The new Star Trek movie is out, and I haven’t seen it since I’m waiting for an opportunity to take my boys. Yes, I know, I’ve just mixed Doctor Who with Star Trek, but hear me out. This got me thinking about the classic original series Star Trek episode “Mirror, Mirror.” (Trekkies might want to skip ahead to the next paragraph.) For those of you who can’t immediately recite the star date when this episode took place here is the plot in a nutshell- Kirk’s landing party gets accidentally beamed to an alternate reality where the Federation is an evil empire, torture is used to discipline wayward crew, and most famously, Spock has a beard. After the usual shenanigans Kirk has planted the seeds of change in an open-minded alternate Spock and the landing party makes it back to the original Enterprise safely. This episode is a perennial favorite amongst true Trekkies, especially since we don’t find out what happens to that alternate Spock or the evil Federation empire. I like to believe that alternate Spock shaved his beard and started a revolution but I freely admit that I am an idealist at heart.

Three years ago the Board of Directors of the Minnesota Orchestra faced a crossroad in the history of the organization. The Association was faced with twin problems, either of which could severely hamper the long-term stability of the orchestra.

First, there was the matter of the deficit. Two years running the M.O. had blown a major hole in the budget which the Board only managed to fill with last minute appeals and major draws on the foundation. History teaches that the most common scenario taken by orchestras to get out of similar messes almost always include reductions in pay and benefits for their musicians. History also teaches that when your artistic product suffers the people notice, and the people won’t be happy. The people complain and they stop buying tickets, musicians are (more) miserable because it’s harder to make a living, and the combination of those two things can be the beginning of a vicious downward cycle.

Second, there was the matter of the hall. The Minnesota Orchestra is in that enviable position of owning their hall since it was built. I worked in that hall for five years, and although I do like Orchestra Hall, it is by no means my favorite. It needed serious updating, and the entire experience for the patron needed to be upgraded. If the parking sucks, it matters. If there aren’t enough bathrooms for women, it matters. Etc., Etc. History teaches that the odds of someone coming back to catch a future performance of your orchestra drop dramatically if they have a negative customer care experience. History also teaches that raising money for a building can be an easier thing to do than for a general foundation. People like to see their names on a building.

What if, in that mirror/mirror alternate universe, at this point the Board had made a different calculation and asked themselves: “If the deficit and the condition of the hall are our two main weaknesses, what are our two biggest strengths?” The obvious answers was before their eyes and ears: an orchestra that on one of those crazy nights, when it’s all clicking, could make a pretty convincing case that you had just heard the best orchestral concert offered anywhere in the world on that given day. Damn good band, man. Damn good band. And you own your hall. You get to set the schedule, you get to make money off of it, you don’t have to negotiate with the opera or the ballet for scheduling, or scramble to find an alternate venue because Les Miz is coming to town for the umpteenth time and you’ve been evicted for 10 straight weeks. You are in control of your own hall, and that puts you in control of so much more that can be positive for your organization.

What if at this point the Board had then decided to propose a bold plan.  The goal would be to ensure the long-term health of both of their two best assets, the orchestra and the hall. What if they had gone to the musicians and laid it all out. It’s 2010, the country is mired in a depression, the organization’s deficit isn’t getting smaller, and the contract is driving us deep into fiscal red ink. What if they had been completely open and told the musicians that their best chance of ensuring that they could have this wonderful life in the Twin Cities, playing in a fabulous orchestra, and raising a family at a standard of living the envy of most cities in this hemisphere, was for the whole organization to buy into a concerted effort to lobby the people of Minnesota.

What if the Board had suggested two fundraising drives. One drive would be for a special “Artistic Fund” designed primarily to ensure that the orchestra would be able to continue to attract and keep musicians of the highest caliber, and perform with the best conductors and soloists in the world today. The second would be an “Orchestra Hall Upgrade” fund, targeted specifically on this one-time upgrade of the facility. One drive to help upgrade the physical side of the organization, and one to ensure the health of the spiritual side. What if they had said that “We, the Board, think we can do this but we need the musician’s help to make it happen.”

What if the Board had recognized the orchestra as the greatest asset that the Association had and asked, nay, demanded that the musicians get out into the community and help the organization make a case for the Artistic Fund? Yes, musicians are an interesting bunch to deal with, but sit down and listen on one of those nights. Damn good band, man. What if the Board had pledged that they would not go forward with the building remodel until the Artistic Fund had also been fully funded, and conversely that said fund would be equally reliant on having the means to upgrade the concert experience for the public?

From a musician’s point of view I’d be inclined to keep listening. The devil remains in the details, but if you have a honest Board in front of you who has come up with a plan to address these two major concerns, a Board that wants to avoid the pitfalls that other orchestras have fallen into, and a plan with a strong artistic focus the upshot of which would directly improve (and continue to improve) my standard of living? Yeah, I think I’d keep listening.

