came to the same conclusion long ago and have written on it before. The time issue is at least partly due to the shift in the increasing demands of the workplace, and that is due in part to the shift of wealth from the middle class to the top tier of society - diminishing buying power and forcing middle and lower class people to work longer for less.

People go to movies in large numbers because it's easy.  Easy to find something close to home, easy to park, you don't have to dress up, it isn't terribly expensive  (especially if you don't buy their popcorn), you can find someone to go with without lots of upfront planning, and the chances of being mildly entertained are decent.  And it is the animated films that appeal to children that are in the top tier of box office earnings - so parents have the time and inclination to take their kids to events - just not necessarily ours.  Going to an arts event requires more - more of a prioritizing of what time is available; more planning.

As others have pointed out, in this second study, particularly troubling was the finding that while exposure to the arts in one's youth is a decent predictor of future arts attendance on the one hand, on the other hand was the finding that those with young children were particularly not likely to find the time to attend an event.

Of course there are lots of questions that come up in the findings. What was the percentage of single parents vs. two parent households?  Did the respondents include in their calculations of cost, not only the ticket, but parking, babysitters, etc?  Was the response of urban dwellers closer to arts venues different from those that had to make a longer trek to get to a performance or exhibition?  And, as with all studies, how truthful were the respondents?  and to what degree are the 'perceptions' of difficulty in attending an arts event based on conjecture, not fact?

But on the question of convenience and the challenges for those with young children, I wonder if we offered more weekend matinee performances and offered free or low cost child care during the performance on site, if that would make any difference for those with very young children?  Would it make economic sense?

I wonder (as I have previously) if we offered van service from certain points at a low cost if that would make any difference to those who said they wanted to attend an event but didn't?

I wonder if we packaged specific performances as "singles" events, if that would make any difference?

I wonder if mobile device availability - perhaps even formatted specifically for children - would tempt more sampling?

The bottom line is that we need to continue to find ways to bring art to our audiences on the one hand, and ways to address the time, cost, convenience issues for potential audiences on the other.

Finally, the elephant in the room is this:  After two decades of declining audience numbers, is that decline an aberration or a new reality?  Is the demand for the core arts now permanently smaller than it once was, or is it that the demand for the core arts in the way we deliver them is what has permanently changed?  

Compounding a clear understanding of how all this impacts us, is the fact that while many arts organizations closed their doors over the past decade, more new arts organizations began -- creating a net increase in the overall number of arts organizations.  Increased data on who these new organizations are, where they came from, who they see as their audiences, how they fared two, five, ten years after launch, and where their funding comes from would be informative.

Everyone should take a look at the NEA studies.  They are important to each organization and to the field as a whole.

The Second development this week was an event at the San Francisco Federal Reserve announcing and touting the current issue of their  "Community Development Investment Review" -  focused on Creative Placemaking.  An anthology of perspectives on the viability and value of the intersection between the arts and community development heralds a potentially win-win future for both sectors.

Why is this important?

First, as Jamie Bennett quoted Rocco Landesman to me about the importance of this event:  "The arts are finally at the adult table."  I think that is spot on, and for that, if nothing else, Arts Place, Jamie, and in particular Laura Callanan, (the newly appointed Senior Deputy Director of the NEA, who was a visiting scholar at the SF Federal Reserve, and is to be credited with taking a lead role in spearheading and shepherding this event from idea to reality) are to be congratulated for a really important milestone.

For far too long we've been seated at the kids table in the kitchen; the province of the East Wing of the White House; hardly even an afterthought for real, serious business concerns; not important enough to be a factor in policy -- irrelevant and marginal; a luxury, a frill (despite all the evidence we have as to our impact).   The imprimatur of the Federal Reserve as to the value and contribution of the arts in addressing the same concerns and goals of the Community Development movement gives us cachet and credibility that we have for so long been seeking.  It's just a step, but a big step.  We can parlay this 'endorsement' if you will as part of our case making to funders public and private.  It also gives us legitimacy in asking for media coverage as to our value.    Finally, it opens doors for us with other stakeholders - both those long in our camp, but questionably actively supportive;, and those who might be new to our messages.

