Podcasts – ArtsFwd

In this podcast, we explore the unique challenges facing arts service organizations, those important institutions working behind the scenes to help artists and arts organizations thrive. For arts services organizations, changes in the funding landscape in the last 15 years have made sustainability an ongoing challenge, not to mention the Catch-22 these organizations face in communicating their value without taking credit for the successes of those they serve. Despite these barriers, our two guests believe that there are ample opportunities for service organizations to reinvent themselves as hubs within their communities and beyond. Host Karina Mangu-Ward talks with Jeffrey Lependorf of the Council of Literary Magazines and Presses and Monica Valenzuela of Staten Island Arts about how these challenges and opportunities play out in their organizations, and gets an inside look at their ah-ha moments and struggles during recent retreat they participated in as a part of EmcArts’ New Pathways for Arts Development, New York City.  Monica and Jeffrey reflect on why getting out of the daily grind and question old assumptions is so important (and not always easy!). The full transcript of this podcast is below. This podcast profiles the work of participants in EmcArts‘ program New Pathways for Arts Development, New York City. Learn more. Featuring: Jeffrey Lependorf, CLMP’s Executive Director, has over 20 years of experience in development, fundraising, corporate sponsorship, and strategic planning. He serves as a shared executive director for Small Press Distribution. His past work experience includes Development Director for the Creative Capital Foundation, Bette Midler’s New York Restoration Project, the Poetry Society of America, and In the Life Media. He is also a professional musician and composer, a certified master of the shakuhachi (traditional Japanese bamboo flute), and serves as Director of Music Omi, an international music residency program in upstate New York. His Masterpieces of Western Music audiocourse is available through Barnes and Noble’s “Portable Professor” series.   Monica Valenzuela is a grantwriter, project manager and freelance photographer who specializes in storytelling, community-based project management, and documentary portraiture. As the Interim Executive Director at Staten Island Arts, she works closely with the diverse cultural ecosystem of Staten Island and values neighborhood-based cultural activities. She enjoys identifying alternative spaces for art and coordinates Staten Island Arts’ LUMEN festival, a cutting-edge video and performance art festival on Staten Island’s waterfront. Audio Transcript:  Karina Mangu-Ward:    Hi. I’m Karina Mangu-Ward of EmcArts. Here on the ArtsFwd Podcast we explore the challenges facing the arts sector right now to do things differently, to do things they’ve never done before. In each episode, we look at stories of experimentation and success from innovative arts organizations across the country. Today, we’re exploring the challenges and opportunities facing Arts Service Organizations. In the studio I’m joined by the leaders of two organizations participating in our New Pathways program for service organizations right here in New York City. I’m pleased to welcome Jeffrey Lependorf the Executive Director of The Community of Literary Magazines and Presses and Monica Valenzuela who’s the Interim Executive Director of Staten Island Arts. Hello. Monica Valenzuela:  Hello. Jeffrey Lependorf: Hi, Karina. Nice to be here. Karina Mangu-Ward: So as our listeners may or may not know, each of your organization supports and develops the cultural community in a particular place or discipline. You each came into the New Pathways program because you were wrestling with challenges that couldn’t be conquered by simply improving or tweaking what you are already doing. You were looking for an innovative approach through workshops and coaching sessions. You’ve been exploring your most complex intractable challenges, questioning assumptions, and brainstorming new strategies for the future. A few months ago, you each began a deeper investigation of just one key complex challenge. So starting with you, Jeffrey, talk a little bit about what challenge or opportunity you’re exploring in this deep dive part of the program. Jeffrey Lependorf: Sure. So CLMP in a nutshell, we are a hub for independent literary publishers. All the folks that produce so much that’s really important to our culture but is not always as commercially viable as those top ten and New York Times best sellers so translation publishers, poetry publishers, cultural theory, things like that. As much as we are a service organization that traditionally has largely provided technical assistance, we’ve realized that some of the stuff we’ve done that we’re most proud of is really been in connecting with the community to each other. So our deeper dive has really been in looking at other ways we might form community and facilitate forming a community, largely moving from a, “What can we do for you?” proposition to a, “How might we facilitate all of us working better?” Karina Mangu-Ward: Great. Thanks. So Monica, tell us a little bit about Staten Island Arts and what was the challenge or opportunity that you guys were exploring in this deeper dive part of the New Pathways program. Monica Valenzuela: Sure. Well, Staten Island Arts is the local arts councilor or local arts agency for Richmond County back, I guess, two years ago we started – we got a Rockefeller Cultural Renovation Fund Grant in 2010 to do an assessment of spaces on Staten Island. We were attendants at Snug Harbor Cultural Center, a very historic kind of landmark space on Staten Island, but we were in a basement as many non-profits are. So in looking at other spaces and what those kinds of elements should be in our space, we were connected with the Staten Island St. George Ferry Terminal as they were looking to fill the spaces inside. There were a lot of vacant spaces in the new renovation of that building. Karina Mangu-Ward: That’s the very terminal on the Staten Island side connected to Manhattan, right? Monica Valenzuela: Correct. It’s a really large transportation hub and the 3rd largest tourist attraction in New York City. It’s the freeway to see the Statue of Liberty but Staten Island is geographically isolated from the rest of New York City and ways of communicating and working with artists were very one-on-one. So we were thinking, “Okay, now we’re going to be on this