And what if that scenario had been successful? With the accolades that the orchestra had been garnering, and the fierce civic pride that the people of this area have for their artistic institutions, it might have succeeded. If your product is substandard then that is a much tougher row to hoe. But at your disposal is a great orchestra and a storied tradition. A successful effort would have gone a very long way to ensuring that the Minnesota Orchestra would be considered amongst the best orchestras in the world to hear play and to work for, and that this would remain the case for decades to come. That would have been incredible leadership on the part of the Board of Directors.

But we will never know how that scenario plays out in the alternate mirror/mirror universe. Instead, the Board intentionally identified their greatest asset to be their chief weakness, and they embarked on a path which has led to this madness which threatens to permanently mar everything that has been entrusted to them. The irony is that the Board got it half right. They tackled the problem of funding a hall renovation, now ongoing, that is going to make the patron experience much better than before. What the Board forgot is that without the orchestra all they had was an empty hall with a face lift. In Texas terminology – “All hat and no cattle.”

We have born witness to something that need not and should not have happened. The 100+ years tradition that is the Minnesota Orchestra is unravelling in front of our eyes with a full season wasted, musicians fleeing at an accelerated pace, and the rather unpleasant deadline when the Music Director says Basta! looming on the horizon. A twin fundraising drive of this sort would have been more difficult to achieve but if successful it would have had the chance to positively impact the organization for decades to come. It would have shown great leadership by the Board and a confidence in the artistic future of the organization. Instead the Board choose this different path, somewhat akin to being invited to the Kentucky Derby and deciding not only to change jockeys but to change horses! No trainer in his/her right mind would do that. In Texas terminology – “You ride the horse what brung ya.”

What a opportunity was lost here. What a lesson is to be learned here. The chance to make a permanent positive mark on the cultural landscape disappeared into so much negative rhetoric. Trust in the organization has dissipated like your chances at Three Card Monte. Instead of relaunching for the future this debacle has unfolded with all the grace of a particularly bad Star Trek: Deep Space Nine episode. And we will never get to find out if alternate Spock shaved his beard.

The Board of the Minnesota Orchestra managed to achieve one thing – they have boldly gone where no man has gone before. Unfortunately, it was in the wrong direction.

For the past year I have been dividing my time as a conductor/Music Director and as a Marketing and Development Director  for Missouri’s largest community Theatre company Springfield Little Theatre, a tremendous organization.  I guess one could say that I have taken up “fencing” since  I’m straddling both sides of the business; Artistic and Administrative.  I know I’m not the first by a long shot to do this and I’m not going to go chapter and verse about the differences.  Instead I want to focus on one experience I had recently which put into sharp focus what Orchestras and the Arts are up against which is the disadvantage they have in fundraising.  It’s larger than anyone could have imagined…and I have at the very least anecdotal proof!

Why is fundraising such a struggle for orchestras?

Part of the problem is a siege like mentality.  How many times is this phrase uttered “how can we compete with (insert Cancer, Homelessness, Aids, Hunger etc…)?”.  There is a defeatist approach as if to say that the arts only get the crumbs that are left after the health and human services (not to mention religious causes) have taken their share.  We don’t fundraise per se, we scavenge.

It has nothing to do with the cause, it has everything to do with ability, here’s my proof:

My Theatre company sent me to the Association of Fundraising Professionals annual conference last month in San Diego.  It was an awe inspiring 3 days, and the amount of information and techniques on display were overwhelming.  The greatest fundraising/business minds were giving classes, people such as Stephen Pidgeon, Marcus Buckingham and many others who are veritable rockstars in the fundraising world.  There was something missing however.  Out of 4000 attendees,  from what I could see scanning the list there was only 1 yes only 1 orchestra development director (only 1 Opera company and only 1 other theatre company).   We as arts fundraisers are stuck in the Model T world of fundraising whereas everyone else is learning to drive a Ferrari!

Beat their cause? No,  JOIN their cause!

This was a conference not about the cause (although there were philanthropists there also) but about fundraising itself and what to do, how to reach, and how to ask.  There was no discrimination as to which cause you represented and that is why it was so inspiring.  There was a mutual respect amongst all attendees.  At lunch we would sit randomly at round tables and everyone would introduce themselves.  During one lunch I sat with someone from the Alaska Wildlife Foundation, the development officer for the USC Law School (in the middle of a $200M capital campaign), a couple of large hospital foundations, and other prolific causes.  When it came time for me to introduce myself, I jokingly said “we do shows!”.  There was a silence that followed and then someone piped up and said, “so you are trying to make people’s lives better, well then you are one of us”.  I was gobsmacked,  just like that I was welcomed in with open arms, I was one of them!

Professional fundraisers truly have a sense of community, they share ideas, experiences, techniques, I spoke one on one with people who had implemented successful crowdfunding campaigns, social media development campaigns and so much more.  There were no secrets only a sharing of ideas and they wanted to know mine also.  This was just at lunch, the talks and seminars supercharged the experience.

