Change happens. We make change happen.  Change changes us. We change places.  Becoming an arts leader is no small change.

Didn’t many of us start out in this business to make change, or at least to contribute to change already occurring? Did we really sign on to a life of low pay and low profile for the excitement of the status quo?  Is that what keeps our artists and audiences growing, the lure of monotony?  What are the road blocks that prevent us from being innovative agents of change? 

Are we truly developing as leaders who anticipate and thrive on change?  Where along our development path do we learn to identify what and when to change, as well as how to lead others through change, especially that which we didn’t foresee or initiate?   How can we engage and transform leaders averse to change?  How can leaders in all levels within an organization introduce and implement change?  Are we embracing the change that new leaders can bring to our work?

We believe that arts and culture can change our cores and change our communities.  We are tirelessly working to change the minds of skeptics.  Why does it then, seem so hard to change ourselves sometimes?  Change the way we think, operate and lead?  Change the lens we’re looking through?  Are we changing our methods and models to adjust to new landscapes? Can we stop changing tires and reinventing wheels, and instead create a vessel that doesn’t require them to go forward?

First, John Killacky, I’m so jealous that you blogged from and about Salzburg, birthplace of Mozart and imaginary home of the Von Trapps. Second, I sensed a thread through many of the rich posts—notably Margy Waller’s and Barry Hessenius’—about the importance of telling an arts story that resonates and is relevant to listeners.

What is the connection between Salzburg and The Hurt Locker?  I believe it’s about authenticity and identity.

Salzburg IS music, it attracts visitors who seek a connection to the magic of geniuses past and present. The city and music are synonymous, creating an appeal that resonates in the ear and the soul as much as the mind. Anticipation of the experience is a mesmerizing overture to a visit and even second hand, thank you John, we have a sense of the magic.

The Hurt Locker is a case in point of making something irresistible by being so authentic that early audiences had a unique experience and became advocates, sharing their enthusiasm via word-of-mouth—which, as we know, is the most powerful marketing tool on the planet. For those of you who haven’t seen it, the movie is tangentially about the war but actually is a character study of what war does to the warriors, creating a rush of adrenaline which becomes an addiction and makes real life seem dead by comparison.

(It just so happens that one of my oldest friends is the mother of Mark Boal, author of the Hurt Locker and winner of an Oscar for best original screen play.  Mark wrote the script drawing on his embedded experience as a journalist with a bomb squad in Iraq. When the movie was released it seemed that audiences wanted anything but a realistic picture of wartime Iraq—the war that’s happening “off stage” to most Americans. Mark even resorted to giving away free tickets to assure a full house and secure a second week’s run. Then the word-of-mouth took off and it became, as noted in the media, “the little movie that could.” Decidedly it wasn’t for everyone but was irresistible to the passionate few.)

How are these two examples relevant and what can we learn from them? Art happens in real time with the exchange between audience and experience. The “noise” the soul hears is the sound of art awakening the human within.

I think it’s simple; it’s about telling our stories well to folks who are hungry to hear them. Every arts experience is unique. No two performances are the same—even of the same play, dance, or music. No visual arts offering will be viewed the same way by any two individuals. No two cities are the same, Salzburg will never be New York or Peoria, for that matter (as our new NEA Chairman discovered!)

The arts, as Picasso said, “Wash from the soul the dust of everyday life.”
We need to do a better job of helping audiences understand the unique appeal of each offering, and be clear about what’s in it for them. People know what to expect when they visit Salzburg or New York, they already know what’s in it for them and are prepared to engage. We need to help the willing get involved with the arts experience and the artists who create it so they become advocates and create the “echo effect” Margy described. I believe everyone wants to be an insider and the more authentic and intense the arts experience; the more impact and resonance it can have.

I’ve been pleased and excited to be part of this fascinating Blog this week.  Many thanks to AFTA’s Private Sector for putting it together and to my fellow bloggers for the stimulating exchange.

I was inspired to connect the dots by John Cloys’ “Big Thing$ Come in Small Packages” and Mark Brewer’s “Finding Passionate Art Investors.” The challenge for the arts community is that we are currently caught in the “in-between.” Most institutions are trapped between the old fundraising techniques that we’ve practiced for the past thirty years and younger givers used to the new technologies of cyberspace.  We are “in-between” the generational gap of traditional donors who want their names on projects and buildings and a younger generation that wants to be totally involved and make community change with cell phones and ipods in hand.

One of our challenges is to position traditional arts institutions not as “entitlements for giving” but as agents for community development, cultural growth and economic expansion. This means a change in operations, marketing and programs. Younger, leaner, and more “hip” organizations may have the upper hand in their appeal to the new generation of givers. Ethnic-centric organizations have the ability to promote cultural diversity and understanding through their art that appeals to a generation that has grown up with a better reality of how our communities have changed.

Then there is the basic understanding of technology and its use in marketing and raising money. Watch Ben Moore’s talk at the TED Canada event. Ben, director of arts for the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation, points out the challenges of performing arts organizations in a world where everyone “knows a 14 year old making her third, fourth, or fifth movie” and downloads of music at 99 cents. The ability to be an artist at a professional level of work has never been so accessible. “ProAm,” Ben calls it. Professional amateurs…making art, posting it on utube, taking lessons to be a “dancing with the stars” star, cutting CDs with Garage Band and the list goes on.

