Roberta Uno

Preparing the Arts Field for a Future Rushing Towards Us

Posted by Roberta Uno, Mar 15, 2016 8 comments


Roberta Uno

In the new Hewlett Foundation report, Moving Arts Leadership Forward: A Changing Landscape, John McGuirk, Hewlett’s Program Director for Performing Arts, urges the arts field to reimagine leadership. The report summarizes Hewlett-supported research and previews their new goal to broaden the Foundation’s arts support to embrace cross-generational leadership and advance shared values of diversity and innovation. The findings and recommendations are strategically intended to prepare the field “for a future that is rushing toward us.”

In California, that future has already arrived. According to a TIME Labs map Find Out If Your State Is America’s Past Or Future?, California’s racial and ethnic demographics place it in the year 2060. The state resembles what the rest of the country will look like more than 4 decades from now. Hewlett’s arts program direction envisions California’s potential as a cultural roadmap for the rest of the country.

Hewlett’s focus on the future fueled its Next Generation Arts Leadership Initiative 2009-15, supporting the development of emerging arts leaders. The report asks tough and necessary questions of this work: “What were we preparing up-and-coming leaders to do? To what degree did we aim to sustain the field as it exists or spur its transformation? Were we adequately preparing leaders for the challenges to come?”

In answering these questions, different generational approaches to leadership are examined: of Millennials (born 1981-1997), Gen X (1965-80), Baby Boomers (1946-64), and the perhaps, ironically labeled, Silent Generation (1925-45). A revelation was the negation of the assumption that a generational shift of arts leadership looms on the near horizon.  Instead, a bottleneck is described where professionalized younger arts leaders waiting for executive positions, can expect a “durable Boomer presence until at least 2034.” The protracted economic recession and job satisfaction of those who have made a long career in the arts are major factors. This is discouraging news for an increasingly professionalized new generation of arts administrators. And yet their entrepreneurial leadership and skill sets are critical to the resilience and relevance of future-focused arts organizations. Hewlett’s eco-system approach aspires to an inter-connectedness among generations, addressing change that could revitalize organizations, while supporting reciprocal development of individual leaders in different career phases.  

The report also reconfirms that “resources, access, and inclusion in non-profit arts production has not been allocated in ways that adequately or fairly reflect California’s racial, ethnic, or cultural diversity.” So what remains unclear to me is: How will the new arts program address both historically-resourced organizations lacking in diversity—and historically under-resourced diverse and diverse new organizations. How will they interconnect? And will other philanthropies complement Hewlett’s leadership support to redress inequitable organizational funding?

Reimaging leadership isn’t urgent for the arts world alone. This month, the NY Times published The Faces of American Power, a photo mosaic of 503 of the most powerful people in American culture, government, education and business; among them just 44 “minorities.” Change is happening from the ground up–the country is in need of leadership that can navigate a transformed American landscape.

The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation’s report, Moving Arts Leadership Forward, describes a changing arts leadership and workforce. Americans for the Arts, in partnership with the Hewlett Foundation, has asked a diverse group of arts leaders to respond to the report’s findings and the recommendations it makes for the field.

8 responses for Preparing the Arts Field for a Future Rushing Towards Us

Comments

March 17, 2016 at 8:01 pm

Roberta:
Thank you for your insights about changing demographics and the lack of "minorities' in Leadership Positions.  I am thinking that if there were a similar "500 Faces of American Power in the Arts" there would probably be less than 44.  Colleen Jennings-Roggensack has been suggesting that arts organizations might adopt a new practice similar to the "Rooney Rule" of the National Football League.  They suggest that each team, when interviewing for a head-coaching vacancy, interview at least one person of color.  It's said that while it didn't change things immediately, it brought Black coaches into the conversation and has, over time, had an impact.  And now with NFL teams hiring women as coaches, we can expect that in a few years, some of those women will be interviewing for head coaching positions.

  • Please login to post comments.
Nami X says
March 20, 2016 at 4:38 pm

Yes thank you Roberta for sharing your perspective and for highlighting some very important questions.
As a Millennial myself, and a Hapa woman from California, I strongly identify with many of the findings in the Hewlett Foundation’s new report, Moving Arts Leadership Forward: A Changing Landscape.
I’ve recently had conversations with coworkers of my generation who have indeed conceptualized “diversity as a crucial tool to improving arts organizations ” and consequently “want more attention to be paid to the ways that racial, ethnic, and economic diversity shapes our lives and communities.”  However for me, it goes beyond wanting more attention to be paid to these topics; I’m simply not willing to work for an organization that isn’t at least trying to reflect the plurality of our world and the changing demographics of our country. And I don’t think I’m the only Millennial who feels this way. If non-profit organizations want to attract and retain young leaders, they had better start questioning who’s ‘not at the table.’
Additionally, my personal experience in the non-profit arts sector has demonstrated a shocking disparity between the diversity on stage (at times), and the simultaneous lack of diversity among staff and audience. This discrepancy shines light on a shallow understanding of diversity and a lack of foresight concerning organizational sustainability.
This chasm between externally showcased diversity, and the often-homogeneous nature of staff (let’s not even get started about the lack of diversity among board members!), represents how many organizations seem to be reflecting on the diversity of their communities, yet they are not reflective of these communities.  
Hopefully new paths of arts funding, like Hewlett’s eco-system approach, will help identify and support innovative leaders and organizations that have moved beyond philosophical aspirations of equity and are helping everyone, not just the privileged players, to live creative and fulfilling lives. 