Our “problem” is actually one of our advantages:

One of our catch cries is “ticket sales only account for a 33% of our income”, we use that day in day out but what I learned at the conference is almost everyone else in the fundraising world has to raise 100% of their income.  They only wish they could count on that third!  It turns out that they have something very powerful though which translates into success, and that is the power of emotion in fundraising and an up to date and progressive approach.  The arts are good at emotion and being progressive on stage, and we think that it is enough to sell itself.  Quite clearly it isn’t, we need it off stage also which was the overriding message at the conference.

Don’t listen to grandfather…Peter was right all along!:

The whole time I was there I kept thinking, where are the arts fundraisers?  The people who were there think globally, they don’t think of how to get as much of the pie as they can,  they think collectively of ways to make the pie bigger, so that there’s more of it for everyone.   In the arts we don’t think that way, we’re not global, state wide or even city wide, we insulate ourselves protecting our disappearing turf.  We build a fence and we lock the gate, it’s time we “went out into the big green meadow”, the wolves are gone!

Something Old – a Recap

The implosion of the Minnesota Orchestra, so brilliantly dubbed the “Minnegeddon,” has shattered the illusion that the governance model of the 1950s is adequate to the task of running a major orchestra in this new millenium. That an artistic institution of this size and quality could be so cavalierly flushed down the drain by a Board led along the garden path by a few blowhards and an incompetent Executive Director, despite the vociferous objections of the musicians and the community at large, puts a blinding spotlight on the concept of public trust - the responsibility to manage and nurture these great institutions that help in the creation of a better society.

I have been criticized for saying that the system is broken yet not suggesting a way to fix it. I plead guilty to this charge, as I have not been able to come up with any idea that I thought had a ghost of a chance of 1) being adopted and/or 2) working. That has changed.  At the end of this post I will let my plan out of the stable. I’m pretty sure that it will generate a lot of hither and fro-ing but I have one request – before you start telling me what an idiot I am I dare you to do better.

Meanwhile, I am obviously not the only one thinking of ways to help the Minnesota Orchestra. We have letters to the Editor in the Star Tribune.  We even have 5 year plans. And I’m pretty sure that anyone locked into social media who has been paying attention to this debacle has run across someone espousing some idea or the other. The problem is that none of these plans get to the root of the problem – governance.

The problem is not money. It is not the actions of the Board, the intransigence of the musicians, the less-than-helpful economy, or anything else that you want to fixate on. The problem is nothing BUT governance. To pretend that with a fundraising campaign and/or decimating the orchestra and/or a new administration we can wish away all the issues that have been unearthed over the past 3 years at the M.O. is pure fantasy. All that will do is postpone the inevitable and ensure that some future generation of Board/musicians/administration will find themselves staring at the same dead end that this generation has engraved on their eyes.

We could flog this particular horse for many posts to come but I hardly think it is worth the effort. I quoted Socrates in my last post and it’s worth bringing that line back -

“The secret of change is to focus all of your energy, not on fighting the old, but on building the new.”

Enough said. If any of you out there still believe that the current governance model makes sense, especially in the case of the Minnesota Orchestra, then good luck with that. I’m moving on, and I firmly believe that everyone who has the best intentions for the Minnesota Orchestra must do so as well. Other orchestras might not be ready for the change, but this one surely is.

Something New – New Ideas

Inspiration comes from various sources, and when it comes to tackling a large problem the old adage that “no man is an island” rings true.  I did not dream up my plan completely out of the blue.  Indeed, the first seed was planted by the good folks at SOSPCO – Save Our SPCO. In case you have been living under a rock, the M.O. is not the only orchestral fiasco the Twin Cities has had to offer up this year. SOSPCO has been most vocal in their desire to see change at the SPCO and they came up with the idea of crowdsourcing enough money to buy a couple seats on the SPCO Board.

It took very little persuading on their part to get me to kick in $50. However, for days afterwards I had the nagging feeling that their plan just didn’t go far enough. Two seats on the Board, what is that going to do? You could certainly be gadflys, but with 40+ members of the Board are you really going to have any influence? From the governance perspective not much has changed with the settling of the SPCO situation – power resides in the hands of the Board chair and the CEO, and not very many other places. Same as it ever was.

And then, as I was walking down the street one day, it hit me – why not revamp the governance model completely and use the SOSPCO idea as a starting point? That is what I have done….. but with a twist.

Something Borrowed – Those Darn Furrners!

Once I decided to offer a revamped governance model there are only a couple directions I could take it. The critical aspect was getting The People involved through the SPCO model, something that finally gives the audience a voting interest in their belovéd cultural institution. The next was to redraw lines of power – with rights comes responsibilities, and I firmly believe that in the current governance model those two things are severely mangled. After that was figured out there was nothing to do but shop it around to some people…..

…. Who promptly told me that it would never work. Well, I’m a stubborn SOB, and I think that the only reason it wouldn’t work is that people don’t want to change. Besides, there must be something out there like this. This is where the miracle of the google search came in.