My generation sees the “in-between” all too clearly… in-between traditional fundraising and what a million people giving $25 on the web can do (like elect a president.) In-between traditional organizations heavy with facilities, reputation and aging donors and lithe young groups, marketing on social networks and making the connections between arts and community change. Maybe there isn’t anything to be done except to wait for these two worlds to change as one grows slowly older and the other develops sophistication that we can’t even predict today.  It’s unsettling to be in the “in-between” but that’s where we are.

This week, hundreds of people met in Providence to discuss “Connecting Creative Communities” in New England.

While there, I had the chance to share our new research with the audience. The response was inspiring. So many people there seemed to recognize the polite head nodding we get when talking about ROI of the arts in dollars and cents. Like us, they also know it isn’t persuasive enough to decision-makers. So, the arts remain a vulnerable policy choice in the public arena.

These New Englanders are as happy as we are to know more about how the public thinks about art and what people value about our art: the vibrancy it brings to our neighborhoods and the way it connects people.

Like me, they struggle with when to talk about art as entertainment and when to avoid that idea. Talking about art as entertainment puts people in a personal, consumer frame of mind – we know now that this is a barrier to thinking about art as a citizen. In the citizen mode, it’s easier to support the arts collectively, as a public good.

So, we discussed the importance of keeping these stories separate.

When we want to promote the value of the arts to everyone – even those who don’t participate by going to concerts or shows – we will focus on stories like how the new theatre on 14th street in Washington DC changed the neighborhood, filling it with people and activity. And how the fringe festival in Cincinnati brings people together from all over the region – people who might not meet under any other circumstances.

Hundreds of interviews in our region provide the proof that this works. Just because art IS entertainment, doesn’t mean we have to always present it that way. When we want to move people to action that supports the arts sector – we should avoid the entertainment lens on the issue. On the other hand, when we are trying to sell tickets, art IS entertainment!

To wrap up this week of important dialog about new strategies for building support for the arts, I’ll share the fun that the New England audience got to see.

This is the video of a surprise public dance my organization put together for our annual community fundraising campaign for the arts.

You’ll notice that we don’t name any arts organizations – we just SHOW how the arts bring people together AND make our city vibrant!

If you want to see the “Making of Splash Dance” video when we release it in a few weeks, sign up for our occasional emails here.

Bob Lynch, President & CEO of Americans for the Arts, discusses the slippage in current private sector giving and addresses the private sector giving blog salon taking place on ARTSblog from March 8-12.

Bob also makes specific references to blog posts by Janet Brown, Julie Muraco, and Mark Brewer and urges visitors to catch up on the the blog posts from the salon.

To find the Salon blog posts in one place, use the Salon March 10 tag.

When Americans for the Arts rolled out its National Arts Index in January, it presented a new way to measure the health and vitality of the arts and culture sector by examining various indicators and comparing them to a 2003 baseline.

“Healthy” would not be a word used describe what the corporate giving figures will look like in 2009 and 2010, and there was some discussion as to whether business and corporate giving  to the arts would ever again be vital. Arthur C. Brooks, an advisor to the index, a musician, and president of the American Enterprise Institute, went so far as to declare that this, ladies and gentlemen, is the new reality for corporate giving in American, and we will never again see even the modest levels of support that arts organizations received in the mid 2000s.

This comment, naturally, sent me running back home with all kinds of questions for our corporate leaders here in Portland. I asked some of our friends to tell us whether they think corporate giving will recover, and what arts organizations should know going forward. This is what they’re saying.

• Carole Morse, President of the PGE Foundation: “One thing that is happening corporately is the desire to tie giving to corporate strategies and performance.  Nobody’s come up w/the formula that can measure that very well.  The best way to increase corporate giving is to get employees volunteering and giving to the arts — then corporate dollars will follow.”

• Mark Edlen, Principal for Gerding Edlen Development: “Yes corporate giving to the arts will recover. However, it looks like it will be some time before the economy fully recovers and we reach close to full employment.  Until we reach stability I would expect reduced giving and that it will be in direct proportion to profitability.  Particularly, I would expect that smaller local companies’ giving will be 100% dependent on profitability because the giving decision is most typically made by the owner who is dependent on his or her company’s profits to generate donations.  There is some logic to the notion that some will not give at previous levels due to the duration and severity of this downturn and the resulting ‘scarring’ effect.”

• Bob Speltz, Director of Public Affairs at Standard Insurance: “Fair or not, there is the perception that businesses here can and should do more. For those of us inside companies that have long supported cultural institutions, hearing that is hard. At Nike, they are using sports to build civil society and to improve lives. Intel is very focused on science and education, and bringing women and people of color into the field. This may be frustrating for arts groups to hear. But what it really means is that they have to do their homework and figure out which organizations care about the arts.

• George Thorn, consultant, Arts Action Research: “Other recessions tend to be cyclical. In looking ahead, we see this extending over a considerable period of time and don’t know what will be the new reality. I don’t’ think we’re going back to a previous reality. Everyone from foundations to corporations are doing the best they can with what they have, but there’s a lack of awareness of the value of the arts in this city. We dream big things about recycling and sustainability here. But we just don’t dream big enough about culture and the arts.”

The task ahead, it seems, is to compel our business leaders who have supported the arts in the past to re-invest in our right-sized organizations as their profits allow, and to scour the companies in our communities for any arts-related angle we can find.

This graffiti showed up in several women’s bathroom stalls on my college campus, California State University San Marcos (CSUSM) (just north of San Diego) last week. It fell on the heels of several racial incidents at another local campus, University of California San Diego, and the announcement on our campus, that we had been officially granted “Hispanic Serving Institution” status.