ferry terminal where 76,000 people are coming though a day.” It’s 2/3 commuters, 1/3 tourists. There’s an incredible opportunity for audience engagement. If this is the first chance when people get off the boat to experience culture in Staten Island, which often is a kind of battling a stereo-type, what would that look like and how could we best utilize 25,000 square feet to do that? Jeffrey Lependorf: It’s funny some things that we sort of have in common. It’s been nice doing this program with other groups where we can really learn stuff from them. Whereas I would say, similarly our best work has been one-on-one with members and traditionally folks come to us with their problem. We help them work through the problem and that’s still great, but we’re a national organization so how do we keep doing that in a national way. We’ve been trying to explore some ways to deal with groups of people, to put it simply, and here you are also having dealt one-on-one and now suddenly you have this torrent of crowds and how do you capture them in groups. It’s really interesting. Karina Mangu-Ward: So listening to each other and just from your own experience, how do you see the challenges facing service organizations which have more recently been called Arts Development Agencies as different from those who focus on producing and presenting work for the public? Jeffrey Lependorf: Well, the immediate challenge is that we don’t generally touch audiences in that easily countable way that at least for now is in the funding community so convenient to talk about and has such clear results. So for us as an organization that serves other organizations, there’s this sort of double and almost triple challenge because we’re helping small publishers who already are misunderstood who then help writers to then reach readers. Our role is this sort of invisible one and it’s only more recently we’ve realized what seems now obvious to us that we need to be as visible in our process to in fact highlight the two ends but also to remain sustainable to ourselves. So we have a lot of hurdles and a lot of explaining to do which makes it really tough. Monica Valenzuela: I would totally agree. I think that the invisibility factor is something that is hard when you’re trying to highlight some of the constituents that you work with in their work and not affected or tainted in any sort of way. I think there’s something really beautiful especially when two groups are coming together to collaborate and very purposely because of just conflict of interest with our granting program, we take a very conscious effort to not have a hand in a lot of the artistic direction of programs but in terms even of reporting on it and capturing information and demonstrating the impact without taking credit for what the end product is, is always challenging, too. Jeffrey Lependorf: That really is the catch because even if we reinforce our facilitating role – I mean get folks together to do great things, the idea of taking credit is really a tough one because we want the limelight on them. That’s why we exist and yet, if we don’t get any of that light then we can’t continue to exist. So it’s a tricky one. Karina Mangu-Ward: So you’re each wrestling with these complex challenges and about a month ago as a part of the New Pathways program, you took an intensive retreat to immerse yourself, your staff, and some other stakeholders in the difficult questions and dilemmas that are arising out of your work around that challenge. So I want to hear from each of you, at that retreat was there a particular turning point or “Aha” moment that really jumps out at you? Monica? Monica Valenzuela: We’ve had a lot kind of going on and are dealing with a lot of changes at once. I think a lot of that came to a head at the retreat. Having everybody in the same room was so powerful and at the end the “Aha” moment was not having the “Aha” moment but knowing that we had a plan. I think the most powerful point was having everybody in the room and really getting out logistics. So our experiments, we hammered out some timelines and it was not as sexy as a larger vision. I think it was the process of actually working as a group kind of to delineate the path forward. Karina Mangu-Ward: That’s very meta. Jeffrey Lependorf: [Laughter] Yes. Monica Valenzuela: [Laughter] Well, that’s what John said. He was like, “That’s Zen Buddhism where you have the Nirvana that you kind of work towards and then you have just the – everyday you’re not going to see nirvana until it’s behind you.” Karina Mangu-Ward:  Jeffrey for you, what was the turning point or an “Aha” moment in the retreat? Jeffrey Lependorf: There were a number of “Aha” moments but there was one that came early on that I think has still been informing a lot of what we do. That has to do with our whole [fields] image of itself in a sense and then also CLMP’s image of itself. I think there was a – in some cases, maybe a body dysmorphia image. We think we’re fat and everyone thinks we’re skinny but [Laughter] it really had to do with us really working hard to feeling like, “Poor little us – tiny, tiny service org and small field made up of little things and there are these giant conglomerate publishers and giant book sellers who seem to be against us.” So we worked really, really hard through language, we’re lit people, to legitimize ourselves. I think we assumed we had done this really, really well. So we have been very careful to avoid saying, “Small Press” and instead said, “Independent Literary Publisher” for example. The big “Aha” moment was when we decided to start with just, “Let’s define who we are. Who is this community? We’re saying we wanted to be a community, but who is it? Who are we?” In going to that process, we reclaimed the word small as actually a virtue. The one thing that really makes us different is we are made up of hundreds of small things. So maybe back to the Zen metaphor, hundreds of small things, this beautiful lotus of activity that are somehow all connected through CLMP. That really is something to celebrate and not something to make pretend it’s not the case, like “We’re not really small.” The fact is that this language we work so hard over the years to construct largely because we thought it is what say, the funded community wanted to hear. I don’t know if that’s true or not but that what we created was something pretty boring and we actually erased ourselves a little bit. The fact is we’re hundreds of small things who are agile and can change and try things and do things