Prompted by a fluctuating economy and technological advances indirectly threatening to usurp the traditional live arts experience, we are at the height of buzz surrounding the possible identification of new business models for arts organizations; specifically, alternatives to nonprofit incorporation.

I agree – nonprofit incorporation isn’t for everyone. But what I feel is absent from these conversations is a real discussion on what we are striving for on the other end of these supposed magic bullet business models.

There seems to be a sense that we somehow trapped ourselves into the 501(c)(3) model. And so instead, we’re looking for alternative structures; other structures within which we can operate. That also seems limiting and honestly a little backwards to me. 

(This title and entry is not meant to insult any one artist, institution, or dog.)

From my perspective, many artists originally incorporated because they saw other people doing it; other people getting grant monies to support their work and determining 501(c)(3) must be the way to go. These same artists somehow persevered, endured, and/or emerged as institutions thirty or forty years later and feel the nonprofit ball-and-chain is something that somehow happened to them. Is this need for alternative models a real issue or is it a midlife crisis for the incorporated arts field? 

Read More

Taboo Cards

Some artists, if you mention the word “business” at all, they recoil, but let us play a field-wide game of Taboo, and have a brainstorm discussion about the future of the arts sans these words or any derivation of them:  “innovation” and “business models.”

Could the private sector keep itself from using all the jargon accumulated in business school and really talk about what they want to accomplish and how to do it?

So often, organizations of all kinds create job descriptions or individuals write their resumes hiding behind platitudes of these perceived “good” business skills without being specific. That or trying to identify a new direction for one’s organization can feel like when we were little kids and played “office” or “school” or “house.” You weren’t exactly sure what you were supposed to be doing, but you emulated what you saw and played out whatever notions you had about working in such a place. 

Jay Dick

State legislatures are finishing their work on state budgets in the coming weeks. As it stands, it is a mixed forecast when it comes to funding for the arts. Some areas are being poured on as if a hurricane parked on top of them, while others are only seeing scattered showers, or even partly sunny conditions.

In an average year, about 35 states see an increase to their arts agency funding. As it stands right now, 17 states will see an increase with four maintaining flat funding. This leaves 29 states receiving a cut. This should not come as a surprise to anyone given the severe economic budget crunch that most every state is experiencing as many state legislatures are cutting most agencies or programs from education to roads. The arts are certainly not immune from cuts. What amazes me is that 17 states are still getting an increase! 

Adam Huttler

[During last week’s Private Sector Blog Salon], fellow guest blogger Diane Ragsdale got me thinking after she posed the question: what would have happened if the nonprofit regional theatre movement had embraced (and had the opportunity to embrace) the L3C instead of the 501(c)(3) corporation?

This is an interesting and subtly radical thought experiment. Diane is effectively proposing that we rewind history and build what we now think of as the nonprofit arts sector as a socially-conscious for-profit arts sector instead. Has the horse left the barn or is it really possible to reinvent ourselves at such a fundamental level?

In truth, I’ve always believed that the alleged conflict between artistic purity and commercial success was largely overblown. If anything it’s a healthy tension, not an insurmountable chasm. Certainly there are arts organizations whose missions are to push aesthetic envelopes and operate at the leading edge of craft and artistry. They will always need philanthropic subsidy to survive, and so they should probably be 501(c)(3)s regardless. But these brave, unpopular pioneers are the exception, not the rule. Most of us operate in the vast middle ground between Broadway and The Wooster Group. 

Una McAlinden

Yes – when you live in Washington State! With more cloudy days than sunshine – you often have to sing, dance, act, and create in the rain! Yes, these activities are usually happening in buildings, but the rain is ubiquitous. And during our coldest wettest spring on record, we’re singing the praises of the arts this month as Washington State celebrates Arts Education Month in May.

From the grand Olympic mountains to the lush rolling hills of the Palouse, support of arts education is heard in harmony from the Governor, the Superintendent of Public Instruction, the School Directors Association, city and county governments, state and local PTAs, local media outlets, and from communities across the state.

ArtsEd Washington (the Washington Alliance for Arts Education) led the efforts to begin highlighting and recognizing the importance of arts education back in 2006 by memorializing an “Arts Education Week” during the third week in May.