The President of the university immediately issued a statement that “hate crimes on campus will not be tolerated,” and university police “are taking all necessary steps to bring the person responsible to justice.” The president also posted a picture of the graffiti for all to witness (above). Students organized a huge “Stop the hate at CSUSM” rally within days, and during the rally many students expressed their fears, hopes, thoughts, and experiences through rap and poetry. In 1967, when I was in 3d grade, my elementary report card began with these words:

The school aims to assist in making a good future citizen of your child. To gain this end, home and school must work together. [His] training to be a citizen worthy of character is as much a matter of developing the right attitudes as it is of teaching [him] facts. -Beverly Massachusetts

I had art, music, and physical education teachers, and I was graded in these areas on my report card. This is in sharp contrast to my daughter’s report card (2010) which does not grade the arts nor physical education. The district’s mission, “is to guarantee that our students flourish in life as enthusiastic, confident learners in a world class educational system.” There is no mention of preparing a good citizen, nor is there any mention of the relationship between home and schooling.

I was heartened at my campus rally to see so many students and professors speak out (and even shout!) for social justice. And, at the same time I was heartbroken that in 2010 students on campuses harbor such racist views. It is not such a surprise, however. K-12 schools are not setting the stage for the learning of democracy. And the consequences are too dire to ignore.

Over the last forty years (since my 3d grade report card), public education has transformed many times and in many ways. The loss of arts, and the institutionalization of testing and test-taking skills has severely diminished the time and opportunity for students to learn the ABCs of democracy, and engagement. These are skills that cannot be taught via a worksheet or in solitude. Children need the time and opportunity to learn to work together, to problem solve, to think outside of the box, and to understand there are many kinds of people, and ways of thinking when it comes to any particular issue or event in history. Ultimately, children need to learn to care about each other, and about learning. Yet, this is not the focus or aim of most schools or curriculum.

I was particularly intrigued with students’ expressions of outrage at the CSUSM rally, since so many students expressed themselves via poetry and rapping. They were passionate, they were confident, they were hurt, they were angry, and at the same time they felt empowered to share their views with the audience. Their poetry and raps were engaging, creative, and powerful. Most of these students did not have any significant arts training in their formal education. Imagine if they did! It seems to me that the arts will survive as a mode of communicating whether or not they are taught in schools. However, students could have easily used their talents to communicate very different and disturbing messages. In fact, it appears to me as if the graffiti on my campus was written as a poem.

I am not arguing that arts and sports in schools will solve all of our societal problems or erase bigotry. They won’t. But they will help students go a long way toward becoming more engaged. Through participating in the arts, core values and skills of democracy are taught: the ability to work cooperatively, listen to each other, critically analyze and reflect, improvise, question, and negotiate. Democracy demands an attention to understanding others – including people who come from different economic backgrounds, races, cultures, sexual orientations, religions, and so on.

The student(s) on my campus who wrote the hateful graffiti are a sad reflection of a broken educational system. Though I remain hopeful that the human spirit will always outweigh any attempts at hate, we have no time to spare at this point. Paying close attention to how and what is taught in school in order to prepare future engaged citizens should become top priority over the attainment of great test scores.

We need to support effective school leaders such as principals who are willing to create their schools into communities of learning and of understanding; leaders who look into the future as they guide their students to become engaged and caring citizens. Restore arts, sports, and a kind of learning that empowers students to think, reflect, and take action. No one ever said that democracy was easy. But it is attainable, if our education system allows it. And by the way, for those of you stuck on test scores…here’s the great news: research has shown over and over (and in all settings) that arts-rich schools produce higher test scores.

As a side note, I sent an e-mail to volunteers at the Tea Party with a picture of the graffiti above saying: “I hope your organization is taking or will assume responsibility for training college students to speak their values without inciting racial hatred.” I haven’t, however, heard back from them.

After reading the blogs and participating in conference calls and every other forum, the question remains: What works? Because we are a UAF we want to know the message that helps garner investments. But any one of us knows that to do whatever we do, we need money. How do we get it?

We ask each other, searching for just the right message that will resonate–with corporations and individuals. One of my questions has become: Is true philanthropy gone? We continually try to link investment with return–and not just helping create a wonderfully rich community–a dollar return. What do you get for the money?

When we fashion our asks to increase the money invested by providing some sort of quantifiable ROI, are we doing ourselves and the agencies we serve a favor  These agencies produce art, history, culture–and while that is a huge benefit to our community–it is also art, history, and culture. It is beyond description, beyond belief sometimes, beyond a metric, and truly valuable for its own sake.

So how do we move forward? Some of the blogs suggest that when business is better our industry will be better. Many of our agencies operate the same way. I, for one, do not believe the climate will return as before. It will be different, and most likely less well funded, so what do we do?

Let’s grapple with this!

I’d like to take this opportunity to brag about a very exciting creative economy effort in Wisconsin, in the Milwaukee region. National arts and culture leaders from around the country experienced Milwaukee’s vibrant arts and culture sector at the 2006 Americans for the Arts conference. Now southeast Wisconsin is leading the way in assessing, strengthening and sustaining the regional creative economy for the 21st century.

The Cultural Alliance of Greater Milwaukee, the regional cultural development/service and advocacy organization, has recently received a $146,250 grant from the U.S. Economic Development Administration (EDA) for “Creative Works!”, a visionary project to turn cultural and creative vision into action and results.

This support of infrastructure development of the artistic and creative economy is a first for the EDA, and a sign that the economic development infrastructure has begun to recognize investment in the arts as a 21st century strategy for stability and sustainability.

I know we will see more of this kind of support from economic development institutions, on all levels, as the creative economy develops globally. For now this groundbreaking grant from a national economic development institution is something for Wisconsin to brag about.