There are two (and perhaps more) august and thriving orchestras that employ a governance model which is c. 85% similar to what I am going to propose. These orchestras have used their models for decades, through thick and thin, and they have grown to be considered amongst the best orchestras in the world. The musicians have a vested interest in working with management because they – meaning the musicians – run the organization. The people are represented on the Board level. There is considerable space for philanthropists and government support. These two orchestras are the London Symphony Orchestra and the Berlin Philharmonic.

I admit that I was a bit annoyed to find that someone had already done my work for me, but I was also elated to find working governance models so similar to mine. There are obvious differences in how those two orchestras are run, and furthermore there are differences between those models and the one I propose. For example, counting on government support in the USA is a non-starter. There are some other differences, but the main thrust of the plans are the same. Better yet, I have friends in both bands so I got to ask some questions (thanks and a shout out to Sarah and Betty).

Now I know this can work because it is working already! Then why haven’t we tried it? Laziness, entrenched interests, and the façade of a working governance model have all colluded to keep the reforms necessary from happening. Musicians and management would actually have to approach each other as equals and with respect. Musicians and the Board would have to do the same. Both of those constituencies would have to stop using the Management as a whipping boy, and everybody would have to listen to what The People have to say! Respect, Listening, Rights, and Responsibilities. The polar opposite of how most orchestras in this hemisphere “function.” But two orchestras work this way, and they work pretty well. Only one more step to take.

Something Blue State – Adapt

How to make the plan work in Minnesota? First of all, there are some great positives of living here that must be built upon.

1. The People love their orchestra and have great pride in its 100+ year history.
2. These Scandahovians take great pride in their cultural institutions in general, and because of the shenanigans of the past year they are pretty fired up (you betcha!).
3. The Musicians have learned a great deal about what it takes to put on concerts, work PR and social media, and connect with the grass roots.
4. There are more Fortune 500 companies per capita here than anywhere else.
5. This is now 2013 – technology, social media, and the age we live in make it easier than ever to connect directly to the people.
6. We live in Minnesota, which has a bizarre, hilarious, and fascinating history of confounding the status quo.  Hey, we’ve given you Paul Wellstone, Fritz Mondale, Jesse Ventura, and Michelle Bachmann.  Beat that!

There are plenty of other positives but that will do for now. To be sure there are plenty of negatives as well, but I prefer to follow the wisdom of Socrates and channel my energy into building the new rather than dwelling on the old.

This plan is by no means completely finished. I acknowledge that some people may perceive it as deeply flawed but it is the best I can do. My goal is to create a working governance model with better checks and balances, with rights and responsibilities, which will allow the Minnesota Orchestra to move forward to a brighter future. It is a gamble. So what. Life is a gamble.

Please note – this is a suggestion for re-organization! But if for some reason the Board of the M.O. decides to go down with the ship then this could as easily be adapted to take over what is left of the old Minnesota Orchestra.

Please note #2 – and this is really, really important:  Anyone out there who thinks that a major symphony orchestra like the M.O. can thrive without the help of the people I call Philanthropists is completely delusional. These people are essential to the long term fiscal well-being of any organization of this type, and I absolutely foresee a major role for them in any future institution. I believe that the majority of the M.O. Board were hoodwinked. I have lived in this fabulous area for 20 years now and I simply do not believe that this could have happened any other way. Call me näive if you will, but that’s my position.

Please note #3 – in order for this or any plan to have any traction the following needs to go:

1. Mr. Corporation – I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: no musician I have talked to will work for Michael Henson. Period.
2. The Blowhards – I reiterate what I said in the paragraph above: I believe that the majority, or at least a good number, of the Board was led down the garden path by a misguided few. Those Blowhards have to go. Might I suggest a comfortable retirement with Bain Capital?
3. Entitlement – OK, one will never fully get rid of artist’s sense of entitlement. We are born with it. Instead, how about channeling it into something productive, for once.
4. Apathy – if you love your orchestra and you know it clap your hands? No. Get up offa that thing and make a difference, because right now most of the audience is just talkin’ loud and sayin’ nothing (with apologies to JB).

The Plan

A New Governance Model for the 21st Century Orchestra

 A co-operative orchestra owned by The Community, operated by Management, and directed by Musicians.

THE FRIENDS OF THE MINNESOTA ORCHESTRA

- The Bylaws of this new orchestra will specify the creation of The Friends of The Minnesota Orchestra,  the purpose of which is to encourage community involvement, ownership, and responsibility for the orchestra.  

• The Friends will be comprised of those most passionate about maintaining the highest artistic standards for the orchestra.
• Any member of the public who fits the description outlined above may become a member of The Friends.
• Any member of The Friends can vote for, and run for, the position of Board Representative which will represent The Friends on the Board of Directors of the orchestra.
• Members of The Friends renew every year, and members receive premium seating options for the upcoming season (+other perks).
• Members of the orchestra may not become members of The Friends during their tenure in the orchestra.
• The Friends must be fully subscribed in order for their representatives to be allowed to vote on Board matters.
• Membership in The Friends does not preclude any individual from donating more money directly to the organization.
• No member of The Friends may serve as the Board Representative for The Friends for more than 3 consecutive 2 year terms.