that the large conglomerate – equivalence is not that word but parallels to us, actually can’t do. In these particularly challenging times for the entire literary bookselling and literary magazine selling arena – if you go out there to a bookstore where all the books look the same but some are not for profit produced and some are small produced and some are large. That’s actually a key virtuous, so reclaiming the words small for me was a big “Aha” and it moved us to change a lot of our other language into just what things really are which seems so obvious, but it’s hard to do. So we have moved toward trying to say things in a way that human beings actually speak to one another [Laughter] which is hard for folks and it’s funny because we’re practicing what we preach. We’ve worked really effectively in helping so many of our own member publishers, use plain language and talk about passionately what they really do rather than the boring mission statements that they write, that they think they’re supposed to create to put into grant proposals that everyone skips when they read the about page because they’re unreadable. We’ve sort of given ourselves permission to exclaim the actual passion that we have for what we do, which is simple and basic in a profound way, not a way that is not complex enough to legitimize it. Karina Mangu-Ward: These were – retreats are not always smooth sailing. There are often moments of heat in the room or conflict in the room, moments of real challenge. I think from where I sit, I think those moments can be really useful. Monica Valenzuela: The retreat was emotionally exhausting. I think what became really clear was the amount of passion that each of the people in the room bring to the table and taking that kind of emotional part out of it as much as possible. Our organization is at a point that our Executive Director had resigned as of the end of the year. So at the end of January for the retreat, we were just a month fresh in trying to figure out what that meant. Whether what that meant in the short term for how are things managed, to how are things managed at the board level, and the amount of work on everybody’s plates to kind of bring the organization to the next chapter I think was on everybody’s skin. Even though that’s not what we were talking about at the retreat, it’s on everybody’s mind. The executive director as a role is the liaison between the board and the staff and so not having that person, that liaison in the room, started conversations that probably have never happened before. Karina Mangu-Ward: So a big part of our practice at EmcArts is about failing small and failing often and coming out of the retreat, you and your teams each identified some prototypes that you’ll conduct to test our the strategies that you started developing at the retreat. So starting with you, Monica, what’s one prototype that you’re – that you have planned, that you particularly excited about? What is it that you’re going to do and what are you hoping to learn? Monica Valenzuela: So our challenge is this physical space. The experiment is to pilot four different programs. We have a film screening, we have kind of an unplugged night with a local band who writes songs about Staten Island and uses a lot of history in their work and then two small kind of literary events: one focused on teenagers who hangout in the ferry terminal between the hours of 2:00 PM and 5:00 PM; and a weekend event with younger kids and families. We’re also using some of the funds to document, to show what different things can happen in the space because we do offer the space for programs and events in the community who are approaching us, “Can I do an event in the terminal? What would that look like?” and we’re still figuring that out. So this allows us kind of in a short amount of time to see what that set up is, what the equipment is required, what kind of interfacing, what kind of contracts between artists and also physical documentation and marketing materials. Karina Mangu-Ward:  Great and for you, Jeffrey, what’s the prototype you’re planning that you’re excited about and what are you going to do and what are you hoping to learn? Jeffrey Lependorf: One of the two main ones we’re doing really has to do with looking at different ways that our community might gather, particularly in places not in our office. So we’re already doing some little experiments around different types of gatherings that are local but the real question is how do we do that on all these other places. We’re national and that’s one of our big challenges, “We’re teeny-tiny,” here we are in New York. So we’re going to be testing some different ways of having people together in person perhaps sending a staff out to another city, and then also some, I think, different virtual ways. So be that a chat room or a Adobe connect or different ways of having communities outside of New York, and even here as well, get together and share knowledge so that we’re increasing our role of facilitating these gatherings of those publishers together and also trying some of these similar experiments with some of our publishers and these other groups of allies I mentioned earlier like, literary agents – we have a speed dating event coming up with agents and publishers. We’re going to be doing one with translators and publishers soon after that and several others. So we’ve learned and we know this for many, many years. It’s awfully hard to get even a small group of people in one place at one time and it’s a challenge that it’s far harder that anyone who hasn’t had to do it would ever, ever imagine. We’re in a helping profession here. You can’t impose your help on folks. You really have to offer it in a way that’s inviting so that they want to engage with it. Now, what other ways might we open our arms so that others will grab our hands and join us. Karina Mangu-Ward: Jeffrey Lependorf is the Executive Director of the Community of Literary Magazines and Presses and Monica Valenzuela is the Interim Executive Director of Staten Island Arts. Thanks to you both for joining me. Monica Valenzuela: Thank you. Jeffrey Lependorf: Thank you. Karina Mangu-Ward: Thanks for listening. This is the ArtsFwd Podcast. You can check our more on our website that features multimedia profiles of innovative organizations, a blog and this podcast series and much more at www.artsfwd.org. I’m Karina Mangu-Ward of EmcArts in New York. – End of Recording – The post Navigating Challenges as Arts Service Organizations appeared first on ArtsFwd.