The Cultural Alliance, Milwaukee Artist Resource Network, the regional organization working with individual artists and creative entrepreneurs, and Greater Milwaukee Committee (GMC), the premier organization for business in the region, are working as a “Creative Coalition” to oversee and guide the ongoing development process. The mission of the Coalition is to integrate the region’s individual creatives, for profit creative businesses, and nonprofit arts and culture groups into a creative economy sector that furthers the distinctiveness and growth of the region.

Mt. Auburn Associates of Cambridge, MA are leading the planning process.  More information about the Cultural Alliance is at www.culturalalliancemke.org.  More information about Milwaukee’s Creative Coalition is at www.creativecoalitionmke.com.

Last month I joined colleagues from around the world to attend the Salzburg Global Seminar: “The Performing Arts in Lean Times:  Opportunities for Reinvention.” Adrian Ellis and Russell Willis Taylor co-chaired the convening. Several ideas from this meeting may be relevant to our blogosphere discussions.

First the context: we were lodged in Max Reinhart’s castle. This is the building that stood in for the Von Trapp villa featured in the movie version of “The Sound of Music.” And, of course, there’s Salzburg, itself: Mozart’s birthplace in the Austrian Alps — totally fabulous!

Now, here are some tidbits from our conversations, as well as my observations.

First off, lean times in the West snapped into perspective when a Zambian playwright reminded us that people in her country live on two dollars a day. This starkly contrasted with the news from a Hong Kong government administrator who privately shared that his city is increasing its (already) multi-billion dollar investment in culture.

Policy analysts, journalists, and practitioners debated.  Have the arts lost their legitimacy? Why have we not been able to articulate our values to various shareholders?

The beleaguered assembled were reassured and fortified by a Bharatanatyam choreographer from India. She explained the concept of Rasa, a Sanskrit term indicating the profound state of empathic bliss that an arts experience can produce in each of us.

Additional encouragement followed. Several presenters addressed the pivotal (at times, predicating) role that arts play in transforming societies. We were rapt as we learned about burgeoning theaters in Beirut, a community center on the outskirts of Casablanca, and a major cultural center in downtown Newark – all metamorphosing their communities.  The intrinsic, social, and economic value of the arts became eminently clear. At last, it was safe to be sanguine!

Leaders from major institutions in England, Australia, and the States groused about cascading losses in ticket revenue, endowments, as well as government and foundation support. Furthermore, they noted, on-line innovations encouraging us to co-create meaning and crowdsource have disrupted the authority once ascribed to large arts organizations.

And, of course, the erosion of arts journalism in mainstream media only compounds all of our problems.

Perhaps, the primary conversation at the summit circled in on sustainability. Is focusing on institutional sustainability the right priority in these, or any, unstable economic times? Perhaps, longevity is not sufficient to warrant investment. Could it be that capitalizing vitality is more pertinent?

As stimulating as the formal presentations and work groups may have been, time-outs with colleagues were deeply rejuvenating. Sitting by a lake in the Austrian Alps reconnecting with friends I have known and worked with for over 20 years was worth the 16 hour cramped coach sojourn. And making new friends in the field was equally terrific.

As the recession lingers, there are going to be many difficult choices for all of us.  My Salzburg retreat reaffirmed that all of us, (artists, producers, presenters, curators, funders, academics, and government workers) with our multiple perspectives, need each other not to lose faith. We rely on one another to continue caring and believing in the power of art.

Technology and funding forecasters predict that 2010 is the breakthrough year for mobile fundraising. SMS mobile giving is one of the fastest growing fundraising outlets; this brings fundraising to your fingertips in a new and exciting way. This was first made popular by relief efforts for Katrina and has since been used by campaigns such as Share Our Strength, The Salvation Army, UNICIF, and the Obama Presidential Campaign.

This trendy topic amongst fundraisers and charitable organizations will attract a younger donor base that was, until now, virtually unreachable. Even a teenager who receives a modest allowance would have the opportunity to make a difference. Cultivating the younger generation of donors can fuel your fundraising efforts and promote a relationship that will hopefully develop into sustainable giving.

To speak to the younger, mobile, or tech savvy donors, organizations should implement a texting donation campaign within their mobile strategy. Since this area is still emerging and developing, it is essential to go through a third party mobile application service vendor such as Mobile Giving Foundation or Mobile Accord.  These vendors provide the organizational structure and ensure compliance with the state and federal communication laws. In addition they act as the billing settlement and records clearinghouse between carriers and participating charities. The organization must comply with a Nonprofit Standards of Compliance Standards (NSC), a list of basic requirements to prove authenticity and legitimacy. While this avenue may be cost prohibitive at the onset, by implementing this strategy you are able to maximize your fundraising efforts and minimize the amount of work done in house.

While this strategy is new and can be somewhat intimidating, it is important to embrace such strategies to maximize exposure in this mobile media driven world. SMS mobile campaigns will launch your organization into the future of fundraising while engaging the donors of tomorrow.

Have you experienced a SMS mobile campaign or transaction?  Please share your thoughts and insight below.

We recently ran a Creative Economy Workforce grants program with funding provided by the special Community Development Block Grant allocation increase under the Recovery Act (CDBG-R). Quite a mouthful, and quite an ordeal in terms of paperwork to administer. BUT, what operating this program highlighted was the need to move beyond our traditional definition of how we define the arts, and the sorts of activity that is funded or supported. In effect, we are trying to perform sophisticated surgery on the patient with rusty sabers and sledgehammers—our tools are not appropriate to the job we have to do.