I might go so far as to argue that an even slight re-positioning of what we do as a complement and collaborator with the purposes of community development might be a way (at least for some who have had limited success otherwise) to successfully argue for more public funding.  Rocco was prescient in his understanding that there was money (lots of money) in other government departments that we might tap into beyond direct funding of the arts through the Endowment.  There is money in the application of the community development goals to what we offer in attaining those goals, and, moreover, the infrastructure that supports the acceptance of the principles of those goals is already long in place and supported by those (like banks and the Fed) who have way more power and influence than we do.  Finally, in many instances the Community Development goals align nicely with many of our own goals.

The report is long at 142 pages (though the last 70 or so are case examples of projects Art Place has funded), and few of us will have time to read it all.  I did read it all-- and there's some very interesting points made - mostly along the lines that the intersection of the arts and community development makes increasing sense, and that there are lots of opportunities for the arts within that intersection.  I would urge you to find the time to take a look at some of the chapters anyway.  It will give you a sense of how your organization might be able to tap into what is potentially a large pot of gold.

Finally, Arts Place used the Fed meeting to tout a new program offering substantial funding ($3 million each) to community planning / development organizations that embed the arts into their approaches.  This is really beginning seed money to support the intersection of the arts and community development.  It's a very smart investment.  The program will make six awards ($18 million total).  Click here for more information.


Have a great week.

Don't Quit
Barry

My 15 Favorite Nonprofit Arts Blogs

Good morning.
"And the beat goes on………………"

As a blogger, I read other bloggers.  Lots of them.  I have the greatest respect for the work of these people who contribute so much to the knowledge base of the field.  They share, report and review; they also challenge, provoke, and offer new thinking. Some of them are widely read; others have a niche audience.  All of them are dedicated to promoting dialogue and discourse on the important issues that we all face.

One trend I note in the past year is that many of those who have plied their craft as solo, individual bloggers have moved towards adding additional voices to their banners with contributing editors, reporters, curators and guest commentators - some even transitioning their original blogs into the equivalent of blog magazines.

Here are (in no particular order) 15 of the blogs I regularly read and which inform, inspire and entertain me -- and which provoke me to think.  I heartedly recommend all of them to you.  This list is limited principally to those nonprofit arts blogs that publish on a regular and frequent basis.  There are many arts blogs that post less frequently or only occasionally, most of which are discipline and interest area organizational based blogs, and there are many in that category that are worth your consideration dependent on your own interest area.  The following blogs consider issues and subject matter that I think is relevant to everyone in our field.

1.    Createquity - Ian David Moss.  Ian's blog is part of the trend away from a single voice by expanding to co-editors and reporters.  While the focus in on research, that is only a part of what is covered here.   Serious commentary and highly respected throughout the field.

2.    Jumper - Diane Ragsdale.  Although Diane has not posted as regularly as she had previously - due to her completing her doctoral dissertation in the Netherlands - she's on my list because she has a keen mind, offers reasoned insights, and her blog is simply one of the best in terms of considering policy for the nonprofit arts. I hope her schedule permits her to regularly post again soon.

3.    You've Cott Mail - Thomas Cott.  The absolute King of the aggregators, Thomas provides - on a daily basis - themed posts from other sources.  You may not be interested in every single post, but I guarantee you that you will find a lot to think about in his posts every single week.  He also offers his twitter followers links to all kinds of news and stories that appeal to a wide universe. People love this blog and for good reason (Thomas does the work for you).

4.    Adaptistration - Drew McManus.  Drew has also recently moved towards including other voices on his posts and has assembled a stellar team of contributors.  While the focus is on the orchestra business, there is much here for everyone.

5.    Museum 2.0 - Nina Simon.  Nina's blog is almost always food for thought with innovative thinking on a variety of issues that impact us all.

6.    The Artful Manager - Andrew Taylor.  Andrew is perhaps the Dean of Nonprofit Arts bloggers and his posts always hit the mark.  Short, sweet and to the point.  People quote Andrew's posts, and that is a fitting testament to his contribution.

7.    For What It's Worth - Michael Rushton.  Michael takes on the generally accepted theories across a wide swatch of data on pricing the arts, and makes one constantly question their own assumptions.