In this plan the community will claim ownership of the new orchestra. The yearly contributions of The Friends, in conjunction with the endowment of the  orchestra, creates a stable level of funding, and due to the community representation on the Board level the membership of The Friends has an incentive to underwrite their orchestra and ensure long-term fiscal stability for the organization. I propose 3 levels of The Friends: $100, $1,000, and $5,000. 

THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS

• The Board will be comprised of 9 people. Musicians elect 5 current members of the orchestra to the Board. The Friends will elect 2 current members to the Board. Philanthropists will hold two seats on the Board.  The Music/Artistic Director and the Executive Director will sit on the Board but not have voting rights
• The Chair of the Board will be one of the Musician members of the Board.
• Board elects the Music/Artistic Director.
• Music/Artistic Director is elected to one 5 year term, and can be re-elected only once.
• The three supporting committees – Artistic, Operations, and Philanthropy – report to the Board of Directors.
• Board elects the 5 Trustees of the Philanthropy Committee.
• Board has ultimate fiduciary oversight for the organization.
• Board has the power to set the amount that The Friends is expected to raise for the organization via membership/subscription on a tri-annual basis.
• Bylaws stipulate that the M.O. budget must be balanced each fiscal year.
• Bylaws stipulate that all members of the orchestra receive the same salary. Principals receive salary +15%.
• Work rules for employees are set by the Board and enforced by Management through the Operations Committee.
• Budget for a next season will not be approved if three of the four non-musician Board members vote against it.
• Programming for a next season cannot be approved if three of the four non-musician Board members vote against it.

3 Committees -

Artistic, Operations, and Philanthropy

Although the committees will function independently they will each report to the Board of Directors for final approval on all major matters. In addition, to foster trust and an efficient working environment each committee will have a non-voting member on the other committees.

ARTISTIC COMMITTEE

• Artistic Committee will consist of the Music/Artistic Director, two Musician representatives, one The Friends representative, the Artistic Administrator, the Education Director, the P.R. Director, and the Marketing Director.
• Artistic Committee oversees the artistic direction of the organization.
• Music/Artistic Director will be empowered to set the artistic goals of the organization and deal with artistic matters in a manner consistent with the present governance model.
• Music/Artistic Director will function as Chair of the Artistic Committee.
• The next season must be approved by the Artistic Committee before it can be presented to the Board of Directors.

PHILANTHROPY COMMITTEE

• Philanthropy Committee will consist of the five Trustees elected by the Board, two Musician representatives, two The Friends representatives, the Executive Director, the Development Director, and the V.P. of Finance.
• Philanthropy Committee oversees the fiscal direction and the philanthropic efforts of the organization.
• The Chair of the Philanthropy Committee will be one of the 5 Trustees.
• Trustees may serve up to 3 consecutive 2 year terms.
• Trustees may not be members of The Friends during their tenure on the Philanthropy Committee.
• The annual budget originates in the Philanthropy Committee and must be approved by a majority of the Committee before it can be presented to the Board of Directors.
• The annual budget cannot be approved if 4 of the 5 Trustees vote against it.

OPERATIONS COMMITTEE

• Operations Committee will consist of 3 Musician representatives, the General Manager, the Personnel Manager, the H.R. Manager, and the Facilities Director.
• Operations Committee oversees contractual and personnel matters, tour and concert logistics,  and the operation of facilities used by the organization.
• The Chair of the Operations Committee will be the General Manager.

CHECKS, BALANCES, AND INCENTIVES 

The key to the plan is interdependency.  Each constituency – Musicians, The Friends, the  Philanthropists, and Management – is incentivized to work well with the others in order to ensure high artistic standards and long-term fiscal stability.

Each constituency has Rights and Responsibilities. Most importantly, each committee is populated by the people most directly involved with that area of the organization.

MANAGEMENT’s role essentially remains the same – prepare budget and manage orchestra – except that it is Management’s responsibility (and in Management’s best interest) to ensure full subscription levels in The Friends, and management’s relationship with the Board and the musicians becomes a full partnership.  If Management engages the community in such a way to ensure The Friends is fully subscribed then it is a sign of confidence in the direction of the organization.

ARTISTIC decisions are in the hands of those most qualified to make them. Crucially, P.R. and Marketing serve to support the artistic mission of the organization. While the Music Director is empowered to make broad decisions in this area the term limits will prevent any long-term artistic stagnation.

PHILANTHROPY is still key to the continued fiscal health of the orchestra, but the responsibility for fiduciary oversight has been divorced from the task of raising money.

THE FRIENDS is the other crucial change from the old governance model. This ensures that The People have a voice in the continued success of the orchestra.

*******************************************************************

Well, there it is. Best I can do. If you can do better let me know, but please don’t write a 3 thousand word comment and expect me to approve it. Get your own blog, it’s not that hard.

Let the hate mail begin.