Increasingly, creative activity is happening within a for-profit or hybrid context. Many of the most innovative artists studio and live/workspace developments happening in Philadelphia right now are not initiated by nonprofit organizations but by creative entrepreneurs who have identified a market niche and are seeking to fill it. We have a commercial developer looking to create a public sculpture garden because they feel it will add value to their property and help attract and serve their tenants. We have a recycling company that wants to add artist studio space to their recycling plant so artists can work on site with recycled materials. One of our most successful creative economy/technology co-working spaces got started with no government input or support or even any type of philanthropic support.

There has been a lot of talk lately about the death of the nonprofit arts model, but the model is not dead. We are just moving into an era where an array of different models exist to make and support art and creativity. Some are for-profit and some nonprofit. Yet we (as in the “arts funding and policy sector”) are all set up to support and study nonprofit arts groups—and maybe individual artists. And our commercial economic development folks largely ignore creative businesses and artists as an industry segment. Even in my own city, I find it somewhat concerning that tremendous energy and resources are going into fostering “green” jobs, when there is an opportunity to support a vibrant creative economy sector that already exists. And, of course, the two are totally connected as a successful green economy depends on innovation and creativity—designers, architects, landscape architects, etc.

For our CDBG-R program we learned that it was unprecedented for the City to be making “grants” to for-profit businesses; it simply did not fit into the system. But why not?  If our goal is to foster our creative sector, create temporary and long-term jobs, improve our neighborhoods, why should it matter what the corporate structure is of the entity that is helping us achieve those goals? I remember having a conversation with Gregory Peck years ago (he was an investor in “Lady Day at Emerson’s Bar and Grill” which I produced Off Broadway in NYC), and he told me of the first few years of the NEA when he was on the National Council – he remembered with great wistfulness the fact that in those early years they (the Council—there was little staff yet) were able to go around and identify what needed to be supported to advance the arts in America. He recalled one grant (made at the suggestion of violinist Isaac Stern, another early Councilmember) to an elderly business-owner who was one of the last remaining links to the art-form of hand-crafting rosin for bows. He was not a nonprofit corporation, and was not even a maker of art directly. But the craft he practiced was essential to musicians, and the grant allowed him to stay in business and train apprentices before retiring. Today that grant could not be made.

Somehow we need to change how government cultural and economic development agencies operate, how foundations operate, how policies are developed and implemented. Should Americans for the Arts be working as hard as it does on NEA funding, to help ensure that the new landscape of commercial music provides opportunities for young musicians, airplay on the radio, access to iTunes distribution, etc.? There is some good work happening with NEA Chairman Rocco Landesman’s reaching out to all the cabinet members to explore the role of the arts in Commerce, HUD, Interior, etc. But we need to make sure that new way of thinking is reflected at the state and local levels, in private funding, and in our thought leaders.

This “brave new world” can seem scary. We worry if traditional art forms and structures like symphony orchestras and opera and art museums will survive. I think the answer is yes, but that the business models and structures may in ten or twenty years look nothing like what we see today. Why couldn’t an art museum’s art department also be a commercial graphic design firm working for outside clients, or their lighting and exhibition design department providing consulting services to high-end retailers? Why can’t a symphony orchestra also be the orchestra for a local opera and ballet company, or be contracted to record jingles or movie soundtracks? I am sure these ideas can easily be shot down, but I provide them just as brief examples of the kind of thinking that is on the horizon where our commercial and nonprofit business models will blend into hybrids. We can bemoan this as a loss of purity, but it is a purity we never truly possessed to start with.

My rabble-rousing thoughts for the day…

The Creation of Adam, Bob Bosch, used with permission

I always dread the first day of classes. I’m currently getting my master’s in operations research and the first day of class is the time when I start to stand out. In every class, we start by going around the room and saying our name and what we do. It usually goes something like: Bob, military employee; Jim, government contractor; Pete, different government contractor… you get the point. Then comes my turn, “Meredith, Americans for the Arts.” Immediately, heads turn and everybody identifies me as the oddball.  

However, there is a growing and little known area of operations research known as “opt art.” This stands for optimization art and this field utilizes optimization algorithms (operations research technology) to make portraits, pictures, and designs. Some of the pictures are created using the classic “traveling salesman problem” where the goal is to reach every point (city) exactly once in the shortest distance. Others are created with knot problems or using a pointillism approach.  

Dr. Bob Bosch is applying this technology to make portraits using dominos. He has made several portraits of famous people (like Marilyn Monroe) and will even make you a customized portrait of your loved one.The majority of the applications of operations research apply to business and military decision-making (the field originated after WWII in the military).  Operations research is a combination of applied mathematics and statistics to determine the optimal (or near optimal) solution to complex problems. It is closely related to the field of management science (the business application of operations research) and industrial engineering.  

Marilyn Monroe Domino Portrait, Bob Bosch, used with permission

I am always amazed at the new and different applications of operations research that I see in the INFORMS (Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences) quarterly journal Operations Research. Some of the applications that caught my eye were: 

• The optimal training program for a triathlon
• Deciding whether Netflix should impose a due date to their movies
• Building a water irrigation system in New Zealand
• How to respond to an influenza pandemic

However, in my opinion, this is definitely the most visually appealing application of operations research I’ve seen.

For more examples of opt art, please visit Bob Bosch’s TSP Art website or his domino art website.