In this podcast, we explore what it means to be a public theater. Guest host John Shibley talks with Raymond Bobgan of the Cleveland Public Theatre, which has recently celebrated a successful dramatic production featuring and created with members of the local Latino community. Now calling themselves Teatro Publico de Cleveland, this assembly of Latino cast members includes Blanca Salva, who also joins our discussion of how projects like this one can attract, and retain, the participation of untapped cultural communities. They explore what it means to engage new communities through artistic collaboration. This podcast is part of a series that profiles the work of participants in EmcArts‘s Engaging the Future program in Cleveland. Learn more. Featuring: Raymond Bobgan, Executive Artistic Director of the Cleveland Public Theatre (CPT), has helmed the productions of 15 world premieres at CPT (9 by local artists), expanding its programs to support new work and achieving unprecedented national coverage. Bobgan specializes in creating new work through an ensemble process. He was the founding Artistic Director of Wishhounds (aka Theatre Labyrinth) and has directed and collaboratively conceived and created more than twenty new theatrical works. In 1994, he initiated the Student Theatre Enrichment Program, a job training program that engages at-risk youth in writing, producing and performing new plays. Bobgan was recently recognized by American Theatre Magazine as 1 of 25 national theatre artists that will shape the next 25 years of American theatre. Bobgan has been affiliated with CPT for over 20 years. Blanca Iris Garcia Rivera Salva lives in the Stockyard neighborhood on Cleveland’s west side. She is the Executive Assistant for Cleveland City Councilman Matt Zone of Ward 15, and a board member for Neighborhood Family Practice and Lutheran Hospital Community Board. She is on the advisory committee of the Teatro Publico de Cleveland and recently enjoyed her premiere theatrical appearance in their debut, Cuando Cierras Your Eyes. Married, with two daughters and a granddaughter, Salva was born in Caguas, Puerto Rico, raised in Bridgeport, Connecticut, and moved to Cleveland in 1988.     The post What Does It Mean to Be a Public Theater? appeared first on ArtsFwd.

This month we explore the sociological and civic impact of what are called “cultural clusters,” where arts centers, business, and community organizations collaborate to spur neighborhood revitalization. Guest host Karina Mangu-Ward talks with Mike Boberg from ArtsWave and Ellen Muse-Lindeman from Kennedy Heights Arts Center, two organizations that are working to achieve this in Cincinnati, Ohio, and they discuss the changes in livability and appearance that take place when and where cultural clusters take root. This podcast is part of a series that profiles the work of participants in EmcArts’s New Pathways program in Cincinnati. Learn more. Featuring: Michael Boberg is the Director of Shared Services for ArtsWave, where he works with representatives from organizations spanning the entire arts and culture sector. Previously, he served as Director of Marketing and Public Relations for Ensemble Theatre of Cincinnati and was Music Director and on-air host for WVXU-FM throughout the 1990s. Boberg served as co-chair of the Civic Pride/Community Engagement working group for the Agenda 360 Regional Planning process and is a graduate of the inaugural class of C-Change. He currently volunteers as a character coach for first graders through the Winners Walk Tall® program and serves on the advisory board for WVQC-LP 95.7 FM, a new lower-power radio station operated by Media Bridges. Boberg is a native Cincinnatian. Ellen Muse-Lindeman became Kennedy Heights Arts Center‘s first Executive Director in January 2008. With more than 20 years experience in nonprofit leadership and management, Muse-Lindeman brings together her love of the arts and her passion for building community. Previously, she served as the Director of Development and Program Director for the Center for Great Neighborhoods in Covington, Kentucky. Her professional experience includes development of community arts programs, community-built public art projects and coordination of a district-wide community-school partnership.   The post Cultural Clusters appeared first on ArtsFwd.