The Minnesota Orchestra absorbed two body blows late this week in quick succession. First, their brilliant Principal Clarinet Burt Hara was offered the Associate Principal Clarinet position at the Los Angeles Philharmonic, and it must be said that Burt’s departure would be an outsized and dramatic loss. Burt has been a star with this orchestra for 25 years, choosing to live and play in Minnesota when he could have had just about any job anywhere. An orchestra is supposed to be more than the sum of its parts, but Burt’s playing has perhaps been the most signature sound of this last generation of the M.O.

The next day we discovered Osmo Vänskä’s line in the sand. The response by M.O. Board chair Jon Campbell can only be summed up using that most expressive language Yiddish – “Meh.” If that’s the Board’s response to the most public artistic figure in the organization then what little shred of hope that they had the artistic health of the organization in mind has fluttered away in this cold and nasty Minnesota spring. These twin salvos have actually prodded the editorial board of the Star Tribune, Minnesota’s largest paper, to get off the fence and pass the prodding on to Governor Mark Dayton.  The current Board of the M.O. is getting pounded in the press and the blogosphere, making it clear that the musicians have won the PR battle.  Actually, it was never much of a battle – it has been a slaughter.  The collateral damage, though, is where this war hurts the most.

Any honest assessment of the nonprofit governance system in place to manage orchestras, subject of constant criticism and ridicule from both within and without the business, must conclude that said system has finally and spectacularly collapsed.  One of the great orchestras of this hemisphere, if not the world, is on the brink of complete ruin due to the intransigence of a bunkered few working in lockstep with someone whose managerial skills could only be termed maladroit, and whose “vision” for this orchestra is at best short-sighted and at worse borderline nefarious. The damage already done to the Minnesota Orchestra legacy is legion and will take decades to undo, even if by some miracle everything would be settled today. But considering the position of the Board I have few doubts that they would be willing to take this mighty ship down with them.

This “stewardship” of the M.O. by its Board of Directors should be considered felonius. At least in the for-profit world there would be some possible redress, though recent history would tell us that just because you intentionally run a company into the ground don’t expect to be held accountable for it. But leaving that aside – the facts are that the Minnesota Orchestra is now almost irretrievably in a state of total collapse. No other orchestra of its size and stature has been in these waters, and these waters are very deep and the ship is sinking. Even if Governor Dayton manages to broker a peace settlement (and yes, I am aware that I am using the nomenclature of war) we would be left with a deeply wounded orchestra missing many of its key players, a nuclear level toxic atmosphere between musicians, Board, and management, an embittered Music Director, and a community who rightly feels that their very proud legacy has been betrayed. It is hard to see how any orchestra could survive, let alone actually thrive, in this atmosphere.

Maybe this is the one situation where it would be possible to jettison the current orchestra governance model in favor of a realigned structure intrinsically different from anything tried before in this hemisphere. It would take tremendous guts and goodwill by all involved to make it work, but as Socrates so eloquently put it -

“The secret of change is to focus all of your energy, not on fighting the old, but on building the new.”

What must first happen is a frank conversation about what the current and future needs of an organization such as the Minnesota Orchestra would be, what the needs/desires of the various constituencies are, and how we could design a new governing model that will address those needs/desires while fostering artistic growth and fiscal stability?

The first question I would ask is “what are the needs/desires of the various constituencies?” I would like to start with the most important constituency of all -

The People

With all due respect to my musical colleagues it is The People who come to hear your concerts, The People who support your organization, The People who believe in having a fabulous artistic endeavor in the community in which they live, who are the most important constituency in this fight. As a general rule, if it is good for your audience it is good for the organization (there are exceptions to every rule but those exceptions tend to be fewer and much farther between then we might want to admit). In every city there are many, many thousands of people who might not ever attend one of your concerts who never-the-less believe that having outstanding arts institutions like the Minnesota Orchestra is a sign of a healthy community.

What do The People want? They want a healthy orchestra, to be sure, but they also want a say in how the organization functions and its long-term health. You would never see all the “Save Our [insert orchestra name here]” organizations if the people weren’t interested in contributing. But as the model stands today most of the people have no voice in the governance of their beloved institution.

The Musicians

This should seem self-evident but it still needs to be said: the musicians are the the next critical constituency in this fight. These are artists, and despite the pejorative connotations that word has in some segments of our society for many of us it is a worthy goal in life to share your artistic talent for the delight of others.

What do The Musicians want? Boiled down to the lowest common denominator what any musician wants is a decent job where, on occasion, you get that rare chance to fill someone’s heart with joy. They crave a healthy orchestra, but they also want a say in how the organization functions and its long-term health. Everyone on earth wants some say over how they must manage their lives. It is necessary for one’s self-respect, and without self-respect you cannot create great music.