This week Stanford University released a study on iPhone addiction. The 200 college students surveyed said: “On a scale of one to five, where five is full blown addiction and one is not addicted at all, 10 percent of the respondents ranked themselves as a five, 34 percent a four …”

Now, I am a few years out of college, but I am whole-heartedly addicted to my iPhone. That’s why I was excited to hear about Americans for the Arts’ inclusion in a new free app called CauseWorld (also available for Android). It’s a micro-giving social media app that is easy to use and allows you quickly (and frequently) support your favorite causes. CauseWorld works similar to Foursquare: just open it up when you are near retail stores or local businesses, check-in to receive Karma Points, and then donate those points to one of the featured causes such as bringing art to schools. Karma Points are actually real funds provided by sponsors, Citibank and Kraft foods.

It seems that everyday cell phone apps are opening up new doors for promotion, fundraising, and productivity for those working in the nonprofit arts. So here is my list of the Top 10 iPhone Apps for the Arts.

BE CREATIVE

• Brushes – The infamous painting app.
• TypeDrawing – This is a very cool text-based drawing app
• MovieMaker – Make your own stop-motion movies.
• Paint Light – It’s Lite-Brite for your iPhone, ’nuff said.

TRAVEL smART

• Artnear – A worldwide guide to art exhibitions, museums, and galleries. Also available for Blackberry users.
• BandMate – Find live music events and concerts no matter where you are.

PRODUCTIVITY RULES

• Evernote – The ultimate multi-media sticky pad. Available for numerous platforms, including Mac, PC, iPhone, Android, and Blackberry.
• Quickoffice – See Excel spreadsheets in your sleep? Now edit them easily on your iPhone.
• Shiftboard – Mange volunteer or staff schedules from your phone. Great for events or conferences.

VISIBILITY & FUNDRAISING

• CharityFinder – Make sure your nonprofit is listed to maximize visibility and outreach to new donors.

And don’t forget to check out these apps from Americans for the Arts members: ArtsMemphis and 40 North | 88 West. Both apps include comprehensive arts calendars for their regions.

Are you inspired to make your own app? Here is a good resource of case studies on what other nonprofits have done. Or check out appmakr.com or Swebapps for information on how to create your own mobile app.

Do you have a favorite app? Let us know in the comments below.

Expanding on my first post, we need to:

1. Identify what business wants from, thinks about, and considers the obstacles, challenges and opportunities to continued, substantive talks between the two sectors, and;
2. Ascertain what changes in the arts sector’s approach to building meaningful coalitions and collaborative efforts are essential prerequisites to address the business community’s needs. 

This knowledge would help the arts sector to move the status of potential collaborative efforts from the current “conceptual level” to more active status by developing strategies that could move towards specific action steps in fostering working alliances – by designing action steps that are in alignment with stated business needs.   Specifically, it is incumbent on the arts sector to fully understand and appreciate what factors the business community identifies as essential for its involvement to be of benefit to them.

That kind of inquiry might include the following discussions with business:

1.  The relationship between creativity and innovation; how the concepts differ in theory and application. 
2. What skills business most values in prospective employees and the relationship between participation in the arts and the development of those skills.
3. How creativity and innovation are defined in each sector, how skills in each are fostered, assessed and nourished?
4.  Identification of what factors would encourage business to fast track involvement with the arts – including barriers and obstacles.
5. The linkage between current arts education and skills desired by business in prospective employees.
6. How arts education is directly related to student interest in math and science, and to proficiency in each subject, including current research.
7. How integration of the arts into the corporate culture might increase productivity, decrease employee absenteeism, improve staff communication, and add to changing “brand” images with the public.
8. The relationship between creativity and the arts, and motivation, idea incubation, brand identity, public valuation, and technical skills development.
9. The rise of the creative class and the role of imagination in the business sector.
10. The changing global marketplace and American business competitiveness.

And that kind of dialogue would potentially yield these kinds of results:

• The ability to leverage the involvement of key, high-profile business leadership to widen and deepen the business community’s understanding of the potential benefits of a real, working relationship between the sectors.
• An opportunity to begin the process of institutionalizing open, on-going and productive lines of communication between the arts and business communities, both locally and nationally.
• A chance to dispel erroneous assumptions held by the business community relative to value of artistic skills, processes and experiences to workforce development
• The opportunity to advance a consensus-built mutual vocabulary defining language to be used in the discussion of areas of mutual interest such as creativity, innovation, entrepreneurialism, etc. 

Unless and until we understand on a deeper level the business perspective on any relationship with the arts (which we do not now really have), there will be precious little advancement of that relationship.

As the late Speaker of the House, Tip O’Neill said famously, “all politics are local.” Could this be a lesson for the arts sector? I was interested in a recent article in The New York Times on February 17th about the formidable Huntington Theater in Boston which is charting a new course to become more relevant to its neighbors. Artistic Director, Peter DuBois noted – “The fact is, the artistic and business models of the regional theaters in the 20th century are over, given the costs of creating theater and the competition for people’s time, so I needed to rethink our relationship with our home community.  To thrive we need a theater with work and audiences that look more like the city of Boston in terms of class, age, race, background. And you have to talk to people here to learn how to do that.”

Maybe that’s our answer for this arts-challenged time, listen first, then talk and make sure you speak the local dialect.

The question of being relevant is hardly new but I commend to your attention a brand new report by the Cincinnati Fine Arts Fund:  The Arts Ripple Effect: A research-based strategy to build shared responsibility for the arts. (Available at www.fineartsfund.org.)

The key findings of  this excellent report are that the arts seemingly promising messages about civic inspiration and human universals didn’t resonate among the “moveable middle” of citizens – those who aren’t focused on the arts in their daily lives but do care about the health and vitality of their neighborhood and community.