8.    Butts in the Seats - Joe Patti.  Joe's blog is entertaining and more often than not finds an angle about something that you haven't considered and that makes you look at things from a new perspective.

9.    Engaging Matters - Doug Borwick.  Doug is the spokesperson for the importance and value of community engagement, and provides tools and thinking to improve your organization's operations in this area.

10.  Marketing the Arts to Death - Trevor O'Donnell.  Trevor is one of my favorites because he doesn't brook foolish marketing mistakes easily and fearlessly calls out arts organizations who are failing their marketing challenge.

11.  Arlene's Blog - Arlene Goldbard.  Arlene is the conscience of the field who deeply cares about what we are all trying to do in a world that so often just doesn't get it.  We need more Arlenes.

12.  Clyde Fitch Report - Leonard Jacobs.  Another blog that has moved to adding additional voices, this blog takes a serious and wide political perspective of the things that impact the nonprofit arts.  A very intelligent blog.

13.  Arts Blog - Americans for the Arts.  Not technically an individual's blog, but rather a site that invites guest bloggers on a wide variety of topics and issues - from the ranks of AFTA and from outside the organization.  I include it here because of the sheer volume of posts and opinions across almost every subject one can imagine.  Lots of important information and insights here.

14.  Arts Journal - Doug McClennan.  The Original aggregation site for news and articles from other sources that may be of interest to the nonprofit arts administrator, and the home base for forty or more bloggers.  Perhaps the 'granddaddy' of them all.

15.  Nonprofit With Balls -  Vu Le.    Not technically a nonprofit arts blog as Vu writes about the whole nonprofit universe, but he does it with such great humor, in an endearing folksy style and hits so many sacred cows with his no nonsense approach, that it is really one of my favorite sites.  He's smart and his 'on the money' suggestions ought to have wide play.

These are some of the smartest and most dedicated people in the industry.  I hope many of you can tap into them as a resource for your own edification.

Have a great week.

Don't Quit
Barry

Interview with Danielle Brazell - General Manager -- Department of Cultural Affairs, City of Los Angeles

Good morning.
"And the beat goes on……………………"

Danielle Brazell Bio:
Danielle was Arts for LA’s (the Los Angeles regional arts advocacy arm) first executive director, joining the organization in 2006 as it transitioned from an ad hoc committee of regional arts leaders to a formalized 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization.  Over the last eight years, she has steadily built Arts for LA’s capacity from an informal network of arts leaders to a respected coalition of advocates working in partnership with elected officials throughout Los Angeles County. Today, Arts for LA’s network includes over 160 member organizations and over 40,000 people.

Danielle’s twenty years of experience include work as the director of special projects for the Screen Actors Guild Foundation and as the artistic director of Highways Performance Space.  She has been honored with numerous grants and awards, including the 2000 Getty Fellowship, a 2009 CLEAR Communications Fellowship sponsored by the James Irvine Foundation, and a 2010 SHero Award from California State Senator Curren D. Price. In 2013, Danielle attended the Executive Education program for State and Local Government Leaders at Harvard University. She serves on the board of Californians for the Arts, on the Arts for All Executive Committee, and represents Arts for LA on the Policy Committee of the California Alliance for Arts Education.

In June of 2014, Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti appointed her to the post of General Manager -- Department of Cultural Affairs, City of Los Angeles - where she presides over a staff of 38 full time, and 80 part time employees and a budget of $9 million.

Here is the interview:

Barry:  What surprised you about running a major city arts agency during your first few weeks at the helm in LA?

Danielle:  I am amazed at the incredible work being done by the people who work for the City of
Los Angeles Department of Cultural Affairs (DCA) to make arts and culture thrive in our
city on a daily basis. The shear talent, commitment, and resiliency that our arts practitioners bring to their work on a daily basis is inspiring.