The Philanthropists

Please note I do not refer to this constituency as the Board of Directors. This part of the conversation is about constituencies, not about governance. Like any Music Director/conductor I have had the opportunity to hobnob with many people who choose to support arts institutions like the M.O., and in most instances I have found their calculus to be surprisingly simple: healthy arts institutions are the sign of a healthy community, and since they have the means to make a difference they consider it their civic duty to do so. Without them none of the great arts institutions would have built. Not one. For decades the Great Philanthropists were the only game in town when it came to underwriting the expenditures of the arts world, but the rise of the middle class over the past 60 years is what has kept people going to those artistic endeavors. People pay real money for tickets these days. They budget for them, and they treasure those experiences.

What do The Philanthropists want? They want a healthy orchestra, but they also want a say in how the organization functions and its long-term health. It’s only human to want your voice to be heard if you have gone to the expense of donating your time, money, and energy.

The Management

I was hesitant to call management a full fledged constituency in this fight for a number of reasons but then I started looking at this issue from another perspective. Outside of an Executive Director (or the equivalent) there are usually dozens of people in an organization the size of the M.O. who draw a paycheck yet never appear on stage in concert! Stage crew, librarians, personnel support, fundraisers, P.R., etc., etc. I would argue in the strongest possible terms that these people have a vested interest in ensuring that the organization functions at the highest possible level of efficiency. Their jobs depend on it. And for many of them it is a labor of love. There aren’t a lot of folks getting rich in Arts Management these days.

What does The Management want? They want a healthy orchestra, but they also want a say in how the organization functions and its long-term health. Working at an arts organization is hard work. There a long hours, low pay, and a high rate of turnover. How can we make it easier for management to function and to attract and retain top quality people?

Analysis

By now the trend should be obvious – every constituency wants a healthy orchestra, and everybody wants a voice in how that organization functions. Everyone wants a say in what the Minnesota Orchestra is, what it does, and how it does it. Everyone wants rights, but with rights come responsibility. That is the critical word - responsibility. After 20 years running around this business I have seen a few universal trends:

1. Other than measuring ticket sales and the level of small donations, most orchestras look at The People as the Victorian child who should be seen, not heard. We refer to “butts in seats” but it’s a bit more complicated than that. In the for-profit world you sell a product. In the non-profit world you should be growing a passionate and devoted constituency who will fight to the bitter end to ensure your organization survives. Why shouldn’t we harness the energy and goodwill or those people who have already drunk the Kool-Aid?

We must give The People more rights pertaining to the governance of the Minnesota Orchestra, and The People must embrace their responsibility to ensure that this orchestra is fiscally stable.

2.  To quote a musician colleague – “There is a small yet extremely vocal group of musicians in every orchestra who believe that their responsibility begins and ends with showing up and playing their instrument, and more often than not the rest of their energy goes into complaining about how management or the Board is trying to screw them over.” I cannot see how this mindset will be a successful one in the reality that is the 21st Century orchestra. In the case of the M.O. I’m pretty sure that the first part of that quote has already been shattered, as the musicians have done a brilliant job organizing concerts and successfully working social media. I would bet that the learning curve has been both steep and very enlightening. So if the musicians want more control then why not?

We must give The Musicians more rights pertaining to the governance of the Minnesota Orchestra, and The Musicians must embrace their responsibility to ensure that this orchestra functions in the most efficient manner possible. 

3.  The time has come to separate philanthropy from governance. “He who pays the piper calls the tune” only goes so far, and to be honest the amount that the M.O. Board (or most Boards) raises on a yearly basis is dwarfed by the twin income streams of 1) ticket sales; and 2) donations by non-board members, corporations, and foundations. Yet it is the Board, alone of all that constituencies, that is solely tasked with governance. Board members are frequently recruited for their philanthropic prowess, or for their connections to those who have money, and then they are confronted with the concept of running a large non-profit. From a for-profit point of view the non-profit world makes very little sense, and some of the funniest conversations I have ever had have been with Board members desperately trying to understand how non-profits manage to exist, let alone function. Instead of tasking The Philanthropist with running the organization, how about relieving them of that responsibility and asking them to focus on what they do best – philanthropy?

We must redefine the relationship between The Philanthropists and the Minnesota Orchestra. The Philanthropists should be tasked with the responsibility of fundraising for the organization without the burden of governance.

4. The time has come to stop using management as the bulwark between the twin competing constituencies of the Board and the musicians.  Management should be incentivized and empowered to work for the maximum efficiency of orchestra, and not used to flog the other constituency in a labor atmosphere that should have been left in the 1950s.  After all, this job is hard enough, why make it harder?

We must make it easier for The Management to present concerts, pursue new artistic endeavors, and provide for the day-to-day operation of the Minnesota Orchestra.  It should be acknowledged that The Management is a constituency as important as any other.

Conclusion

It is time to move on with the long overdue task of finding a new orchestral governance model suitable for the 21st Century.  In these days of 3-D printers, social media, and home HD entertainment it makes little sense to try and run a large, personnel heavy, non-profit institution by the rules and regulations of the McCarthy era.  The world has changed too much for that approach to have the necessary flexibility to succeed.