In this podcast, host Richard Evans explores how to strengthen communities through cultural initiatives. He is joined by Frances Lucerna, Executive Director of El Puente, which is based in the South Williamsburg section of Brooklyn, and Caron Atlas, Co-Director of Naturally Occurring Cultural Districts. They discuss how to best support existing communities through grassroots organizing around local cultural commonalities. This podcast is part of an ongoing series that profiles the work of the Rockefeller Foundation’s 2011 Cultural Innovation Fund grantees. Learn more. Featuring: Caron Atlas, Co-Director of NOCD-NY, is also Director of the Arts & Democracy Project, which supports the cross-pollination between arts and culture, participatory democracy, and social justice. She also teaches at Pratt Institute, and is a member of the Steering and District committees for Participatory Budgeting in New York. She is co-editor of two publications: Bridge Conversations and Critical Perspectives, and contributor to Towards a 21st Century City for All and Beyond Zuccotti Park. Atlas worked many years at Appalshop, the Appalachian media center, and was the founding director of the American Festival Project, a national coalition of activist artists. Frances Lucerna, Co-Founder & Executive Director of El Puente, has been a pioneer of community arts and education for the past 30 years. She holds a Bachelor of Arts in Education and Dance from Hunter College and Masters of Arts, in Education and Supervision, from Bank Street College. She danced professionally for 10 years and in 1980 returned to her community of Williamsburg, Brooklyn and founded the Williamsburg Arts & Culture Council for Youth, a performing and visual arts program for adolescents. In 1982, Ms. Lucerna became co-founder of El Puente, a nationally recognized community/youth development organization nurturing holistic leadership for peace and social justice. The post Cultural Organizing appeared first on ArtsFwd.

In this podcast, host Richard Evans explores two stories of artist residencies that are highly rewarding for the artist, the presenter, and the public. Jean Davidson of New York Live Arts discusses their new artist residency focused on mid-career artists. Marlène Ramírez-Cancio of Hemispheric Institute speaks about their residency for artists making political performance art that seeks to be a vehicle for social change. This podcast is part of an ongoing series that profiles the work of the Rockefeller Foundation’s 2011 Cultural Innovation Fund grantees. Learn more. Featuring: Jean Davidson (Chief Executive Officer, New York Live Arts) was appointed Chief Executive Officer of New York Live Arts in 2011 after serving as the Executive Director of the Bill T. Jones/Arnie Zane Dance Company for six years. She was instrumental in leading the Bill T. Jones/Arnie Zane Dance Company through its merger with Dance Theater Workshop to create New York Live Arts, a new model of artist-led, producing and presenting arts organization unique in the United States. Marlène Ramírez-Cancio (Associate Director of Arts & Media, Hemispheric Institute) is an interdisciplinary artist from Puerto Rico who co-founded and co-directs Fulana, a Latina video collective based in New York City. The Hemispheric Institute is a multilingual, collaborative network of institutions, artists, scholars, activists and cultural creators from throughout the Americas who work at the intersection of art, scholarship and social change. The post Artist Residencies appeared first on ArtsFwd.

Dance Cleveland presents performances from dance theater companies such as Chicago-based group Lucky Plush.This month, we explore how to engage younger and more culturally diverse audiences in arts and culture organizations. Richard Evans is joined by Pamela Young, Executive Director of DANCECleveland, which now has an experimental initiative fueled by EmcArts‘s Engaging the Future program. Richard and Pam discuss how DANCECleveland has developed a team of social ambassadors who call themselves the DanceAdvance Team. Duration: 9:24 min Pamela Young (Executive Director, DANCECleveland) joined the organization in 2003. With a strong background in project management, development and non-profit organizational and transition management, she has brought focused leadership and experience to Cleveland’s premier and oldest dance presenting organization. Prior to joining DANCECleveland, Pam had over 20 years of experience working in the nonprofit arts arena with a number of arts organizations in the Greater Cleveland community, including: MOCA-Cleveland, Cleveland Public Art, Dancing Wheels/Professional Flair and Cleveland Ballet and has served in a variety of functions from Acting Executive Director, Development Director, and Earned Income Specialist. Prior to moving into the non-profit sector, Pam enjoyed a career in architecture and design. She received her Bachelor of Science in Design from the University of Cincinnati and Certificate of Non-Profit Management from CASE-Mandel Center for Non-Profit Management. She has been a life-long resident of Cleveland Heights and claims it is the best place in the world to live. The post Cultivating Social Ambassadors at DANCECleveland appeared first on ArtsFwd.

