As I write this, there are two orchestras in the U.S. which are currently facing an existential crisis. The Columbus Symphony and the Shreveport Symphony are both facing cuts which will forever alter how they function, sound, raise money, and basically exist.
Over the past week, two fellow violists/bloggers have written posts about the situation, both about these two orchestras and a new study which suggests that US orchestras are based upon an untenable model.
Sam Bergman, a violist in the Minnesota Orchestra, wrote about Columbus, and raised the valid question (if not a popular one) – what if a community doesn’t want to support a major symphony orchestra?
Not every city is going to be able to boast of having every conceivable entertainment and amenity. So there shouldn’t have to be a lot of civic shame if a populace decides that it just doesn’t want to spend millions every year to sustain a specific sports team or cultural group.
Today, Robert Levine (principal violist of the Milwaukee Symphony) writes about the “chicken little” school of arts scholarship.
He’s referring to the study by Robert J. Flanagan of the Stanford Business School which reached the following major conclusion – that orchestras spend more money than they make in ticket sales. Wow. I hope the Mellon Foundation didn’t spend too much money on this study.
[you can find a link to the complete study here]
What’s the solution to this financial quandary? Orchestras should cut spending rather than trying to increase fundraising. Boards should grow backbones and get more confrontational with their unionized employees.
In other words, orchestras should behave more like for-profit corporations, and more specifically, like publicly-owned corporations.
“Some of them say it doesn’t surprise them because many symphonies have a bias towards revenue growth strategies and a bias against cost-cutting strategies,†Flanagan said, adding that nonprofit board members often shy away from conflict. “It’s not clear that they’re willing to be as tough minded about costs as directors in the private sector.â€
I think that there are some interesting seeds of future industry-wide conversations, in fact, these conversations should take place in every community which is currently supporting major arts organizations such as symphony orchestras, opera, theater and ballet companies. The major seed questions that I would ask of these communities would be:
- Do you value the high-level artistic organizations in your community?
- Do you regard these organizations as important community assets?
- Is the maintenance of these assets a high priority for your community?
- Is maintenance of these assets sustainable for your community?
If the answer to any of these questions is “no”, then the final question should be:
Should we pull the plug on this institution now or let linger with an uncertain future?
It would appear that the answer to at least one of the questions in Shreveport and Columbus was “no”, and that the final answer for the board in Columbus was that of the lingering, uncertain future.
Why?
Because cutting is always the easy solution. It doesn’t take any effort to reduce weeks or rosters. The payoff is immediate. You spend less money right away. However, the long-terms costs remain unknown: What sort of music can you program with a 31 member orchestra? If you want to perform larger works, will enough quality musicians remain in the area to be hired as extras to fill out the orchestra? If asked, would those quality musicians even return? Will donors support a substantially different product than they originally bought into? Will audiences continue to come to your concerts? Will the adverse publicity compromise future fundraising or attendance?
On the other hand, working to grow the cash flow while keeping costs steady or manageable is much harder. You have to have a committed board and effective, skilled managers. It takes commitment and skill and brains to chart a course which increases funding while also keeping your employees relatively happy and not diminishing your product.
But before you make the decision to cut or not to cut, you need to ask the following question:
Does my community (and by extension, my board) have the will to support my organization?
If not – then take the third choice – pull the plug. Let people who are willing to do the job and make the really tough choices have a crack at it. Get rid of the dead wood and the chaff that are just along for the ride (and we all know board members who are just along for the ride for social reasons, or empty tradition) and let the new blood in. Maybe even let the musicians re-form the orchestra with musician management for the first year or so (like Colorado and Tulsa have done) and regain the trust of the community.
To hack away at a fragile mechanism such as the symphony orchestra, which has taken decades if not centuries to arrive at its current high level of performance, is a travesty. It is not an action taken in good faith. It is an abdication of belief, responsibility, and passion. It is a selfish act, made when all other efforts to evade the truly tough decisions have failed.