It’s broke.  Why bother trying to fix it?  Throw it out. When I moved into my house in 1995 I discovered that my laboring clothes dryer was from 1951.  That poor dryer could barely get above 80 degrees (fahrenheit, I must add) and it did not take me long to have a new dryer delivered and installed by my local large appliance store. I firmly believe that the Minnesota Orchestra is in that same boat. Let us see if all those who share a love and passion for the mighty Minnesota manage to create a new and more flexible governance model and get back on the road to prosperity.

Next Post: Something Old, Something New, Something Borrowed, Something Blue State

It has now been almost seven months since the corporate managers of the Minnesota Orchestral Association decided that the best way to move this orchestra forward into a successful future was to lock out its musicians, set a non-negotiable annual budget that would be dwarfed by all of our peers, and demand an array of cuts the likes of which have never before been seen at any major American orchestra. Under their plan, the base salary of a Minnesota Orchestra musician would plummet, overnight, to a figure that, adjusted for inflation, equates to what our predecessors were making in 1983. Under their plan, untold numbers of public orchestral concerts would be scrapped and replaced with musicians being farmed out to play private corporate rental events at Orchestra Hall. Under their plan, the final authority on the hiring of new musicians for our orchestra would be stripped away from our Music Director, and given instead to the corporate management team.

In the face of these demands, we requested, way back last September, the right to speak to the full board of directors about our concerns. That request – to speak to the very people who hold our lives and careers in their hands – was met with eight months of flat refusals. Finally, two weeks ago, we were offered a 15-minute slot to address the next full board meeting. Better late than never: we’re looking forward to meeting with them tomorrow.

There has been a lot of misinformation flying around over the last few months, and one of the most disturbing things to us has been our management’s continuing allegation that our attempts to reach out to our board and conduct meaningful inquiries into our management’s plans for the future amount to nothing more than delaying tactics.

Let’s be very clear about one thing. This lockout is destroying the Minnesota Orchestra, musician by musician by musician. As I look around this stage, I look into the faces of no fewer than three incredible colleagues who are playing with us for the very last time tonight, and they are only the latest to leave as a direct result of the lockout and the short-sighted business plan that spawned it. The full complement of the Minnesota Orchestra is 98 musicians. After tonight, we will be down to 73. Delay? Why would we want to delay anything that could put an end to this nightmare?

The loss of our best musicians is also not the only consequence we will face if this artistically unsustainable lockout continues much longer. Our ongoing recording projects, which garnered us a Grammy nomination this year, are very much in jeopardy. It is very likely that we will shortly find ourselves officially disinvited from performing the symphonies of Sibelius at Carnegie Hall this coming fall. In a few months, Orchestra Hall will be ready to reopen, but what will it stand for? Will it continue to be the proud home of one of the finest symphony orchestras in the world, and of the hardest-working, most dedicated group of musicians that I haveever been fortunate enough to be a part of? Or will it be just another venue to be rented out to the highest bidder night after night, perhaps with some nice string quartets in the background?

We have been told, time after time, by our management, that great symphonic music, performed by world-class musicians, has now become fiscally unsustainable. And we say to you tonight that it is this lockout that is unsustainable. Great American orchestras are thriving in cities from Cleveland to Chicago to Washington, D.C., and a lot of those cities would kill for the economic advantages we enjoy here at home. Minnesota is at or near the top of every list of positive economic indicators, and we boast a philanthropic and business community that would be the envy of most cities twice our size. What is unsustainable here is the notion that Minnesota no longer deserves the fruits of its decades-long labor. What is unsustainable is the idea that building for the future is accomplished by demolishing the present.

We are your orchestra: you brought us here, you gave us a home, and you showed the world what we could do together. We are looking to the future, and tonight, we need your help more than ever. If you’ve written a letter, or made a phone call, or dashed off an e-mail supporting us over the past seven months, we thank you. But we need another letter, another e-mail, and very soon, if you join our e-mail list and monitor our web site at minnesotaorchestramusicians.org, we’ll be rolling out some new ways you can add your voice to the struggle. Together, we will make our collective voice heard; together, we will reset the priorities of this sadly drifting organization; together, we will ensure that our audience will never again be marginalized and ignored; together, we will do away with the cynicism and ideology that has led us to this precipice; and together, we will move this orchestra forward into a truly artistically sustainable future.

You know, no one has been more outspoken in opposition to this lockout and the destructive plan that accompanies it than the man who got Orchestra Hall built in the first place. It was Stan Skrowaczewski who, way back in the 1960s, when this orchestra was only 60 or so years old, worked with visionary Minnesota leaders to chart a course of growth and expansion for the orchestra he loved. And it is Stan who has been reminding us all of what is at stake all along the way. When we began rehearsals for this concert earlier this week, Stan jumped up on the podium with an energy that, frankly, I didn’t have when I was 20. And the first thing he said to us, just before we began to play, was this: “It is so good to be with you. And I mean that not only musically, but morally.”

It is so good to be with all of you tonight, both musically and morally. Ladies and gentlemen, would you please welcome back to the podium, Maestro Stanislaw Skrowaczewski.