This month Richard Evans invited an executive team from the Cleveland Orchestra to explore the team roles performed by individuals.  The group had employed a tool called Belbin Team Roles Analysis, which helps team members understand the roles they prefer to play.  To discuss the results of the analysis and what clues and surprises they provided to the organization, we have Chief Marketing Officer Ross Binnie, Director of Sales Julie Stapf, and Patron Systems Manager Adriane Smith. Duration: 16 min 48 sec Guests: Ross Binnie (Chief Marketing Officer, The Cleveland Orchestra) was also named the Director of the Center for Future Audiences in October 2010.  Mr. Binnie served as vice president for sales and services for the Detroit Symphony Orchestra for eleven years before coming to The Cleveland Orchestra.  In Detroit, he was responsible for all new business development and customer service, including the supervision of single-ticket and subscription sales and services, public relations, advertising, and promotions, as well as overseeing two retail stores.   Mr. Binnie has also held positions at performing arts venues in London, England, including the Hackney Empire, Open Air, and Her Majesty’s theaters.  He lectured in music business at Wayne State University.  Raised in the United Kingdom, Ross Binnie received his master of business administration degree from the Edwin L. Cox School of Business at Southern Methodist University in Dallas in 1997 and a Bachelor of Arts degree at the University of Texas in Austin.  Mr. Binnie is married to his wife Liz and has four children. Julie Stapf (Director of Sales, The Cleveland Orchestra) joined the staff in November of 2011, where as overseeing all functions related to subscription and single ticket sales and box office operations.  Prior to joining the staff at The Cleveland Orchestra, she was Director of Marketing and Communications at Hartford Stage, a Tony Award-winning repertoire theatre, and Director of Marketing and Sales at the Detroit Symphony Orchestra.  Julie holds a bachelor’s degree in Music Performance (French horn) from the University of Cincinnati College-Conservatory of Music and pursued a master’s degree in performing arts management/marketing at The American University in Washington, DC.  When not attending performances by The Cleveland Orchestra, Julie is an avid equestrienne and studies dressage. Adriane Smith (Patron Systems Manager, The Cleveland Orchestra) is directly responsible for the institution’s database and data analysis, as well as optimizing its marketing programs through strategic initiatives.  Adriane has a strong history of leading data-rich marketing efforts and has specialized expertise in customer intelligence and data mining/segmentation.  Prior to joining the nonprofit sector Adriane held various positions in pricing, operations research and database management at both a Fortune 500 Company and an internet start-up.  She graduated with degrees in Mathematics and Statistics from Penn State University. The post Analyzing Team Roles appeared first on ArtsFwd.

This month Richard Evans is joined by the leaders of two different arts organizations which are both implementing projects in Hunts Point, a neighborhood in the New York City borough of the Bronx:  Aviva Davidson, Executive and Artistic Director of Dancing in the Streets, and Amy Sananman, Founder and Executive Director of Groundswell.  They offer a lively discussion which explores how to build community engagement in cultural initiatives — a question that each organization is approaching in some different — and surprising — ways. Guests: Credit: Adam DavidsonAviva Davidson (Executive and Artistic Director of Dancing in the Streets) has over 25 years experience as an arts administrator, producer, presenter, and theatre director. She has an MFA in Arts Administration from Columbia University. From 1993-98, Davidson was the Curator of Performing Arts at the John Michael Kohler Art Center in Wisconsin.  Previously, from 1985-93, she was a Producer and Marketing Director at Symphony Space. With Dancing in the Streets since 1998, Davidson has commissioned and produced over 35 site-specific works and created three signature series of innovative public performances that celebrate and explore salient aspects of New York City public life—Breaking Ground, Hip Hop Generation Next, and—in collaboration with Casita Maria—The South Bronx Culture Trail. In the context of Trail, Davidson commissioned choreographer Joanna Haigood and musician Bobby Sanabria to create PASEO, a community-based, traveling site-specific work that featured over 80 performers in a celebration of the Latin music history of the South Bronx. She spearheaded Dancing in the Streets’ move to the South Bronx on January 31, 2011, where it became a Company in Residence at Castia Maria Center for Arts and Education in Hunts Point. Amy Sananman (Founder and Executive Director of Groundswell) was motivated by her long-standing fascination with murals to conceive of Groundswell in 1996 — its mission to bring together professional artists, grassroots organizations, and communities to create high-quality murals in under-represented neighborhoods, and to inspire youth to take active ownership of their future by equipping them with the tools necessary for social change. Over the past sixteen years Groundswell has worked with thousands of community members to complete more than 400 collaboratively-designed and painted murals across New York City. From the Bronx to Brooklyn, Groundswell’s murals have visually transformed neighborhoods through celebrating cultural diversity and unity, telling stories of community empowerment and challenges overcome, and giving youth a voice to speak to their immediate communities and the general public. Sananman holds a masters degree in Public Policy from the University of California at Berkeley. Her accolades include NYU/Wagner School’s Rudin Award for Community Service through the Arts and the prestigious 2006 Union Square Award for her leadership in developing Groundswell as a grassroots asset. In 2009 she was named one of the 21 Leaders for the 21st Century by Womens Enews. She has served on numerous panels speaking on arts as a tool for social change panels hosted by the Bronx Museum of Art, the New School for Social Research, Pratt Institute, Columbia University, Teachers College, CUNY’s Hunter School of Social Work and the Partnership for After School Education. She currently lectures at Pratt Institute on Arts and Community Development. *Featured image of Jose Garcia in Hunts Point, the Bronx by Chris Arnade The post Building Community Buy-In appeared first on ArtsFwd.

