Andrew Taylor, Director of the Bolz Center for Arts Administration, an MBA degree program and research center in the University of Wisconsin-Madison School of Business, and long time arts blogging colleague posted a fascinating piece on May 7th that examines the potential for mergers in the nonprofit world. It focuses on mergers throughout the broader nonprofit world but when it comes to performing arts organizations, mergers are rarely a good idea…
Back in March, 2005 we examined the results of one of the larger performing arts mergers in recent years between the Utah Symphony and Utah Opera. Ostensibly, that merger failed to produce the benefits of combined resources and seemingly similar missions to anticipated levels and instead produced larger economic and artistic challenges that ended up consuming even more capital.
In Andrew’s post, he quotes Kennedy Center commander-in-chief, Michael Kaiser espousing alternatives to mergers:
“The amount of time, energy, and focus it takes, it takes energy away from the kinds of activities that I think really help to create health for an organizations. I’m more interested in joint venturing and sharing certain costs than I am about merging corporate entities.”
Kaiser couldn’t offer better advice. In fact, I have a current set of clients that are considering similar issues and much of my initial work has been related to providing examples demonstrating that combined resources do not always produce maximized results. During a time when some communities are experiencing economic troubles, we all need to be on guard against the lure of false security that typically rests at the heart of most merger discussions. As an alternative, directing those same efforts toward refining internal efficiency and focusing on core mission goals.
Related Posts
-
I spent the weekend preparing taxes so no new post today, however, it seems fitting to point over to a finance related resource. To…
-
If you haven't been to Adaptistration Jobs lately, you're missing out on a flood of new listings; in fact, there are ten new listings…
-
After spending the last few days compiling all of my records to send off to the accountant, it seems fitting to focus today’s post…
An interesting article that hits home for me as a member of the Arizona Opera — in the same city as the Phoenix Symphony.
This, in combination with an extensive commentary from Bruce Ridge posted on AFM Observer have raised valid concerns in my mind over what amounts to a zero-sum game.
Aside from the financial issues noted here, these mergers pit musician against musician in order to save one institution. It amounts to, as Mr. Ridge calls it, wedge politics.
From his post:
“It is the willingness of musicians and their representatives to indulge in the toxic practice of wedge politics in pursuit of declining revenues and political power. By attempting to argue that the division is one between full-timers and part-timers, the advocates for this idea perpetuate the real problem and attempt to paper over their own destructive role in it.”
These are desperate times for many arts institutions. Yet there can be a fine line between fighting to survive and being predatory towards other institutions in that pursuit.
The complete article is here
I don’t even know WHERE to begin….
george brown
utah symphony/ICSOM
I would say “the beginning” but even that’s a bit too complex for your respective situation.
Well, now that I think about it, the beginning IS a very good place to start. The beginning wasn’t nearly as complex as what came later; and, examining some things from back then can shed some meaningful light in places that could use some light.
I would agree that various forms of joint ventures may, in cases, be part of an effective new strategy for arts organizations in their attempts to hash out a new business model for the 21st century. The keyword here is ‘strategy.’
In the case of the Utah Symphony and Opera merger, it is notable that, at its inception, this merger was not a ‘strategy’ (an overall campaign plan towards an objective), but rather a ‘tactic’ (the means used to gain an objective).
In our case, the strategy to save the Symphony was, quite simply, to hire our former CEO, hand her the keys to the car and tell her to ‘work her magic.’ The merger was thus a tactic, a carrot if you will, to lure her by making the job BIG enough to attract her here. One of the Board members who originally crafted the merger idea even said as much, on the record, to the Deseret News.
Which is why, when trying to sell the players on the idea of the merger, this same Board member was completely stumped when asked the question of whether there was an exit strategy if the merger went sour. Of-course they had no exit strategy from the merger as the merger was a never a strategy to begin with. Hiring the perspective CEO was THE STRATEGY.
However, it certainly was spun to the players and to the community as a strategy. Much like the Government’s decision to go to war with Iraq, the decision to merge was made 1st and the spin to sell the idea came later — in the form of the usual yada yada of the potential savings and benefits of combined resources and elimination of overlap. We’ve heard it all before.
So, before other arts organizations simply jump on the old “urge to merge” bandwagon, it behooves those Managers and Board members to first simply ask themselves precisely WHY they feel said urge, plus how such a venture fits into their longer range objectives. Had our Board at the time taken the time to consider this route, we might not be so entangled in our current situation.
george brown
utah symphony/ICSOM