Artistic Leadership in Orchestras, Part III: Conclusions

My original study proposal included developing an alternative model to the traditional American music director structure. I had imagined that the new model would include greater musician involvement and empowerment, and lessened music director responsibilities. Although I did find examples of leadership structures using musician involvement effectively, I have concluded that the art of symphonic music is best served by a clear institutional vision and identity, with a balance of shared leadership that includes a music director or principal conductor.

Individual Leaders

I have met many exemplary leaders in my travels this past year. I have been very impressed with the dedication and talent that exists within all the orchestra constituencies. Because my study focused only on artistic areas, I was surprised that the importance of strong board leadership was so very evident in creating and maintaining a consistently successful organization. Even though the board is not usually involved in making the daily artistic decisions, the presence of outstanding trustee leadership affects all areas of the organization in a tangible, positive way.

While there is an unstated expectation that the music director has exceptional leadership skills, his/her vision and decisions are often based partly or entirely upon his/her own career advancement, with lesser consideration of the well-being of the entire organization.

Explicit and generally clear leadership responsibilities are given to executive directors and staff, usually as part of their job descriptions. Like music directors, their decisions can be influenced by personal career agendas to the possible detriment of the institution. Administrators can also suffer from focusing on only short-term issues, often the financial bottom line, rather than balancing the big picture with the immediate necessities.

While there are musicians who participate effectively in the leadership of their orchestra, there still are many who lack awareness of the total picture. Musicians tend to be unaware of their leadership potential even when they are committee chairs or section Principals. This is an area of great potential if the musicians become aware of the possibilities, develop the skills and knowledge needed to be effective, and choose to participate. I believe that continuing education throughout a musician’s career may stimulate personal excitement and engagement. My observation is that leadership and involvement with off-stage aspects can offer musicians positive challenges and opportunities that can help keep their jobs interesting and fresh. I feel there is much that can and should be done to educate and encourage musicians to be aware of a larger perspective, enable them to be more knowledgeable participants, and encourage them to take more responsibility.

Board chairs generally have attained considerable success as leaders in the corporate or non-profit world. As volunteers, their decisions are less likely to be influenced by personal agendas. Leadership from a strong board chair and other trustees can offer direction that makes the organization remarkably healthier and stronger.

One of the dangers in all leadership positions is risk aversion, a reluctance to make changes or take risks “on my watch.” Short tenures and quick turnovers can lead to avoiding issues and leaving them for the next person to deal with.

Succession and shared leadership are two of the biggest challenges. While most orchestras are aware of the challenges of music director succession and attempt to begin the search process so that succession can occur smoothly, few orchestras plan for seamless leadership succession in every aspect of the organization[1]. Perhaps the area most lacking in leadership understanding and planning is the musicians’ representative/committee structures.

Successful shared leadership can create results that surpass individual input, provide a system of checks and balances that can assist an organization in staying on course while still evolving and changing, and be extremely beneficial during times of leadership transition.

Institutionalization

Several relatively young orchestras were included in my study. As suggested to me by Stephen Hales, a Louisiana Philharmonic Orchestra trustee who is a pediatrician, young orchestras go through developmental stages similar to those of a human child. Indeed, in my limited study, I noticed that very young orchestras require a great deal of attention and many course corrections. I observed that there seems to be a critical time for the organization when the founding individuals, be they conductor, musicians or administrators, need to allow the orchestra to become an institution that is no longer founder-centric. This is also true after a lengthy period of leadership by a powerful personality who acts as a founder. A part of determining the success of this transition appears to be whether the orchestra has established an identity that goes beyond the individuals involved – an identity that can exist without the presence of the founder(s).

CBAs – Union Rules

The union shop model currently used in American orchestras was developed at a time when the individual musicians needed protection from unreasonable music directors and managements. While this structure has served well to protect the individuals, it does not always serve the needs of the institution well. Tenure clauses were negotiated when mandatory retirement ended a musician’s career at age 65. Mandatory retirement age is now illegal in the United States and considered age discrimination. CBAs have become voluminous and inflexible. They exist as epic monuments to past mistakes.

Perhaps it is time to take a fresh look at CBAs and at what rules and structures benefit the institution as a whole, while still treating every individual fairly and humanely. Perhaps it is reasonable to look anew at lifetime tenure, and possibly institute some form of feedback whereby musicians could be helped to know their strengths, so as to increase their effectiveness; and their weaknesses, so as to improve them.

Conclusions from the European Orchestras Studied

For a portion of the European interviews, I was joined by Bob Wagner, Principal Bassoonist of the New Jersey Symphony Orchestra, who also had a Mellon-funded project to study how the musicians of “musician collective” orchestras felt about their systems. At the end of our time together we drew up the following list of conclusions:

Artistic excellence appears to be associated with:

• 1. A culture that is collegial and supportive. Every individual is valued. Communication is encouraged and expected.

• 2. A culture that encourages musical risk-taking and forgives mistakes resulting from players “going for it.”

• 3. The policy of always placing the music (the art of music) first.

• 4. The practice of determining the rate of pay as a team unit, not by individual negotiation.

• 5. An entrepreneurial connection – “the better we play, the more we get paid” – the understanding that the musicians are working for each other.

• 6. The inclusion, or the possibility of inclusion, in the non-playing aspects of the orchestra, which encourages greater commitment to the orchestra as a team.

• 7. The unique sound and style of the individual orchestra is at the forefront of audition decisions.

• 8. Mandatory retirement seems to benefit the organization, allowing it to rejuvenate, and players, by allowing life/career planning.

Challenges to American orchestras:

• 1. Few American orchestras have an artistic signature and awareness of the strengths of the orchestra. Therefore, few have established unique sounds and styles. There is little value placed on regional differences and individual situations.

• 2. Current work rules do not place the music first or take into account individual circumstances.

• 3. Most orchestras do not value the team. For an orchestra to play exceptionally well, it needs to be a team and engage and value every member.

• 4. Orchestras, players, boards and managements tend to be artistically and economically risk-aversive.

Limiters

Perhaps, in looking at what does limit orchestras, it might be helpful to keep in mind a larger perspective. Frank Byrne, executive director of the Kansas City Symphony, summed up the artistic limiters for his orchestra with a list that I found to be applicable to almost all orchestras:

• Imagination (thinking too small)

• Personal initiative and responsibility (someone else is responsible for how well I play/do my job)

• Flexibility (trying new things new ways, even if it is “inconvenient”)

• Money (always a factor in all areas)

• Time (never enough of that)

Artistic integrity

Integrity, both personally and institutionally, can create excellence. Putting the music first can create excellence. Working as a supportive team can create excellence. Artistic integrity joined with identity and vision can be magical.

[1] The Cleveland Orchestra recognizes and values the importance of long tenured board leadership. The Cleveland board president technically serves one-year terms, but the expectation is that he/she will serve seven to ten years, with the average being eight. When a successor is identified, he/she is elected first vice president one to two years before the actual succession.