In this podcast, Richard Evans sits down with leaders from three organizations who participated in EmcArts’s New Pathways Program in New York City to explore the question: How do you incubate innovation in a local community? New Pathways brought together a cohort of 30 NYC organizations to identify the persistent adaptive challenges that they face as individual organizations and as a local community.  In the podcast, Richard and his guests discuss their experience in the program, the trends that emerged among seemingly disparate organizations, and how their new thinking has been incorporated into daily practice. Guests: Linda Shelton (Executive Director of the Joyce Theater) has served as The Joyce’s executive director since 1993.  Prior to her current position, she served as general manager of The Joffrey Ballet.  Before The Joffrey, she managed tours for the Bolshoi Ballet, Bolshoi Ballet Academy, Moscow Virtuosi, 1000 Airplanes on the Roof and Sankai Juku.  From 1982 to 1988, she held management positions at The Twyla Tharp Dance Foundation.  A Dance/USA board member for over ten years, Linda served as their chair from 2000 to 2002 and was also chair of their 1996 National Roundtable. Linda currently teaches in the graduate program of arts administration at New York University. LaRue Allen (Executive Director of the Martha Graham Center of Contemporary Dance) came to the Martha Graham Center as head of its development department in April 2005 from the North Carolina Dance Theatre where she was Executive Director since 2003.  Previously, she served for nine years as Executive Director of the Trisha Brown Company.  Ms. Allen has been the Senior Program Specialist for Dance Companies and Dance Presenters at the National Endowment for the Arts.  Ms. Allen founded and directed the Pennsylvania Dance Theatre and taught dance technique, composition, and history at Penn State University. Mary Ceruti (Executive Director and Chief Curator of the Sculpture Center in Long Island City) oversees all aspects of program, planning, and organizational development. She has organized numerous solo and group exhibitions of contemporary art and curated specialprojects and commissions by over 50 emerging and established artists. Before joining Sculpture Center in 1999, Mary worked as an independent curator andwriter and was the Director of Programs at Capp Street Project, an acclaimed international residency program, commissioning installation projects in SanFrancisco from 1992-98.   Duration: 24 mins The post Incubating Innovation Locally appeared first on ArtsFwd.

What Makes a Project a Good Fit for the Lab? The Innovation Lab is a non-traditional program with a non-traditional application, so we thought it would be useful to talk through some of the underlying ideas of the program and give a few examples to help guide your thinking. Last week, I sat down with Richard Evans, President of EmcArts, and prompted him with a few questions. The podcast of that conversation is available in a couple other forms: a video presentation or the full transcript below. As always, as you prepare your application, don’t hesitate to ask for help. You can write me at LDreyer@emcarts.org with questions and to schedule a consultation. LD: Hi, I’m Liz Dreyer, the Manager of National Programs here at EmcArts and I’m talking with Richard Evans this afternoon about our Innovation Labs.  It’s a non-traditional program with a non-traditional application.  We thought it would be useful to talk through some of the underlying ideas of the program and give a few examples to help guide your thinking as you move through the application process. So, Richard — can we start with the EmcArts definition and approach to innovation? RE: When we started the Innovation Labs, there was no useful definition of organizational innovation so we created one and the program is really based on that.  We did a lot of research.  We came up with three parts to this.  We see organizational innovations as examples of organizational change that are based upon some shift in the underlying assumptions that organizations hold which have been in the past reliable predictors of success. We find that innovation really is built upon a shift in those assumptions.  Finding a assumption that you’re questioning where there’s evidence that contradicts the assumption and then finding a new hypothesis or proposition that you can test that might be more predictive of success in the future. So innovation derives from this shift in underlying assumptions.  It’s therefore discontinuous from previous practice. In other words, it’s not just an extension of what you’ve done before, it’s a new direction that you’re taking with your organization. And finally, we believe that those new pathways must be ones which show a pretty good sign that they will create public impact and value. We firmly believe that innovation is, in fact, an organizational discipline; something every organization can learn and in the Innovation Lab we aim to try to build the adaptive muscles, if you like, of organizations that are participants. LD: We talk a lot a lot about the difference between technical and adaptive challenges.  I was hoping that you might spend a little time about why we differentiate, what we mean, and why focus on adaptive challenges. RE:  Yes, we find this a really useful distinction.  Technical challenges are those kinds of problems or challenges we can solve by incremental change. We don’t need a breakthrough here; we just need to improve the way we do things. so, we see technical challenges as extensions of business-as usual.  And we’re all used to those.  