The impact the great recession had on cities across our country continues to reverberate, including within the city of LA. Although we are in the last few years of digging ourselves out of this financial situation, turnover in the city’s workforce has emerged as a much larger challenge. To avoid falling off the fiscal cliff, the City offered early retirement for many of its employees who were within five years of retiring. The response to this offer exceeded expectations, and the city had no time to plan for a massive staff turnover. These individuals took their institutional knowledge, their relationships, and their management acumen with them. The resiliency of those who stepped in to fill the void have done an incredible job keeping the vision alive, often with little support and reduced budgets. The city is now facing another wave of staff turnover with at least a third of its leadership planning to retire in the next five years.

Yet at the same time, as the city begins to recover from the great recession, its senior leadership is turning its attention towards leveraging creativity as our signature homegrown industry, which will poise Los Angeles to live up to our potential as a creative capital.

Barry:  What is your assessment of the biggest challenges facing major city LAAs - yours specifically, but others in general?

Danielle:  I’m just starting to wrap my arms around the opportunities and challenges for the City of
Los Angeles, much less LAAs in general, so I’ll keep my comments to my own city.

The City of Los Angeles is on the crest of an exciting new wave. There is no shortage of opportunity to grow cultural infrastructure and programming at all levels in the City of
Los Angeles.

Although we have more artists working in Los Angeles than anywhere else in the country, more intimate theatres than in Chicago or New York City, we also have more landmass than any other major city in the country. Our lack of density diffuses energy that usually creates a buzz, so our scale requires a different approach and energy.

The uniqueness of our cultural ecology is further informed by our thriving commercial creative industries. Fashion, design, technology, the visual arts, and entertainment represent 1 in 7 jobs in our region. Creativity is big business in LA.

For example, a visual artist may be represented by a gallery, show her works in an exhibition, or sell her works on her own, yet she might also work in film production as a set dresser. A lighting designer may oversee locations for film production by day, yet at night you’ll find him up on a ladder in an intimate theatre hanging lights. This fluidity between commercial creativity and public interest creative production is part of our ecosystem, but it also drives artists in the commercial sector.

Philanthropic and corporate support for arts and culture in Los Angeles is comparatively low. Individual support is stronger, especially for the major institutions. This makes small and mid-sized arts organizations more reliant on public support. Los Angeles also has multiple layers of government, municipal, school district, county, state, and federal support available.

However, as we all know, public support for arts and culture have been on the decline for twenty years. I often wonder if that’s because we have accepted a transactional value frame to our work. My experience tells me that people make decisions based feeling, not logic. So story, backed by data, is important strategically in rebuilding public will and public funding.

Barry:  And what then do you hope to accomplish in your first year?

Danielle:  Nothing short of a paradigm shift in the way we value arts and culture in Los Angeles and the role the Department of Cultural Affairs plays in increasing neighborhood vitality, prosperity, and the quality of life for its residents and visitors.

To achieve that ambitious goal, the work of our Department must become more visible and meaningful to those who authorize our funding. Our visibility must be at the proper scale. Transforming the Department from an analogue agency to a digital one in all aspects of our operations is a primary and necessary goal, from bringing our collection management and grants application systems online -- to aggregating event data and sharing it with the city family, community networks, visitors, and our convention bureau. From there we can connect our work with more people to further create meaning. I hope this strategy will build the value frame of the important work this department is accomplishing. Once we build meaning, we can demonstrate the return on investment for the city and its residents. It is a goal set very much aligned with Mayor Garcetti’s back to basics priorities.

Building the capacity and the spirit of possibility within the Department will position us to expand our reach throughout the entire city through signature festivals, iconic public art, and strong small, mid-sized, and large nonprofit arts and cultural organizations.

Barry:  What can an agency such as yours do to promote fairer and more balanced equity in the allocation of funding -- both from government (federal, state, local) and from foundations?

Danielle:  The term “equity” means different things to different people. Equity can mean distributing resources, like splitting the pie. It can also mean that those with unequal situations should receive a greater slice of the piece to help even out the gap.

At its core, equity is about fairness. Our national standard of public grant making is rooted in a set of established criteria to determine artistic excellence, and to build capacity to deliver the proposed projects and/or services. The peer panel review and scoring process is intended to keep personalities and politics out of grant awards.