The bottom line is simple but perhaps profound – the messages that moved the needle emphasized one organizing idea: “A thriving arts sector creates ‘ripple effects’ of benefits throughout the community.” The most compelling of these? Just the ones that the arts uniquely provide – 1) The arts make neighborhoods livelier, attracting tourists and residents to the area and 2) The arts enable diverse groups to share common experiences and by hearing new perspectives, understand each other better.

Of course a thriving arts sector produces those local benefits (which is of course why artist rich neighborhoods gentrify faster than others – often resulting in artists being unable to afford to live there!)

One of the political leaders I was privileged to work with during my time at Wallace was Mayor Michael Nutter of Philadelphia. When asked why he was such a strong supporter of the arts he replied (I’m paraphrasing) “For me, it’s not about art, it’s about how the arts and artists make people want to come to, hang out in and stay in Philadelphia – and that helps me do my job of keeping the city lively and livable.”

So there you have it, Simple? Profound? Maybe the arts can be each community’s “ruby slippers” reminding citizens why “There’s no place like home?”

A 2007 study by the Social Impact of the Arts Project at the University of Pennsylvania describes the impact of cultivating “natural” Cultural Districts. They’re not talking about building high profile, big-ticket downtown cultural districts (think Lincoln Center) but rather about using culture to revitalize the urban grass-roots — its neighborhoods and their residents’ civic engagement.

This is about nurturing “down home” indigenous culture — as the report notes: “The arts are no longer just about going to the symphony, the ballet, or a Broadway musical.  They are more active, more accessible, and more polyglot.  Artists have become social entrepreneurs; selling their wares as well as their vision…The arts build ties that bind – neighbor-to-neighbor and community-to-community.”

It is these social networks that translate cultural vitality into economic dynamism. They are natural cultural districts which identify and ennoble the density of assets of each neighborhood and set it apart from other neighborhoods as a place to be and a place to belong.

Thinking small and local is a promising place to start.

Do what Presidents Do.

The nonprofit marketplace was changed forever by the Obama presidential campaign. Alum of the nonprofit sector, the President used our business model to get elected. In the last month of his campaign, Mr. Obama raised $152 million on the Internet with an average gift of $68.

The business model used by the president reflects a model most of us are familiar with, but don’t use anymore. Before flush corporations stepped up to do “cause marketing” and before we could do multiple events to raise big dollars, most arts nonprofits used their volunteer leaders (Board members) to spread the message. Volunteer leaders are best suited to make friends with high net worth donors, find collaborative opportunities, and engage others by sharing their passion for what you do. In other words they are engaged and invested in the arts.  The President taught us a lesson by having groups of people in communities across America rally around a message of change, make a contribution, and go find others who would do the same thing.

We can use the same model (it belongs to our sector, after all) and create the necessary scale by using giving circles to create generational-specific investors who have passion for the art. Members make a small investment and carry the message to their peers. Scale happens with the use of social marketing and technology.

If we aren’t willing to do this, the shrinking marketplace for traditional big-dollar development strategies will leave many of us out in the cold. The political fundraising establishment has already dissected the Obama strategy and every politician who runs for office in the future will us a “community building” plan – which will bring more competition in the marketplace.

by Kristin Symes

The James Joyce Pub, just a short walk from the Baltimore Marriott Waterfront.

Wondering what the food is going to be like in Baltimore this summer when you come to visit during the Annual Convention? It should come as no surprise that a city generating so much buzz about its recent growth and downtown development also boasts some of the greatest chefs and cuisine to match. It’s as if Baltimore has experienced a gastronomic renaissance. The locally grown culinary scene has sprouted a new crop of extraordinary restaurants for you to harvest.

Baltimore has an emerging culinary scene and is quickly becoming a hot spot for foodies from around the globe. With culinary accolades appearing in Gourmet, Food & Wine, and Bon Appétit, and with two Baltimore chefs recently featured on The Food Network’s hit show, Top Chef, it’s clear that Baltimore is finally gaining the culinary recognition it deserves.

Local restaurants feature sophisticated and original menus that embrace the farm-to-table concept. No longer is Baltimore thought of as only the home of the crab cake (although we do have the best!). The city’s progressive compilation of cutting-edge eateries pedaling fresh, funky-fusion recipes like crispy Thai string beans, lobster mac and artisan beers has put Baltimore on the map as an up-and-coming culinary city not to be missed.

The most inviting part is Baltimore possess all the palate-pleasing tastes and nouveau fare while also offering the comfort and accessibility of a hometown. Many of the city’s hottest new restaurants are just steps away from downtown hotels, and with the recent addition of Baltimore’s new FREE Charm City Circulator, sampling Baltimore’s eclectic cuisine has never been easier.

The city’s culinary synergy of sophistication and a laid-back attitude sets the scene for an unforgettable experience. Renowned chefs are venturing out from the Inner Harbor to set up shop in eclectic and quaint historic neighborhoods rich with culture and flair. Areas such as Harbor East (where the Convention headquarters hotel–the Baltimore Waterfront Marriott–is located) have also experienced a surge of restaurant development, much to the delight of the locals and visitors.