  • Please login to post comments.
Mr. Toran X Moore says
March 22, 2016 at 2:38 am

Thank you, Roberta,
"The report also reconfirms that “resources, access, and inclusion in non-profit arts production has not been allocated in ways that adequately or fairly reflect California’s racial, ethnic, or cultural diversity.” Seeing statement in post reminds me of the continual message of equity sweeping the nation as of current. The allocation of resources does not match the growing landscape. People may ask "why". In some sectors, the current leadership do not view that there is enough 'qualified' persons of color for the positions. The other side of that with the emerging leadership, they are viewed as not having enough experience for the positions they are aiming for. This lack of diversity only furthers a stagnated mindset that funds the same old 'good ol boy' network of organizations and projects.
The faces of power article from the new york times made it apparent across all sectors that diversity is pivotal in all sectors of American culture if we are to progress. The new emergent leader is tired of waiting their turn for a seat at the table which is beautiful because now we are seeing many new independent ventures which are broadening the landscape as we speak. 
 
Thank you Roberta for your insight.

  • Please login to post comments.
E M W says
March 22, 2016 at 3:25 pm

Thank you, Roberta, for your insightful remarks. I also identify with what Nami X has commented above. As a graduate student in a prestigious art school, I find that many of these issues are prevalent at my school as well as institutions of higher education nationwide. One major concern is the lack of diversity among permanent faculty members. While our school has done an excellent job of creating a diverse student body, this diversity is not reflected among the faculty—and there has not been any sustained effort by the administration to change this.
Students and adjunct teachers across the nation are dealing with similar issues (http://www.thedemands.org/) and many of our suggestions have fallen on deaf, if not actively resistant, ears. Here, Michelle Dizon asks, “Institutions: When will you open your doors?
Institutions are embodying the very ideas they are teaching us in class to reject: for example, the idea that “dominant,” white, Western European discourse should be permanent and central, while all other ways of being/seeing belong in the unstable periphery. The visiting/adjunct faculty position is this periphery, which appears now to serve as a revolving door of token diversity hires. Conversely, regularized faculty positions—which offer security and longevity—reify a predominantly white status quo. If this institution seeks to broaden the diversity of its student body and establish a globalized presence, this diversity must also be reflected in the regularized faculty. We are not arguing for diversity for diversity’s sake. Diversifying our faculty will expand the types of discourses taught and help all of us. Refusing to diversify our permanent faculty will hurt all of us.
If it is too late to rise before the wave of change, the least we could do is ride it.

  • Please login to post comments.
Ms. Daniela Alvarez says
March 22, 2016 at 3:27 pm

The issues brought up by Roberta and the new Hewlett Foundation report, Moving Arts Leadership Forward: A Changing Landscape, deeply affected me and touches upon concerns I have for the future.
As a millennial and "minority"  in California trying to establish myself academically and professionally in the arts, I am aware of the disconnect (in both the manner of engagement and reflection of diversity) between art organizations/institutions and their surrounding communities. And while I continue my work with the endeavor of bridging the gap, I have also witnessed many of my colleagues becoming disillusioned with the field as they don't see themselves or their communities represented. 
I hope that the issues raised here will continue to develop into actions that will realize change and equity. The dialogue catalyzed by the report, Roberta, and following comments is already an inspiring step forward. 

  • Please login to post comments.
Kristen Adele says
March 25, 2016 at 11:05 am

Thank you for this wonderful post, Roberta! Just this weekend at the Citizen University conference in Seattle, I sat down with arts leaders from around the country and we spoke about the urgent need for the decision makers at arts organizations to, at the very least, reflect the diversity of the communities they serve. Sadly, in my travels as an actress I've found what Nami says above to be consistently accurate in most major cities in the regional theatre scene. Organizations that proudly state missions of telling "American stories" often fall drastically short with a play by an African American writer in February and an abundance of plays the rest of the year by white writers, performed by white actors, designed by white designers and ultimately attended by mostly white audiences. They often forget that race in America doesn't exist on a black and white binary and rarely program work by Native American, indigenous, Asian or Latino voices.  Without fail, these organizations have very few people of color serving on their boards, as artistic directors, or in senior level administration. This has to change. In a country that's rapidly approaching a new American majority, these organizations are only promoting a culture of segregation. A concrete way to begin to remedy this is for philanthropies to only fund diverse, equity driven organizations. Additionally, members must no longer accept homogenous board rooms, production meetings, or prospective candidates for new positions. It requires those in the room to create space and open doors for the rest of the population to have a seat at the table. Only then will we begin to see diversity in attendance, thriving community engagement and work on American stages that reflects the full depth, beauty, complexity and nuance of the human condition. 

  • Please login to post comments.
January 30, 2017 at 1:56 am

 Without fall flat, these associations have not very many ethnic minorities serving on their sheets, as masterful chiefs, or in senior level organization. This needs to change. In a nation that is quickly moving toward another American lion's share, these associations are just advancing a culture of isolation. A solid approach to start to cure this is for philanthropies to just reserve different, value driven associations.(from  term paper writing service .)
 

  • Please login to post comments.
January 30, 2017 at 8:06 am

The lesson in this experience for me, and numerous others, was to keep in mind the force of chronicled priority while exhorting approach, subsequently, "we are continually strolling into verifiable priority". To engage the development, the "artivists" grasped the effect of painting history that had gone before them. They shared buy research papers online a profound thankfulness for the muralists who established the framework for human expressions in LA. Had we not possessed the capacity to well-spoken its centrality to our policymakers, it's conceivable that the interest for the flexibility of creative expression and its pertinence for our city would have not been.
 

  • Please login to post comments.