We do them every day in our work. The changes that are going on in our environment, however, mean that the other kind of challenge — adaptive challenges — are becoming more and more important. An adaptive challenge, then, is one where there is no established solution. There’s no consultant you could bring in to direct you towards contemporary best practices and help you select one. It has to be the group of people who are the organization who come to grips with new ways of working, new ways of doing business. And it’s our experience that the muscles we use to respond to adaptive challenges are less developed in our organizations and the Lab is a way to try to strengthen those.  And they can use the Lab to develop, design and prototype an innovative response to that adaptive challenge. LD: So when they come to us for the Lab, how far down the road should an organization be in addressing a strategic response to an adaptive challenge? RE: Yes, we often say we’re looking for “half-baked” ideas.  We mean that in a positive sense because an organization needs to have identified a significant adaptive challenge.  But on the other hand, if they’ve really worked it through and they’ve done the difficult work of coming up with an innovative strategy and all they really need is an operational plan to implement that, then I think they’re too far down the road.  So between those two areas are what we call “half-baked” ideas.  And, if an organization has begun to mobilize around a strategic response to a major adaptive challenge, has begun to have conversations, is asking itself hard questions about what kind of strategy they should develop but is not yet clear exactly what that should be, then I think it’s very well placed to make the best possible use of the Lab. Let me give you a couple of examples: There was a contemporary music ensemble which has come into the Lab which was concerned as it grew not to just create a traditional non-profit arts organization with staffing on one side and musicians on the other. But rather to utilize its musicians as its staff and to make its staff come from the musician complement. So there would be no distinction between its administration and its artistry. This is a radical approach for that organization. It may not be new to the world but it’s certainly new to that organization. They knew they wanted to develop this new model but exactly how that would look–how the musicians would be able to deal with this, what skills they’d be looking for and so on–were all to be tested. So that was a “half-baked” idea. Another example might be with a theater company. A regional theater company that knew that it had an under-utilized theater in its complex and that it wasn’t attracting the kind of younger, more adventurous theater-goer that it wanted to in its overall portfolio of artistic offerings. So they knew they could use this new space. They also realized that they needed to put the project into the hands of their younger staff members who had tremendous creative chops and represented the demographic they were looking for. So having made those decisions they began to question how should we go about this? They didn’t know what the theater experiences would be like. They didn’t know which local companies they might partner with. So that was again a clear sense of direction – a clear sense of what the goals were – of this project, but a lot of space for prototyping different kinds of activities as part of the Lab. LD: Are there any other areas that you would encourage applicants to focus on when they’re sending in their applications? RE: We ask organizations to tell us something about an innovation you tried to do in the past that didn’t work. I’d encourage organizations that are applying to be brutally honest. If an organization doesn’t give us propaganda, but rather gives us an insightful analysis of why their previous innovation may not have worked as they hoped, how they learned from that and how that affected their practice going forward. The other area I’d say is particularly useful is the section of the application where we ask organizations to give us an idea of the Innovation Team that they would put together for the Lab. We say in the application that we encourage these teams to consist of multiple constituents — board members, staff members, artists, and particularly outsiders who will bring a new perspective and ask those kinds of questions which people inside the organization probably wouldn’t ask. We don’t hold organizations to the people they name, but we do find that that can be a really helpful way for us to understand the scope of the project and the kind of new thinking that they want to bring to bear. LD: Great! Thank you. Is there anything else — any other piece of advice that you have for people looking into applying to the Lab? RE: Well, Liz, the last thing that I would say is that I’d encourage you as an organization to bring multiple voices together in preparing the application. We’ve had a number of applications that come from just a single voice – whether that voice is the Executive Director, or someone who is working in development. And you can usually tell that. It’s usually stronger if a variety of people have come together. And maybe their voices are actually heard in the application. We encourage organizations to use direct quotes in the proposal to give us a sense of the approaches that are being brought forward and the perspectives of different people in the organization. So think of the application as a group effort. One of the reasons I say that is that we’ve heard from a lot of applicants even though they may not have been successful at getting into the Lab that the application process was really valuable for them because it brought them together to have a kind of conversation they hadn’t had before. Note: EmcArts is now accepting applications for Round 3 of the Innovation Lab for Museums, our newest Innovation Lab program. The RFP can be downloaded here on ArtsFwd or on the EmcArts website. The deadline for applications is June 5, 2013. You can contact Liz Dreyer with questions or for consultation at ldreyer@emcarts.org. We look forward to reading your application! The post EmcArts Innovation Lab: Guiding Principles for Applicants appeared first on ArtsFwd.