Baltimore’s swanky Harbor East neighborhood features upscale restaurants that have replaced dilapidated warehouses and industrial mills. Now, about the only thing stored in bulk, in Harbor East, is wine. You’ll have the opportunity to enjoy southern-inspired cuisine by James Beard Foundation nominee, Cindy Wolf at Harbor East’s Charleston. If a laid-back lounge is more your style, Teavolve’s Honeydew Bubble Tea Latte will hit the spot. For the more adventurous diner, sample an Avocado and Crabmeat Tian at Harbor East’s only civiche bar, Talara. In short, Harbor East has evolved into a restaurant lover’s paradise, with something to please any palette. You and your appetite should be excited about the many culinary curiosities you’ll enjoy during your stay in Baltimore when you come for the 2010 Americans for the Arts Half-Century Summit.

For a list of restaurants just a stone’s throw from the Annual Convention headquarters, click here.

In January, The San Francisco Foundation and Grants for the Arts, with support from The Wallace Foundation, hosted a daylong Dynamic Adaptability Conference.  Over 700 community members attended, learning from creative thinkers from the arts, neuroscience, business, media, and philanthropy.

Neuroscientist Jonah Lehrer encouraged us to reclaim our value proposition and have faith in our stories.  His research on meta-cognition drew upon many examples of artists.  Lehrer also stressed the importance of building in periods of relaxation as part of the creative process, cautioning when people get too focused on solving a particular problem, this often results in being ‘locked in’.

James Rucker from Color of Change and Hugo Morales from Radio Bilingüe called for rethinking relationships to audiences and donors and forming deeper and more authentic connections to communities.  Merely broadcasting invitations isn’t enough in the socially engaged, interactive, high-touch, and multi-platform online environment.

Psychographic research by WolfBrown and Helicon Collaborative revealed that donors become engaged via four connection points:  a personal relationship, passion for the art form, emotional or intellectual connect to the subject matter, and/or a connection to the culture or community involved. Values and empathy matter.

Despite the grim realities of artists in this economic recession, Judilee Reed from Leveraging Investments in Creativity shared that 75% of the artists in her research believe it is an inspiring time to be an artist and 89% think artists have a special role in strengthening communities.

Artists underscored these hopeful points.  Performance provocateur Philip Huang challenged colleagues to be thrilling and bold.  Veteran choreographer Margaret Jenkins talked about the only way to keep balanced, is by moving forward.
I closed the conference by reiterating my trust in artists. Everyday they start anew with a blank page, an empty canvas, a barren rehearsal room; everyday struggling to go deeper. If something does not work, they think of something else.  If it does work, they make it even better.

These are essential skills in tumultuous times for society in general and requisite for working in the nonprofit arts – moving forward with whatever resources available; building a future by crafting the present.

Continuing from my first blog post…

Feeling like we’d leveled off in our effort to build broad support for the arts, we decided to get more information. We studied how people think about the arts — that is, we engaged in some real research over the past 18 months. With this information, we’re crafting a new communications strategy—one built on a deeper understanding of the best ways to communicate about the arts—that we believe will lead to increased shared responsibility and motivate action in support of the arts.

In order to create a more constructive dialog, we had to explore the dynamics of the current public conversation—in the media, for instance—as well as in the thinking of the majority of people who do not focus on the arts in their daily lives. Understanding attitudes and beliefs more deeply is a key to negotiating them more successfully in future efforts. A new argument, or lens, on the issue is useful to the extent that it can move people to a collective perspective and shared action in support of the arts.

When legislators, business leaders, community leaders, and others all take in the same core message seen through the same lens—and in turn repeat them to their own constituencies—the resulting echo chamber can begin to transform the accepted common sense on the issue.

After a year of investigation and interviews with hundreds of people in the Cincinnati region and surrounding states, this research—conducted with the Topos Partnership, a national communications framing organization—found that public responsibility for the arts is undermined by deeply entrenched perceptions. Members of the public typically have positive feelings toward the arts, some quite strong. But how they think about the arts is shaped by a number of common default patterns of thinking that ultimately obscure a sense of public responsibility in this area.

For example, it‘s natural and common for people who are not insiders to think of the arts in terms of entertainment. Problematically, entertainment is a matter of personal taste, not public responsibility, and perceived as an extra, not a necessity. We need to change the landscape by employing a message strategy that:

•     Positions arts and culture as a public good—a communal interest in which all have a stake;
•     Provides a clearer picture of the kinds of events, activities, and institutions we are talking about;
•     Conveys the importance of a proactive stance; and
•     Incorporates all people in a region, not just those in urban centers.

Holding typical messages up to these standards clarifies why some ideas, even emotionally powerful ones, fail to inspire a sense of collective responsibility. Art as a transcendent experience, important to well-being, a universal human need, etc., all speak to private, individual concerns, not public, communal concerns. While many people like these messages, the messages do not help them think of art as a public good, and therefore inspire action.

Messages that are more communal in nature, such as the commonly used economic impact message, or a message about creating a great city, fail for other reasons. For instance, traditional economic arguments often compete with other (usually more compelling) ideas about how to bolster an economy.

Of the many communications approaches we tested, one stood out as having the most potential to shift thinking and conversations in a good way: A thriving arts sector creates “ripple effects” of benefits throughout our community. Two ripple effects — that people already believe in — work well to build more support:

o        A vibrant, thriving economy: Neighborhoods are more lively, communities are revitalized, tourists and residents are attracted to the area, etc. Note that this goes well beyond the usual dollars-and-cents argument and becomes about creating an environment where people want to live, work, play, and stay.

o        A more connected population: Diverse groups share common experiences, hear new perspectives, understand each other better, etc.

Now conversations move beyond polite nodding – you know, the kind we got when we talked about ROI or economic impact of the arts. We know we’re on to something when people offer their own examples — like how their neighborhood changed after an art center opened or the experience they had connecting with others at the fringe festival.