However, those of us who manage public agencies can, and must, do a better job at making sure our applicant pool reflects the broad arts and cultural ecology of our region. To accomplish this objective, DCA is looking at strategies to increase the pathways for funding. Next year DCA will pilot a program to fund non-arts, nonprofit organizations in communities with traditionally low cultural infrastructure. We are also partnering with the Center for Cultural Innovation through a Surdna Foundation grant to pilot a Creative Entrepreneur Fund (CEF). The CEF will make strategic investments in creative businesses who are operating in the public interest. These sole proprietorship and LLC businesses fall outside the traditional 501(c)(3) nonprofit structure.

Barry:  By all accounts, you ran one of the best regional arts advocacy organizations in the country. What lessons did you take from that experience to your new post?

Danielle:  Arts for LA is one of many effective arts and arts education advocacy organizations doing great work in communities throughout our country. It is successful because it operates in relationship to its environment. It is clear and realistic in its strategic objectives and is fiscally prudent. Also, it does not advocate for any one person or arts organization, rather it advocates for all through its policy framework, which focuses on the policies and conditions needed for a healthy arts and cultural ecosystem. Finally, it helps authorizers and advocates play within the rules. That means that we all embrace fair and transparent distribution of funds, not leveraging personal relationships to receive special (pork) appropriations or funding.

At its core, advocacy is about relationships. It is about creating a winning situation for everyone…celebrating the accomplishments, but giving away the credit freely. Everyone advocates from a place of self-interest, but the message can never be about one’s own self-interest. It must always be about our mutual interest. This changes the conversation from an “us vs. them” perspective to a ‘mutual interest” reality. Finally, the impact of the messenger can make all the difference. Bring in the unusual partners to tell the story. Mobilize business owners, developers, and residents who are active voters and who can talk about how access to arts and culture make their live better.

Barry:  On the topic of advocacy, what is your assessment of state advocacy efforts in California and elsewhere? Advocacy efforts seem to be organized at the federal level, and to the extent state efforts support national goals, at the state level to a lesser degree, but there is hardly any effort to organize local advocacy efforts on a national basis. If all politics is, indeed, local - why hasn’t there been any real effort to organize the nation’s local advocacy efforts into a collaborative, cohesive whole?

Danielle:  It is a great question for a big country with multiple issues and overlapping political boundaries. Arts for LA’s primary focus is local (for a region with the landmass of Connecticut and the population of Georgia). Because of the interconnectedness of the political landscape, Arts for LA allocated a certain amount of its organizational resources to shore up support at the state and Federal levels. We coordinated these efforts with our statewide partners, California Arts Advocates and the California Alliance for Arts Education, and with our Federal partner, Americans for The Arts. But this strategy is difficult to maintain for a couple of reasons:

1) Elected officials are moved by their constituents. Which means that every campaign must have a very targeted approach. Targeted approaches require appropriate staff skilled at running campaigns (community organizing, training, and communications).

2) Term limits have created rotating leadership and many local elected officials run for state and federal office and some return to a local post. The sheer number of public officials in
Los Angeles is simply too large for any one agency to manage effectively.

And finally,

3) Legislative calendars overlap and if the messages are not coordinated at the local, state, and federal levels, advocacy burn out happens very fast.

Barry:  How is making the case for more local funding different than making the case for more state or federal funding?  And what are the impacts of those differences?

Danielle:  I don’t know if it is different. The secret sauce appears to be the same.

Barry:  If the revenue stream model for arts organizations is broken, can it be fixed, and how?  And if it can’t be fixed, what would a new model look like?

Danielle:  Is it broken? I don’t know if that is the case. The sector has a one-size fits-all model.  We need other models to foster a healthy ecology. This is why we are piloting the new initiatives I mentioned before. The City of San Jose successfully piloted a version of the Creative Entrepreneur Fund and our colleagues at the Los Angeles County Arts Commission are about to launch a pilot program to fund nonprofit health and human services who have high-quality arts programs. Continual and rigorous inquiry is essential to moving our sector forward.

Barry:  Progress in making arts education available K-12 seems to take two steps forward, two steps back.  How can we finally reach a tipping point in that arena?

Danielle:  Policy and advocacy is a marathon, not a sprint. Build political will, diversify the messengers, and consider running candidates. We see this strategy working at the local level. We need to pass mandates that have funding, required instructional minutes, and testing, tied to legislation. Without these accountability measures in place, arts education will be left to superintendents, principals, and outspoken parents to ensure delivery.

Barry:  Two of the biggest movements in the field in the past five years have been our Placemaking and Community Engagement initiatives. What is your assessment of these two theories?

Danielle:  These are new names for strategies that the arts community has been engaged in throughout the ages. I embrace new frameworks that expand the conversation of how arts and culture contribute to society.

Barry:  Assess the current state of the art field’s attempt to prepare our current and future leaders to meet the challenges of tomorrow? How effective are our professional development and college preparatory programs in training our leaders and our rank and file staffs to be better managers and administrators? In your future hiring of people at your agency, what will you be looking for in candidates?

Danielle:  The influx of college preparatory programs and arts and cultural professional development programs over the past ten years has raised the performance bar for our sector exponentially.

I entered the nonprofit arts sector through a local community arts center, first as a participant in a performance workshop, then as an artist, then as a teaching artist, and finally as an administrator. Because of these experiences, I am aware our field should have other strategies to recruit and develop talent.

Professional development programs and college preparatory programs may have also made it more difficult for people like me, who enter the field as an enthusiastic volunteer, to build a career in the nonprofit arts sector, and that’s something we should think about.

The skills I look for when I am hiring someone are emotional intelligence, passion, commitment, and the ability to learn. I also look for signs the person knows how to collaborate, think creativity, communicate effectively, and think critically. These four “Cs” are the foundation of what is needed for success in a 21st century workforce.

We must also continue preparing for succession. So many of our emerging arts leaders are saddled with insurmountable student debt. These emerging leaders are hungry for advancement, may want to start a family, and one day buy a home. But entry-level salaries in our sector are still quite low. This forces many dynamic leaders out of the nonprofit arts and cultural sector and into the private sector. On the other side of the coin, we have so many baby boomers who simply cannot afford to retire, that they stay in the field longer.

Barry: Most big city arts agencies face a plethora of political challenges - including dealing with local governments and a sometimes territorial competing arts organization ecosystem.  How do you navigate those waters?

Danielle: In Los Angeles the arts and cultural sector is incredibly collaborative.  We know it’s the way to success.

Barry:  What was your last “aha” moment?

Danielle:  Right now.

Barry:  Innovation is the current buzzword for arts administration.  But in government situations, arguably the constraints of bureaucracy and government often obviate against creative risk taking.  How do you deal with those limitations?

Danielle:  With creativity, patience, and partnerships.

Barry:  Other than the broken funding model, what other models (e.g., audience development, donor solicitation, marketing) do you think are broken, which can be repaired, and which not, and which models are working?

Danielle:  There is so much innovation happening in our sector. It would take another interview to articulate all the ways in which creativity is moving audience development, donor solicitation, and marketing forward.

Barry:  What kind of research is not currently available to you that would be most helpful in moving your agency forward?

Danielle:  I would love to expand the NEA survey on the relationship between engagement in the arts and civic engagement, i.e. voting.

Barry:  What is the current state of the relationship between larger urban arts agencies and their state agency, and how might it work better?

Danielle:  I can speak only for California. In my experience, my colleagues at the municipal level have a collaborative relationship with our state arts agency and with each other.

Barry:  Political appointees are often removed from their posts when the elected official who appointed them leaves office.  How does that influence and impact doing your job?

Danielle:  Short-term deliverable increments and demonstrated track record is the way I am approaching this appointment. Set the agency on a path to success, focus on the conditions needed to succeed, and do your very best to leave it in a better position for the person who will come after you.

Barry:  What is your management style and how do you keep your people motivated?

Danielle:  Empower, inspire, and develop accountability.

Barry:   How do we, as a field, better collaborate both by, and between, arts organizations, and with outside stakeholders and potential partners?

Danielle:  With deep and genuine curiosity, and a focus on where our venn diagram intersect. Operate from that space and celebrate your progress along the way.

Thank you Danielle.

Have a great week. Stay warm everybody.

Don't Quit
Barry